If this is the non-sticking coating thing behind the pay wall, here is an article from 2013 readable for everyone: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2356793/No-wh...
Don't link to it.
Wow, I've just defended the Daily Mail. This is a weird feeling.
The other two are the highly flamebait opinion columnists (Littlejohn, Hopkins) and the "women's" coverage for non-feminist women: celebrities, clothes, "sidebar of shame" and so on. The latter is hugely profitable and popular for some reason. A unique combination of slut-shaming while at the same time telling you where you can buy the outfit.
The Guardian is financed by a trust. It doesn't necessarily need to be profitable.
However, yes, it is currently hemorrhaging money.
It is.