I'm in agreement with you. I think the Times lost readers that won't be coming back.
Another point on this study is that it was done in 2004, yet it didn't appear in print until June 2007. The study was done at at time when the consumer shift was on to search. So in 2004 the two, online and print, might have complemented each other. By 2007 the concept of a destination Web site was clearly toast.
ErikSchwartz
· 2 years ago
I was up at the Online News Association conference in Toronto this week. The NYT decision to undo TimesSelect was obviously quite a topic of discussion. The most interesting opinion I heard was not about the columnists behind a wall, but the archives behind the wall.
It has not been widely discussed but when the NYT decided to do away with TS, they also opened up free access to the archives of the NYT for the last 30 years or so. How long do you think it will take for whenever you do research on google in the top 2 or 3 links you'll find every story the NYT did on the subject in the last 30 years?
To me, (and to Steve Safran who pointed it out to me) that is far more powerful than the opening up of the columnists.
josh guttman
· 2 years ago
I completely agree. NYT does deserve some credit though, for reversing their decision and correcting it. WSJ is an even more egregious offender of the subscription model (a topic I blogged about last winter) and I think it has cost them millions in lost ad revenue from the missed traffic opportunity. NYT will recover from the NYT Select fiasco and not miss a beat. WSJ will take far longer because they've alienated users by shutting them out for years.
blogcosm
· 2 years ago
Of course that's possible, but I suspect that the WSJ is an exception since it's considered a "business news" paper rather than "general news" paper.
SidneyV
· 2 years ago
Hey, thanks for quoting me! I am glad you found them useful. Generally I keep my comments that don't concern my professional identity separate, while giving my email address to the author, so as to keep my views separate from my employment. This is just for your eyes only, since you were generous enough to quote my comment.
Steve Kane
· 2 years ago
why do we keep agonizing over this stuff?
first, Clayton M. Christensen laid all this out clearly, deeply and in detail, and for the ages, in his must-read tome, The Innovator's Dilemma. And it's not that complicated, really: Big companies simply are not set up or rewarded for innovating and risk taking; they are justly devoted to creating economies of scale and harvesting.
more important, what are we? suicidal? if big companies suddenly became innovators and risk takers, all the rewards and returns will go out of being entrepreneurs and doing startups. we get paid huge premiums when we succeed because we have smartly executed outsourced R&D for big companies and institutional investors. if big companies start blazing the new trails themselves, and getting it right quickly, our value in the food chain will radically deteriorate.
i get as frustrated as anyone dealing with big companies, but next time your head is ready to explode let a little voice say: "opportunity is knocking..."
fredwilson
· 2 years ago
Well said steve
I couldn't agree more
Don Jones - VentureDeal
· 2 years ago
Grey ladies aren't known for being visionary...One more example of an old industry stuck in an old thought pattern.
As the owner of a subscription model venture capital database, I wrestle with the ad vs. subscription supported model. So, I'm starting up an ad-supported site of syndicated data from the subscription site - to diversify revenues and to see which concept comes out the winner.
All Comments
Another point on this study is that it was done in 2004, yet it didn't appear in print until June 2007. The study was done at at time when the consumer shift was on to search. So in 2004 the two, online and print, might have complemented each other. By 2007 the concept of a destination Web site was clearly toast.
It has not been widely discussed but when the NYT decided to do away with TS, they also opened up free access to the archives of the NYT for the last 30 years or so. How long do you think it will take for whenever you do research on google in the top 2 or 3 links you'll find every story the NYT did on the subject in the last 30 years?
To me, (and to Steve Safran who pointed it out to me) that is far more powerful than the opening up of the columnists.
first, Clayton M. Christensen laid all this out clearly, deeply and in detail, and for the ages, in his must-read tome, The Innovator's Dilemma. And it's not that complicated, really: Big companies simply are not set up or rewarded for innovating and risk taking; they are justly devoted to creating economies of scale and harvesting.
more important, what are we? suicidal? if big companies suddenly became innovators and risk takers, all the rewards and returns will go out of being entrepreneurs and doing startups. we get paid huge premiums when we succeed because we have smartly executed outsourced R&D for big companies and institutional investors. if big companies start blazing the new trails themselves, and getting it right quickly, our value in the food chain will radically deteriorate.
i get as frustrated as anyone dealing with big companies, but next time your head is ready to explode let a little voice say: "opportunity is knocking..."
I couldn't agree more
As the owner of a subscription model venture capital database, I wrestle with the ad vs. subscription supported model. So, I'm starting up an ad-supported site of syndicated data from the subscription site - to diversify revenues and to see which concept comes out the winner.