New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#1

Post by aj » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 5:43 AM UTC

New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee
bloomberg.com

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#2

Post by aj » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 5:44 AM UTC

Also considering that NYTimes is a major news contributor to Twitter, Techmeme and our own HN, I wonder if this is implemented, what the impact will be!

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#3

Post by satyajit » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 6:14 AM UTC

Didn't they read/listen the "Free" book by 'Chris Anderson' (posted here on HN few days back)? Who will pay to read the news? Who will pay to read the blogs? I feel sorry for the news site and the business in general, but I am afraid this strategy isn't going to work. Will be happy to be proven wrong! In fact donation may work even better!

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#4

Post by ramidarigaz » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 6:22 AM UTC

I'm really sorry to say that, even though I really like the quality of NYT articles, I won't pay nearly that much. Maybe $0.99/month, but I can't justify the $5/month.

It's slightly sad though; all of their articles that are posted on HN are quality material.

I hope they realize.

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#5

Post by chaosmachine » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 6:41 AM UTC

aj wrote: post #2

Also considering that NYTimes is a major news contributor to Twitter, Techmeme and our own HN, I wonder if this is implemented, what the impact will be!

I can guess: No more links to NYTimes.

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#6

Post by quoderat » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 6:57 AM UTC

No way in the world I will pay for this. Nothing that special in the NYT to me. They are already close to going out of business as is. This won't make it any better.

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#7

Post by anigbrowl » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 7:00 AM UTC

I'm bored with the endless speculation. I wish they'd go ahead and actually try it instead of sending up endless trial balloons. If it doesn't work they can try something else after 3 months.

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#8

Post by Adam503 » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 7:36 AM UTC

Please do. Few will pay, and the NYT will make itself even less prestigious.

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#9

Post by quoderat » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 7:37 AM UTC

quoderat wrote: post #6

No way in the world I will pay for this. Nothing that special in the NYT to me. They are already close to going out of business as is. This won't make it any better.

Ah, apparently no one bothered to check the actual facts before downvoting:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display...

Re: New York Times Considers $5 Monthly Web-Access Fee

#10

Post by gojomo » Fri, Jul 10, 2009, 7:44 AM UTC

They tried something similar with TimesSelect and then pulled back; their columnists were at a disadvantage in online conversations.

They should first try more aggressive interstitials -- or even a 12-24 hour embargo of fresh news -- both of which only paid subscribers can skip. Then they get the inlinks, and people in a race to link/comment are most likely to pay.

(And the idea that they want print subscribers to pony up $2.50/month for online access? Petty. You'd think they could throw it in for the $300-$400/year print delivery costs!)