Comments on: Gazing into NAA’s 2009 crystal ball and seeing very different things http://timwindsor.com/2008/10/03/gazing-into-naas-2009-crystal-ball-and-seeing-very-different-things/ Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:25:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: Richard Wakefield http://timwindsor.com/2008/10/03/gazing-into-naas-2009-crystal-ball-and-seeing-very-different-things/comment-page-1/#comment-1427 Richard Wakefield Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:43:30 +0000 http://timwindsor.com/?p=160#comment-1427 We have a considerably more pessimistic forecast of the (NAA) newspaper advertising expenditures - not to be confused with ad revenue, which is considerably different and lower than ad expenditures.<br><br>We see for 2008: print down 16.1% to $35.4 billion; online down 2.4% to $3.1 billion; total NAA ad expenditures down 15.2% to $38.5 billion.<br><br>We see for 2009: print down 15.6% from 2008 to $29.9 billion; online down 27.7% to $2.2 billion; total ad expenditures down 16.5% to $32.1 billion.<br><br>Yes, it's a really gloomy forecast. But, we prepared this forecast using state-of-the-art econometric models and the only category with a brief history is "online".<br><br>Our web site has more details. We have a considerably more pessimistic forecast of the (NAA) newspaper advertising expenditures – not to be confused with ad revenue, which is considerably different and lower than ad expenditures.

We see for 2008: print down 16.1% to $35.4 billion; online down 2.4% to $3.1 billion; total NAA ad expenditures down 15.2% to $38.5 billion.

We see for 2009: print down 15.6% from 2008 to $29.9 billion; online down 27.7% to $2.2 billion; total ad expenditures down 16.5% to $32.1 billion.

Yes, it's a really gloomy forecast. But, we prepared this forecast using state-of-the-art econometric models and the only category with a brief history is “online”.

Our web site has more details.

]]> By: Richard Wakefield http://timwindsor.com/2008/10/03/gazing-into-naas-2009-crystal-ball-and-seeing-very-different-things/comment-page-1/#comment-1293 Richard Wakefield Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:43:30 +0000 http://timwindsor.com/?p=160#comment-1293 We have a considerably more pessimistic forecast of the (NAA) newspaper advertising expenditures - not to be confused with ad revenue, which is considerably different and lower than ad expenditures.<br><br>We see for 2008: print down 16.1% to $35.4 billion; online down 2.4% to $3.1 billion; total NAA ad expenditures down 15.2% to $38.5 billion.<br><br>We see for 2009: print down 15.6% from 2008 to $29.9 billion; online down 27.7% to $2.2 billion; total ad expenditures down 16.5% to $32.1 billion.<br><br>Yes, it's a really gloomy forecast. But, we prepared this forecast using state-of-the-art econometric models and the only category with a brief history is "online".<br><br>Our web site has more details. We have a considerably more pessimistic forecast of the (NAA) newspaper advertising expenditures – not to be confused with ad revenue, which is considerably different and lower than ad expenditures.

We see for 2008: print down 16.1% to $35.4 billion; online down 2.4% to $3.1 billion; total NAA ad expenditures down 15.2% to $38.5 billion.

We see for 2009: print down 15.6% from 2008 to $29.9 billion; online down 27.7% to $2.2 billion; total ad expenditures down 16.5% to $32.1 billion.

Yes, it's a really gloomy forecast. But, we prepared this forecast using state-of-the-art econometric models and the only category with a brief history is “online”.

Our web site has more details.

]]> By: Richard Wakefield http://timwindsor.com/2008/10/03/gazing-into-naas-2009-crystal-ball-and-seeing-very-different-things/comment-page-1/#comment-47 Richard Wakefield Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:43:30 +0000 http://timwindsor.com/?p=160#comment-47 We have a considerably more pessimistic forecast of the (NAA) newspaper advertising expenditures - not to be confused with ad revenue, which is considerably different and lower than ad expenditures.<br><br>We see for 2008: print down 16.1% to $35.4 billion; online down 2.4% to $3.1 billion; total NAA ad expenditures down 15.2% to $38.5 billion.<br><br>We see for 2009: print down 15.6% from 2008 to $29.9 billion; online down 27.7% to $2.2 billion; total ad expenditures down 16.5% to $32.1 billion.<br><br>Yes, it's a really gloomy forecast. But, we prepared this forecast using state-of-the-art econometric models and the only category with a brief history is "online".<br><br>Our web site has more details. We have a considerably more pessimistic forecast of the (NAA) newspaper advertising expenditures – not to be confused with ad revenue, which is considerably different and lower than ad expenditures.

We see for 2008: print down 16.1% to $35.4 billion; online down 2.4% to $3.1 billion; total NAA ad expenditures down 15.2% to $38.5 billion.

We see for 2009: print down 15.6% from 2008 to $29.9 billion; online down 27.7% to $2.2 billion; total ad expenditures down 16.5% to $32.1 billion.

Yes, it's a really gloomy forecast. But, we prepared this forecast using state-of-the-art econometric models and the only category with a brief history is “online”.

Our web site has more details.

]]> By: Boom. Bust. Boom. — Zero Percent Idle http://timwindsor.com/2008/10/03/gazing-into-naas-2009-crystal-ball-and-seeing-very-different-things/comment-page-1/#comment-44 Boom. Bust. Boom. — Zero Percent Idle Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:04:04 +0000 http://timwindsor.com/?p=160#comment-44 [...] of course, that these are just projections. You have to look only as far as last December to see how far ad projections can be off when conditions on the ground [...] [...] of course, that these are just projections. You have to look only as far as last December to see how far ad projections can be off when conditions on the ground [...]

]]>