Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : America On-Line (AOL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tang who wrote (10237)	4/11/1999 7:57:00 PM
From: Jenne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 41369

Giving Up on One Dream By James J. Cramer 4/11/99 4:27 PM ET All my life I wanted to own a newspaper. I thought it was a fabulous way to reach people and make a lot of money. I was wrong. In this morning's New York Times, there is an amazing article about The New York Daily News and the troubles it is facing. I wouldn't wish those troubles on my worst enemy. The problem is not the newsroom, where the people at the Daily News seem as good, if not better, than any other newsroom. The problem is getting that newspaper to you. First, presses cost a fortune. The paper needed to print costs a fortune. The ability to print color costs a fortune. The trucks needed to take the paper to the depots costs a fortune. The people who print it, bundle it, stuff it and drive it to the delivery people cost a fortune, and the people who put it on your driveway cost a fortune. Is there any wonder why the stock market values the dot-coms so highly and the Old World Printing and Delivering Companies (that is what they are, basically) so lowly? How much would you pay for Old World Printing and Scribing Company post Gutenberg? Not much, I am afraid. It gets worse. If the people who own the Daily News were listening to Meg Whitman's eBay (EBAY:Nasdaq) conference call last week they would be shaking. The most lucrative part of a daily newspaper is the classifieds. Right now the big drawback to Web classifieds -- which is what eBay is -- remains the inability to match up buyers and sellers of bigger items. I don't feel like bidding on that '65 Mustang in Encino when I live in New Jersey. I can't get it. I can't go pick it up. The owner isn't going to mail it to me. That's why the Los Angeles Times still gets that '65 Mustang classified. But now eBay is going to do regional editions of its classifieds. That means I would rather list my Mustang with eBay than with the Times. There goes that business. There will still be display ads and they can be lucrative for newspapers. But how much longer will they stay with these shrinking companies? I can't believe, when everyone is online and checking with Moviefone [which America Online (AOL:NYSE) has agreed to buy], that we won't see a wholesale shift of movie ads from newspapers to Web sites. There goes that business. Sports and financial news, we already know, go better on line because it can be updated more timely. Do you really think that once the execs of the ad agencies wake up and get online that those who advertise against sports and business will stick with the dailies? Is there really that much ad money around that it will stay with these dinosaurs? So what is left? There is the front section. That always has a few advertisers in it. Some metro news and the obituaries. Hey, great business. Right now my musings may seem nuts to you. But believe me, when I read about the problems the Daily News has, I think, talk about nuts, I mean, what kind of business spends all of its money trying to get the product to you instead of making the product better for you? Newspapers.