Aardvark

[Bruce Simpson]

This column is archived at: http://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2009/0717.shtml

Is Barry Coleman NZ's own Rupert Murdoch?

Not only is he looking to repeat the mistakes of the past by re-introducing a subscription model but he's also slagging off bloggers and content aggregators (just like Rupert did).

Might it be that Barry's biggest handicap is his inability to move with the times?

Surely, given the huge strides that NBR has made in terms of their online presence, they're now positioned in a great place to start innovating and creating new (profitable) models for online content publishing.

While they're on a roll, why don't they start harnessing some of the internet's key strengths -- instead of falling back on proven-flawed 20th century strategies.

When I see publishers like NBR effectively wasting their position I get really frustrated.

If I had the time/money I'd love to show the Murdoch's of the world how it should really be done.

I've done it before, I *know* I can do it again.

The secret?

Look forwards, not backwards.

What do you think of NBR's website these days?

Would you pay the $298 a year they're effectively asking for a subscription?

Will the appearance of "go away you non-subscriber" pages put you off returning to NBR?

Has the publisher just ankle-tapped itself?

[Who?]

The ONLY online service I pay for is consumer.org.nz. I also get their paper magazine delivered. Great for reading when munching on the morning cereal

So why do I pay for the consumer info? Because it is informative, relevant and most importantly it saves me money! In other words I see the subscription as an investment and not a cost.

When the MSM get the message that they have to offer value for money, they will start to make money. In the meantime the MSM is a lame duck in my opinion.

[Bruce Simpson]

Oh dear, I see that Barry's decision to implement a subscription-based level of content is getting roundly bashed over on the NBR website itself

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/a-letter-national-business-reviews-publisher-105764

It would appear that he did no real analysis of the market before making this decision and, as I predicted in my column, the results may well be decidedly negative for the publication's bottom line.

What is it they say about old dogs and new tricks?

[Jman]

[braedon]

Bruce, would "Aardvark.oc.nz"[sic] in the comments be you? I didn't realize you had changed your web address

The whole basis of the internet is that it gives open and free access to information from a huge range of sources. Unless every source of new on the internet gets on the subscription bandwagon(which we all know is not going to happen), the vast majority of net uses will not pay. There is simply no need.

Whenever i see a subscription only page, i leave immediately. It isn't worth my time to be on a site that doesn't allow access to half it's content, as i can always get both the free and subscription content elsewhere. As it stands, i get the majority of my news from a "nasty leaching blogger" known as Bruce, so this move by the NBR isn't going to affect me much.

The subscription problem that i always run across is "experts exchange". Whenever i have a programming or general computer problem, i use trusty google, and open a bunch of the promising looking results in tabs, ready to go through until i find the solution. One of them is invariably "experts exchange", which shows you, and google, a question(which is often VERY similar to what you asked google, leading me to suspect that some of them are not even real questions. If so they have a very good generator, however.), and then tells you to pay for the answer. It is Extremely infuriating. Has anyone ever paid for that site? Does it actually have any useful content? Or is it just an ad site that has somehow forced itself up the google rankings?

---Braedon

[edwin]

[Sophocles]

[Sophocles]

Yep, I read that inaccurately: the $89 was the "Introductory offer ..."

[Newsjunkie]

[braedon]

[DarrenG]

When I am following a train of thought on a particular idea I end up jumping from site to site all over the world. I feel quite annoyed when I see what looks like something relevant on google's summary, but when the page eventually loads (curse KOL's pathetic dial up service) there is NOTHING but a subscription request. Why should I subscribe to a service I may never visit again? And how did google get that information for the summary in the first place? Does the site bait and switch?

[khamtanh]

[edwin]

[thrashcardiom]