Cash Crunch At New York Times (NYT): $400 Million Due In May
The New York Times Company's 10Q (NYT) contains more details on the company's cash crunch.
Specifically, the company must deliver $400 million to lenders in May of 2009, six months from now. The company has only $46 million of cash on hand, and its operations will likely begin consuming this meager balance this quarter or next. The company has been shut out of the commercial paper market, but has a $366 million short-term credit line remaining that it entered into several years ago, when the industry was strong. It has not yet drawn this cash down, and given the current environment and the trends at the company, we would not take for granted that it will be able to do so.
The New York Times is in discussions with its lenders about the May payment, and management thinks it will be able to work something out ("We expect that we will be able to manage our debt and credit obligations as they mature." Note the use of the word "manage" as opposed to "meet.") The company does not provide details as to what this managed solution might look like, so here are some possibilities.
1. Sell assets. This is a must. It is also likely to be difficult and painful in the current environment. As we noted in "New York Times Running On Fumes", the New York Times has gotten itself in a situation where it will be forced to choose among multiple bad options just to pay its bills. A fire sale of the building, the Boston Globe, the Red Sox, and/or other assets is one of them.
2. Draw down the $366 million remaining on the second credit line immediately. This option, too, unfortunately, is problematic (if it weren't, the NYT would almost certainly have already drawn this money down). What is a "credit line"? It is a promise, on paper, that a bank will lend NYTCO money when it wants it. This promise was made several years ago, when the New York Times and the rest of the newspaper industry were undefeated heavyweight fighters in perfect physical shape. Now, it's the 11th round, and they're battered and bloody and slumped on the ropes.
Doesn't the bank that signed that credit line have to give NYTCO the money? Not necessarily. The bank is contractually obligated to give NYTCO the money, but some contracts, obviously, are barely worth the paper they're printed on. Given the current circumstances, if we were that bank, and we were as strapped and scared as most banks are these days, we would certainly be reading the fine print to see what sort of "material adverse change" clauses the contract might include. Even if NYTCO could persuade us that early 2009 is not going to be as bad as it seems like it will be, the money will be due in two years, in 2011, and 2011 just isn't that far away.
3. Make major cash-saving cost cuts, including eliminating (or severely cutting) the dividend. This won't conjure up $400 million by May, but it might convince a lender that NYTCO understands what it is up against and is committed to taking the tough steps necessary to deal with it. It would also allow the company to keep generating cash through 2009, which would obviously help.
Can't NYTCO just borrow more money from someone else or issue some commercial paper or something? This will be tough. The reason the company has drawn down its first short-term credit line is that it got shut out of the commercial paper market. On getting another loan from someone else...would you lend NYTCO more money right now? (There are certainly terms under which we would, but they are not terms that NYTCO would like very much.)
Conclusion
Will this cash crunch force the New York Times into bankruptcy? No. (Or at least not yet.) The company still has assets, and it is not yet burning so much cash that it can't take steps to save itself.
Those steps are likely to be unpleasant, though. And they will be taken at gunpoint.
See Also:
New York Times Running On Fumes
How The New York Times Can Save Itself
Dividend Cut Could Make New York Times Sale More Likely




The industry will definitely head in that direction, though. No other way out.
This said, there are two key elements that should factor into an online subscription strategy:
(1) Subscriptions should be priced so the Times makes the same profit from an online subscriber as from a print subscriber. They should not load print-related overhead into this calculation. Therefore, the price of digital will be lower than the price of print, but the company will be profit indifferent. This will encourage the company to sell online subscriptions and find ways to outsource or consolidate (with other papers) print operations over time to save cash.
(2) To those who say that a subscription strategy will kill the online advertising opportunity, I say this:
(a) Have some confidence in the value of your content. First of all, a paid subscriber base while smaller than a free audience may actually be more valuable on a CPM basis, since the subscribers are "committed" viewers.
(b) Why does it always have to be a binary choice between free and paid content? Why can't you version your content so there is a free level and a paid level? The Times tried and notoriously failed with this approach when it did Times Select. However, the failure had more to do with execution than with the idea of paid content. Rather than slicing off a few sections or features or editorials to be subscription content, the Times should version *all* of its content to have a free "summary" and a subscriber-only full version. The free summary would allow for massive web traffic and advertising to casual readers. Yet only paid subscribers would be able to read the full story. The free summary could be generated by human editors or by automatic summarizing algorithms or maybe a combination of the two.
Like Eric Schmidt, I think we're all in trouble if the NY Times goes bust. I hope they take the economic crisis as an opportunity to shake up their business model and innovate (which, by the way, means not adhering to the conventional "information wants to be free" wisdom of the web bubble 2.0). If the Times goes under, our country is screwed.
Re - Knox: A typical credit line would contain all sorts of covenants (including financial covenants) that are likely problematic at this point for the Times.
Any other potential purchasers that you can think of?
I think PE would have a hard time pulling off a deal for it.
A ringing, screaming from the hilltops endorsement for Obama puts a serious crimp in their journalistic integrity, a fact not lost on readers like myself. With their life-blood compromised, it really doesn't matter how try and adjust their business model.
In fact, I believe that this recession will break the backs of some newspaper companies and will put an end to local printed daily papers in many towns and cities.
The NYT's will survive but I doubt the family will be able to maintain control much longer.
Having let that genie out of the bottle, though, they're going to have a hard time putting it back in. Also, a huge portion of the print business revenue model is advertising, and that's going to be a lot smaller online no matter what they do.
As John suggests, they should charge whatever they need to to make the same profit per sub online as offline. This might end up being a similar subscription fee because the lost advertising would probably more than offset the savings gained from not printing and shipping a hard copy.
Is it really in the public's interest for this Democratic Party rag to exist?
The recession is going to accelerate the inevitable for these companies...
Anyone know why?
1) Cut newsgathering costs by 25%
2) Play hardball with the unions. They won't strike in this climate. Get at least $100 million in annual concessions. Give back nothing.
3) Cut vanity, bulk circ that is expensive to maintain and advertisers care nothing about (or raise prices on portions of the expensive portions of the circ in order to cover costs)
4) Consider the transition to a premium, upper-crust product -- forget the masses. What does this mean in terms of ad rates, subscription expenses, etc.?
These fools gave away their news but tried to charge people for reading propaganda. That's exactly backwards. I might pay to read their news coverage, but I would *never* pay to read their editorials and columnists. In fact I think I'd pay to *not* see even the links to their columnists. Did they ever think of that as a business model?
Contrast with the WSJ. You can read opinionjournal.com for free, but you only get some free news and a free teaser for the rest.
Wonder which business model is making more money online?
No wonder these morons are circling the drain. They really don't understand capitalism at all.
Sorry if this comment is submitted multiple times. I normally run "noscript" and this site pulls Javascript from *at least* 20 different sites. The more sites I enable, the more new ones appear!
What about NYT mobile with payment per article?
my comments at http://www.commentino.com/orim
Look at your average newspaper and identify articles written by the paper's staff and articles sourced from AP and Reuters.
You will find that the bulk of it is composed of articles by AP and Reuters.
I can typically read that content for free online from any number of sources.
Content is king in the news publishing business. Premium unique content is what sets NY Times apart from other papers.
So, let's consider this business model:
NY Times operates a website and calls it "Digital Edition".
The full text of AP and Reuters stories is visible at no charge.
The NY Times original content is visible as an abstract.
If you choose to pay for that original content, you can pay for it in various ways similar to the way we access scientific journals today.
That way, NY Times wins:
1. They operate a massive digital destination and profit from Internet-based revenue streams
2. They provide unique content and generate additional revenue for the added value they produce.
Whether that is sustainable in the long run is a different story, but anyone can create a newspaper now from free AP and Reuters content.
I won't miss her at all.
We continue to work hard to stock Tiffany super-trendy pieces, as well as the classics and are adding new Tiffany silver jewelry all the time.
We put a lot of focus into making sure all our Tiffany Jewellery gets delivered to our customers as quickly as possible - so don't be afraid to shop until you drop!
Tiffany jewellery
Tiffany Bracelet
Tiffany rings
Tiffany earrings
tiffany necklaces
Tiffany jewellery
Tiffany rings
Tiffany earrings
tiffany bracelets
tiffany necklaces
Tiffany Earring
Tiffany rings
tiffany bracelets
tiffany necklaces
Tiffany Jewellry
Tiffany Bracelets
Tiffany Rings
Tiffany Pendants
Tiffany Earrings
Welcome to UK Tiffany Jewellery! We are proud to carry a wide variety of Tiffany & Co Jewellery for your wearing pleasure. All Tiffany are 100% Authentic sterling silver made guaranteed.Whether you love the look of classic Tiffany 1837, Tiffany ring, or cherish the memories of a personal charm bracelet UK Tiffany Jewellery has you covered.
We continue to work hard to stock Tiffany super-trendy pieces, as well as the classics and are adding new Tiffany silver jewelry all the time.
We put a lot of focus into making sure all our Tiffany Jewellery gets delivered to our customers as quickly as possible - so don't be afraid to shop until you drop!
The only reason broadcast distribution systems made money was because the high capital costs for building the systems made it difficult for competitors to enter the marketplace. They were essentially a monopoly. And newspapers were the only vehicle advertisers had to provide hard copy to their customers.
The New York Times does have a unique brand. But I'm not so sure that brand is valuable enough to command a premium over other distributed information that has now become a near free commodity. What they would be trying to put a premium price on is assembled words and words are cheap. Whether they are assembled well enough to add value is the issue.
The internet is a much more efficient way to distribute information and advertising. Think quill pen vs movable type. What we're seeing is technological progress. There's nothing anyone can do about it.
Besides that, cost obviously needs to go down and maybe more of the news staffers should become independent contractors and live off writing, speeches, books etc and not just a NYT salary. And in today's time - why does the Times need a fancy, new office tower in midtown Manhattan? How about a move to Newark, NJ with a 50% rent reduction?
DVD Creator for Mac provides an easy and fast way to create and burn DVD movie with brilliant DVD menus that can be played on portable or home DVD players. Perfect DVD Creator for Mac OS X software! With the DVD creater for Mac, you can convert MP4, M4V, MPA, MPG, MPEG, MOV, 3GP, 3GP2, FLV, VOB, DAT, TS, TP, TRP, M2TS, DivX, AVI to DVD on Mac. Mac DVD Creator is the best video to dvd creator for Mac OS X users.
Mac DVD Ripper is an all-in-one DVD ripper for Mac OS X software. This Mac DVD Ripper is an excellent DVD Decryption tool for Mac users to rip DVD to various video formats (including MP4, AVI, M4V, MOV, 3GP, MPG, FLV) and audio formats (MP3, M4A, AAC, WAV, OGG, APE, etc.) for playback on iPod touch, iPod classic, iPod nano, iPhone, Apple TV, PSP, PS3, Youtube (web), Creative Zen, iRiver PMP, Archos, all kinds of video cell phones and digital video and audio players. The Mac DVD Ripper is what godgious you need to put your DVD movies on your mobile devices.This Mac DVD Ripper software lets you select DVD subtitle and audio track, choose any DVD chapters/titles you want to convert, trim any DVD chapters/titles, and even merge more than one DVD chapter/title into a single file. Put your DVD movies on almost any mobile devices with this professional Mac DVD Ripper Software! please take a carefully look at the following link:Mac DVD Ripper.and another a greate converter software is vob converter for mac.VOB Converter for Mac is an excellent VOB to Video conversion software for Mac OS users to convert VOB files on Mac to various video formats perfectly and quickly. The Mac VOB converter supports converting VOB to mp4, avi, mov, mpeg-4 etc and also converting to PSP, Apple TV , iPod, iPhone, Archos, video mobile phone, Zune, etc. Aha,please come in the following link:VOB Converter for Mac