Mary Hodder shared, in her report from day two of the Digital Media Summit, this tiny tidbit.
I chatted with Craig Calder of NYT Digital, who told me that their archives generate around $1 million a year in revenue, but it’s declining. He said mostly what’s accessed is less than 90 days old, but the revenue is still revenue.
This kind of revenue figure is always interesting to see. I’ll take it on face value because I have no other choice. I’m also going to assume that this is direct archive revenue, not via Lexis-Nexis, Factiva, etc. I expect those sources remain much higher revenue streams for the larger NYTimes company, if not the digital division.
Several questions come to mind. Is their revenue declining because their archive is less accessible than most, due to registration? Is it declining because there are alternate ways to retrieve similar information that bring them less revenue? (Factiva, Highbeam, etc.) Is it declining because no links to their archives (back to the accessibility)? Is it declining because the newshounds of the world know how to use the NYTimes link generator to create a link that will remain free to all as long the NYTimes continues to quietly support the blog links? I’d be amazed if this kind of linking has really an impact of note, but the more people that read the NYTimes.com information via blogs/aggregators, the more these free links spread.
I wouldn’t turn down $1 million in revenue, but strategically, for NYTD, I can imagine that they don’t spend much time worrying about this. As long as they can control their archive (whether or not it’s profitable), they can work on ways to make their business generate more cash.