Guardian hits historic low circulation...

TelevisionUserTelevisionUser Posts: 41,406
Forum Member
The Guardian's circulation has fallen below 200,000 average daily sales for the first time since records began, in its first full month since increasing its coverprice by 20p on weekdays and on Saturdays.
http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/1173980/newspaper-abcs-guardian-hits-historic-low-following-20p-price-hike/

The latest Audit Bureau of Circulations are actually bad for all broadsheets showing a decline based on both last month and last year. The only winners are the i and the Sunday Mirror (increases) and the Daily Star and Daily Express (just about static).

These figures do again illustrate the overall move from loss-making print media to electronic media and the newspaper groups will have to come up with some innovative ways to get revenue from their online titles to help fund their journalists' operations.

Comments

  • Top Gun 001Top Gun 001 Posts: 382
    Forum Member
    It's funny how many people on various message boards claim to read the Guardian. :D

    Are they still losing £100.000 a day?
  • BigDaveXBigDaveX Posts: 835
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's funny how many people on various message boards claim to read the Guardian. :D

    In fairness, they probably do. They just don't specify that they mean the Guardian website rather than the newspaper itself.
  • semimintedsemiminted Posts: 3,354
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Many "claimed" guardian readers also heavily frequent many forums

    On the i paper I tried 6 outlets last week in one day and couldn't get a copy

    To be successful a paper like the i needs to cost less and be good. And it is both Take note pricey papers....
  • -Sid--Sid- Posts: 29,365
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The Guardian is amongst the top three most read online papers worldwide though (along with the Mail and the New York Times). It attracted 38.9 million unique visitors last October:

    http://www.comscoredatamine.com/2012/12/most-read-online-newspapers-in-the-world-mail-online-new-york-times-and-the-guardian/

    I do read the Guardian, but always only online. Never buy a copy.
  • omnidirectionalomnidirectional Posts: 18,799
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    -Sid- wrote: »

    I do read the Guardian, but always only online. Never buy a copy.

    I'm the same, The Guardian is the only newspaper website I have bookmarked, I access their site several times per day and have their mobile app on my phone - but i've never once bought the paper.
  • ViridianaViridiana Posts: 8,017
    Forum Member
    I do buy the Guardian on Saturday, but i never bother during the week, is way too expensive for what it is. Particularly when you can read it on website.
  • Top Gun 001Top Gun 001 Posts: 382
    Forum Member
    -Sid- wrote: »
    I do read the Guardian, but always only online. Never buy a copy.

    This of course is the problem with all papers not just them. Giving them away for nothing was a big mistake. And seemingly they don't know what to do about it now.

    Youngsters expect it for free - if they read papers at all.
  • Glenn AGlenn A Posts: 23,851
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The problem is the paper appeals to too narrow a demographic, middle class readers on the left, who are a minority in the middle class anyway and the paper is considered too high brow for working class Labour voters whose traditional paper is the Daily Mirror. It's clear The Guardian is being squeezed.
  • MandarkMandark Posts: 47,930
    Forum Member
    It's the paper of the professional public and voluntary sectors. I have the phone app which requires a sub but haven't got the time to read the full paper or the iPad app. I could see it merging with the New York Times one day to create a global left of centre brand.
  • hustedhusted Posts: 5,287
    Forum Member
    -Sid- wrote: »
    The Guardian is amongst the top three most read online papers worldwide though (along with the Mail and the New York Times). It attracted 38.9 million unique visitors last October:

    http://www.comscoredatamine.com/2012/12/most-read-online-newspapers-in-the-world-mail-online-new-york-times-and-the-guardian/

    I do read the Guardian, but always only online. Never buy a copy.

    Maybe they should abandon print and concentrate on building worldwide on-line brand?
  • -Sid--Sid- Posts: 29,365
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    husted wrote: »
    Maybe they should abandon print and concentrate on building worldwide on-line brand?

    I think that's eventually what will happen husted.

    Another interesting piece of research shows that within the Twittersphere, Guardian articles generate the most tweets:

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/polis/2013/03/14/newsmaking-in-the-twittersphere-some-new-international-data-on-how-journalism-flows-through-the-microblog-network-guest-blog-twitter/

    So clearly some papers have more of an online presence / following whereas the converse is true for other papers like The Express which perform better in terms of circulation.
  • Top Gun 001Top Gun 001 Posts: 382
    Forum Member
    The problem with the Guardian is that it is such a very dull read. But people like to claim they read it when actually they don't.

    Hence the £100.000 a day loss.
  • -Sid--Sid- Posts: 29,365
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The problem with the Guardian is that it is such a very dull read. But people like to claim they read it when actually they don't.

    Hence the £100.000 a day loss.

    Depends what sort of writers and articles you find engaging.

    I really enjoy Hadley Freeman, Suzanne Moore, Zoe Williams and Charlie Brooker's columns.

    Horses for courses.
  • barbelerbarbeler Posts: 23,827
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's never been the same since Steve Bell lost the rich material provided by Thatcher and the Falklands.
  • Top Gun 001Top Gun 001 Posts: 382
    Forum Member
    -Sid- wrote: »
    Depends what sort of writers and articles you find engaging.

    I really enjoy Hadley Freeman, Suzanne Moore, Zoe Williams and Charlie Brooker's columns.

    Horses for courses.

    I'm very familiar with the writing of Suzanne Moore as until recently she wrote a column for The Mail on Sunday. She is hopeless, a duller waste of space column you couldn't imagine.

    I can't understand why they didn't sack her years ago.
  • tghe-retfordtghe-retford Posts: 26,449
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    This of course is the problem with all papers not just them. Giving them away for nothing was a big mistake. And seemingly they don't know what to do about it now.

    Youngsters expect it for free - if they read papers at all.
    Clearly the Metro and the Evening Standard have been a massive flop..?
  • Mr TeacakeMr Teacake Posts: 6,593
    Forum Member
    I suspect the Guardian may well end up in some form of agreement with a billionaire with left leaning politcial interests. It's a world famous newspaper and commands a lot of respect abroad.
  • Top Gun 001Top Gun 001 Posts: 382
    Forum Member
    Clearly the Metro and the Evening Standard have been a massive flop..?

    I wouldn't know. I don't read either.
  • TelevisionUserTelevisionUser Posts: 41,406
    Forum Member
    -Sid- wrote: »
    The Guardian is amongst the top three most read online papers worldwide though (along with the Mail and the New York Times). It attracted 38.9 million unique visitors last October:

    http://www.comscoredatamine.com/2012/12/most-read-online-newspapers-in-the-world-mail-online-new-york-times-and-the-guardian/

    I do read the Guardian, but always only online. Never buy a copy.

    Therein lies their problem. They only sell a couple of hundred thousand newspapers but they have 40 million website visits.

    They lose £50+ million a year and those losses are untenable. If they want to survive then they'll have to merge the Guardian & Observer operations and come up with innovative ways to monetise their online version and tablet apps especially in respect of foreign readers of the website.
  • ftvftv Posts: 31,668
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Doesn't the BBC buy more copies of The Guardian every day than any other organisation ? It certainly only seems to advertise its jobs in that paper. Personally I think the decline began when The Guardian moved from Manchester:eek:
  • Raquelos.Raquelos. Posts: 7,734
    Forum Member
    The problem with the Guardian is that it is such a very dull read. But people like to claim they read it when actually they don't.

    Hence the £100.000 a day loss.

    It really is no more dull than any other broadsheet and if you are actually interested in current affairs and politics it isn't dull at all!

    It does miss the trick of illustrating every story with a semi naked female though, perhaps that's what you mean.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 87,224
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Some media pundit on the car radio (didn't catch his name) said he reckoned in a few years there will only be one tabloid, one mid-range and one quality dead-tree newspapers left.
  • mfrmfr Posts: 5,607
    Forum Member
    The Guardian's news coverage can be dull; where they excel is their live blogging (it can be brilliantly witty and incisive) and their columnists (ditto).

    The problem for the Guardian is that the website is actually better than both their printed version and their iPad app. Leaving out live news from the iPad was a huge mistake - that's why I don't bother to subscribe.
  • *Sparkle**Sparkle* Posts: 10,955
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I like their phone app.

    If I buy a physical paper, it's normally the i. The price is a bonus, but it's also a decent size. I rarely have time to read a full newspaper, and I'm not sure I'd want to on a daily basis as I'm normally getting news from a number of different sources every day already.
Sign In or Register to comment.