The Athletic's Financials Since The New York Times Acquisition
Discover more from Huddle Up
The Athletic's Financials Since The New York Times Acquisition
If you are not a subscriber of Huddle Up, join 56,000 other professional athletes, business executives & casual sports fans that receive it directly in their inbox each morning — it’s free.
The newsletter is presented by…
Stop renting Airbnb’s…invest in them.
Airbnb has added a modern and potentially more lucrative twist to real estate investing. In fact, there are 10 million short-term rental properties worldwide that make up a $1.2 trillion market.
reAlpha is revolutionizing this market through advanced technology and democratizing it through fractional ownership. They’ve shown that their AI-chosen Airbnb properties have the potential to beat long-term rental property revenue by 70%+ per property. And today, you can invest in reAlpha as a shareholder.
This isn’t financial advice, and you should do your own research.
Hey Friends,
The New York Times released its first-quarter 2022 results yesterday, which provided us with more details on how its acquisition of The Athletic is going.
As a reminder, after searching for a potential buyer for almost a year, the sports subscription media site was acquired by the New York Times for $550 million in January. That represented about half the cash that the New York Times currently had on its balance sheet, and they said they could develop synergies to make it profitable.
Here’s what we learned yesterday:
The Athletic added about 1.1 million subscribers to The New York Times.
This has pushed total subscribers at The New York Times to 9.1 million.
But the acquisition has also altered the company’s balance sheet:
The Athletic has lost $6.8 million since the acquisition (February & March).
This has eaten into the parent company’s profits, with The New York Times reporting an operating profit of $60.9 million for the quarter — that’s down from $68.1 million a year earlier and means that $6.8 million (94%) of that $7.2 million drop in profitability was due to The Athletic’s operating losses.
The truth is that many people didn’t think this was a smart acquisition by The New York Times, and they will probably use these results as an opportunity to say I told you so. But the reality is that it’s entirely too soon to declare victory one way or another, even if I am skeptical of the overall strategy myself.
The New York Times has previously said that just 13% of its current subscribers already have a subscription to The Athletic. That offers them the opportunity to cross-promote the publication and significantly reduce customer acquisition costs through lower marketing spend and fewer signup bonuses. Still, you have to assume the end goal is to eventually limit The Athletic’s operating losses through combined synergies.
The Athletic Operating Losses
2019: $54 million
2020: $41 million
2021: $55 million
Because, based on a $6.8 million loss in February & March, that would put The Athletic on pace to lose more than $40 million again this year — estimated, of course.
The New York Times has said they plan to reduce the operating losses by introducing more advertising to the subscription-based sports site later this year. And given that advertising only counted for 18% of The Athletic’s $12.157 million in revenue in February & March, that could help make a pretty significant difference.
As A.J. Perez points out below, they currently only run advertisements on podcasts.
So we’ll see what happens. The New York Times is playing the long game here. They don’t plan to fire any staff at The Athletic or even limit their travel. Instead, they want to see how it plays out over the next few years, and they have the capital to do that.
The more interesting part to me is seeing if a legacy media company like The New York Times—a business that has significantly shifted its business model over the last several years—can take an unprofitable business and turn it around. But on that front, only time will tell.
I hope everyone has a great day. We’ll talk tomorrow.
Your feedback helps me improve Huddle Up. How did you like today’s post?
Loved | Great | Good | Meh | Bad
The Joe Pomp Show: New episode with Justin Marks is now live!
Justin Marks is the owner of NASCAR Cup Series team Trackhouse Racing. We discuss the business behind owning a NASCAR team, why he thinks the sport is ripe for disruption, how he thinks about building a cohesive organization, the future of media rights in the United States, and more. Enjoy!
The 10 Weirdest Contracts In Sports: Professional athletes are always asking for weird, unconventional stipulations in their contracts. So today’s video breaks down 10 of my favorites — from Manny Ramirez requesting unlimited sushi to George Brett ending up with equity in a nearby apartment complex. Subscribe and enjoy!
The Athletic's Financials Since The New York Times Acquisition
It's alarming to me that "increase advertising" is the key idea they have for reducing losses at The Athletic. The Athletic is a subscription based site, people (like me) who subscribe, do that because we wanted to get away from ad-based free news outlets. I do not want to pay for a service then spend my time on that service looking at adverts. This is a proven way to make existing customers really mad.
"Making existing customers really mad" - surely isn't a smart move when keeping those existing customers is critical to achieving your goals!
Unpopular opinion, but they need to increase the price of the service, perhaps by 30%, but at the same time make a pledge that not a single advertiser will ever get anywhere near the service. Oh, and promise to cover cricket.
They have already got me agreeing to pay £60 or whatever it was each year, the difference from that to £90 is psychologically small compared to £0 to £60. Yet if done correctly would possibly make them profitable.
NYT take note: I (and millions like me) want a top quality sports site/magazine - I will pay for it, more than you are currently charging. I hate being advertised to.