\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial-page/columns/margaret-sullivan/article904114.ece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 That sucks, particularly for those of us out of town, but you can't blame them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOBILLS78 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Good for them. There's no replacing local news. Even though I haven't lived in Western New York in years, I still stop at the News website at least once a day. I'm fine with paying for content, even though according to Sullivan's column you still get 10 free views a month. Most local newspapers around me already have paywalls. They should have had them to begin with. Giving away your product for free isn't a good business model, especially in the era of dwindling advertising sales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 1339765123[/url]' post='2486850']That sucks, particularly for those of us out of town, but you can't blame them. Following up on this, I'm considering the Sunday paper and E-connect pkg. I realize I'll get the paper a day or 2 later in Florida, but I'm good with that if -and it's a BIG IF- there aren't any ADS popping up all the time on the E-service. Does anyone know if that's the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 (edited) We will be offering digital subscriptions for the first time this fall. For all of our print subscribers, those digital subscriptions will be included at no additional cost -- even if you only get the paper delivered on Sunday. I think this is essentially what's going to happen industry-wide (among bigger papers). Print editions available on Sundays when people have time to sit down, and digital-only through the week. The NYT instituted that Sunday-only still gets the digital package free, which is referred to in the biz as the 'Frank Rich Discount.' With all the adverts, Sunday is their cash cow. It would be nice if our Hartford Courant would offer the same terms as the bolded section. We get home delivery (sporadic at best Monday-Wednesday but then again, the paper has been cut about 10 pages on those days ) but, last I looked, they were charging for the e-paper even for print subscribers. And despite saving them material costs (paper and ink are hella-expensive), production costs and delivery costs... the e-paper is $2.50/week. After a standard discount (basically, call them up and say you're going to cancel unless ...) home delivery of a physical paper is $1.75 per week. Explain that, please! Add to it that there's no accessibility for the iPad, and the interface for it on the PC is beyond stevestojan. Edited June 15, 2012 by UConn James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 First off..looking at Margaret's picture...Yes! I have no issue paying..they gotta make money too, and ad sales just don't cut it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 (edited) My wife is in the newspaper biz. Things are even worse than we realize at a lot of dalies. The whole industry is circling the drain. One of the big reasons is that local businesses are slow to adopt web advertising. The other reason, believe it or not, is Craiglist. Want ads used to be a cash cow for papers and Craigslist killed it almost overnight. I read the Buffalo News more than the local rags so I will probably subscribe too. There are so many Buffalonians living elsewhere that it ought to work well. PTR Edited June 15, 2012 by PromoTheRobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLFan Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 My only interest in the News is the Bills and Sabres coverage. I will miss the Sabres coverage - the Bills, not so much. There seems to be enough NFL content everywhere that the News is not really adding much value there. I cannot see it being worth $2.50 per week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FitzShowUsYourTitz Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Great. So we can all pay to read Jerry Sullivan and then bash him. perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Great. So we can all pay to read Jerry Sullivan and then bash him. perfect. See, I was thinking about it from a different angle. Maybe we'll finally see less people starting the same thread over and over to complain about him now that they'll have to pay. If that's the case, thank you Buffalo News! Oh, and I was really hoping I would get a message saying I had to pay to read that link about how they will now be charging people to read online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 1339767530[/url]' post='2486882']Great. So we can all pay to read Jerry Sullivan and then bash him. perfect. Is Margaret related to Jerry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhg Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Hopefully the improvements to their web site will be significant. Currently, the BN site is horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snopple Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 What concernes me about these subscription fees for the Digital copy of the News, is how it will affect TBD. Will their Bills related articles still be posted on TBD? Or will we have to subscribe to the News and log in to their web site each day in order to get complete coverage of our favorite team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Great. So we can all pay to read Jerry Sullivan and then bash him. perfect. OTOH, unpopular columnists face a lot more pressure when revenue is less dependent on advertising and more on subscribers. To wit, a columnist in the Hartford Courant, who wrote social commentary in the main section and is just to the political left of Karl Marx, last week was finally handed her hat. So... there's that. Don't like him? It's the same with Internet trolls --- don't read him, and don't respond to his stupid crap. The paper's metrics on customer choice of articles will catch up to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 (edited) I might subscribe simply for TG's new blog. I've found it to be enjoyable so far. But, I'll wait and see, because it all depends on how the RSS feeds are affected. Edited June 15, 2012 by Dorkington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 I think this is essentially what's going to happen industry-wide (among bigger papers). Print editions available on Sundays when people have time to sit down, and digital-only through the week. There are nearly 80 million adults over 55 years old that regularly read the newspaper (one of every three readers), so newsprint will always be an option, even in the major media markets... See, I was thinking about it from a different angle. Maybe we'll finally see less people starting the same thread over and over to complain about him now that they'll have to pay. If that's the case, thank you Buffalo News! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv's Neighbor Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 I'd pay for a digital COURIER EXPRESS, digital News??? Maybe not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 This will never stick. A lot of papers tried this 5-10 years ago with the advent of the internet and failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnychemo Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Yeah, but 5-10 years ago is a lifetime ago in technology. Look at how smartphones have exploded in popularity in the last five years. Now tablets are hitting their groove with the Ipad, Nook, Fire, Galaxy etc. People are far more accepting of getting their info digitally today over 5 years ago. Not only is it more "normal", but there is also more accessibility. I don't see them having much trouble with this, esp with including a free digital subscription with a delivery subscription. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OvrOfficiousJerk Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 This will never stick. A lot of papers tried this 5-10 years ago with the advent of the internet and failed. Ehh... not sure if I agree. Reading between the lines, it's basically a grab at the $$$ of the people in Buffalo who read The News for free online but don't subscribe to the paper at all... the cost of a weekly online subscription is slightly more than a Sunday paper, and all print subscribers will get the online edition for free. Basically to save $25 a year ($2.50/week - online only, $2/week - Sunday only + online), people who really want The News will shift to the Sunday-only subscription. So, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a modest spike in Sunday subscribers, which IMHO is the real cash cow for the newspaper industry with all the advertising and such. Keep up the Sunday numbers, keep your financial head above water. Not sure what failed 5-10 years ago, but this is the way to do the print to online transition for local papers. Speaking of local papers, I'd happily drop $2.50 a week to make sure we don't end up like NOLA w/ the Times-Picayune. And as it relates to the Bills, I'd do anything to get Jerry Sullivan's incessant whining incisive commentary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts