i'd be willing to pay a subscription fee for a quality product. i pay for the magazines. why should i expect to receive what you provide for free?
however, i agree with some of your readers who ask for greater breadth and depth of content, especially if we are asked to pay. so far, i've had no complaints about the value of the product you provide. i might feel otherwise if there were a fee inlolved.
sure, it would be great if you could generate enough advertising revenue to cover all your expenses and provide you with a living as well. however, it's naive for anyone to suggest that you "go out and get more ad money." believe it or not fellow readers, advertisers have limited budgets. they also tend to be a bit timid when it comes to spending money outside the conventional audience delivery vehicles.
giving up a page or two in the major print magazines in order to pay for a presence online can be hard to justify for advertisers. the more they run in the print mags, the more they receive in page-cost discounts as well merchandising.
in the real world, where people are not just managing ad budgets, but their own careers, borrowing money from the conventional to afford the unconventional can be a hard sell to the people to whom the ad managers report. especially when they believe, justifiably, that the people who are reading online sites are also reading the magazines.
i'm not defending the behavior, just telling it like it is.
so, if i had to make a choice between saying goodbye to m.o. or paying a few bucks to keep it alive, and improving, then i'm up for paying.
however, i agree with some of your readers who ask for greater breadth and depth of content, especially if we are asked to pay. so far, i've had no complaints about the value of the product you provide. i might feel otherwise if there were a fee inlolved.
sure, it would be great if you could generate enough advertising revenue to cover all your expenses and provide you with a living as well. however, it's naive for anyone to suggest that you "go out and get more ad money." believe it or not fellow readers, advertisers have limited budgets. they also tend to be a bit timid when it comes to spending money outside the conventional audience delivery vehicles.
giving up a page or two in the major print magazines in order to pay for a presence online can be hard to justify for advertisers. the more they run in the print mags, the more they receive in page-cost discounts as well merchandising.
in the real world, where people are not just managing ad budgets, but their own careers, borrowing money from the conventional to afford the unconventional can be a hard sell to the people to whom the ad managers report. especially when they believe, justifiably, that the people who are reading online sites are also reading the magazines.
i'm not defending the behavior, just telling it like it is.
so, if i had to make a choice between saying goodbye to m.o. or paying a few bucks to keep it alive, and improving, then i'm up for paying.
