Look, it's your site. You do what you want, of course. But getting into charging for content is a whole new game. Do you think you'd get some of the past inter

Look, it's your site. You do what you want, of course. But getting into charging for content is a whole new game. Do you think you'd get some of the past interviewees if they'd known you were going to charge for access to the interview? Where's their cut? And others wouldn't have wanted to appear at all if their precious time was just going to a tiny paid audience. You say you're not happy with the view rates on older interviews. I consider this a problem with your site's design, which is really not much more than a blog. Go and look at TED's site, they have an excellent idea where the front page shows highlights from the past. Implementing something similar might work really well for you. I also think you're overestimating the ability or willingness of people here (your obvious audience) to pay anything at all. People here are trying to be "ramen profitable" and $25 is a lot of ramen. For every blowhard blustering (presumably making use of the satellite internet on their G) about how $25 is nothing and anyone who can't afford that should probably just give up, I guarantee you there's a hundred who can not just drop $25/m on a whim to watch some inspirational videos. I just think it's a bad idea. But like I said, hey, it's your site, and congratulations on your success so far.