3 ms·
It might be too granular. One of the things I like about print magazines (and newspapers) is the serendipity--you read something that wouldn't normally grab yo
by mattkrause 10y ago
It might be too granular.
One of the things I like about print magazines (and newspapers) is the serendipity--you read something that wouldn't normally grab your attention because it's on the next page and...you've already paid for it, after all.
Paying per article seems like it would push people only to read things that they're sure they'll enjoy (based on the author, title, etc).
- js2 10y agoTrue, but I already have more than I can read. You could always let readers make the decision to pay after reading, with maybe a reasonable limit.
- mattkrause 10y agoI do too, but...here I am. I wonder if an opt-out payment scheme would work: you authorize the site to bill you up to (say) $5/month. When you finish reading an article, the site deducts $0.25 from your account unless you take some simple action. If your account is empty, you read for free until the next month, and maybe some "proud support/well read" flair or something. It does put a limit on the site's monthly revenue, but perhaps ensuring that readers feel like they're getting what they paid for helps make up for that.