Ireland.com - will you pay?

The Cigarette Smoking Man

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/finance/2002/0321/3351359076BZIRISHTIMES.html

No final fee has been agreed but it is believed the weekly subscription charge will cost about €10 while annual subscriptions will cost less than €100.

Meh

Not if the breaking news remains free.

Terminator

Never use the site. Yahoo.co.uk has an excellent *free* news section.

b20uvkft6m5xwg

I would only pay if...

*I was living abroad

or

*If they included all sections in their entirety- ie the full sports round-up and results, the law Report etc.

As for the e-mail service, I understand there are convenience and cost issues (like Expenditure on Signage etc.) but I dont think enough ppl consider simply buying their own domain name and using that for their e-mail- (like me ) at (depending on service) a fraction of the cost!

dahamsta

Not a hope. Mangan is trying to go the whole hog in one go, and this will make the service unsustainable. The suggested fees are scandalous by the way.

adam

The Corinthian

The ex-pat market will pay to a great extent, but the Irish market, which is a very substantial percentage of their visitors, will collapse. btw, I believe they're planning to introduce two rates for these two markets.

I would concur with dahamsta’s view, overall. Most other news sites are adopting a ‘wait and see’ or at most a tentative approach, letting Ireland.com take the risk and learning on what will and won’t work.

At least they’ll save money on servers/support as bandwidth demand plummets…

pugwall

Im not going to pay but Im going to start buying the paper again. Its a quality paper and the only reason I haven't bought it in a while is that it was on the web for free. I get it at a discount in college anyway. I actually prefer reading the paper itself rather than on the web........it just isn't the same.
Hey, it will be interesting to see whether sales increase when they introduce the charge for the webcontent.

I think I heard a while ago that Ireland.com is loosing a substantial amount of money for the organisation. If so then it is only right that they charge for content.

If I was living + working abroad, I think that I would then pay for the content. Im a huge fan of the opinion section, letters to the editor and of course the crossword.

Victor

Originally posted by 80project
*If they included all sections in their entirety- ie the full sports round-up and results, the law Report etc.

I agree, although I suspect the copyright on the law report may be held by someone else.

dahamsta

Actually, that €10 a week figure can't be right, unless Mangan has totally flipped. €10/month would be more likely.

As it happens, I don't agree with the "wait and see" approach either Corinithian (although I see your point -- I'm not arguing with you). I think that the time has come for people to start paying for content; that the "freebie mentality" has to end if commercial operators are going to be viable at all. I have no problem with commercial operators making a few quid out of their efforts.

The problem in this case is that I believe Mangan is jumping the middle ground and trying to do it all at once, and I firmly believe that it won't work. I think there has to be stopgaps on the approach. Mangan should have taken the Salon approach and moved into the paid arena slowly. Even this approach is dangerous in the extreme, but it is better (in my view) that trying to go the whole hog.

That said, it's not as if Mangan had a choice, and I think that may be the core of the problem. Mangan was brought into ireland.com to manage this exact process, and she's most likely under severe pressure to get ireland.com moved to a paid-for regime ASAP. She's still the boss though, and she should have been pressuring in the opposite direction. If she was, she lost.

I've been talking to the operators of two rather large Irish content providers about this recently, and although they're thinking about it, they're sitting on the fence. In these cases, I believe that it's the only option for them to take, since they don't have the might or the experience of the Irish Times to back them up. The Irish Times will probably pull this off, but they will have to absorb serious trouble on the path.

I think that the alternative route of micro-managing the process could avoid that trouble. Cut costs in other ways. Lay off more staff, automate more procedures, take your time. With the current route, they're going to have to absorb big losses and a hell of a lot of flack along the way. The other route will take just as long, but at least it will pay for itself.

I believe this approach should be applied to /all/ commercial websites. Invest the bare minimum. Take your time. Make a little money, set it aside, and build yourself up out of it. It doesn't have to happen overnight, and it's very unlikely that it will.

adam

The Corinthian

Originally posted by dahamsta
Actually, that €10 a week figure can't be right, unless Mangan has totally flipped. €10/month would be more likely.

That figure may well be for ex-pats, not Irish residants. You're right, €10 p.w. wouldn't make sense for ppl in Ireland.

As it happens, I don't agree with the "wait and see" approach either Corinithian (although I see your point -- I'm not arguing with you).

I can see their logic, it's unchartered territory that would cost money (both in infrastructure and admin) to implement. Given this I would also agree that the "wait and see" approach is flawed, with similar arguments to your own. Although, were I a content providor, following this approach, I'd hardly use Ireland.com's apparent implementation as a benchmark.

I think that the alternative route of micro-managing the process could avoid that trouble.

Ahhh... to plug, or not to plug... :rolleyes:

davros

Originally posted by dahamsta
Actually, that €10 a week figure can't be right, unless Mangan has totally flipped. €10/month would be more likely.

Yes, the same article says < €100 annually.

Mangan should have taken the Salon approach and moved into the paid arena slowly.

Just how slow can they go? They have been developing their site for five years now, they have built their audience and they have tested the waters on charging with the email service. The only thing remaining is to charge for the rest of it.

I am convinced this is going to work. The Irish Times is a great brand and it's the paper of record in this country. If you want to consider yourself informed you have to read it. The online market is the tens of thousands of overseas Irish who do not get a paper copy and are well-and-truly hooked on a browse over their morning coffee.

The archive is a utility which is used internally by the Times (and apparently by rival newspapers, it's so good). Anyone they get to pay for that will be a bonus.

I've been talking to the operators of two rather large Irish content providers about this recently, and although they're thinking about it, they're sitting on the fence.

The IT had to make the first move on charging. I'll be interested to see how quickly the likes of The Irish Emigrant move to a charging model.

Back in the mid-1990s, the IT was charging £50 a year (or was it $?) for a subscription (daily news by email) while the Irish Emigrant charged £30 (or was it $?). I can see it going back to this. Smaller providers will undercut the IT and maybe provide a different slant on the news

With the current route, they're going to have to absorb big losses and a hell of a lot of flack along the way.

They have big losses *now*. As soon as they start charging they will have a tidy revenue stream. I don't see who will really complain about this. Grumble a little perhaps. But it will help that the IT nearly went into examinership recently (according to themselves). Who would begrudge them a few dollars to keep the excellent ireland.com alive?

Victor

Originally posted by Clain
and thirdly because of the extras not included in the web site.

I think the idea is that everythingin the real paper would end up in the subscription (web)paper.

lara

No way would I pay to use Ireland.com - they already charge for their email (who still uses it by the way?) - and there are a lot of other places to get Irish news on the web.

I know they have to make money from the site, but they won't be making it off me anyway. Or anyone I know for that matter!

Victor

When will people get it through their thick skulls that the proposal is that only people using the more sophisticated parts ('the premium services') of the site would pay. You will still get the web version and breaking news, property and a few other bits free.

b20uvkft6m5xwg

There, There Victor.

Nobody has a thick skull-
Civility Please:)

The Corinthian

Originally posted by 80project
Nobody has a thick skull

I'd like empirical evidence of that…

b20uvkft6m5xwg

for the purposes of this thread we all have egg-shell skulls and are blindly unaware to what ireland.com are actually up to.

although upon production of such empirical data to the contrary I may alter my view

jmcc

Originally posted by The Corinthian

I'd like empirical evidence of that…

Step right this way - the 2x4 is waiting.
Seriously though there was some court case about 120 years ago dealing with a case of a man who was killed by a blow to the head at some fair. The guy's skull was unusually thin and apparently the ruling stated something about the risks of thin skulled visiting towns of fair days.

Regards...jmcc

b20uvkft6m5xwg

"Egg-Shell Skull Syndrome" is actually a legal principle used in determining liability in Tort.

There ya go;)

jmcc

Originally posted by Victor
When will people get it through their thick skulls that the proposal is that only people using the more sophisticated parts ('the premium services') of the site would pay. You will still get the web version and breaking news, property and a few other bits free.

The problem Victor is that what Mangan and the Irish Times management perceive as being premium is at odds with reality. And there is a lot of non-uniquely sourced material there that can be obtained elsewhere on the web for free.

The technology subsite is a joke as it is padded with Financial Times/Associated Press buy-ins and very little meat. This particular subsite faces more clueful opponents on the web like Techcentral.ie and even from ENN. The big mistake that IT made was in killing Computimes in favor of the whinge binge of Sociology In Business (the Friday 'technology' section.) The IT has lost sight of the old newspaper maxim that all news is local. Most people here don't care about some problem with the water in Silicon Valley and end up thinking that the IT is really just taking the p1ss. They do care about when they are getting ADSL or some kind of decent pricing for flat rate. To put it bluntly the IT's technology subsite has a fatal lack of editorial quality.

The business side of things has competition from Business And Finance and other Irish business related websites.

The IT's morgue (the back issues archive) is good but the search software could be improved. It could be a good idea for IT to use some commercial search engine software for this.

The failure of the IT to encourage the growth of a community around their various subsites makes it more difficult to successfully charge for these areas.

On the issue of Mary Mangan as CEO of ireland.com, I think that the IT has made a fatal mistake. The IT needs to re-establish the primacy of the Irish Times. To do so, it requires someone with a publisher's instinct for what sells rather than a manager. Mangan seems to be a dotcom manager caught between a hard place - the Irish Times management and the paying public. Publishing is all about getting paid and the strategy that the IT has adopted here seems to be cargo-cult in that it is following papers like the FT and the WSJ and believing that it is in the same class. The IT is a Dublin newspaper at heart whereas the FT and WSJ are global and clearly identified niches. And successful publishing on the web is all about niches.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

Originally posted by davros

I am convinced this is going to work. The Irish Times is a great brand and it's the paper of record in this country. If you want to consider yourself informed you have to read it. The online market is the tens of thousands of overseas Irish who do not get a paper copy and are well-and-truly hooked on a browse over their morning coffee.

The idea that it is the "newspaper of record" is a bit outdated. However the ex-pat market may pay for access though I doubt that they will pay in huge numbers.

The IT had to make the first move on charging. I'll be interested to see how quickly the likes of The Irish Emigrant move to a charging model.

Back in the mid-1990s, the IT was charging £50 a year (or was it $?) for a subscription (daily news by email) while the Irish Emigrant charged £30 (or was it $?). I can see it going back to this. Smaller providers will undercut the IT and maybe provide a different slant on the news

The Emigrant seems to be a very tightly run operation whereas the IT does not. This is the critical factor.

Who would begrudge them a few dollars to keep the excellent ireland.com alive?

The market is a cruel and harsh place and ireland.com is, at the end of the day, a business.

Regards...jmcc

davros

Originally posted by jmcc
The idea that it is the "newspaper of record" is a bit outdated.

Yes, it's a very old-fashioned phrase. But I mean it in the sense that it is the one the newsmakers read and the one that leads the national agenda. Or am I being unfair to the Indo, the Herald and the Examiner? That said, I entirely agree with you that its Science & Technology coverage is lamentable, but that seems to be a blind spot with all newspapers, for some reason.

The Emigrant seems to be a very tightly run operation whereas the IT does not. This is the critical factor.

The difference is that The Emigrant reports what's in the paper whereas the IT *is* the paper.

The market is a cruel and harsh place and ireland.com is, at the end of the day, a business.

And they are finally beginning to act like it, by charging for their product.

jmcc

Originally posted by davros
Yes, it's a very old-fashioned phrase. But I mean it in the sense that it is the one the newsmakers read and the one that leads the national agenda. Or am I being unfair to the Indo, the Herald and the Examiner?

The market has fragmented to such an extent that no one newspaper can lead the national agenda. The newsmakers tend to read all the broadsheet newspapers. Over the past few years, the IT has become more confused with an increasing reliance on columnists as opposed to newsgathering. The Examiner is actually beginning to be a good national newspaper. Previously it was more of a regional newspaper.

That said, I entirely agree with you that its Science & Technology coverage is lamentable, but that seems to be a blind spot with all newspapers, for some reason.

Actually the reason is very simple - quality costs money. It is far cheaper for the newspaper to get some freelancer whose highest technological or scientific achievement is opening $MS Outlook without formatting their computer's harddrive than pay for good copy from technologists or scientists.

From the newspaper point of view, that is not a major advertising revenue stream so frequently they get cheapo technology journalists to pad out the good business type reporting produced by the newspaper's real journalists. They then will add some AP/syndicated stories to pad out the section. But unless a section is a major advertising magnet, the newspaper will not pay for specialist editors or specialist journalists. The specialists generally end up working for the trade papers. However the dotcom bubble attracted all types of people who fancied themselves as journalists writing about technology. The result was a complete collapse of the quality of reporting. The Irish Times was not alone in this respect. Sometimes it takes a technologist or a scientist to simplify complex arguments. The problem was that you had people with no technological or scientific background or training let loose on complex technical issues.

The difference is that The Emigrant reports what's in the paper whereas the IT *is* the paper.
And they are finally beginning to act like it, by charging for their product.

The IT is *a* paper. However its methodology and strategy as regards online publishing and services are questionable. The Emigrant is classic niche publishing. It is far easier to charge for niche publishing. Ireland.com is just cargo-culting along following the latest idea that the big international papers come up with.

The News International papers (The Times/The Sunday Times) are going to implement a PPV model with SMS. (Corinthian's area) I think that this option of micro-payments is one that has some merit. However from a publisher point of view it could be a nightmare. The publisher could find out that the most popular section is the horoscope and the big name columnists are really just a legend in their own minds. It used to be that newspapers reported the news and magazines did the analysis. The problem for the Irish Times is that it is trying to be all things with Ireland.com.

Regards...jmcc

lara

The idea that it is the "newspaper of record" is a bit outdated. However the ex-pat market may pay for access though I doubt that they will pay in huge numbers.

Particularly since some overseas customers can subscribe to the IT. That would be a chunk of Ireland.com's subscribership gone already, if they were paying purely to view the full version of the paper online.

I don't dispute the fact that Ireland.com needs to make a profit - otherwise there'll be a few more journalists out of a job - but it remains to be seen whether this will make any difference for the site.

jmcc

Originally posted by lara

I don't dispute the fact that Ireland.com needs to make a profit - otherwise there'll be a few more journalists out of a job - but it remains to be seen whether this will make any difference for the site.

This is actually a very important part of the problem for Ireland.com. The online newspaper has to have an edge or unique selling proposition to use the marketspeak. It has to offer more than the paper edition and the best way would be for more analysis/news from the journos. However the catch is that Ireland.com cannot realistically support the costs of extra articles from the journos until it goes PPV.

Regards...jmcc

Victor

Originally posted by 80project
"Egg-Shell Skull Syndrome" is actually a legal principle used in determining liability in Tort.

Like people with lots of fillings biting a bone?

lara

Originally posted by jmcc


It has to offer more than the paper edition and the best way would be for more analysis/news from the journos.

Actually, there is a good bit of analysis, special reports, etc that you can get on Ireland.com that you can't get from the paper edition.

ireland.com was always intended to be a long term investment for the company, so I don't think they would have been too surprised to find it was making a loss. But I would hate to see them kill off the site by trying to implement a PPV model that people won't accept. Until other Irish websites, such as Unison and examiner.ie do the same, Ireland.com may find their online readership seriously declines after they begin charging for content.

b20uvkft6m5xwg

Re: EGGSHELL SKULL SYNDROME

Originally posted by Victor
Like people with lots of fillings biting a bone?

Very simply- by way of example:

You drive into the back of a car-
The driver if the car in front of you, as a child had, had fallen from a tree and as a result had a weakened neck- this caused the driver to snap their head violently against the steering wheel- unlike a normal person, and ultimatley caused their death.

You are charged with their death.
As a defence you claim that the person had a weakened neck and that you only tapped the car and any normal person would not have died from the impact

The judge replies: You must take every victim as they come and while unfortunate, you are liable for your actions. Hence egg-Shell Skull Syndrome- ie- this person had an egg-shell skull (ie. Weakened Neck) but you are still liable for your actions.

Hope that explains it

b20uvkft6m5xwg

ooh just read a real case in...
McDermott, Bolger, Charleton: Criminal Law

2 blokes have a fight
1 of them has haemophilia and is stabbed in the brawl-
ultimatley bleeds to death, whereas a normal person would not have- given it was a minor injury-
The offender is charged with murder

hence the haemophiliac had egg-shell skull symptons, that made him a special kind of victim.

Victor

Without wishing to go /stay off topic, are you saying you have a greater duty of care to the 'egg-shell' cases or the same duty of care?

b20uvkft6m5xwg

Its the same DoC, but it depnds on the victim...

Wherein the expected normal level of care is rebuttable in favour of a heightened one to address the nature of the victim at the time of the act.