3 ms·
I really hope this works for them. I subscribe to LWN and don't mind paying for things that I find valuable (even news). I also like the idea of the reader bein
by jordanb 17y ago
I really hope this works for them. I subscribe to LWN and don't mind paying for things that I find valuable (even news). I also like the idea of the reader being the real customer instead of the advertiser.
But I don't think it will work.
The problem is that the 50¢ a copy we used to pay was never the real money maker for newspapers. What made the business so fat was the near-monopoly control they had over many components of local advertising. That control is gone and it's never coming back.
- samg 17y agoBut remember one of their largest costs is also disappearing. Newspapers almost certainly lost money per copy by selling it for 50¢, and made up for it by selling ads. The problem will be selling that same metaphor of "copies" or subscriptions, when each additional subscription costs them next to nothing.
- potatolicious 17y agoBut the real cost was never the production of the physical newspaper - it was always centered on content. Content really hasn't gotten any cheaper to produce, though... the fact that they're saving a few pennies a copy (that they used to sell for money) by distributing their content for free online is really little comfort to them I'm sure.
- joshu 17y agoThe typical newspaper pays 15-20% of revenues towards content creation and the rest to printing and distribution. The NYT spends a great deal more. Perhaps higher than 40% IIRC.