Wall Street Journal now the #1 selling US newspaper | Hacker News Reader

Wall Street Journal now the #1 selling US newspaper

reuters.com

22 pointscredo21 comments

It's no reason for celebration if your main competitor and #1 drops 17% and you only gain 0.5% compared to a year earlier.

That means your industry is in serious trouble.

Surviving is a reasonable cause for celebration. May not last though

No. That small growth is good means that your industry is mature.

... And you gained .5% because you can count online subscriptions as subscriptions. They didn't break it out but I bet they had a similar dive in paper sales.

Keep in mind that WSJ charges a substantial fee for online subscriptions, and probably ends up profiting more on them than on paper subscriptions.

Ah, good point, without the breakout even that is meaningless.

That also means that if this is a conversion issue that it may be a one-time affair.

The next years figures will tell that story.

Working link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sns-ap-us-wall-street...

But how does the print revenue compare to the online revenue?

You have to wonder if the WSJ pay-wall is keeping more of their readership in the dead-tree world vs something like the NYT.

Why would WSJ care? Either way, the readers pay.

I'm not a huge fan of Murdoch, but I respect him for insisting on the simple principle of charging money for his product, while the hyposphere keeps twitting on how he "just doesn't get it".

Being the king of the hill on a sinking ship isn't exactly impressive.

That was one painful mixed metaphor.

....

Response to dschobel above. Nytimes stats:

http://publishing2.com/2007/07/17/newspaper-online-vs-print-...

    *  Online unique users (12 month average): 13,372,000
    * Print circulation – weekday: 1,120,420
    * Print circulation – Sunday: 1,627,062

    * Total advertising revenue: $483,594,000
    * Online advertising revenue: $51,000,000

You're right. Shall we go with "king of a hill of quicksand?"

Sad. I used to read it when I had the chance, but now I pick up the FT out of principle.

Worth quoting Paul Krugman: """

1) The WSJ editorial page is wrong about everything.

2) If you think the WSJ editorial page is right about something, see rule #1"""

Can you say 'Begging the Question' ;-)

Frankly, I really don't think Krugman is any position to criticize. He has a terrible track record himself. The worst thing is that his actual work in economics (e.g., international trade theory) is really good - but he makes completely unwarranted and unsubstantiated claims well beyond anything theory supports. Then, those suppositions are given credence just because of who he is.

I happen to believe that Krugman is mostly right, and a darn good writer. (but I am a Social Democrat who likes to read right-wing newspapers because they are usually so well funded :)

The issue most people have with Krugman is that he's living this odd dual-life between respected economist and partisan. He intertwines the two in such a way that you take <serious economics> + <krugman's belief system> and get policy recommendations out the other end.

So it's seriously compelling to people who share his beliefs, anathema to those who don't, and kind of annoying to everyone else who notices the context switches and hand waving.

"people who share his beliefs, those who don't" == Everybody

So you're saying nobody notices the context switches?

It's been a few years since I read it, but the WSJ had some of the best primary reporting of any periodical on the market, and certainly the best of any daily.

Yes, the opinion page was bad, but I thought the purpose of a newspaper was news.

You mean opinions like this: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020425140457434...

I sometimes agree or disagree with the opinion page, but in general I find it thought provoking.

It used to be good, but has been going slowly downhill since Rupert took over. The number of increased sensationalism of the headlines for various articles is particularly annoying.

Opinion page? Is that what they call the delusional/surreal comedic essays at the back of the first section of the WSJ? It was always good for a laugh...

I agree about the news in the WSJ. First class. But I wish they wouldn't bundle it with the ideology section. (also, the FT is more relevant to us Europeans)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com