Comments on: Monetization strategies for the New York Times http://www.texttechnologies.com/2009/05/17/monetization-strategies-for-the-new-york-times/ Understanding technology ... in both senses of the phrase Sun, 22 Aug 2010 10:21:09 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: NYT Appoints a “Social Media Editor” | The Noisy Channel http://www.texttechnologies.com/2009/05/17/monetization-strategies-for-the-new-york-times/#comment-99243 NYT Appoints a “Social Media Editor” | The Noisy Channel Tue, 26 May 2009 19:00:52 +0000 http://www.texttechnologies.com/?p=327#comment-99243 [...] taken the apparently controversial stance that the New York Times should seek ways to monetize community. A hopefully less [...] [...] taken the apparently controversial stance that the New York Times should seek ways to monetize community. A hopefully less [...]

]]> By: Geschäftsmodelle für die NYT | relevant media. now. http://www.texttechnologies.com/2009/05/17/monetization-strategies-for-the-new-york-times/#comment-96396 Geschäftsmodelle für die NYT | relevant media. now. Mon, 18 May 2009 09:01:29 +0000 http://www.texttechnologies.com/?p=327#comment-96396 [...] zurücklehnen und die besten Ideen aufgreifen muss. Die letzten vier Ideen kommen von Text Technologies. Ich sage absichtlich nicht “neue”, sie sind dennoch eine kurze Erwähnung [...] [...] zurücklehnen und die besten Ideen aufgreifen muss. Die letzten vier Ideen kommen von Text Technologies. Ich sage absichtlich nicht “neue”, sie sind dennoch eine kurze Erwähnung [...]

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.texttechnologies.com/2009/05/17/monetization-strategies-for-the-new-york-times/#comment-96358 Curt Monash Mon, 18 May 2009 06:33:46 +0000 http://www.texttechnologies.com/?p=327#comment-96358 Daniel, I think that charging for the right to comment, without offering other benefits as well, would generate less than $100,000 annual revenue for the New York Times, and unless heavily promoted would indeed generate less than $10,000 per year. I.e., it would be a money-losing idea and would damage the business in other ways besides. The only ideas I can come up with to get past those numbers are very far from the "Charge somebody to be part of the community" concept. CAM Daniel,

I think that charging for the right to comment, without offering other benefits as well, would generate less than $100,000 annual revenue for the New York Times, and unless heavily promoted would indeed generate less than $10,000 per year.

I.e., it would be a money-losing idea and would damage the business in other ways besides.

The only ideas I can come up with to get past those numbers are very far from the “Charge somebody to be part of the community” concept.

CAM

]]> By: Daniel Tunkelang http://www.texttechnologies.com/2009/05/17/monetization-strategies-for-the-new-york-times/#comment-96318 Daniel Tunkelang Mon, 18 May 2009 03:26:09 +0000 http://www.texttechnologies.com/?p=327#comment-96318 The comparison to advertising is not off the mark. But that's where we stand today: people are mostly unwilling to pay for content, but they are willing to accept advertising as the price for free content; meanwhile, people who want to push a message are willing to pay for the privilege. Hell, call them "sponsored comments". The comparison to advertising is not off the mark. But that’s where we stand today: people are mostly unwilling to pay for content, but they are willing to accept advertising as the price for free content; meanwhile, people who want to push a message are willing to pay for the privilege. Hell, call them “sponsored comments”.

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.texttechnologies.com/2009/05/17/monetization-strategies-for-the-new-york-times/#comment-96288 Curt Monash Mon, 18 May 2009 01:19:03 +0000 http://www.texttechnologies.com/?p=327#comment-96288 1. How many commenters are you talking about? It's hard to see how the hard-core passionate commenters would be more than a few hundred or a few thousand AT MOST. 2. People are passionate about forums, Usenet, etc. But only a small fraction of those would pay just be able to SPEAK. Interesting idea to make people pay for the opportunity of commenting. It's sort of like selling them advertising ... 1. How many commenters are you talking about? It’s hard to see how the hard-core passionate commenters would be more than a few hundred or a few thousand AT MOST.

2. People are passionate about forums, Usenet, etc. But only a small fraction of those would pay just be able to SPEAK.

Interesting idea to make people pay for the opportunity of commenting. It’s sort of like selling them advertising …

]]> By: Daniel Tunkelang http://www.texttechnologies.com/2009/05/17/monetization-strategies-for-the-new-york-times/#comment-96282 Daniel Tunkelang Mon, 18 May 2009 00:43:32 +0000 http://www.texttechnologies.com/?p=327#comment-96282 Have you seen the vast comment stream at the NYT? It's not uncommon for an article to attract over 100 comments. Clearly these are people who are eager to get their words in front of the NYT readership. I do think some of them would pay for that privilege, or perhaps for being fast-tracked in the moderation queue. I don't know that anyone has ever tried this model, but the NYT is in a position to try. Of course, there are otherwise to monetize community, such as access to staff via events, tchotchkes, etc. Have you seen the vast comment stream at the NYT? It’s not uncommon for an article to attract over 100 comments. Clearly these are people who are eager to get their words in front of the NYT readership. I do think some of them would pay for that privilege, or perhaps for being fast-tracked in the moderation queue. I don’t know that anyone has ever tried this model, but the NYT is in a position to try. Of course, there are otherwise to monetize community, such as access to staff via events, tchotchkes, etc.

]]>