4 ms·

Surely the creator could have made more money by serving ads or something. I doubt the NYT paid them the full lifetime value of the site. And anyway, isn't the

Surely the creator could have made more money by serving ads or something. I doubt the NYT paid them the full lifetime value of the site. And anyway, isn't the NYT supposed to be reporting news or something? Since when has the most prestigious newspaper become a hub for fooling around?

dpark 5y ago
> made more money by serving ads That seems pretty unlikely. As a funnel to NYT games, the NYT decided this thing was worth over a million. It's very questionable whether Wardle could have extracted a million in revenue from ads on Wordle.
nverno 5y ago
It's entertainment, for the most part, and always has been. Crosswords have been popular in the NYT forever.
capeterson 5y ago
I'm sure it likely sold for enough that the owners can retire early and wealthy. Maybe they'd get more money serving ads, or maybe it's a fad and it dies out in a month or two. I'd rather just take the payout and move onto other personal projects, given that Wordle is pretty much complete.
motoxpro 5y ago
What the heck? You want the guy to run ads on the site because you don't like the NYT? Thank god he didn't do that. What was the lifetime value in your eyes? Adding popups and paywalls like many other online games? He made > $1 million dollars.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- queuebert 5y ago
  I never said I don't like the NYT. It's important to read only what people say, not combine what they say with what you think. I didn't realize he got over a million bucks. In that case, it was a good move. I doubt ads would've paid that much.
oweiler 5y ago
As soon as he'd start serving ads people would leave in droves.
approxim8ion 5y ago
Do you know how much ads pay? It's peanuts. And really, the "full lifetime value" isn't much. These fads die out really quickly. If anything, this is a win for almost everyone. Dev gets paid handsomely, code still remains available for people who care, and the experience seems mostly unchanged for people who don't.
hoppyhoppy2 5y ago
The NYT has a games section; it brings in money that helps pay for journalism. And they've been publishing the crossword since 1942, so this isn't a brand-new idea.
guinness74 5y ago
Ads would've resulted in people complaining about user experience. And no one pays a full "lifetime" for anything. For an acquisition like this it's usually a multiple of 5 years of earnings. Probably more because of the popularity.

dpark 5y ago

> made more money by serving ads That seems pretty unlikely. As a funnel to NYT games, the NYT decided this thing was worth over a million. It's very questionable whether Wardle could have extracted a million in revenue from ads on Wordle.

nverno 5y ago

It's entertainment, for the most part, and always has been. Crosswords have been popular in the NYT forever.

capeterson 5y ago

I'm sure it likely sold for enough that the owners can retire early and wealthy. Maybe they'd get more money serving ads, or maybe it's a fad and it dies out in a month or two. I'd rather just take the payout and move onto other personal projects, given that Wordle is pretty much complete.

motoxpro 5y ago

What the heck? You want the guy to run ads on the site because you don't like the NYT? Thank god he didn't do that. What was the lifetime value in your eyes? Adding popups and paywalls like many other online games? He made > $1 million dollars.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
queuebert 5y ago
I never said I don't like the NYT. It's important to read only what people say, not combine what they say with what you think. I didn't realize he got over a million bucks. In that case, it was a good move. I doubt ads would've paid that much.

oweiler 5y ago

As soon as he'd start serving ads people would leave in droves.

approxim8ion 5y ago

Do you know how much ads pay? It's peanuts. And really, the "full lifetime value" isn't much. These fads die out really quickly. If anything, this is a win for almost everyone. Dev gets paid handsomely, code still remains available for people who care, and the experience seems mostly unchanged for people who don't.

hoppyhoppy2 5y ago

The NYT has a games section; it brings in money that helps pay for journalism. And they've been publishing the crossword since 1942, so this isn't a brand-new idea.

guinness74 5y ago

Ads would've resulted in people complaining about user experience. And no one pays a full "lifetime" for anything. For an acquisition like this it's usually a multiple of 5 years of earnings. Probably more because of the popularity.