Haymarket is ready to charge for online mags
Discussion
Story in the Standard today http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/ar...
Lets hope it does not come here although I suppose the editors' car fleets must be paid for somehow !
Lets hope it does not come here although I suppose the editors' car fleets must be paid for somehow !
I doubt this place will be charged anytime soon, if they have brains (which they do) then they'll realise all the ad revenue here is sold straight off the back of the huge numbers of people coming through the site, which I would imagine the vast majority are forum users, many of which would probably leave if they had to pay.
fathomfive said:
Soovy said:
Well it worked for the Times. No wait.....
How is the online Times faring these days since it started charging?Indy said:
The verdict, according to industry feedback I’m receiving this morning, is a thumbs down. News International has revealed today that 105,000 people have paid up for access to the Times website since it went behind a paywall with its newly-established Sunday Times sister site. As a topline number it’s not bad, but most observers regard it as an inflated figure.
Inflated, not so much because it includes iPad and Kindle subscribers (somewhere around 30,000) but because it adds in all of those who have enagaged in any sort of transaction since the big experiment started four months ago. Some, perhaps many, of those will have drifted away after giving the walled garden a try. News International admits that many of those included in its top figure are “single copy or pay-as-you-go customers” who are far less valuable than subscribers though an important part of the business plan.
Among those least impressed by the revelations is media buyer Rob Lynam, press buyer at MEC. He said that although News International was claiming that some 50,000 people of the total were monthly subscribers to the sites, some of those would have paid just £1 for an introductory 30 day offer.
Very poor.Inflated, not so much because it includes iPad and Kindle subscribers (somewhere around 30,000) but because it adds in all of those who have enagaged in any sort of transaction since the big experiment started four months ago. Some, perhaps many, of those will have drifted away after giving the walled garden a try. News International admits that many of those included in its top figure are “single copy or pay-as-you-go customers” who are far less valuable than subscribers though an important part of the business plan.
Among those least impressed by the revelations is media buyer Rob Lynam, press buyer at MEC. He said that although News International was claiming that some 50,000 people of the total were monthly subscribers to the sites, some of those would have paid just £1 for an introductory 30 day offer.
Great timing as well since they have just put up the cost of subs.
As for the run down on the Times issues I am sure that information is from November last year. Is there anything more upto date on its success or otherwise now that it has 'matured' a little and most of the freebies have run their course?
As for the run down on the Times issues I am sure that information is from November last year. Is there anything more upto date on its success or otherwise now that it has 'matured' a little and most of the freebies have run their course?
tubbystu said:
And if those numbers include paper-print version subscribers, who get free access to the web version within their subscription cost, it is only getting ever worse.
Be interesting to see how, and if, they take the paywall down.
There was a piece about this a while ago on Radio 4. Be interesting to see how, and if, they take the paywall down.
The story was IIRC that it was a failure and inflated and spun figuresd were being used. I can't remember exactly if they counted print subscribers but it would't surprise me.
Daily mail is free and has shot to number two spot overtaking one of the famous US on line papers another US one tried a paywall and gave up as it also failed.
They are looking at different models of making it work. Like 30 pages a month free then you pay etc etc
Paywalls for magazines is a non-starter unless you can offer absolutely unique content.
Newspapers will never be able to make a success of pay walls simply because it is not possible to copyright news.
The FT can do it because of its specialist status and the unique content that is perceived of having value. If I want to read LEX I have to go to the FT. Film review in The Times? So what? I'll get just as good for free from "Rotten Tomatoes"
Pay walls for car, gadget magazines is never going to work. Want to read a road test of a (INSERT MAKE AND MODEL)?. FIne. Just type "road+ test+make+model" into Google.
Newspapers will never be able to make a success of pay walls simply because it is not possible to copyright news.
The FT can do it because of its specialist status and the unique content that is perceived of having value. If I want to read LEX I have to go to the FT. Film review in The Times? So what? I'll get just as good for free from "Rotten Tomatoes"
Pay walls for car, gadget magazines is never going to work. Want to read a road test of a (INSERT MAKE AND MODEL)?. FIne. Just type "road+ test+make+model" into Google.
Paywalls for magazines is a non-starter unless you can offer absolutely unique content.
Newspapers will never be able to make a success of pay walls simply because it is not possible to copyright news.
The FT can do it because of its specialist status and the unique content that is perceived of having value. If I want to read LEX I have to go to the FT. Film review in The Times? So what? I'll get just as good for free from "Rotten Tomatoes"
Pay walls for car, gadget magazines is never going to work. Want to read a road test of a (INSERT MAKE AND MODEL)?. FIne. Just type "road+ test+make+model" into Google.
Newspapers will never be able to make a success of pay walls simply because it is not possible to copyright news.
The FT can do it because of its specialist status and the unique content that is perceived of having value. If I want to read LEX I have to go to the FT. Film review in The Times? So what? I'll get just as good for free from "Rotten Tomatoes"
Pay walls for car, gadget magazines is never going to work. Want to read a road test of a (INSERT MAKE AND MODEL)?. FIne. Just type "road+ test+make+model" into Google.
Paywalls for magazines is a non-starter unless you can offer absolutely unique content.
Newspapers will never be able to make a success of pay walls simply because it is not possible to copyright news.
The FT can do it because of its specialist status and the unique content that is perceived of having value. If I want to read LEX I have to go to the FT. Film review in The Times? So what? I'll get just as good for free from "Rotten Tomatoes"
Pay walls for car, gadget magazines is never going to work. Want to read a road test of a (INSERT MAKE AND MODEL)?. FIne. Just type "road+ test+make+model" into Google.
Newspapers will never be able to make a success of pay walls simply because it is not possible to copyright news.
The FT can do it because of its specialist status and the unique content that is perceived of having value. If I want to read LEX I have to go to the FT. Film review in The Times? So what? I'll get just as good for free from "Rotten Tomatoes"
Pay walls for car, gadget magazines is never going to work. Want to read a road test of a (INSERT MAKE AND MODEL)?. FIne. Just type "road+ test+make+model" into Google.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff