If the whole point is to make the Times more efficient and ultimately profitable and self-sustaining, VR isn't going to bring home the bacon any time soon for them. Will it eventually? Maybe. But you're not going to see print (or TV) ad dollars suddenly flow into VR that is used (i.e. owned or simply tried once) by a small fraction of the U.S. population.
This kind of study is essentially a recommendation for layoffs in the newsroom and investments in other areas. Having worked at 3 magazines, I don't personally believe the current VR market is big enough to be a viable source of persistent and growing revenue for them to pay salaries. I do think there is an opportunity on long-term, expensive-to-produce feature stories where VR is offered more as a package deal to an advertiser rather than the sole output format of the report. That aligns an advertiser with innovation, even if those that actually experience it is statistically small. But those types of sales deals are expensive tactical one-offs, not strategic plans. Not yet, anyway.