Murdoch vows to charge for all online content

SteamWake · 08-06-09, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Rupert Murdoch has vowed to charge for all the online content of his newspapers and television news channels, going well beyond his prediction in May that the company would test pay models on one of its stronger papers within the year

He seriously thinks this is a sound buisness model?

Good luck with that Rupert.

Aramike · 08-06-09, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteamWake

He seriously thinks this is a sound buisness model?

Good luck with that Rupert.

I actually don't blame him. Realistically, if only a tiny fraction of the people who currently visit his sites (foxnew.com being one of them) subscribe, that's still way more revenue than ad dollars alone. If it doesn't work, then it's just lesson learned.

This is probably the cheapest marketing test he could have thought of.

geetrue · 08-06-09, 04:30 PM

Pay for what you now get for free?

I don't think so ... I've been surfing the web since 1998 and I have seen many web pages go from charging for all kinds of things (mostly downloads) to being free.

People will go else where ...

Hey! How about a national internet card that everyone has to sign up for and then they could just take it right out of your bank account in case you owe them something?

Naugh no one would go for that ...

08-06-09, 05:20 PM

Well if you have a bunch of muppets that are willing to pay for Fox news or the Tmes then fair play to murdoch

But hold on , isnt he the bugger that every time the banks try to call his debts says FU I owe too much.

Isn't it ironic that when the banks are screwed some people repeat the propoganda of the fella that left you holding part of the bill.

Letum · 08-06-09, 05:42 PM

Whilst this is a great thiong for a specialist publication to do (Financial Times, New Scientist, Nat. Geo., etc.), I doubt it will work with more generic journalism.

08-06-09, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Whilst this is a great thiong for a specialist publication to do (Financial Times, New Scientist, Nat. Geo., etc.), I doubt it will work with more generic journalism.

How is it a great thing?
The whole idea with Murdock is that all the real competition becomes himself.

08-06-09, 04:30 PM	#3
geetrue Cold War Boomer Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Walla Walla Posts: 2,837 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Pay for what you now get for free? I don't think so ... I've been surfing the web since 1998 and I have seen many web pages go from charging for all kinds of things (mostly downloads) to being free. People will go else where ... Hey! How about a national internet card that everyone has to sign up for and then they could just take it right out of your bank account in case you owe them something? Naugh no one would go for that ... __________________

08-06-09, 05:42 PM	#5
Letum Navy Seal Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: York - UK Posts: 6,079 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Whilst this is a great thiong for a specialist publication to do (Financial Times, New Scientist, Nat. Geo., etc.), I doubt it will work with more generic journalism. __________________

08-06-09, 05:20 PM	#4
Tribesman Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Well if you have a bunch of muppets that are willing to pay for Fox news or the Tmes then fair play to murdoch But hold on , isnt he the bugger that every time the banks try to call his debts says FU I owe too much. Isn't it ironic that when the banks are screwed some people repeat the propoganda of the fella that left you holding part of the bill.