New York Times sells half online inventory through ad networks


nytimes1.jpgADOTAS — In the New York Times earnings call, there was some interesting tidbits, including how much digital inventory it sells through ad networks and how shining star has lost some of its luster.

According to Martin A. Nisenholtz, senior vice president, digital operations, when asked about how much ad inventory sold through networks: “I would say that from an industry-wide perspective, you are probably looking today at around 50%. Some of our properties are above that, some of them are below that, but that’s about where the industry is at this point.”

Earlier he said: “We’re seeing or we have seen an increasing amount of inventory on the marketplace and we’ve seen that pouring on for the last year or so through the social networks and through other what I would call, non-traditional content companies.

“…There are over 300 ad networks in the space now. And so, the combination of those two things has put some pressure on rate. Having said that, as I said in response to the last caller, we have actually seen not only… we’ve seen the strengthening in rate over most of the course of the year at Where you will not see that is in the less premium inventory, which is the display inventory. So that’s the disparity between the two businesses on the display side.

You will not have the same kind of rate strength in a brand that is not as strong as The Times brand. And I think you will see that across the rest of the industry as well. You saw it in Yahoo’s results yesterday. So the display business overall, and I mean from an industry perspective, from a rate perspective, has weakened this year. I don’t think that you can say that the same thing from a pure CPM perspective has occurred at”

— Express your opinion, comment below.


  1. This makes sense as the integrity of the New York Times brand and the trust the user places in it accrues to the advertiser, whether branding or direct response, in addition to the higher demos.

  2. So the Times complains that networks are creating excess inventory supply and driving prices down, and then they contribute their supply to a network to sell? Am I missing something?

    Also, they claim not to have incurred any price erosion. Well, if you sell a handful of inventory at $20cpm to blue-chip marketers and the rest at $1cpm to a network, then guess what, you have rate erosion.

    I don’t understand the doublespeak.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here