NY times must think this is 1994!!!!

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by S2007S, Mar 17, 2011.

  1. clacy

    clacy

    For you to charge for internet content, you must be highly specialized and provide something that can't be just as easily found for free.

    The NYT doesn't qualify as that.
     
    #11     Mar 17, 2011
  2. #12     Mar 18, 2011
  3. the1

    the1

    This is laughable. I can't remember the last time I read a newspaper. ESPN.com for all sports. Craigslist for classified. Store websites for weekly sales. Google for headlines. Yahoo Finance for business news. And the New York times wants to charge me for what I can get for free? Big time LOL!
     
    #13     Mar 18, 2011
  4. I am sure they get some subscribers. The question is if that would pay enough for the disappearance of advertisers.

    Even if they just get 1000 online subscribers, it is 15000/mo. if they get 10,000 subscribers, it 150,000/mo. And for 100,000 subscribers, they get 1,500,000/mo extra in revenue. This not counting the ipod ipad fools who subscribe.

    http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/...s-at-detail-of-metered-model-online-strategy/

    "Given that the site draws roughly 40 million monthly uniques, that translates to a potential base of 6 million that NYTimes.com can try to convert to paid. That is roughly seven times its daily print circulation of 877,000 and more than four times its Sunday circulation of 1.4 million.

    At even a modest conversion rate of 5 percent, that would work out to 300,000 additional paid subscribers. A Kindle subscription to the Times cost $19.99 a month, and Scott Heeken-Canedy, president of The New York Times newspaper, said that might be indicative of where pricing for full Web access will end up. In a single month, that $19.99 for 300,000 subscribers would total about $6 million....."

    Let's see how many subscribers NYT gets. I won't be one of them. lol
     
    #14     Mar 19, 2011
  5. BSAM

    BSAM

    Put me in the "not gonna pay" column, also.
     
    #16     Mar 20, 2011
  6. You guys don't get it. They are after the institutional money. Most if not all colleges will subscribe. Same goes for high school libraries as well as public libraries. It will bring a few hundred thousands a month and that is better than what they get now.
     
    #17     Mar 20, 2011
  7. Institutions have full print subscription. Those with full print subscriptions still get free online access.
     
    #18     Mar 20, 2011
  8. I visit nytimes.com quite frequently but I would rather die than ever pay them one cent. if it's free I'll visit, if it's not I won't. simple as that.

    The Times of London tried this same thing a few years ago and their readership INSTANTLY dropped 90% and never recovered.
     
    #19     Mar 20, 2011
  9. But don't they already do that? The NYT will need new subscribers.
     
    #20     Mar 22, 2011