The New York Times paywall goes up next week, and the knocks against it keep on coming. I have yet to read anything defending their crazy-expensive pricing model, though lots and lots of people say that they’d be willing to pay for the Times, if it were priced right. This would seem to be a pretty clear message, but having announced this whole thing after years of speculation, they’re not going to change it all right before it launches. They’ll have to wait until after it’s a big mess.

But now I’m starting to think they have a different strategy in mind. Slog commenter care bear alerted us to a an email she got from Lincoln (still?), offering her free access to the Times for the rest of the year.

And then today Groupon throws out 12 weeks of the Sunday edition for $36. Any print subscription will come with unlimited access through the paywall on all devices, so is this the strategy? Price direct access too high and then get people to subscribe to the print edition via partnerships and discounts, thus getting them the digital access for free and claiming big success?

If they ever release numbers (they better), it will be very interesting to see how many of the people who get unlimited access to the digital editions get it via a print subscription or some promotion.

Also, Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger thinks that some people will circumvent their “purposely porous” paywall, but it’ll be mostly “high school kids and people out of work.”

Finally, check out this illuminating infographic comparing the cost of a New York Times digital subscription to various other digital services. Yowch.

Anthony Hecht is The Stranger's Chief Technology Officer. He owns no monkeys.

13 replies on “The New York Times Paywall Strategy: Synergy!”

  2. Right, because only high school kids and unemployed people will think to delete their NYT cookies and get around this retarded paywall. See how well that goes, douchebag.

  5. I got the Lincoln offer too, via relentless online ads on the NYT site that targeted me because I’m a “frequent user.”

    And I accepted!

    So, yeah, if they placate their online “frequent users” (aka younger users) via Lincoln-style freebies; get their aging, less-frequent-using paper subscribers to hold onto their subscriptions because it’s a cheaper way to access content online; and draw new paper subscribers because Groupon got to them, plus maybe they think it’s a cheaper way for them to access online content…

    If they can do all that, then presto: They have a bigger subscriber base against which to sell print ads, which are still far more lucrative than online ads.

  6. I’m going to withhold judgment until Monday, when I can see for myself how easy (or difficult) it is to get around the paywall. One thing’s for sure, though – I won’t be paying that kind of money for it.

  7. This is EXACTLY what their strategy is: to keep people getting the printed paper. They’ve decided, correctly, that the web version is a total loser, which will never in a million years earn a tenth back from advertising of its cost; but the printed newspaper is still profitable, now that the economy is rumbling back to life and people are advertising again.

  8. Or maybe they should go back to the kind of ads they used to have in the NYT and do the same for their web version …

  9. Echoing @7, I will do anything to keep my printed paper at the doorstep each morning. Glad I won’t have to pay any more than I do, and hoping the best for everyone who needs it but can’t shell out.

  10. Will is the kind of person who doesn’t understand why the ads in the printed newspaper don’t say “click here for more information”.

  11. Everyone is clamoring for a subscription model that’s under $10 a month. The cost of getting the newspaper everyday $66 a month. Sure there’s printing and distribution, but I don’t think the paper stays afloat if everyone moved to $10 a month pricing.

    Sure maybe more people are willing to pay $10 a month than $35 a month, but that doesn’t make it profitable.

    ESPECIALLY because if the system is so easy to cheat, people will be just as willing to steal it at $10 a month as they will be at the current prices.

    I’m not saying the current plans will be a smashing success, but I’m not sure the alternatives being offered would be either.

Comments are closed.