The Volokh Conspiracy - Washington Post Loses $1.10 Per Copy?

Virginia Postrel remarks concerning the results of the Washington Post Company:

"Per @Romenesko, Washpo lost $143 million through the first six months of this year." Which means they lose $1.10 PER COPY. Yikes."

That makes sense to me, but I do not hold myself out as an accounting expert or financial analyst. Question to professional analysts or accountants out there ... is that a fair way of representing the results of the newspaper division? I'm not disputing it, but would like a second opinion on whether that's a fair methodology for characterizing financial results, from someone who is pretty close to doing this for a living. Romenseko, writing at Poynter Online, says:

Graham tells investors: "We're not at all satisfied with results at The Post and Newsweek

Washington Post Co. chairman Don Graham, however, is thrilled with the results at Kaplan, which provides more than half of all Post Co. revenue, which has surged from $258 million in 1999 to more than $2 billion today. WP publisher Katharine Weymouth told shareholders that the newspaper division lost $143 million through the first six months of this year. In response to a question, she said that Post doesn't have a plan to start charging for its online content.

I'm not so concerned with finding the exact number of papers in question - assume if you like that the division works. My basic question is whether it is a fair way to represent results for a newspaper company or division like the Post.

	[Kenneth Anderson, September 13, 2009 at 10:34pm] Trackbacks Washington Post Loses $1.10 Per Copy? Virginia Postrel remarks concerning the results of the Washington Post Company: "Per @Romenesko, Washpo lost $143 million through the first six months of this year." Which means they lose $1.10 PER COPY. Yikes." That makes sense to me, but I do not hold myself out as an accounting expert or financial analyst. Question to professional analysts or accountants out there ... is that a fair way of representing the results of the newspaper division? I'm not disputing it, but would like a second opinion on whether that's a fair methodology for characterizing financial results, from someone who is pretty close to doing this for a living. Romenseko, writing at Poynter Online, says: Graham tells investors: "We're not at all satisfied with results at The Post and Newsweek Washington Post Co. chairman Don Graham, however, is thrilled with the results at Kaplan, which provides more than half of all Post Co. revenue, which has surged from $258 million in 1999 to more than $2 billion today. WP publisher Katharine Weymouth told shareholders that the newspaper division lost $143 million through the first six months of this year. In response to a question, she said that Post doesn't have a plan to start charging for its online content. I'm not so concerned with finding the exact number of papers in question - assume if you like that the division works. My basic question is whether it is a fair way to represent results for a newspaper company or division like the Post.