It’s Official: NYT To Start Charging For Content In 2011

by Glynnis MacNicol | 9:38 am, January 20th, 2010

» 8 comments

The New York Times announced today that it will be introducing a paid model for NYTimes.com at the beginning of 2011.

The new approach, referred to as the metered model, will offer users free access to a set number of articles per month and then charge users once they exceed that number. This will enable NYTimes.com to create a second revenue stream and preserve its robust advertising business. It will also provide the necessary flexibility to keep an appropriate ratio between free and paid content and stay connected to a search-driven Web.

Through 2010, NYTimes.com will be building a new online infrastructure designed to provide consumers with a frictionless experience across multiple platforms. Once the metered model is implemented, New York Times home delivery print subscribers will continue to have free access to NYTimes.com.

“Our new business model is designed to provide additional support for The New York Times’ extraordinary, professional journalism,” said Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., chairman of The New York Times Company and publisher of The New York Times. “Our audiences are very loyal and we believe that our readers will pay for our award-winning digital content and services.”

“This process of rethinking our business model has also been driven by our desire to achieve additional revenue diversity that will make us less susceptible to the inevitable economic cycles,” said Janet L. Robinson, president and CEO, The New York Times Company. “We were also guided by the fact that our news and information are being featured in an increasingly broad range of end-user devices and services, and our pricing plans and policies must reflect this vision.”

More details regarding the metered model will be available in the coming months.

Pages: 1 2

New York Times, paid content, Richard Perez-Pena, The State of Journalism

http://www.zachinthehighlifeagain.com Zach Linder

Any word on if home delivery subscribers will have to pay for online content?
Glynnis MacNicol

According to the internal memo from Sulzberger and Robinson (I just added an excerpt and link above) they won’t. From the memo: “New York Times home delivery print subscribers will continue to have free access to NYTimes.com”
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

I’d be interested in this new infrastructure and how it might enhance the product, but I have to also caution that once you get to a price point above $30 to $40 per annum, they’d really be looking at diminishing returns.

IOW: I’d pay $29.95 a year tomorrow for unlimited access to their current product and if they adopted the right kind of improvements, I wouldn’t blink at $39.95. But if they go up from there, I’d really need a return on my investment because though I love the Times, it’s not the end-all of the web.
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

Note: I probably should’ve used a “probably” to modify my blinking at $39.95.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Joe-Callan/100000200979966 Joe Callan

It’s good to see that the NYT has faith enough in their brand to charge money for the online site. Theirs is a publication worth paying for.

Now here’s the thing–I kind of sound like a hypocrite because I poked fun at Murdoch when he discussed the same move with his publications. The difference is in the tone, though: NYT’s memo to discuss this new plan is not a scathing attack of its web consumers (or internet users in general). It calmly and rationally explains the need for the NYT to move in this direction in order to continue to bring its readers top-quality content.
http://www.adamsherk.com Adam Sherk

No one may know what the future holds, but I’ve got the inside scoop on the (not) real reasons that the NYT is moving to a paid model :) Top 10 Reasons The New York Times is Really Putting up a Paywall
http://www.adamsherk.com Adam Sherk

Sorry, that link didn’t work: http://www.adamsherk.com/publishing/top-10-reasons-for-new-york-times-paywall/
ChrisNH

The dilemma is that a move like this naturally will shrink their audience. How will people like Krugman and Rich (et al) react to their leftist shrieks reaching fewer eyeballs? That’s the consequence of a move like this.