Can old media beat new media in the ad wars?
While media that began online appears to have an edge in advertising revenue, don't count out web properties set up by the old-school, pre-internet companies.
The conventional wisdom is that old media online content usually gets trumped by new media properties, at least when it comes to ad revenue. But that's not necessarily the case, based on the number of people who visit old media websites.
New media, which did not spring from print or broadcast properties, often have an edge as far as total audience is concerned. ComScore reports that in January, Yahoo (YHOO) sites had 186.6 million unique visitors. AOL (AOL) had 111.3 million. Microsoft (MSFT) sites, mostly MSN, had 169.7 million. (Microsoft owns and publishes Top Stocks, an MSN Money site.)
In aggregate, however, old media online does very well with audience reach. CBS (CBS) sites had 82.8 million unique visitors in January. Turner, a part of Time Warner (TWX), had 79.5 million. NBC Universal, part of Comcast (CMCSA) had 71 million. Viacom (VIAB) had 69.7 million. Gannett Co. (GCI) had 50 million. Hearst had 43.1 million. The Top 50 sites by U.S audience also included Meredith (MDP), which probably will combine with Time Inc., The New York Times (NYT) properties, Fox Digital and The Tribune online properties.
All of this is a long way of showing that old media has extraordinary reach online, and that as traditional media outlets fail to produce the level of revenue they once did, or are no longer growing as quickly, their online revenue has a chance to do better.
The New York Times reported as part of its fourth-quarter results:
Digital advertising revenues as a percentage of total Company advertising revenues were 24.7% in the fourth quarter of 2012, compared with 22.7% during the same time period in 2011. For the full year, digital advertising revenues as a percentage of total Company advertising revenues were 23.9% in 2012, compared with 22.5% in 2011.
Given that the Times had 33.6 million unique visitors online in January, which dwarfs the circulation of the company's properties, its online revenue production is pathetic. The Times will continue to have to cut editorial staff and production costs to remain financially viable. Digital ad growth is too slow to cover the expense needs of the company.
Time Inc., another firm that produces some of the most well-regarded content on the Web, will nearly disappear into Meredith -- largely because it could not unlock Internet revenue.
So why is new media in such a struggle with old media companies? There is no single answer. Perhaps management has not put enough pressure on sales staffs to press online ad sales. Perhaps the companies have not been adroit enough to create content online that is of as high a quality as their traditional content. Whatever the reasons, it is not a lack of audience.
More from 24/7 Wall St.:
MORE ON MSN MONEY
Copyright © 2013 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
The Fed may start tapering in just a few months. Here are a few of the likely winners and losers.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.
Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.
Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.