3 ms·

> still wish when it came to news sites there was a micropayment option so I could read a single article for $0.10 or something along those lines. Same. I'm s

> still wish when it came to news sites there was a micropayment option so I could read a single article for $0.10 or something along those lines. Same. I'm shocked that the NYT didn't use Flattr on their articles for this. To access the full version of the NYT currently costs $0.50 a week so it would have been possible the NYT could charge $0.50 per article, or $5 for the year (one time no subscription) through Flattr or something along those lines. I could definitely see this working at scale.

eknkc 3y ago
I come across paywalled articles at least a couple of times a week. I’d gladly pay $0.50 for most of them to access the single article. It just needs to be easy, don’t make me create an account a subscription and shit like that. Things like cryptocurrencies could work great for these kinds of transactions. Shame it became what it is now.
- infecto 3y ago
  Thats the boat I am in. I don't even care if they show me ads too, I just want to get around the paywall but I don't want to pay for a subscription.
dageshi 3y ago
We have to assume they have considered this in the past and come to the conclusion it just doesn't work. I suspect tying a purchasing decision to every page visit just leads to people automatically backing out of the page with a very low conversion rate because it's just too annoying to decide whether to pay for something you're not sure the value of. Despite all the gnashing of teeth, nothing competes with ads on the web.
- infecto 3y ago
  Since most news publications are failing businesses I would not immediately assume they have considered all avenues of monetization. I agree that ads have historically made a lot of money...but I am thinking of the paywalled industry. I am probably in the minority but I would be interested if any of the major publications had data on this kind of strategy. I realize there have been products including Flattr that did this but again I never saw it being using on a NYT level publication. Instead of me reading an archive link or just not reading the article at all I would be happy to pay some cents to consume it.
  - amadeuspagel 3y ago
    The NYT is very much not a failing business.
    - infecto 3y ago
      Thanks for the downvote but I said most not all. If you look at the news/magazine industry though it has not made a good transition to the internet age. Lots of closures and consolidations with some of the major outlets acquired as almost toys for the rich. It’s very much a shell of what it once was.
- JoshTriplett 3y ago
  > We have to assume they have considered this in the past and come to the conclusion it just doesn't work. Or that they prefer the world in which it doesn't take off because they expect to make more money, at least in the short term. If they believe that they can still convince N users to buy $195/year subscriptions, versus getting 10N users to pay a net total of $10/year in per-article fees, then they're better off trying to convince the N users to subscribe. Which might* work for the biggest dozen newspapers with brand recognition, but won't work as well for the long tail of news sites.
sgerenser 3y ago
The $0.50 weekly price for NYT is a teaser rate. The full price for digital only was recently raised to $195/year. I imagine they make too much money from people who subscribe at the teaser rate and forget to cancel (like all newspapers/magazines) to make it worth exploring other business models.

eknkc 3y ago

I come across paywalled articles at least a couple of times a week. I’d gladly pay $0.50 for most of them to access the single article. It just needs to be easy, don’t make me create an account a subscription and shit like that. Things like cryptocurrencies could work great for these kinds of transactions. Shame it became what it is now.

infecto 3y ago
Thats the boat I am in. I don't even care if they show me ads too, I just want to get around the paywall but I don't want to pay for a subscription.

dageshi 3y ago

We have to assume they have considered this in the past and come to the conclusion it just doesn't work. I suspect tying a purchasing decision to every page visit just leads to people automatically backing out of the page with a very low conversion rate because it's just too annoying to decide whether to pay for something you're not sure the value of. Despite all the gnashing of teeth, nothing competes with ads on the web.

infecto 3y ago
Since most news publications are failing businesses I would not immediately assume they have considered all avenues of monetization. I agree that ads have historically made a lot of money...but I am thinking of the paywalled industry. I am probably in the minority but I would be interested if any of the major publications had data on this kind of strategy. I realize there have been products including Flattr that did this but again I never saw it being using on a NYT level publication. Instead of me reading an archive link or just not reading the article at all I would be happy to pay some cents to consume it.
- amadeuspagel 3y ago
  The NYT is very much not a failing business.
  - infecto 3y ago
    Thanks for the downvote but I said most not all. If you look at the news/magazine industry though it has not made a good transition to the internet age. Lots of closures and consolidations with some of the major outlets acquired as almost toys for the rich. It’s very much a shell of what it once was.
JoshTriplett 3y ago
> We have to assume they have considered this in the past and come to the conclusion it just doesn't work. Or that they prefer the world in which it doesn't take off because they expect to make more money, at least in the short term. If they believe that they can still convince N users to buy $195/year subscriptions, versus getting 10N users to pay a net total of $10/year in per-article fees, then they're better off trying to convince the N users to subscribe. Which might* work for the biggest dozen newspapers with brand recognition, but won't work as well for the long tail of news sites.

sgerenser 3y ago

The $0.50 weekly price for NYT is a teaser rate. The full price for digital only was recently raised to $195/year. I imagine they make too much money from people who subscribe at the teaser rate and forget to cancel (like all newspapers/magazines) to make it worth exploring other business models.