3 ms·

I agree - the business model seems a bit forced. I think your first point will translate into quite a reduced maximum popularity. I would have tried the oppos

by mrtron 17y ago

I agree - the business model seems a bit forced. I think your first point will translate into quite a reduced maximum popularity. I would have tried the opposite approach and gave sites some easy way to embed clips of the interviews on their sites/blogs. People are used to paying for live video (PPV). People are used to paying to download content. They aren't used to paying for old content. This seems to be like giving away your new hits for free and charging for the long tail - not sure that is ideal.

cookiecaper 17y ago
I agree that an opposite model would probably have worked out better -- charge for early access instead of archive access. Those who appreciate and anticipate new installments can pay to receive them sooner, [past] interviewees are perhaps less disturbed because the content will ultimately become free, and users searching the web for things like "Paul Graham interview" or similar would be able to find the content and get hooked, thereby creating new paying customers. It'd really be interesting to hear Mixergy's thought process on this, though.