According to an article in the International Herald Tribune, Republicans and Democracts estimat there to be to about 6-7 million Americans living abroad:
There are no official figures on the number of Americans residing outside of the United States because of the difficulty in keeping track of a largely transient group, some of whom do not alert officials that they have moved overseas. Estimates from both political parties put the number at six to seven million.
At 6.5 million, that would make a conglomeration of the U.S. citizens living abroad the 13th most populous state just ahead of Massachusetts, but the Democrats living abroad will get just 22 delegates, the same number as South Dakota and just 5 percent of the California delegation. California is the most populous state in the United States, with 35 million residents; South Dakota is the 46th, with 750,000 residents.
So here's the thing:
Advertisers don't like the IHT because they perceive it is being read by expat Americans (plenty of evidence of that in the blogosphere) but from a circulation sales and marketing point of view the International Herald Tribune, assuming a circulation of around 240,00o and let's say 2.5 readers per copy, then penetration, at thes figures is around 600,000, that is to say at an upper level of 10%.
How do these figures stack up with NYT national edition penetration of the USA and the NYT NY edition penetration of the NY area.
I can't be bothered to do the maths but if anyone can, please post a comment.
I guess the question is if the penetration really isn't that good, relative to absolute population estimates comparative to say various European nationals and the NYT, could we just ditch all the NYT editorial, American opinion and College Footballl and all move off to more profitable pastures as The World's Daily Newspaper before the WSJ/Times of London combo steals the prize from under the IHT's nose?