{"id":266153,"date":"2010-02-02T13:26:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-02T18:26:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/techdirt.com\/articles\/20100127\/2059297951.shtml"},"modified":"2010-02-02T13:26:00","modified_gmt":"2010-02-02T18:26:00","slug":"massive-disconnect-paywall-analysis-claims-its-reasonable-to-expect-66-of-readers-to-pay","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/266153","title":{"rendered":"Massive Disconnect: Paywall Analysis Claims It&#8217;s Reasonable To Expect 66% Of Readers To Pay"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>And we were amazed by reports that Stephen Brill actually expected <a href=\"http:\/\/www.techdirt.com\/articles\/20090901\/0243526068.shtml\">10% to 15%<\/a> of newspaper readers to pay up for the paywall he&#8217;s building for various newspapers (still none confirmed, as far as we know).  A reporter over at Slate seems to have taken things to a new level.  John points us to the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.thebigmoney.com\/articles\/impressions\/2010\/01\/25\/crunching-numbers-times-pay-wall?page=full\" >back of the envelope analysis\/calculation of the NY Times&#8217; decision to put up a paywall<\/a> that appears to have some highly questionable assumptions.  The biggest one is that 66% of readers will pay.  Yes, 66%.  Oddly, this statement comes right after the reporter&#8217;s claim that, &#8220;a large percentage&#8221; of readers probably wouldn&#8217;t pay &#8212; but he seems to assume that &#8220;large percentage&#8221; is just 33%:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><i><br \/>\nFirst of all, a large percentage of these readers land on these sites though search engines, and therefore are not likely to consume a lot of pages. Such visitors, about a third of the total audience, must be removed from the pool of readers likely to pay for content.<\/p>\n<p>How much would people pay? According to a Boston Consulting Group survey, readers would agree to pay $3 per month on average. Interestingly enough, the BCG found the upper limit to be $6 for the &#8220;heavy print consumers&#8221; category.<\/p>\n<p>Coming back to the Washington Post, using the remaining 66 percent of total users likely to pay for content (7.34 million unique views\/month), the expected revenue could be considerable.<br \/>\n<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>I&#8217;d argue that getting even 5% to pay, as one <a href=\"http:\/\/www.techdirt.com\/articles\/20090922\/0424456278.shtml\">recent study suggested<\/a>, may be wildly optimistic.  66% is downright delusional. While the pricing is clearly much higher, you would think that the recent <a href=\"http:\/\/www.techdirt.com\/articles\/20100126\/1515217905.shtml\">example<\/a> of Newsday getting a grand total of 35 subscribers to its paywall would be telling.  So, it&#8217;s difficult to take the rest of the analysis seriously, when it kicks off with such a bizarre assumption.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/techdirt.com\/articles\/20100127\/2059297951.shtml\">Permalink<\/a> | <a href=\"http:\/\/techdirt.com\/articles\/20100127\/2059297951.shtml#comments\">Comments<\/a> | <a href=\"http:\/\/techdirt.com\/article.php?sid=20100127\/2059297951&#038;op=sharethis\">Email This Story<\/a><br \/>\n <br clear=\"both\" style=\"clear: both;\"\/><br \/>\n<br clear=\"both\" style=\"clear: both;\"\/><br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/ads.pheedo.com\/click.phdo?s=9d080d52104c740f5d7804a6450ed833&#038;p=1\"><img decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" style=\"border: 0;\" border=\"0\" src=\"http:\/\/ads.pheedo.com\/img.phdo?s=9d080d52104c740f5d7804a6450ed833&#038;p=1\"\/><\/a><br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" height=\"0\" width=\"0\" border=\"0\" style=\"display:none\" src=\"http:\/\/a.rfihub.com\/eus.gif?eui=2225\"\/><\/p>\n<div class=\"feedflare\">\n<a href=\"http:\/\/feeds.techdirt.com\/~ff\/techdirt\/feed?a=pc39exCNnkU:NBvoz1t7fM8:D7DqB2pKExk\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/feeds.feedburner.com\/~ff\/techdirt\/feed?i=pc39exCNnkU:NBvoz1t7fM8:D7DqB2pKExk\" border=\"0\"><\/img><\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/feeds.techdirt.com\/~ff\/techdirt\/feed?a=pc39exCNnkU:NBvoz1t7fM8:c-S6u7MTCTE\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/feeds.feedburner.com\/~ff\/techdirt\/feed?d=c-S6u7MTCTE\" border=\"0\"><\/img><\/a>\n<\/div>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/feeds.feedburner.com\/~r\/techdirt\/feed\/~4\/pc39exCNnkU\" height=\"1\" width=\"1\"\/><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>And we were amazed by reports that Stephen Brill actually expected 10% to 15% of newspaper readers to pay up for the paywall he&#8217;s building for various newspapers (still none confirmed, as far as we know). A reporter over at Slate seems to have taken things to a new level. John points us to the [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-266153","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/266153","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=266153"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/266153\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=266153"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=266153"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=266153"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}