Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:26 am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:45 am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:00 am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:36 am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:37 pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:41 am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:32 am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:29 pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:09 pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:47 am EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

WSJ.com Will Go Free, Eventually
Congratulations to wsj.com for posting impressive growth in both pageviews and unique visitors over the past year. Don't pay too much attention to the numbers quoted: they're "based on the company's internal traffic numbers," and therefore not much use in apples-to-apples comparisons. But the rate of change is probably reasonably reliable, and it's high.
Does this mean that Rupert Murdoch was right not to make the website free? No, it doesn't. And in fact I'm still convinced that the site will end up going completely free, if not sooner then later.
If you look at the Mediaweek story, there's one statistic conspicuous by its absence: what has happened to the number of subscribers to wsj.com over the past year. Betcha it hasn't grown at all, and that substantially all of wsj.com's new uniques are there for the free content only. (That would help explain why pageviews are growing much more slowly than uniques are.)
One can assume, then, the subscription revenue stream from wsj.com is stagnant, even as the advertising revenue stream is rising. And clearly if the site went free, then the number of pageviews per unique visitor would rise, which would mean a substantial increase in advertising inventory even if the number of unique visitors didn't increase much at all. Keeping a large amount of content behind a subscription firewall only serves to alienate non-subscribers and mimize the degree to which wsj.com's new uniques can be monetized.
Still, I no longer expect wsj.com to go free in the near future. As the US moves into a recession, a reliable income stream like that from subscriptions is going to be much more valuable than a volatile one like that from advertising - especially when most of the advertising on wsj.com comes from financial-services companies who are mostly struggling themselves, and always looking for areas where they can cut costs.
In the longer term, however, it just doesn't make sense to reserve a majority of your content for a minority of your readers. The publishing industry is all about building lasting relationships with readers, and you don't do that by putting walls in their faces. The wall will come down: it's only a question of when, not if.
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.





