The Tampa Bay Times started charging to read the USF blog

[Who'sYourData?]

Not only have people paid for their newspaper for a very long time, they still had advertisements in them.  Companies have a right to make money, consumers have a right to decide whether to pay.

[Triple B]

 

 

I'd wager to be Mother Trib goes to this format in the next 6mths to a year... then who are you going to complain about? Newspapers have been moving to all digital format for years... eventually they were going to expect you to pay for the info. 

I pay for it already, every time I see another car ad on the site.

 

 

You realize that those banner ads you see are being purchased for anywhere from $0.50 to $6 per every 1,000 ads (depending upon placement, campaign size, etc)

 

So even if you viewed 1,000 banner ads the amount you are "paying" is about 6 bucks at most.  Newspaper companies are trading print dollars for digital pennies and it has really hurt their revenue.

 

People have paid for the newspaper for over 100 years.  No one complained.  Digital has changed everything.  If the content is worth it, people will pay.  Look at sites like Rivals or 247.  They charge for their content.  

 

Obviously as people have pointed out on this thread, there are several "work arounds" to not pay.

 

 

And the ones too cheap to pay a small amount for the local coverage will be the first ones whining about no respect when the Trib and Times start using stringers for away football games ...

[Who'sYourData?]

 

 

 

I'd wager to be Mother Trib goes to this format in the next 6mths to a year... then who are you going to complain about? Newspapers have been moving to all digital format for years... eventually they were going to expect you to pay for the info. 

I pay for it already, every time I see another car ad on the site.

 

 

You realize that those banner ads you see are being purchased for anywhere from $0.50 to $6 per every 1,000 ads (depending upon placement, campaign size, etc)

 

So even if you viewed 1,000 banner ads the amount you are "paying" is about 6 bucks at most.  Newspaper companies are trading print dollars for digital pennies and it has really hurt their revenue.

 

People have paid for the newspaper for over 100 years.  No one complained.  Digital has changed everything.  If the content is worth it, people will pay.  Look at sites like Rivals or 247.  They charge for their content.  

 

Obviously as people have pointed out on this thread, there are several "work arounds" to not pay.

 

 

And the ones too cheap to pay a small amount for the local coverage will be the first ones whining about no respect when the Trib and Times start using stringers for away football games ...

 

 

 

[dabull80]

Let me think ?  $12 a month for on line Bulls coverage which I will get here anyway or $10 for a year Of Road & Track ?  Road and Track Winner Winner Chicken Dinner

[Who'sYourData?]

Let me think ?  $12 a month for on line Bulls coverage which I will get here anyway or $10 for a year Of Road & Track ?  Road and Track Winner Winner Chicken Dinner

 

If it isn't important to you, why are you complaining?

[dabull80]

 

Let me think ?  $12 a month for on line Bulls coverage which I will get here anyway or $10 for a year Of Road & Track ?  Road and Track Winner Winner Chicken Dinner

 

If it isn't important to you, why are you complaining?

 

 

Try reading comp - Do you see me complaining ?  Just making a choice like all good shoppers do.

Edited September 24, 2013 by dabull80

[Who'sYourData?]

So it's our fault the Times can't sell advertising.  Hire new sales people

 

 

Reads like complaining to me.  But maybe I am a sensitive soul.

[Mr. Big]

 

 

I'd wager to be Mother Trib goes to this format in the next 6mths to a year... then who are you going to complain about? Newspapers have been moving to all digital format for years... eventually they were going to expect you to pay for the info. 

I pay for it already, every time I see another car ad on the site.

 

 

You realize that those banner ads you see are being purchased for anywhere from $0.50 to $6 per every 1,000 ads (depending upon placement, campaign size, etc)

 

So even if you viewed 1,000 banner ads the amount you are "paying" is about 6 bucks at most.  Newspaper companies are trading print dollars for digital pennies and it has really hurt their revenue.

 

People have paid for the newspaper for over 100 years.  No one complained.  Digital has changed everything.  If the content is worth it, people will pay.  Look at sites like Rivals or 247.  They charge for their content.  

 

Obviously as people have pointed out on this thread, there are several "work arounds" to not pay.

 

I'll pay Starbucks to read my free paper. 

[Gismo]

Gen X and mellinnials have grow up without paying for papers. Now we are adults and the idea of a pay wall is too much for most of us.

Edited September 24, 2013 by Gismo

[Bull Martin]

I'd gladly pay for GA's content, unfortunately for the Times they moved him at a bad time for us.