Guardian Australia rejects The Australian’s claims it has two years to prove commercial viability
Guardian Australia has rejected suggestions by rival publication The Australian its losses “have blown out to $14m”, stating it has in fact had a “revenue increase of 64 per cent last year”.
On Monday The Australian’s media section reported financial accounts for the 12 months ended June 30 showed the losses for the local operation of The Guardian were up from $6m in the prior corresponding period.
The Australian’s report stated: “Journalists, overheads and traffic-acquisition costs are pushing up operating costs as digital ad rates fall through the floor.”
In a follow-up report, The Australian said the digital publication had two years “to prove itself commercially viable before a multi-million-dollar loan is called in”. That loan is held by businessman Graeme Wood.
But Guardian Australia has rejected the claims in a statement this afternoon saying: “There is no specific timeline for the debt to be repaid”.
“Guardian Australia is owned by GMG and The Scott Trust, which has assets of over $2bn. We have external financing to fund the start up costs of the Australian venture. The investor has no equity, board seat or say in the operating of the business,” the company said in the statement.
“Our mission is to build a sustainable business in Australia, with Australian staff and paying Australian taxes. The business is currently on plan and has exceeded the expectations of the original plan.
“The overall financial stability of the group has allowed the Guardian to make vital investments in our digital products, our global expansion, local editorial teams, native advertising, data and programmatic capabilities.
“Our ability to make these investments at this time puts us in an extremely strong position compared with some local competitors,” the statement concluded.
McClelland
Speaking at an event today in relation to a question on what is expected in the year ahead, Guardian Australia managing director Ian McClelland said the company would be looking to diversify its business more.
“We are going to focus on creating non-advertising based revenue streams, that’s a sensible thing to do to diversify the business more. The benefit of doing that is great first party data collection, that’s a great way to do that. In the UK we have jobs classifieds, dating services, we have all these amazing things that collect data. We have some in Australia but we want more,” he said.
“I’m starting to see this always on partnership with clients rather than a campaign mentality. As they move to become more like publishers and creating content and managing and owning communities, they’re waking up to the fact that this is a 24/7 business. We’re in a brilliant place to help them achieve that.
“And recruitment, recruitment, recruitment. Still more people to go, 15 I can see at the moment,” he added.
Miranda Ward worked for Mumbrella from 2013 to 2017, eventually becoming deputy editor. Miranda joined Mumbrella in September 2013 from Sky News.
Linkedin
Oh what a shock, News Ltd is attacking a rival. This after they cried foul at SBS for not playing nice.
New day, same stuff that’s turning away the punters.
User ID not verified.
Say what?
User ID not verified.
who buys or reads The Australian anyway?
User ID not verified.
Why would anyone believe the crap News Corp papers, in particular The Oz and The Tele, publish about their rivals? It’s all so pathetic and transparent. There doesn’t appear to be even a tiny little pretence of credibility anymore.
User ID not verified.
The Australian having a go at a rival newspaper for running at a loss? LOL! Haven’t heard something that funny in a while. Pot, meet kettle.
User ID not verified.
News could have said:
“The Guardian were right about pay walls, ours have been a disaster and we’re going to take them down.”
The Australian article referred to above is behind a paywall. Therefore, the only reason that anyone read it is because Mumbrella subscribe to The Australian and re-wrote it here.
User ID not verified.
Where does this myth that news can be made profitable come from?
It’s always been subsidized, and promoted an agenda. Always. From governments, to trusts, to the revenue from associated businesses like classifieds, news has never stood on its own feet.
It would be a fucking revolution if someone developed a model where it did.
User ID not verified.
It would appear The Guardian is doing things to reduce or eliminate losses, while at The Australian the paper is only published to suit a very right wing section of the public. It has never worked.
User ID not verified.
I read the Guardian news app with it’s excellent journalism everyday both Australia and UK editions which works brilliant on my device and I’d happily fork out for a pay wall (if they ever decided to introduce one). To be honest I cant say that about the Australian nor it’s UK sister paper The Times even if they did work…..
User ID not verified.
You could easily crowd source (fund) the sustainability of the Guardian in Australia, but people would laugh at the idea of trying to raise money from the public to sustain the Australian. As for the proposition that the Guardian has two to prove itself commercially viable, well, the Australian may not be around to test that prediction.
User ID not verified.
With so many ex Daily Tele staff moving over to The Australian, ‘The Australian’ is nothing but a tabloid in disguise isn’t it?
I really enjoy the balanced journalism in The Guardian. Keep it up guys; you are doing a great job and can probably also sleep very well at night too.
User ID not verified.
Wow, glass houses and throwing stones from an extremely profitable The Australian
User ID not verified.