23-08-2013, 09:37 PM
hi cityfarmer, it doesn't worked for new york times as well, not sure about FT.com
paywall are really difficult. but the news publishing business has challenges due to questions like:
do you really need quality journalism? would you pay for it? or do you need just news? if you were to pay for it how much would you pay for it.
i somehow am leaning towards that i just need to know news, not super good quality.
and if that is the case quality journalism requires staffing, which is rising much faster than what they can charge for it.
ah i didnt study english that well. i never knew its a term for never improves....
its a matter that if everything is legal which one is a more sturdy model.
there may be a habitual enjoyment in reading paper news media, and a consistent need by big companies to advertise, but i felt that in terms of culture and habits, TV watching is something really hard to shake off.
as long as its not too expensive, you will just treat that as part of what you need to pay and not think about it. would Singaporean's look at newspaper that way?
i am not really talking so much on the health of the balance sheet and debt risk (which i should!) more of the business and the yield provided. perhaps 10% is a good enough compensation vs 6% for a little more debt.
one no matter what they do tries to maintain a 10% payout while the other builts more malls and rents them to maintain a 6% payout. which would you take.
as a summary, i felt the model of taiwan broadband and pay tv to be more future proof vs print media, but safety wise i would rather choose SPH over APTT due to the debt level and the management.
paywall are really difficult. but the news publishing business has challenges due to questions like:
do you really need quality journalism? would you pay for it? or do you need just news? if you were to pay for it how much would you pay for it.
i somehow am leaning towards that i just need to know news, not super good quality.
and if that is the case quality journalism requires staffing, which is rising much faster than what they can charge for it.
(22-08-2013, 06:39 PM)KopiKat Wrote: [ -> ](22-08-2013, 06:30 PM)Drizzt Wrote: [ -> ]as always only SPH can warrant such a strong reaction. that is what i observed from the profit statement through these quarters, what is classified as media. I did not come up with that category,sph did. I believe in seeing the figures. by no means am i concluding. but if a large part of earnings come from distribution and advertising and revenue have consistently been going down, isnt that bleeding.
this business have become more of a developer and renting and people like it because of brand.
perhaps its better because you get tax savings. a lot of the diversification really don't add much to long term recurring cash flow that is sizable.
do correct me if i am wrong on this.
Thx! At least I learnt a new meaning of bleeding today!
Quite different from my usual understanding..
Bleed
1. To lose money in a venture or investment over time. Bleeding may occur fast or slowly, but never improves.
ah i didnt study english that well. i never knew its a term for never improves....
(22-08-2013, 10:10 PM)Greenrookie Wrote: [ -> ](22-08-2013, 06:18 PM)Drizzt Wrote: [ -> ]you can invest in half that in APTT for 10% yield! and the business is likely to be less corroding then this!
Hi Drizzt,
Can you explain why you find APTT less corroding? I took a closer look (just preliminary, tempted by the yield and since it is highlighted by u ), saw the gearing level and the OCF and is quite turned off.
While my gut feels is not accurate, I already know of friends and relatives who have ways to stream channels from starhub and mio TV without paying, I am not sure how "copyrights" conscious Taiwanese have, but if you ask me what is the risk of decoding devices or internet streaming bleeding the pay TV and the risk of digital platforms bleeding the newspaper in singapore, I would think the later has higher chance of survival. Care to explain why you think APTT is less corroding?
its a matter that if everything is legal which one is a more sturdy model.
there may be a habitual enjoyment in reading paper news media, and a consistent need by big companies to advertise, but i felt that in terms of culture and habits, TV watching is something really hard to shake off.
as long as its not too expensive, you will just treat that as part of what you need to pay and not think about it. would Singaporean's look at newspaper that way?
i am not really talking so much on the health of the balance sheet and debt risk (which i should!) more of the business and the yield provided. perhaps 10% is a good enough compensation vs 6% for a little more debt.
one no matter what they do tries to maintain a 10% payout while the other builts more malls and rents them to maintain a 6% payout. which would you take.
as a summary, i felt the model of taiwan broadband and pay tv to be more future proof vs print media, but safety wise i would rather choose SPH over APTT due to the debt level and the management.