- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
The New York Times buying The Athletic for $550 million.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:14 am
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:14 am
LINK
quote:
The New York Times Co has agreed to acquire subscription sports site The Athletic in a deal valued at around $550 million, according to a person familiar with the situation.
The deal is a major acquisition for the Times, giving it a new pocket of subscription customers to the New York Times, which has set an ambitious goal of reaching 10 million subscribers by 2025. As of Sept 30, the Times reported 8.3 million digital and print subscribers.
21
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:15 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
$550 million
Holy shite
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:22 am to Fun Bunch
Article says that they were hoping for a valuation of $750 million and sold at $550m.
Either NYT got a steal or The Athletic was bleeding and took one of the first reasonable offers they had. Maybe both.
Either NYT got a steal or The Athletic was bleeding and took one of the first reasonable offers they had. Maybe both.
This post was edited on 1/6/22 at 11:23 am
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:24 am to TotesMcGotes
The athletic was bleeding bad. They were losing like 100 million a year. I don’t understand why NYT paid that price tag
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:25 am to TotesMcGotes
Explains why the Athletic ran a promo for three months that gave returning subscribers a 12 month subscription for 12 bucks 
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:26 am to Fun Bunch
That sucks. Sadly, I just renewed my subscription, too.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:27 am to Hergadoogadoo
quote:
Moar wokeness in our sports. Woohoo!
Woke. That's why they're so good at Capitalism.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:27 am to TotesMcGotes
They'll pick up plenty in savings through shared overhead but I'm sure the Athletic brand is not long for this world.
This post was edited on 1/6/22 at 11:32 am
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:27 am to philabuck
quote:
Explains why the Athletic ran a promo for three months that gave returning subscribers a 12 month subscription for 12 bucks
They run one of those specials every month. You’d be a sucker to pay full price for the athletic, they offer it up for basically free constantly
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:29 am to wildtigercat93
Cancel scripts folks. Hit them in the nuts.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:29 am to Civildawg
They didn’t lose $100 million per year. I think they lost $100 million over the course of 2-3 years.
I don’t think they were supposed to be profitable until somewhere down the line. Maybe they couldn’t bridge the gap and NYT figured they can. Come in at the tail end of their long road to profitability and then reap the rewards.
I don’t think they were supposed to be profitable until somewhere down the line. Maybe they couldn’t bridge the gap and NYT figured they can. Come in at the tail end of their long road to profitability and then reap the rewards.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:34 am to Civildawg
quote:
The athletic was bleeding bad. They were losing like 100 million a year. I don’t understand why NYT paid that price tag
Same. I know it's less than the price tags I've seen in recent years, but still seems like a heavy overpay for a model that has already given up a lot of it's original selling points.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:37 am to Fun Bunch
And the voices shrink again.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:37 am to lsutigers1992
quote:
Woke. That's why they're so good at Capitalism.
Does being unhinged and unsuccessful ever get old?
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:40 am to Pettifogger
Cost synergies will be high given the model overlap, there will be fat that can be trimmed at least
I don't think it adds much on the cross-selling front, a lot of those customers will not remain sticky as the Athletic brand is diluted
I don't think it adds much on the cross-selling front, a lot of those customers will not remain sticky as the Athletic brand is diluted
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:43 am to RemouladeSawce
I have kept my Athletic subscription for a while now. It doesn't cost much. I don't anticipate cancelling unless they jack up the price. There are enough writers on there whose work I'm interested in to make the small fee worth it to me.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:43 am to Fun Bunch
Remember when the NYT had the worst poll in the BCS? It was a sign of things to come
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:46 am to RemouladeSawce
What cost synergies? I would think 85% of The Atheltic's costs are in its writers and their expenses. If you cut either --- the talent itself or take away the talent's ability to do their work, ie, actually attend events, travel for interviews, etc..., the product will decline.
See generally, Sports Illustrated.
See generally, Sports Illustrated.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 11:56 am to Fun Bunch
Great more wokeness, Liberalism, and no talk of sports. Cool.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 12:02 pm to Civildawg
I can't fathom how they were losing so much money over so much of a time frame. Were their payroll costs that insane?
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News