After Three Months, Only 35 Subscriptions for Newsday's Web Site

[RamboLiberal]

Source: New York Observer

In late October, Newsday, the Long Island daily that the Dolans bought for $650 million, put its web site, newsday.com, behind a pay wall. The paper was one of the first non-business newspapers to take the plunge by putting up a pay wall, so in media circles it has been followed with interest. Could its fate be a sign of what others, including The New York Times, might expect?

So, three months later, how many people have signed up to pay $5 a week, or $260 a year, to get unfettered access to newsday.com?

The answer: 35 people. As in fewer than three dozen. As in a decent-sized elementary-school class.

That astoundingly low figure was revealed in a newsroom-wide meeting last week by publisher Terry Jimenez when a reporter asked how many people had signed up for the site. Mr. Jimenez didn't know the number off the top of his head, so he asked a deputy sitting near him. He replied 35.



Read more: http://www.observer.com/2010/media/after-three-months-only-35-subscriptions-newsdays-web-site

---

Rupert Murdoch and New York Times are you paying attention? Subscriptions won't work. You spoiled us by allowing free access for this long.

[pimpbot]

1. Five bucks a week?

That sounds a little steep. Isn't a print newspaper like 50 cents a day? I would think online access would be cheaper, since there is no printing press, delivery vans, etc.

[EFerrari]

2. Maybe they started high so they can now offer "deals". n/t

[fasttense]

3. Spoiled?

Free TV ran on ad revenues alone for years and still made big profits. I don't think we are spoiled, I think Murdoch monopolies and leveraged buyouts have raised expectations of what profits should be. No longer are modest reliable profits a good thing, they have to be bigger and bigger every year.

The over-leveraging of newspapers killed good reporting and sank most large newspapers, just like it sank big banks (without their bailout Goldman Sacks would be dead), yet credit unions are for the most part not hurting.

[TheWraith]

7. Yep. That's exactly what's killed the big-city newspaper industry.

A media company buys a newspaper, and in order to justify the acquisition they demand higher profits. That usually means laying off reporters, raising prices, or increasing ad space, all of which turn off readers. That means less sales, and consequently more demand to increase profits. Lather, rinse, repeat.

The internet didn't kill newspapers, it just provided an alternative to national papers that didn't offer any real value. Small papers are still profitable because they cover the local news that the AP doesn't.

[jgraz]

4. Maybe their content sux

I don't know too many people who have a problem paying for decent content (e.g. Thom Hartmann or Young Turks). Maybe people just don't want to pay for crap.

[AP]

8. I don't think it's the content. I think it's the competition once you're on line.

I'd have paid 5 or 10 bucks a week for a printed paper when I had a choice of only two or three delivered to my house every day and it was my best opportunity for a in-depth news coverage.

But if I can open a web browser and have millions of free in-depth media to satisfy whatever it is I'm curious about, why would I pay $5 for a single paper.

You'd really need to have a strong desire for that paper and there can't be any easily substituted source to satisfy that desire if you're going to pay for it.

[smoogatz]

5. $260 a year for content that's replicated all over the intertubes for free.

That's the issue. I already pay for Sunday NYT delivery because, old fart that I am, I like sitting down with my coffee and a bagel and the Sunday paper. The Times has lots of original content I can't get anywhere else--the Book Review, the food section, the travel section, the crossword, the Week In Review and Frank Rich. All top notch, and well worth the subscription cost to me, even though I could (for now) read it online for free. I subscribe partly because I want to support the paper, just as I give to public radio and public TV. But Newsday? I wouldn't wrap fish in it.

[tanyev]

6. I think all right wing media should require paid online subscriptions.

C'mon, think about how much money you would make!!!!


:rofl: