SlowAppreciation

Thank you, I appreciate that. Looking out ~ 5 years, probably something like this. Though the farther out you go, the more print—and print advertising in particular—will decline. $500M print sub $100M print ad $300M digital advertising $300M "Other" This has been by far the biggest pushback on this presentation. I think many believe if Trump loses re-election, NYT loses all momentum and may even start shedding some of the new subs. But we always live in unprecedented times, and crazy things are always happening. So to me, producing high-quality journalism around those events seems timelessly valuable. Trump surely brought in more new people to NYT than would have otherwise. But if he loses, I don't think sub adds stop, nor that existing subs. Definitely a good chance I'm wrong, but I feel like the risk/reward is in my favor. Time will tell. Yeah this I think is a more valid criticism than the dependency on Trump. And I think you're right that with today's product @ $100/yr, you're not going to get 22.5m domestic subs. But they can get really aggressive with price, where at a certain point each new sub is pure profit. And they're only going to keep investing more in their product. So you may not get 22.5M people paying $100/yr for the News. But will you get a few million paying for cooking, or games, or podcasts, or parenting content, or video (live news? books? etc.)? And could you then up-sell those people by bundling with other stuff, like News? Maybe.... Honestly there's a lot they can do now that all the digital infrastructure is built and they have a customer base that is generally affluent and engaged with the product. Who knows what it looks like, but I think they have a good foundation in place and am excited to see where it goes.

I'll take it!

"And if I can just perhaps add, John. Part of also what we're looking at is the period of the 2016 election, where we hit a peak, as we said, in the first quarter 2017, not as big a peak as we've just hit now. And then after a couple of quarters, our audiences fell back, but a lot of people have come to The Times because of that, and they stayed. And we -- after the Trump Bump effect diminished, we had a much higher run rate of subscribers then. And particularly given what Meredith says about the large number of registered lockdown users we're gaining, we've got real confidence that, although certainly, a lot of people are coming to us now for the coronavirus, that many of them will stay, and we hope, will become loyal, long-term users and subscribers of The Times." "To put that in context, 587,000, total digital-only additions is 2/3 more net adds than we brought in, in the first quarter of 2017 at the peak of the so-called Trump bump." “Between…early 2015 and 2018, we more or less halved churn through better tactics and more expertise. Our challenge now is really holding churn down as we massively expand the base. And I would say so far, that's going well." “The success of our price rise tests, and our growing confidence in our ability to deliver discrete messages to different segments of our subscriber base has convinced us that we can execute a price rise for tenured subscribers with minimal risk of reducing new subscriber growth momentum.”

Anyone else following The New York Times? 6.5M Subscribers, growing 30%+ YoY ~$100 ARPU 4X more subscribers than the print era peak Management thinks they could reach 30M subscribers Owns one of—if not the—most popular podcasts in the world Profitable (and FCF > Income) Few competitors, and NYT is one of only a handful of publishers investing in high-quality journalism Flywheel business Customers have $0 marginal costs Their model is high fixed cost, low variable cost. So should have tons of operating leverage $0 Debt $725M Cash/Long-term securities I made a deck if anyone is interested.

Well ROE has doubled too...

The only thing I could see is maybe it has slowed down their Chinese expansion? The stock was up a lot when the first Shanghai store opened, so I think the market is discounting significant profits from China. If that ramp gets delayed a year the PV is less? Doesn't seem like it considering this was announced 4 days ago: http://www.timeoutshanghai.com/features/Blog-Blog/72339/Costco-is-opening-its-second-Shanghai-store-in-Pudong.html

Howley is former Transdisgm CEO right?

And laptops are more expensive than desktops... miniaturization and portability are expensive

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2019/08/15/oscar-health-lands-berkshire-hathaway-deal-ahead-of-obamacare-expansion/#180561442051

https://www.wsj.com/articles/inflated-bond-ratings-helped-spur-the-financial-crisis-theyre-back-11565194951

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fed-to-create-payments-system-to-speed-money-transfers-11565026200?mod=hp_lead_pos4

https://minesafetydisclosures.com/blog/2019/7/23/part-ll-an-overview-of-visa

https://www.pressconnects.com/story/money/2019/07/09/oakdale-mall-sears-sold-3-million/1675604001/

Thanks. Can you elaborate on "International"? Is that percentage of cross-border transactions? Harder to estimate than the other revenue sources because I don't think Visa explicitly breaks out what % of transactions are cross border, their payment volume or yield. I've seen estimates that the yield is around 1%, but still kind of a guess. So this is just estimating growth in revenue, rather than the underlying drivers (payment and transaction volume).

I put together a quick Visa valuation model if anyone is interested. You can plug in your own assumptions for: payment volume growth transaction volume growth service fee yield data processing fee per transaction operating margin etc. Original: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/138Ai2ifYT6jyo6v-ur8ASO0r-FycLlsdtFbr8Xj6W4k/edit?usp=sharing If you want a copy: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/138Ai2ifYT6jyo6v-ur8ASO0r-FycLlsdtFbr8Xj6W4k/copy Cells highlighted in green are editable once you make your own copy.