Warren Buffett on Why We Buy Some Newspapers

 

All the passages below are taken from Berkshire Hathaway 2012 Annual report.

 

                  www.berkshirehathaway.com

 

We Buy Some Newspapers . . . Newspapers?

 

During the past fifteen months, we acquired 28 daily newspapers at a cost of $344 million. This may puzzle you for two reasons. First, I have long told you in these letters and at our annual meetings that the circulation, advertising and profits of the newspaper industry overall are certain to decline. That prediction still holds. Second, the properties we purchased fell far short of meeting our oft-stated size requirements for acquisitions.

 

We can address the second point easily. Charlie and I love newspapers and, if their economics make sense, will buy them even when they fall far short of the size threshold we would require for the purchase of, say, a widget company. Addressing the first point requires me to provide a more elaborate explanation, including some history.

 

News, to put it simply, is what people don’t know that they want to know. And people will seek their news – what’s important to them – from whatever sources provide the best combination of immediacy, ease of access, reliability, comprehensiveness and low cost. The relative importance of these factors varies with the nature of the news and the person wanting it.

 

Before television and the Internet, newspapers were the primary source for an incredible variety of news, a fact that made them indispensable to a very high percentage of the population. Whether your interests were international, national, local, sports or financial quotations, your newspaper usually was first to tell you the latest information. Indeed, your paper contained so much you wanted to learn that you received your money’s worth, even if only a small number of its pages spoke to your specific interests. Better yet, advertisers typically paid almost all of the product’s cost, and readers rode their coattails.

 

Additionally, the ads themselves delivered information of vital interest to hordes of readers, in effect providing even more “news.” Editors would cringe at the thought, but for many readers learning what jobs or apartments were available, what supermarkets were carrying which weekend specials, or what movies were showing where and when was far more important than the views expressed on the editorial page.

 

In turn, the local paper was indispensable to advertisers. If Sears or Safeway built stores in Omaha, they required a “megaphone” to tell the city’s residents why their stores should be visited today. Indeed, big department stores and grocers vied to out shout their competition with multi-page spreads, knowing that the goods they advertised would fly off the shelves. With no other megaphone remotely comparable to that of the newspaper, ads sold themselves.

 

As long as a newspaper was the only one in its community, its profits were certain to be extraordinary; whether it was managed well or poorly made little difference. (As one Southern publisher famously confessed, “I owe my exalted position in life to two great American institutions – nepotism and monopoly.”)

 

Over the years, almost all cities became one-newspaper towns (or harbored two competing papers that joined forces to operate as a single economic unit). This contraction was inevitable because most people wished to read and pay for only one paper. When competition existed, the paper that gained a significant lead in circulation almost automatically received the most ads. That left ads drawing readers and readers drawing ads. This symbiotic process spelled doom for the weaker paper and became known as “survival of the fattest.”

 

Now the world has changed. Stock market quotes and the details of national sports events are old news long before the presses begin to roll. The Internet offers extensive information about both available jobs and homes. Television bombards viewers with political, national and international news. In one area of interest after another, newspapers have therefore lost their “primacy.” And, as their audiences have fallen, so has advertising. (Revenues from “help wanted” classified ads – long a huge source of income for newspapers – have plunged more than 90% in the past 12 years.)

 

Newspapers continue to reign supreme, however, in the delivery of local news. If you want to know what’s going on in your town – whether the news is about the mayor or taxes or high school football – there is no substitute for a local newspaper that is doing its job. A reader’s eyes may glaze over after they take in a couple of paragraphs about Canadian tariffs or political developments in Pakistan; a story about the reader himself or his neighbors will be read to the end. Wherever there is a pervasive sense of community, a paper that serves the special informational needs of that community will remain indispensable to a significant portion of its residents.

 

Even a valuable product, however, can self-destruct from a faulty business strategy. And that process has been underway during the past decade at almost all papers of size. Publishers – including Berkshire in Buffalo – have offered their paper free on the Internet while charging meaningful sums for the physical specimen. How could this lead to anything other than a sharp and steady drop in sales of the printed product? Falling circulation, moreover, makes a paper less essential to advertisers. Under these conditions, the “virtuous circle” of the past reverses.

 

The Wall Street Journal went to a pay model early. But the main exemplar for local newspapers is the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, published by Walter Hussman, Jr. Walter also adopted a pay format early, and over the past decade his paper has retained its circulation far better than any other large paper in the country. Despite Walter’s powerful example, it’s only been in the last year or so that other papers, including Berkshire’s, have explored pay arrangements. Whatever works best – and the answer is not yet clear – will be copied widely.

 

* * * * * * * * * * * *

 

Charlie and I believe that papers delivering comprehensive and reliable information to tightly-bound communities and having a sensible Internet strategy will remain viable for a long time. We do not believe that success will come from cutting either the news content or frequency of publication. Indeed, skimpy news coverage will almost certainly lead to skimpy readership. And the less-than-daily publication that is now being tried in some large towns or cities – while it may improve profits in the short term – seems certain to diminish the papers’ relevance over time. Our goal is to keep our papers loaded with content of interest to our readers and to be paid appropriately by those who find us useful, whether the product they view is in their hands or on the Internet.

 

Our confidence is buttressed by the availability of Terry Kroeger’s outstanding management group at the Omaha World-Herald, a team that has the ability to oversee a large group of papers. The individual papers, however, will be independent in their news coverage and editorial opinions. (I voted for Obama; of our 12 dailies that endorsed a presidential candidate, 10 opted for Romney.)

 

Our newspapers are certainly not insulated from the forces that have been driving revenues downward. Still, the six small dailies we owned throughout 2012 had unchanged revenues for the year, a result far superior to that experienced by big-city dailies. Moreover, the two large papers we operated throughout the year – The Buffalo News and the Omaha World-Herald – held their revenue loss to 3%, which was also an above-average outcome. Among newspapers in America’s 50 largest metropolitan areas, our Buffalo and Omaha papers rank near the top in circulation penetration of their home territories.

 

This popularity is no accident: Credit the editors of those papers – Margaret Sullivan at the News and Mike Reilly at the World-Herald — for delivering information that has made their publications indispensable to community-interested readers. (Margaret, I regret to say, recently left us to join The New York Times, whose job offers are tough to turn down. That paper made a great hire, and we wish her the best.)

 

Berkshire’s cash earnings from its papers will almost certainly trend downward over time. Even a sensible Internet strategy will not be able to prevent modest erosion. At our cost, however, I believe these papers will meet or exceed our economic test for acquisitions. Results to date support that belief.

 

Charlie and I, however, still operate under economic principle 11 (detailed on page 99) and will not continue the operation of any business doomed to unending losses. One daily paper that we acquired in a bulk purchase from Media General was significantly unprofitable under that company’s ownership. After analyzing the paper’s results, we saw no remedy for the losses and reluctantly shut it down. All of our remaining dailies, however, should be profitable for a long time to come. (They are listed on page 108.) At appropriate prices – and that means at a very low multiple of current earnings – we will purchase more papers of the type we like.

 

* * * * * * * * * * * *

 

A milestone in Berkshire’s newspaper operations occurred at yearend when Stan Lipsey retired as publisher of The Buffalo News. It’s no exaggeration for me to say that the News might now be extinct were it not for Stan.

 

Charlie and I acquired the News in April 1977. It was an evening paper, dominant on weekdays but lacking a Sunday edition. Throughout the country, the circulation trend was toward morning papers. Moreover, Sunday was becoming ever more critical to the profitability of metropolitan dailies. Without a Sunday paper, the News was destined to lose out to its morning competitor, which had a fat and entrenched Sunday product.

 

We therefore began to print a Sunday edition late in 1977. And then all hell broke loose. Our competitor sued us, and District Judge Charles Brieant, Jr. authored a harsh ruling that crippled the introduction of our paper. His ruling was later reversed – after 17 long months – in a 3-0 sharp rebuke by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. While the appeal was pending, we lost circulation, hemorrhaged money and stood in constant danger of going out of business.

 

Enter Stan Lipsey, a friend of mine from the 1960s, who, with his wife, had sold Berkshire a small Omaha weekly. I found Stan to be an extraordinary newspaperman, knowledgeable about every aspect of circulation, production, sales and editorial. (He was a key person in gaining that small weekly a Pulitzer Prize in 1973.) So when I was in big trouble at the News, I asked Stan to leave his comfortable way of life in Omaha to take over in

Buffalo.

 

He never hesitated. Along with Murray Light, our editor, Stan persevered through four years of very dark days until the News won the competitive struggle in 1982. Ever since, despite a difficult Buffalo economy, the performance of the News has been exceptional. As both a friend and as a manager, Stan is simply the best. [Pg 16-18]

 

March 1, 2013

Warren E. Buffett

Chairman of the Board

 

         ----------------------------------------------------------

 

       BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC.

DAILY NEWSPAPERS

 

Publication

City

Daily

Circulation

Sunday

Circulation

Alabama

 

 

 

      Enterprise Ledger

Enterprise

8,289

8,979

      Opelika Auburn News

Opelika/Auburn

13,605

13,621

      Dothan Eagle

Dothan

26,143

26,721

 

 

 

 

Florida

 

 

 

     Jackson County Floridan

Marianna

4,963

4,813

 

 

 

 

Iowa

 

 

 

      The Daily Nonpareil

Council Bluffs

11,347

13,138

 

 

 

 

Nebraska

 

 

 

   York News-Times

York

3,253

-----

   The North Platte Telegraph

North Platte

9,790

9,821

   Kearney Hub

Kearney

10,724

--------

   Star-Herald

Scottsbluff

12,151

12,831

   The Grand Island Independent

Grand Island

17,601

19,144

   Omaha World-Herald

Omaha

130,001

162,905

 

 

 

 

New York

 

 

 

   Buffalo News

Buffalo

142,750

227,395

 

 

 

 

North Carolina

 

 

 

   The (Marion) McDowell News

Marion

4,108

4,676

   The (Morganton) News Herald

Morganton

6,993

7,982

   Statesville Record and Landmark

Statesville

10,000

12,233

   Hickory Daily Record

Hickory

18,662

22,407

   Winston-Salem Journal

Winston-Salem

55,013

70,464

   Greensboro News & Record *

Greensboro

55,081

82,095

 

 

 

 

South Carolina

 

 

 

   (Florence) Morning News

Florence

22,077

27,074

 

 

 

 

Texas

 

 

 

   The Eagle

Bryan/College Station

16,673

19,229

   Tribune-Herald

Waco

31,282

36,566

 

 

 

 

Virginia

 

 

 

   Culpeper Star Exponent

Culpeper

5,355

5,626

   The (Waynesboro) News Virginian

Waynesboro

5,773

5,635

   Danville Register and Bee

Danville

14,388

17,136

   The (Charlottesville) Daily Progress

Charlottesville

21,274

24,050

   Bristol Herald Courier

Bristol

23,466

29,375

   The (Lynchburg) News and Advance

Lynchburg

25,287

31,819

   Richmond Times-Dispatch

Richmond

107,226

156,623

 

* Acquired January 2013     [pg 108]

 

 

DAILY AVERAGE NEWSPAPERS CIRCULATION IN SINGAPORE

                August 2016

        http://sph.listedcompany.com/misc/annualreport/2016b/SPH_AR2016_daily_average.pdf

 

DAILY AVERAGE NEWSPAPERS CIRCULATION 1

August 2016

August 2015

 

 

 

The Straits Times / The Sunday Times

 

 

     (Print + Digital)

393,300

378,400

     (Print)

277,100

304,300

     (Digital)

116,200

74,100

 

 

 

The Business Times

 

 

     (Print + Digital)

36,900

36,400

    (Print)

28,100

29,200

    (Digital)

8,800

7,200

 

 

 

Berita Harian / Berita Minggu

 

 

     (Print + Digital)

39,300

45,600

     (Print)

37,700

44,600

     (Digital)

1,600

1,000

 

 

 

The New Paper / The New Paper Sunday

 

 

     (Print + Digital)

113,300

110,000

     (Print)

61,700

70,200

     (Digital)

51,600

39,800

 

 

 

Lianhe Zaobao

 

 

     (Print + Digital)

188,600

162,700

     (Print)

143,000

148,600

     (Digital)

45,600

14,100

 

 

 

Lianhe Wanbao

 

 

     (Print + Digital)

102,000

90,200

     (Print)

70,800

82,500

     (Digital)

31,200

7,700

 

 

 

Shin Min Daily News

 

 

     (Print + Digital)

100,300

120,200

     (Print)

100,100

120,200

     (Digital)

200

0

 

 

 

Tamil Murasu / Tamil Murasu Sunday

11,300

12,800

zbCOMMA2

40,400

52,800

Thumbs Up2

21,200

22,400

Thumbs Up Junior2

11,600

12,700

Thumbs Up Little Junior2

37,100

36,800

 

Notes:

1. With effect from 1 March 2016, all subscriptions to our All-in-One packages are counted as the sale of one print copy and one digital copy. Prior to 1 March 2016, such subscriptions were counted as the sale of one print copy and three digital copies, in line with Audit Bureau of Circulation’s (ABC) rules. With the implementation of new cover prices of our newspapers and All-in-One packages on 1 March 2016, we have had to change the basis of our circulation count and have obtained ABC’s endorsement for the new method. For comparative purposes, copy sales for Aug-15 had been restated accordingly.

2. Figures are reported on a per issue basis.