3 ms·

> And we all know that consumers don't fork enough money to support ads-free journalism, which leads to perverse incentives. yes they do. susbcription-based mo

> And we all know that consumers don't fork enough money to support ads-free journalism, which leads to perverse incentives. yes they do. susbcription-based models are doing quite well. besides the big heavyweights, in UK alone there are several smaller and successful subscription-based magazines: the TLS, the economist, the spectator etc. in us sports there's 'the athletic' and its clones.

ndarwincorn 7y ago
> 'the athletic' and its clones None of which have actually taken off their runway as far as I know.
- blaser-waffle 7y ago
  Indeed. This is the first time I've heard of it.
pokler 7y ago
> several smaller and successful subscription-based magazines: ... the economist, ... Maybe I am misreading, but did you mean to imply that The Economist is a 'small' newspaper? It has been around since the 1840s.
- kristjankalm 7y ago
  compared to the best known subscription success stories -- the NYT, WP -- it certainly seems significantly smaller. but i agree, that comparison isn't very valid, it's certainly a heavyweight amongst magazines.
  - skinnymuch 7y ago
    Is WP WaPo or something else? WaPo went for only a few hundred million when sold. Economist around the same time was valued 3-5x more at $1B. Did WaPo turn things around that much? Economist is mostly owned by super rich elite families, so prestige would’ve entered what they paid too. But WaPo was purchased by Bezos so not likely he was super skimpy on the price (even being considerably “poorer” back then)
    - uncletaco 7y ago
      Yeah they did. After being bought by Bezos they made a number of changes that have been for the better. They've turned a profit over the last few years based on their growing subscriber base and their digital publishing business. Of course they've built it all using AWS and I would love to learn more about how they leverage that platform.
      - skinnymuch 7y ago
        I see. Interesting. I know WaPo used to do deals with Prime too. Even with that, NYT has to be much bigger and their profit is only around 2x Economists. Economist is pretty big in most metrics.
- eigenrick 7y ago
  "Old" doesn't mean "Large". However, in this case you're right. They have 1.6 million subscribers, 50% are digital. Interestingly, a 50% digital rate probably puts them far above all of the other "Old" periodicals.

ndarwincorn 7y ago

> 'the athletic' and its clones None of which have actually taken off their runway as far as I know.

blaser-waffle 7y ago
Indeed. This is the first time I've heard of it.

pokler 7y ago

> several smaller and successful subscription-based magazines: ... the economist, ... Maybe I am misreading, but did you mean to imply that The Economist is a 'small' newspaper? It has been around since the 1840s.

kristjankalm 7y ago
compared to the best known subscription success stories -- the NYT, WP -- it certainly seems significantly smaller. but i agree, that comparison isn't very valid, it's certainly a heavyweight amongst magazines.
- skinnymuch 7y ago
  Is WP WaPo or something else? WaPo went for only a few hundred million when sold. Economist around the same time was valued 3-5x more at $1B. Did WaPo turn things around that much? Economist is mostly owned by super rich elite families, so prestige would’ve entered what they paid too. But WaPo was purchased by Bezos so not likely he was super skimpy on the price (even being considerably “poorer” back then)
  - uncletaco 7y ago
    Yeah they did. After being bought by Bezos they made a number of changes that have been for the better. They've turned a profit over the last few years based on their growing subscriber base and their digital publishing business. Of course they've built it all using AWS and I would love to learn more about how they leverage that platform.
    - skinnymuch 7y ago
      I see. Interesting. I know WaPo used to do deals with Prime too. Even with that, NYT has to be much bigger and their profit is only around 2x Economists. Economist is pretty big in most metrics.
eigenrick 7y ago
"Old" doesn't mean "Large". However, in this case you're right. They have 1.6 million subscribers, 50% are digital. Interestingly, a 50% digital rate probably puts them far above all of the other "Old" periodicals.