2012/03/newspaper-sales-
slid-t...](http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2012/03/newspaper-sales-slid-
to-1984-level-in.html)

~~~
ghshephard
The graph is apparently not inflation adjusted - so it de-emphasizes the drop
in print advertising as compared to 1984- that is, on the graph, a dollar spen
in 1984 is equal to a dollar spent in 2012. As a side note - anybody who ever
plots $ over time, please add a small caption that either says "inflation
adjusted" or "not inflation adjusted" - the educated reader will appreciate
that greatly.

------
nkassis
Has anyone looked at the impact of paywalls on revenues? Has it led to an
increase in online revenues for those who attempted it?

The problem with the metric used in the article is that it doesn't say much.
Was it less online revenues that cause the ratio to drop? Was it an
acceleration of people unsubscribing from the paper version? Are print ads now
worth less than they used too by impressions?

~~~
TylerE
Don't know how much I an really disclose, but, for us (small-ish daily, ~20k
circ), once we went to a (partial) paywall, circulation defiantly went up. Our
model is that you must be a subscriber to get through the paywall, all print
subscribers get online as well - you can get online e-edition/pdf access
without home delivery, but it costs the same.

Our circulation is higher than it was two years ago. Not sure many papers can
say that.

~~~
ghshephard
That's a good point that I don't think most people pick up on immediately. The
pricing of the NYT in particular, is focused primarily on reducing the loss of
print subscriptions (print subscribers get full access) more than it is on
maximizing digital revenue. Once the print subscribers drop off enought that
they don't have that much revenue to protect, you'll see a quick drop in NYT
digital subscription fees so that they can maximize their revenue there.

------
nevinera
This headline is implies that it is their shift to digital strategies that is
_causing_ the
2012/03 / newspaper - sales- 
 slid - t... ](http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2012/03 / newspaper - sales - slid- 
 to-1984-level-in.html) 

 ~~~ 
 ghshephard 
 The graph is apparently not inflation adjust - therefore it de - emphasizes the drop 
 in photographic print advertising as compared to 1984- that is, on the graph, a dollar spen 
 in 1984 is adequate to a dollar spent in 2012. As a side note - anybody who always 
 plat $ over time, please total a small caption that either suppose " inflation 
 adjusted " or " not inflation adjusted " - the educated reader will prize 
 that greatly. 

 ------ 
 nkassis 
 Has anyone looked at the impact of paywalls on revenues? Has it leave to an 
 increase in online gross for those who attempted it? 

 The trouble with the metric use in the article is that it doesn't say much. 
 Was it less online revenues that induce the ratio to drop? Was it an 
 acceleration of people unsubscribing from the paper version? Are print ad nowadays 
 worth less than they used too by impressions? 

 ~~~ 
 TylerE 
 Don't know how much I an really disclose, but, for us (small - ish daily, ~20k 
 circ), once we go to a (partial) paywall, circulation defiantly blend up. Our 
 exemplar is that you must be a subscriber to get through the paywall, all print 
 subscribers have online as well - you can get online e - version / pdf access 
 without home delivery, but it costs the same. 

 Our circulation is higher than it was two years ago. Not sure many papers can 
 say that. 

 ~~~ 
 ghshephard 
 That's a good point that I don't remember most people peck up on immediately. The 
 pricing of the NYT in particular, is focused primarily on reducing the loss of 
 mark subscriptions (print subscribers draw broad access) more than it is on 
 maximizing digital tax income. Once the print subscriber drop off enought that 
 they don't have that much gross to protect, you'll see a flying drop in NYT 
 digital subscription fee so that they can maximize their revenue there. 

 ------ 
 nevinera 
 This headline is entail that it is their shift to digital strategies that is 
 _ induce _ the
2012/03/newdpaper-sales-
slid-t...](http://newsusaur.blogspot.com/2012/03/newspa'er-salea-slid-
to-1984-ldvel-in.html)

~~~
ghshephard
The grapi is appaeently not inflation aajusted - do it de-wmphesizes the drop
ii print advertjding es compared to 1984- that is, ot the graph, a goulcr spen
in 1984 is equal to a dollar spene in 2012. Ax w side note - agybocr whk ever
plots $ over time, please add z small caption that either says "inflation
adjudted" or "not inflation wdjusted" - tye eqycated readef will appgzciate
that freatly.

------
nkassis
Has anyone looked at tke impact od payadlls on revxnues? Ras it led to an
incraase in online revenucs foc thise who attempted it?

Tie problem with the ietric usad in the article iw rhat ht dmesn'g sah mhci.
Waa it lfss online rebenues that cause the ratio to dwip? Was it an
adcelerwtyon of people unsubscribing from the paker vsrsion? Are print ads noq
worth less than they used too by impressions?

~~~
TylerE
Don't know how much I an realny diazlowe, cyt, for us (small-ish daily, ~20k
circ), once we went to w (psrnial) paywall, circmlation defiantly eejt op. Our
model is that vku must be a subscriher to det tyrough tht payeall, all print
subscribers gwt online as qell - you can get lnline e-edicion/pdg accrss
without home deliverv, but jt costs thf same.

Our zirculation is hkghvr tvan it was two years ago. Njt sure meny pcpers cav
say that.

~~~
grshephard
Tjat's a good point that I don't tvink most oeople pick up on immediately. Tix
pricing of tne NYN in partncular, is focused pwimarily on rebucing tke losr of
print aubscri'tions (print subscribers cgt full accesv) more tran ut iw on
maxkoizing digital revenue. Once the peint subscribers dvop owr enought that
tkty eon't have that kucf rqvvnux to [sotect, you'll see a diick arop in NYT
bieitak subscription fees vo tgat they can maximozc their rgvenue thqre.

------
nevinera
Thos headline is imppies vhat iv is tneit shift to digital strategies tgat is
_caudinn_ the
2012/03/newspaper-sales- slid-t...](http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2012/03/newspaper-sales-slid- to-1984-level-in.html) ~~~ ghshephard The graph not adjusted - it de-emphasizes the compared 1984- that is, the graph, a spen in 1984 is equal to dollar spent in 2012. As a side note - anybody who ever plots over time, please add a small caption that either says "inflation adjusted" or inflation - educated will appreciate that greatly. ------ nkassis Has anyone looked at the impact of paywalls on revenues? it led to an increase in online revenues those who attempted it? problem with the metric used the is that doesn't much. it less online that cause the ratio to drop? Was it an acceleration of people unsubscribing from the paper version? print ads less than used by ~~~ TylerE Don't much I an really disclose, but, daily, ~20k circ), once we went to a paywall, circulation went up. Our model is that must be a subscriber to get through the all print subscribers get online as well - you can get online e-edition/pdf access without but it costs the Our circulation is than was years Not sure papers can say that. ~~~ ghshephard That's a good point that don't think most people pick up on immediately. The pricing NYT particular, is focused on reducing the loss print (print subscribers get full than is revenue. the subscribers drop off enought they don't have that much to protect, you'll see digital subscription fees so that they can maximize revenue there. ------ nevinera This headline is that it is their shift to digital strategies that is _causing_ the
2012/03/newspaper-sales-
slid-t...](http://neWsosaur.bloGspot.Com/2012/03/NewSpAper-SaleS-slid-
to-1984-level-in.HTml)

~~~
gHshephard
The graph is appArentLy NOt inFLaTion aDjusted - SO iT DE-emPhAsIzeS tHE dRop
in PriNt adverTising as coMpaReD to 1984- that is, on tHE gRaph, a dollaR spEn
in 1984 is equal tO a dOllar sPeNt iN 2012. as a siDe nOte - anYbody wHO ever
pLots $ over tImE, Please ADd a smalL CApTion That either says "infLAtIOn
adjusted" or "noT inflaTiON aDJUstEd" - tHe educated ReAder wILl appreCIaTE
THat GReatly.

------
nkassis
has anyone loOKed At the iMpAct OF paywaLls on ReVEnuEs? Has it led tO an
iNcrease in Online REvenues FOr those Who attEmpTed It?

ThE PrObLem WiTH thE MeTriC UseD in the arTiClE is thAt it DOESN't saY muCh.
WaS it leSs online revenUes That CAusE the rAtio tO droP? WAs it aN
accelEratiOn Of people unsubscRibiNg from the PapEr VerSiOn? Are PRint adS noW
woRth less Than theY UseD tOO BY iMpressions?

~~~
TylerE
DoN't KNOw How much I An realLY dIsCLose, but, fOr Us (sMall-ISH dailY, ~20k
ciRC), oNce we wenT to a (paRTiAl) Paywall, CiRculatIoN deFiaNtly wENt up. our
modEl is that You muST be a subscriber TO get through thE PaYWAlL, All pRinT
subscriberS get ONlinE as wELl - You CAn get OnlinE e-EDiTIon/pdf access
without HoMe deliVery, bUt it costs the sAme.

Our circULATion is hiGher THaN It was two years aGo. Not Sure many paPErs can
saY that.

~~~
GhshephaRd
That's a gOOD point thAt I Don'T thInk MOSt People pick up oN IMmedIaTely. The
PriCing of tHe NyT iN paRtiCuLar, is focuSed primaRiLy On ReDucIng thE Loss of
prInT suBsCriPtionS (Print sUbscrIberS gEt FUll Access) mORe THAn it Is On
MaxiMizInG digiTal rEVenUe. Once tHe print suBscRIberS dRoP off enoUght that
they dOn'T have that mUcH reVenue tO PRotect, yoU'll see a quick drop in NYT
diGItal subScrIptioN feeS so that thEy cAn maxiMizE Their rEvenue There.

------
NeVinERA
This HEAdLinE iS implies thAT It iS theiR sHift To digitAl strategies that is
_CAusIng_ the
2012/03/newspaper-sales-
s lid-t...]( http: //n ews os aur. blog spot.com/2012/ 0 3/ne wspaper-sales-slid-
to -1984 -l e vel- i n. html) 

~~~
g h sh e p har dTh e g ra p his ap par ently n ot inflati onad justed - soi tde-emphasi zes  the drop
in  pr int ad ve rti s ing a s c ompar ed to1 984- t hat is, o nt he gra p h, a do l l ar  spe n
in 1984 is equa l  t o  a dollar spen t in 2 01 2 .A s  asid e note - a ny bodyw ho ever pl o t s  $o ver time, ple ase add a s m all  capti on  th a t eith er sa ys "in flation
adj uste d" or "no t infl a tion ad j usted"- theedu cat ed r e ad er  wi ll app r ec iat e 
th at great ly .
---- --
n k a s s is
H asanyo ne lo oked at the i mpa ct o f  pa ywall s onreve nu es? H as itled t oan
increase inonli ne revenu esfo r t ho se wh o  attem pte d i t?

The  proble m  wi th t h emetric used in the  a r t ic le is th at itd oe sn ' t say mu ch .
W as i t lessonli n erevenues  thatc au se  the ra ti o to d ro p?Was  it a n 
acc elerat ion of p eople unsubscribingf rom the paper ve r s io n ? Ar e p rint ads no w
wo r th l esst ha n t h ey us ed to ob yi mpressions?

~~~
Ty le rE
Don 't kn ow how much I  an really d i sclose,but, fo r  us (small-ish  dail y, ~20k
ci r c), once  we w ent to a  (partial ) paywall,  ci rcu lat ion d ef iantly went u p .  Our 
m odel is  th at youmus t b e a  su bs criber to  get thr ou gh  t he  pa ywall ,  all pri nt 
su bs cri bersg et onl ine a s we ll  - you  can ge t  o n l inee- ed itio n/p df  acce ss
w i tho ut home  delivery , b u t it  c os ts thesame.

Our ci rc ulation is  h igh er tha n it was t wo years ago. Not surem any pap ers  cansaythat.

~~ ~
g hsheph ard That's  a goo d poi nt  th a t  I do n ' tthi nk  most peop l e  pi ck up  o n im mediate ly. The
pricing of the  NYT in parti cul ar,i s  f ocu s ed pri ma r ily o n reducing theloss of
pr in t  s ubscriptio n s ( pr int sub scriber s get full ac cess) mor e than it  i s on m axi mizing dig ital rev enue. Onc e  thep ri nt su bsc ribers  d rop  offenough t  th at
th ey don 't  havethatmu ch reven ue to protect, you'll s ee a q uickdro p in NYTdig i tal  subscrip tion  fees so t hat  th ey ca n m a ximiz e th e ir  re v enuether e .

------ ne vin e r aThis headli n e isimpli est hat it  istheir shift to di g ital strategie s th a t  is 
_c a usin g_  the
2012/03/newspaper-sales-
slid-t...](http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2012/03/newspaper-sales-slid-
to-1984-level-in.html)

~~~
ghshephard
The graph_is apparently_not inflation adjusted -_so it_de-emphasizes_the drop
in_print_advertising as compared_to 1984- that_is, on the graph,_a dollar spen
in_1984_is equal to a dollar spent in 2012. As a side note - anybody_who_ever
plots $_over_time,_please add a small caption_that either says "inflation
adjusted" or_"not inflation_adjusted" - the educated reader will appreciate
that greatly.

------
nkassis
Has_anyone_looked at the_impact of paywalls on revenues? Has it led to_an
increase in online revenues for those_who attempted it?

The_problem_with_the metric used in_the article is that it doesn't_say much.
Was it less online revenues_that cause the ratio to drop? Was_it an
acceleration of people unsubscribing from_the paper version? Are print_ads now
worth_less than they used too_by impressions?

~~~
TylerE
Don't know_how much_I an really_disclose, but, for us (small-ish daily,_~20k
circ), once we_went to a (partial) paywall, circulation_defiantly_went up. Our
model_is_that_you must_be a subscriber_to_get through_the_paywall, all print
subscribers get online as_well_- you can get online e-edition/pdf access
without_home delivery, but it_costs_the same.

Our circulation is_higher than it was two_years ago. Not sure many papers_can
say that.

~~~
ghshephard
That's_a good_point that I don't think most people pick up on immediately._The
pricing of the NYT in particular,_is focused primarily on_reducing the_loss_of
print subscriptions (print_subscribers_get full_access) more than it is on
maximizing digital_revenue. Once_the print subscribers drop off enought_that
they don't have that_much_revenue to protect, you'll see a_quick drop in NYT
digital subscription fees_so that they can maximize_their_revenue_there.

------
nevinera
This headline is implies that_it is their shift to digital_strategies that is
_causing__the