Posted on 08/07/2009 12:43:31 AM PDT by raccoonradio
The Boston Globe will soon begin charging for its Web site, publisher P. Steven Ainsley told the paper’s union bosses yesterday as the Globe’s parent New York Times [NYT] Co. confirmed in a regulatory filing that the money-losing Hub broadsheet is for sale.
News of the Globe’s intention to charge for Boston.com came a day after News Corp. [NWS] Chairman Rupert Murdoch announced his company would start charging for content at all of its news Web sites, including the New York Post, The Times of London and The Sun, a popular British tabloid. News Corp. already charges for some access to The Wall Street Journal’s Web site.
Globe spokesman Bob Powers said charging for Boston.com appears inevitable.
“It’s going to happen one way or another,” Powers said. “We are looking at several different options, and the goal would be to generate revenue.”
Ainsley also told Globe union bosses the combination of price increases and labor cost reductions, including $20 million in union concessions, have put the paper on better financial footing.
He said union concessions, plus $8 million in Globe management givebacks and the $18 million the company expects to save by closing its Billerica printing plant, have all helped, sources said.
The Times’ quarterly report filed yesterday shows the company spent $30 million to close its Billerica printing plant. Sources have told the Herald that at least one outside party was interested in the plant, but was rebuffed.
Ainsley refused to answer questions about the potential sale of the Globe at yesterday’s meeting, saying his Times Co. overlords had ordered him to keep mum.
Howie Carr list ping.
And guess what they are going to lose all their advertisers. LOL! Boston Globe will be out of business in 1 year tops.
Fox is doing same.... Hmmmmm..........Not sure this is a good business model.
Sad to see that a forum that offers a conservative view is jumping onto this suicide mission.
Surprised they have lasted this long. NYT overpaid big time for this paper.
The other night on WBZ radio they were talking about the Globe’s boosting of their subscription rates—that may chase away many longtime subscribers.
I remember for awhile the Herald charged if you wanted to read Howie Carr’s column ($5/month or something, unless you were a Herald subscriber—something I have been for many years). Some papers like the Salem News also had a deal where you had to pay for online content—namely, you had to subscribe to the print edition to be able to read (more than just the headline) the online edition!
Globe says NYT in no hurry to sell paper.
>>NY Times Co. says it is in no hurry to sell Globe
Paper’s finances called improved
>>The Times Co. is also selling its 18 percent stake in the Red Sox and related properties
It’s a desperate move that will not work. The web is too big. Too many people and web sites. Furthermore, less people will pay translates to less readers, less advertisers and ultimately less revenue.
Right!
I saw some other papers try that a few years back, and it did not work. They went back to the free model.
I hope the Globe’s Jeff Jacoby lands on his feet. Otherwise, I have as little use for the Globe as I usually do for the Washington Post. I love newspapers, but I want the leftist propaganda rags to fail.
If Google can do search and make lots of money on advertising, why can't Fox make money from advertising on their web site? I suppose they can't charge enough because they don't have millions of people going to their site. If Fox starts charging, I won't be subscribing.
I’ll defer to the bloggers. While a lot of information is disinformation, bloggers tend to do their homework, something the LSM fails to do. The blogs will only get better and more reliable than the biased press as time goes on. The scope of information gathering, confirmation and reporting will spread exponentially around the world becoming more and more reliable and newsworthy.
Simple. People use Google to locate things they want to buy. Ads that appear after a Google search for a particular product often result in sales. Google ads pay for themselves, so advertisers are willing to purchase, so Google makes money.
Visitors to the Fox website aren't going there to buy anything, they just want to read the news. Ads on a news site are annoyances, to be ignored. Social networking sites like Facebook have the same problem. People go there to meet friends and have conversations, not to purchase.
I find Amazon's "personal recommendation" ads interesting. They are targeted to specific users based on their past Amazon purchases. These days I actually want to see what Amazon thinks I should buy, because I often agree with them. I don't know how those ads are generated, but I bet they are very valuable to Amazon and its independent vendors.
Who wants to pay to read one of Murdoch’s lousy papers, when we can get the real news from Al Jazeerah for free?
No one reading Globe articles online = No one reading the Globe.
Reporters and Columnist won’t be read anymore - this is a lousy deal for them - we will all forget their names.
Sometimes people are looking for something to buy. But I think more often people are searching for information, and with that search comes ads.
Visitors to the Fox website aren't going there to buy anything, they just want to read the news.
When I watch television or listen to radio, I get ads. I don't watch or listen because I want to buy something. I am interested in some TV or radio show. The ads fund the show. If nobody watches a show, no company or organization will buy ads.
I find Amazon's "personal recommendation" ads interesting. They are targeted to specific users based on their past Amazon purchases. These days I actually want to see what Amazon thinks I should buy, because I often agree with them. I don't know how those ads are generated, but I bet they are very valuable to Amazon and its independent vendors.
It's called personalization. Amazon keeps a database of every person that has an account. When you log in, the software searches your database, analyzes what you bought in the past, matches your buying pattern to similar products in another database, and they generates a web page customized to your past purchases. If they have other information about you, where you live, your age, sex, etc., this information is taken into consideration as well in selecting merchandise to show you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.