Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
To: neverdem
2 posted on
01/07/2005 12:23:19 PM PST by
Born Conservative
(Entertainment is a thing of the past, today we've got television - Archie Bunker)
To: Born Conservative
And I would pay to read the New York Lies because...?
3 posted on
01/07/2005 12:23:41 PM PST by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws help fund terrorism.)
To: Born Conservative
Who would pay to read The New York Times?
4 posted on
01/07/2005 12:23:41 PM PST by
Brilliant
To: Born Conservative
5 posted on
01/07/2005 12:25:20 PM PST by
BenLurkin
(Big government is still a big problem.)
To: Born Conservative
People used to pay for "Pet Rocks" so I guess they may as well try to see if people will pay for "Loose Marbles".
To: Born Conservative
If it ain't free liberals won't bite. They get all their liberal bile from about 500 different sources(ie MSM) for free. Why would they pay for it? NYT is trying to pad their waining subscription revenue. They would have better luck selling lemonade out on 5th Ave.
7 posted on
01/07/2005 12:26:34 PM PST by
mlbford2
("Never wrestle with a pig; you can't win, you just get filthy, and the pig loves it...")
To: Born Conservative
One of the paper's biggest rivals, Dow Jones & Co. Inc.'s Wall Street Journal, charges for its online edition. Big difference. There are actually people that will pay to read WSJ.
8 posted on
01/07/2005 12:27:44 PM PST by
VRWCmember
("You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." - Indigo Montoya)
To: Born Conservative
Why would anyone pay for birdcage liner?
11 posted on
01/07/2005 12:29:47 PM PST by
sergeantdave
(Help save the environment. Mail your old tires and garbage to the local Sierra Club.)
To: Born Conservative
The National Post started doing this last year but you can only read it if you're connected. If they made a downloadable version I would have considered it.
12 posted on
01/07/2005 12:29:48 PM PST by
Squawk 8888
(With enemies like Michael Moore, who needs friends?)
To: Born Conservative
Oh good! The blogs will still be free as the Gray Lady goes the way of the dinosaur.
14 posted on
01/07/2005 12:31:36 PM PST by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: Born Conservative
"Michael King mulls not reading the Times any more"
17 posted on
01/07/2005 12:36:07 PM PST by
mhking
(Do not mess with dragons, for thou art crunchy & good with ketchup...)
To: Born Conservative
I pay to have garbage removed from my house, not to have it brought in.
Cordially,
19 posted on
01/07/2005 12:37:23 PM PST by
Diamond
To: Born Conservative
Oh I misunderstood. I thought the the Times was going to pay
me to visit their site. Even that would be a hard sell.
20 posted on
01/07/2005 12:38:07 PM PST by
ghitma
(MeClaudius)
To: Born Conservative
... we training a generation of readers to get quality information for free. Quality information? Sez who?
25 posted on
01/07/2005 12:44:05 PM PST by
Noachian
(A Democrat, by definition, is a Socialist.)
To: Born Conservative
The business model for the web is still evolving...the poitns made re the NY Times don't reanslate in all cases.
I subscribed to the Washington Times National Weekly for years...I loved it..great source of conservative news and views. I didn't renew it in 1999, when their website was really rnin gwell..because I got everything there, and more besides, and instantly, and FREE..I wrote the publisher a letter thanking him, explaining why I wasn't renewing, and offerign to donate my subscription cost to the paper's in-house charity..got a nice reply back discussing the evolving busiess model..
The WSJ, and Barron's..are unique.both have like 95% of sales by annual subscription..delivered to home.office..the genius was to offer the website for a reduce cost to subscribers...both publications , over the years, have saved lots of money by moving much statistical pages to the website only..indeed..it's probably a waste of time for the WSJ to print ANY stock tables now..everyone has the stuff available on line..in many different formats..the big probalem for the WSK is that much of the revenue is derived from print advertising in the papers...that doesn't translate well into the website yet....people..."read" it differentl..you can't just browse over the whole page, like you do with the paper...OTOH..if you eliminated paper, and distribution, and printing costs completely..you'd save big $$$.. Barron's should be completely on-line..but they'd lose a fortune in print ad revenue....still..it's coming soon..
31 posted on
01/07/2005 12:57:56 PM PST by
ken5050
To: Born Conservative
Nice try, you can pay me but I still wouldn't read it!
These guys are getting desperate.
To: Born Conservative
Come on NYT admit it. Michael Moore is reading your drivel free and you want him to pay.
To: Born Conservative
Charge the readers..... yeah that's the ticket.
Rush does it..... why can't we.
37 posted on
01/07/2005 1:08:35 PM PST by
bert
(Don't Panic.....)
To: Born Conservative
They can mull all they want.
If I have to "sign in" I won't read it for FREE!
38 posted on
01/07/2005 1:09:51 PM PST by
Publius6961
(The most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen, ignorance and stupidity.)
To: Born Conservative
The old pink whore (formerly the old gray lady) trying to strut her suff in the free market cauldron of the internet?
LOL, this should be really rich! FRANK RICH!, that is!
SCHADENFREUDE ALERT!
40 posted on
01/07/2005 1:22:26 PM PST by
Agent Smith
(Fallujah delenda est. (I wish))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson