Paying for On-line Argus

[filbert]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Warning: I just went to Vandrovec's live chat page, and it said I had eight articles left. I left his page, did some other stuff, then because I was curious, I went back, and it said I had six articles left.

As with most Argus technology deployments, this one is broken even before it starts.

[SturgisJeff]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Terry places his articles in his twitter. doesnt count towards the argus deal.

[filbert]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Terry places his articles in his twitter. doesnt count towards the argus deal.

Hmm. I wonder about that . . . are you talking about links to argusleader.com or to his tumblr blog?

[SturgisJeff]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Hmm. I wonder about that . . . are you talking about links to argusleader.com or to his tumblr blog?

tumblr he also said tonight you can get the game chat by going through the twitter link he tweets

[jacks1]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

As of now, if you use Google Chrome and clear your browsing data, it resets the free articles to 9 when you go back to the Argus site.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

As of now, if you use Google Chrome and clear your browsing data, it resets the free articles to 9 when you go back to the Argus site.

LOL

I wondered about that but hadn't tried it yet. I wonder what happens when you switch browsers?

Leave it to print media to not understand how the internet works. Unless they fix this bug, the majority of people this will effect are the ones most likely to buy a print version anyway.

[Jacks-02]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Subscribed to the Argus online today. For $11 a month I get total online access and Thursday and Sunday delivery of the paper. I think the content provided is more than worth it.

[EQguy]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

I'm with 02, TV needs to get paid and they can't pay his salary giving away all his work for free.

[EQguy]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Put my money where my mouth was. Signed up for the $11 Thurs, Sun Argus.

[JimmyJack]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Got the digital edition, $9 a month. They'll work out the bugs. I think this sort of thing is the only way papers like the Argus are going to make it.

[BTownJack]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Got the digital edition, $9 a month. They'll work out the bugs. I think this sort of thing is the only way papers like the Argus are going to make it.

Agreed...this needed to happen a long time ago. It's no secret why newspapers are now struggling.

[Walrus]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

I got the digital version. I never was sure why they gave it away for free.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Agreed...this needed to happen a long time ago. It's no secret why newspapers are now struggling.

Without severely restricting the way the Internet works (which major media companies have been trying to do for at least 5 years, PIPA, SOPA, etc), this move by the Argus will have a minor impact on their long term financial status.

I will still be able to come to this site, Keloland, KSFY, and countless others and get about the same news coverage of Jackrabbit athletics. Heck, the biggest dog in sports (ESPN) can't keep their paid insider content off this and many, many other sites across the web. That makes guys like Stu mad, but that's the world we live in now.

Until they pass legislation that stops linking and posting summaries, newspapers will continue to struggle. This is not a fix to the AL's woes, it is a band-aid.

[JimmyJack]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

Without severely restricting the way the Internet works (which major media companies have been trying to do for at least 5 years, PIPA, SOPA, etc), this move by the Argus will have a minor impact on their long term financial status.

I will still be able to come to this site, Keloland, KSFY, and countless others and get about the same news coverage of Jackrabbit athletics. Heck, the biggest dog in sports (ESPN) can't keep their paid insider content off this and many, many other sites across the web. That makes guys like Stu mad, but that's the world we live in now.

Until they pass legislation that stops linking and posting summaries, newspapers will continue to struggle. This is not a fix to the AL's woes, it is a band-aid.

There will never be legislation to stop linking. Let me give you some numbers to give you an idea of what is happening in the big picture here. The New York Times has a $200 million annual news budget. That pays for the whole news process from reporter to doorstep. If they went with a free Web site, they estimate they might make from $2 million to $20 million a year in advertising revenue online. That huge gap is why paywalls are going to become the norm.

Now imagine the Argus Leader. How many people are there who were simply reading the online edition? Let's say conservatively it is 5,000. If they can move that many people to the pay wall system, twelve months of digital subscriptions for 5,000 people comes to $540,000 annually. Doesn't sound like much, but it's NEW revenue. Newspapers have been trying for years to figure out how to find new revenue. They also need to train people to move to online and mobile news while paying for it. This is how you do that. Do you think there will be more people or fewer over time who want access to online content instead of the print product?

This is just part of a very long-term plan to eventually be an online news organization and pay the bills that way.

In the near- and medium- term, though, there is a bigger threat to the Argus Leaders of the world. What I worry about is their corporate overlords' need to pull 22 to 27 percent profit margins out of communities like Sioux Falls. What happens when it becomes impossible for Gannett to get those levels of profit out of Sioux Falls and all the other Sioux Fallses they own? When that happened at Knight-Ridder, stockholders broke up the company. With a few exceptions (some right around here) the properties were sold off to even more predatory corporations that cut the operations to the bone to make the margins again. That will happen if Gannett cannot get its 22 to 27 percent. In the meantime, they're furloughing employees again this year and no doubt their CEO will get another multi-million-dollar bonus for his excellent performance cutting the staff in places like Sioux Falls. One of my Argus friends told me that the other day there were four people available in the newsroom to cover the news that day. Four people for a four-county metro of 250,000. That's where we are now. How long can they keep cutting and furloughing and pulling those profits out?

Is running a newspaper in Sioux Falls still a profit-making venture? Yes. How long can they maintain the corporate-mandated margins? That's the question. If they can get something going online, it can extend that period AND ultimately provide a place for the news business to land. Theoretically,anyway.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Paying for On-line Argus

There will never be legislation to stop linking. Let me give you some numbers to give you an idea of what is happening in the big picture here. The New York Times has a $200 million annual news budget. That pays for the whole news process from reporter to doorstep. If they went with a free Web site, they estimate they might make from $2 million to $20 million a year in advertising revenue online. That huge gap is why paywalls are going to become the norm.

Now imagine the Argus Leader. How many people are there who were simply reading the online edition? Let's say conservatively it is 5,000. If they can move that many people to the pay wall system, twelve months of digital subscriptions for 5,000 people comes to $540,000 annually. Doesn't sound like much, but it's NEW revenue. Newspapers have been trying for years to figure out how to find new revenue. They also need to train people to move to online and mobile news while paying for it. This is how you do that. Do you think there will be more people or fewer over time who want access to online content instead of the print product?

This is just part of a very long-term plan to eventually be an online news organization and pay the bills that way.

In the near- and medium- term, though, there is a bigger threat to the Argus Leaders of the world. What I worry about is their corporate overlords' need to pull 22 to 27 percent profit margins out of communities like Sioux Falls. What happens when it becomes impossible for Gannett to get those levels of profit out of Sioux Falls and all the other Sioux Fallses they own? When that happened at Knight-Ridder, stockholders broke up the company. With a few exceptions (some right around here) the properties were sold off to even more predatory corporations that cut the operations to the bone to make the margins again. That will happen if Gannett cannot get its 22 to 27 percent. In the meantime, they're furloughing employees again this year and no doubt their CEO will get another multi-million-dollar bonus for his excellent performance cutting the staff in places like Sioux Falls. One of my Argus friends told me that the other day there were four people available in the newsroom to cover the news that day. Four people for a four-county metro of 250,000. That's where we are now. How long can they keep cutting and furloughing and pulling those profits out?

Is running a newspaper in Sioux Falls still a profit-making venture? Yes. How long can they maintain the corporate-mandated margins? That's the question. If they can get something going online, it can extend that period AND ultimately provide a place for the news business to land. Theoretically,anyway.

Thanks for the informative reply.

My understanding is that there has already been legislation that would have stopped linking, it just didn't become law (yet, I'm sure there will be another attempt). Google and numerous other experts said PIPA or SOPA (can't remember which one or both) would have caused the internet to cease to exist as we know it in part because of their restrictions on linking.

What would happen to newspapers like the Argus if they went 100% digital? ie, what percentage of their income/expenses are derived from their print editions?