Bloomberg:
July 9 (Bloomberg) -- New York Times Co. said in a survey of print subscribers that it's considering a $5 monthly fee for access to its namesake newspaper's Web site.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I have this site bookmarked, but I hardly go to it. Looks like I will be removing it entirely from my Favorites list.
Excellent idea!!!! A subscription fee for the New York Times will FINALLY send this so-called newspaper off the financial cliff and into the black-hole of bankruptcy!!!! Please NYT, do it----PLEASE!!!!
Plenty of good ideas here.
Grim truth is that ad revenue across-the-board is taking big hits. And OK, online models better enabled (long overdue) metrics for advertising.
Nevertheless, I can't friggin believe NYT, or other biggies. can't monetize online content w/o relying on a paid subscription model. BETTER TARGETING is the key.
Simply require a login AND completion of a secure, modest and maybe annual survey for profiling individual preferences/tastes. Each subsequent click further appends the profile.
Classic filthy-rich Google is free, bearing no content costs...but can't very well pre-survey the user.
Or OK, also offer fewer and untargeted ads for institutions, the well endowed and for the privacy freaks with a paid subscription.
Razed forests, porch/yard clutter (and clogged snowblowers) are so last millennium. And typically discounted subscription prices of yore didn't even cover print/distribution costs.
Going to a pay model will kill the drive-by traffic off of Google News that clicks on the ad links and banners on their pages. Once the traffic to the advertisers drops, they'll lose more money than they gain with the subscription fees.
Get rid of the ink and you've got the cheapest toilet paper in town.
I would pay $5 if I can read NYT without any ads.
I don't know? There is so much information out there, much the same and better than the NYT.
I buy the Times along everyday if more people actually would read the news the papers would not be in trouble.
Perhaps, but if I want to read fiction, I can go to Borders or Barnes and Noble...
I'd pay $5 bucks a month for the NYT - come on that's like $0.17 a day. Sundays just wouldn't be the same without Frank Rich's OpEds.
With all the penny-pinching going on in my household, I will not be paying a subscription fee to the NY Times for access to their website. Sorry, NY Times, you are no longer a necessity, or haven't you already noticed that? I will keep my $60/year and I will simply go somewhere else and get my news.
Are you really that dim? Do you think the NY times is the only paper thinking about doing this! Every single news outlet is thinking about charging for their online content, so in the near future anywhere you go online will require a fee! The most sort after innovation right now is figuring out a way to monetize the internet and at the rate technology is advancing it won't be long B4 someone finds a way of doing it. The most valuable commodity out there isn't oil or diamonds, its information and people like you are irrational to think it should be handed out for free!
I like the New York Times and would pay $ 5.00 a month for access to their website. I paid a yearly subscription rate before but then they offered it free again. I want newspapers (the good ones, anyway) to be profitable.
We would pay too!
Sorry pal, the New York Times if FAR from profitable... When you have to borrow 250 mil from a Mexican Billionaire, you've got major issues---and they've brought on all of their issues themselves!!!
I think it's a good idea. It could be a way to save many newspapers. I'd pay a $5 monthly subscription price.
Me too.
Not me. I don't have to read the New York Times to get my news.
What's frightening these media moguls? There are too many of them on the Internet -- all with the same news. That's called redundancy. They are refusing to come to terms with that, scrambling at every turn to think up another band-aid scheme.
News organizations used to be protected geographically and demographically. They were the only place in town for advertisers. That has changed. There are only so many advertisers. There is only so much news.
Many newspapers/on-line news outlets will be gone very shortly.
Present interesting and in-depth news; commentary with some intellect behind it; outstanding photography; easy-to-comment formats for your readers, without censorship of opinions (versus moderators to weed out the usual commentary no-no's). Then you will be one of the news sites that sticks around.
1. Force ALL online readers to watch one commercial in order to log on to the NYT site...and then another one every 7 minutes...just the way Hulu does it.
2. Show the countdown on the screen while the commercial is playing so people feel like they have some control/warning. [Psychologically that will make people more likely to stick it out b/c they will realize that it is not much time given what they get for it.].
3. Do not give people the option of refusing to participate in this. It is the price one must pay in order to have a good paper. Period.
4. Play hardball with ALL advertisers to make sure the commercials are fun/good quality.
5. Hire a great PR firm to play up this whole experiment. That will make people curious and advertisers happy.
6. Stick with this--and do NOT listen to the nihilists who say access should be completely free.
7. Recognize that a sizable % of the stories about the death of newspapers and print are probably coming from various PR efforts to sell products (i.e., the Kindle and books such as Free) that are trying to make money at the expense of "old" media. People who should know better are mistaking PR for "news"!
That's reasonable. Are you reading this. NYT?
My college library would probably provide free access to this, as they do with other paid newspapers online. But, if I didn't have that service available, I would probably pay $5 to get access to NYT. The Sunday edition alone would be worth the price.
I get my news from many different sources, but there are certain Times sections that can't be replicated: Opinion, Travel, Book Review, Magazine, etc.
The Times has become completely worthless...I have saved so much money since I have stopped paying the ridiculous price the Times charges...I only read throwaway papers offered in NY area and have no intention of paying a red cent for a paper again, whether online or in print.
I'll bet you pay at least $ 3.00 for a cup of coffee to sip while you're reading your throwaway paper.
didn't they try a subscription service already? how'd that work for them?
i can live without the NYT web site. there are literally thousands more - often who subscribe to the same AP service - or NYT service.
News gathering costs money! It costs money to send reporters out there to catch politicians like South Carolina Gov. Sanford when they do something wrong! Would you be willing to work for free?
Sorry, the Times can come up with strategies to generate revenue WITHOUT charging for its website...many sites do, including Huffpo...so my sympathies for the Times reporters? Non-existent.
Firstly, it is questionable whether Gov. Sanford has "done something wrong."
Secondly, advertising has always paid the way for newspapers. Advertising will continue to pay the way for online news. If newspapers had relied on subscriptions, they would have gone out of business a long time ago. As their expenses will be vastly reduced in the future (no printing presses or distribution systems), they won't need subscription revenues at all.
Now that all newspapers have to move on to the Internet, there are too many of them. They are no longer demographically and geographically protected. When it comes to advertising, news organizations are no longer in a buyers' market. On the Internet, advertisers are not forced to go with regional papers any more. They can take their pick from the thousands. Hundreds will not survive.
Good luck with that
Come on back and tell us how less people are reading your website than reading your newspaper
Loading comments…
Posted: 07- 9-09 05:03 PM