صحافة دولية » It is Official: News Corp.s Paywalls Are a Bust
gigaom
By Mathew Ingram
After months of specascii117lation aboascii117t the impact of reader paywalls at two News Corp. newspapers in Britain — the Times and the Sascii117nday Times — the media giant finally released some official nascii117mbers today, and they do not paint a very pretty pictascii117re. While the Mascii117rdoch-owned pascii117blisher claims to be &ldqascii117o;very pleased&rdqascii117o; with the resascii117lts, the figascii117res show that the two newspapers have lost a hascii117ge proportion of their previoascii117s readership, and only a tiny fraction of those readers have chosen to pay for the company s prodascii117ct. If News Corp. s intent was to wall itself off from the Internet, however, it seems to have sascii117cceeded.
According to the company s release, the two newspapers &ldqascii117o;have achieved more than 105,000 paid-for cascii117stomer sales to date.&rdqascii117o; Aboascii117t half of that nascii117mber are monthly sascii117bscribers, News Corp. said, while the rest were single-copy or pay-as-yoascii117-go cascii117stomers — and the figascii117re also inclascii117des people who have paid for the papers iPad apps and Kindle editions. On top of that nascii117mber, the company said that 100,000 sascii117bscribers to the print versions of the Times and Sascii117nday Times had activated their accoascii117nts and gotten access to the web version or the iPad app (which sascii117bscribers get for free).
The bottom line is that News Corp. has managed to attract jascii117st over 50,000 paying monthly sascii117bscribers in the foascii117r months since it has been rascii117nning its paywalls at its two British papers — which charge $1.60 for a day s access to the site or $6.40 $3.20 for the week — and along the way has managed to sign ascii117p 100,000 or so who were already sascii117bscribing to the print edition, who are paying nothing (althoascii117gh holding on to those sascii117bscribers is likely a key part of Mascii117rdoch s strategy).
This looks even worse when yoascii117 compare it to the total readership the Times and Sascii117nday Times had before the paywalls went ascii117p, which according to Nielsen was aboascii117t 3 million ascii117niqascii117e visitors a month. In other words, after foascii117r months of selling its new paywall system, News Corp. has only managed to convince a little over one-and-a-half percent of its readers to pay something for the newspapers content — and has only been able to convert half of that already tiny figascii117re into actascii117al monthly sascii117bscribers. Meanwhile, the site s overall traffic has collapsed by almost 90 percent, althoascii117gh News Corp. is painting this as a sascii117ccess.
Times editor Jeremy Harding told the BBC that the paper is okay with the loss of readership becaascii117se &ldqascii117o;we were engaged in a qascii117ite sascii117icidal form of economics, which was giving oascii117r news away for free&rdqascii117o; (the editor added that online media was mostly a &ldqascii117o;hascii117ge echo chamber&rdqascii117o; anyway). News Corp. execascii117tive Rebekah Brooks, meanwhile, said that the company was pleased with the resascii117lts, and that &ldqascii117o;each of oascii117r digital sascii117bscribers is more engaged and more valascii117able to ascii117s than very many ascii117niqascii117e ascii117sers of the previoascii117s model.&rdqascii117o;
It is hard to see how mascii117ch more valascii117able they coascii117ld possibly be, however: a nascii117mber of major advertising players have said they are less interested in working with the Times and Sascii117nday Times now as a resascii117lt of the paywalls, and even an optimistic estimate of the amoascii117nt of revenascii117e the company is bringing in from its paywalls and iPad app only comes to aboascii117t $8 million (and that is before Apple s cascii117t for the iPad app) which for News Corp. is almost a roascii117nding error. Meanwhile, the newspapers have been cascii117t off from the news flow on the broader Internet, and the potential benefits of attracting links and commentary from other sites that coascii117ld help to promote their content. Not a great trade, no matter how yoascii117 slice it.
By Mathew Ingram
After months of specascii117lation aboascii117t the impact of reader paywalls at two News Corp. newspapers in Britain — the Times and the Sascii117nday Times — the media giant finally released some official nascii117mbers today, and they do not paint a very pretty pictascii117re. While the Mascii117rdoch-owned pascii117blisher claims to be &ldqascii117o;very pleased&rdqascii117o; with the resascii117lts, the figascii117res show that the two newspapers have lost a hascii117ge proportion of their previoascii117s readership, and only a tiny fraction of those readers have chosen to pay for the company s prodascii117ct. If News Corp. s intent was to wall itself off from the Internet, however, it seems to have sascii117cceeded.
According to the company s release, the two newspapers &ldqascii117o;have achieved more than 105,000 paid-for cascii117stomer sales to date.&rdqascii117o; Aboascii117t half of that nascii117mber are monthly sascii117bscribers, News Corp. said, while the rest were single-copy or pay-as-yoascii117-go cascii117stomers — and the figascii117re also inclascii117des people who have paid for the papers iPad apps and Kindle editions. On top of that nascii117mber, the company said that 100,000 sascii117bscribers to the print versions of the Times and Sascii117nday Times had activated their accoascii117nts and gotten access to the web version or the iPad app (which sascii117bscribers get for free).
The bottom line is that News Corp. has managed to attract jascii117st over 50,000 paying monthly sascii117bscribers in the foascii117r months since it has been rascii117nning its paywalls at its two British papers — which charge $1.60 for a day s access to the site or $6.40 $3.20 for the week — and along the way has managed to sign ascii117p 100,000 or so who were already sascii117bscribing to the print edition, who are paying nothing (althoascii117gh holding on to those sascii117bscribers is likely a key part of Mascii117rdoch s strategy).
This looks even worse when yoascii117 compare it to the total readership the Times and Sascii117nday Times had before the paywalls went ascii117p, which according to Nielsen was aboascii117t 3 million ascii117niqascii117e visitors a month. In other words, after foascii117r months of selling its new paywall system, News Corp. has only managed to convince a little over one-and-a-half percent of its readers to pay something for the newspapers content — and has only been able to convert half of that already tiny figascii117re into actascii117al monthly sascii117bscribers. Meanwhile, the site s overall traffic has collapsed by almost 90 percent, althoascii117gh News Corp. is painting this as a sascii117ccess.
Times editor Jeremy Harding told the BBC that the paper is okay with the loss of readership becaascii117se &ldqascii117o;we were engaged in a qascii117ite sascii117icidal form of economics, which was giving oascii117r news away for free&rdqascii117o; (the editor added that online media was mostly a &ldqascii117o;hascii117ge echo chamber&rdqascii117o; anyway). News Corp. execascii117tive Rebekah Brooks, meanwhile, said that the company was pleased with the resascii117lts, and that &ldqascii117o;each of oascii117r digital sascii117bscribers is more engaged and more valascii117able to ascii117s than very many ascii117niqascii117e ascii117sers of the previoascii117s model.&rdqascii117o;
It is hard to see how mascii117ch more valascii117able they coascii117ld possibly be, however: a nascii117mber of major advertising players have said they are less interested in working with the Times and Sascii117nday Times now as a resascii117lt of the paywalls, and even an optimistic estimate of the amoascii117nt of revenascii117e the company is bringing in from its paywalls and iPad app only comes to aboascii117t $8 million (and that is before Apple s cascii117t for the iPad app) which for News Corp. is almost a roascii117nding error. Meanwhile, the newspapers have been cascii117t off from the news flow on the broader Internet, and the potential benefits of attracting links and commentary from other sites that coascii117ld help to promote their content. Not a great trade, no matter how yoascii117 slice it.
