The Times to start charging for the web content

[Asterix]

£1 a day or £2 a week and free for subscribers of the hard copy.

I'm in two minds about this. The site is my favourite for online news so if I decide that I don't want to pay then I'll be missing out. However, I'm sure I could use other free resources to gain information about what is going on in the world.

That said, it does make sense that their good work is rewarded.

Thoughts?

[randlemarcus]

100% sure that paid content in its current form is not a tenable business model. I'd be more than happy to pay for news content in a delivered format, i.e. onto an iPhone or e-magazine format, but paying for http content I have to go and get? I dont think so, especially when news.google.co.uk offers a broad spectrum of articles and opinions.

[Eric Mc]

It remains to be seen if charging to view content on the internet is a valid business model. My hunch is that it isn't and a year from now they will reverse this decision.

[amir_j]

Murdoch will be stubborn even if it fails

Sun and news of the world to charge too later

[Parrot of Doom]

The Times isn't distinct enough to warrant a charge to access it. There are plenty of other news sources.

[Busa_Rush]

They will have to offer some impressive filtering/selection and delivery service to get £2 a week.

[Dave Angel]

R

[5unny]

So long as the Daily Mail does not start charging PH should be fine

[Stu R]

Won't be getting any cash from me. As much as I like the times paying £100 a year to read their website isn't happening.

[Mikeyboy]

I reckon they'll be spending a fortune in Lawyers over the coming years to sue those people that cut and paste content for blogs and forums etc.

I went to a lecture/discussion on this subject a few months ago fro the publshers association. the upshot was all publshers would like to charge but none can see how it would work.
"Dirty Digger" is just too obstinate to listen to the voices telling him that.

[Parrot of Doom]

The difference will be that in future, news will arrive not from newspapers such as The Times, but from bloggers like Guido Fawkes.

[Frankeh]

This business model will never ever work. Name one website that it's worked for?

[Fittster]

Frankeh said:

This business model will never ever work. Name one website that it's worked for?

FT?

[esselte]

Fittster said:

Frankeh said:

This business model will never ever work. Name one website that it's worked for?

FT?

Yep, but the FT is a bit more specialised than the Times...

[Frankeh]

Fittster said:

Frankeh said:

This business model will never ever work. Name one website that it's worked for?

FT?

According to some stats i just found they have 110,000 paying subscribers.

3.29 for the standard online membership.

£18,818,800 a year.

£20m guestimate if you include a few pricier subscriptions in the calculations.

I have no doubt that some redtops that use advertising make more than that each year.

[Fittster]

Frankeh said:

Fittster said:

Frankeh said:

This business model will never ever work. Name one website that it's worked for?

FT?

According to some stats i just found they have 110,000 paying subscribers.

3.29 for the standard online membership.

£18,818,800 a year.

£20m guestimate if you include a few pricier subscriptions in the calculations.

I have no doubt that some redtops that use advertising make more than that each year.

But they would also get income from the ads the online edition carries.

[Frankeh]

Fittster said:

Frankeh said:

Fittster said:

Frankeh said:

This business model will never ever work. Name one website that it's worked for?

FT?

According to some stats i just found they have 110,000 paying subscribers.

3.29 for the standard online membership.

£18,818,800 a year.

£20m guestimate if you include a few pricier subscriptions in the calculations.

I have no doubt that some redtops that use advertising make more than that each year.

But they would also get income from the ads the online edition carries.

I couldn't see any ads on the ft website at the time of posting, but after clicking on an article I see them now.
Still, the FT is very specialised. It's a broad sheet for a start...