1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Athletic keeps growing .......

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Fran Curci, Feb 3, 2018.

  1. Reddy235

    Reddy235 Member

    'm
    When people see their $24.99 intro rate balloon to $72 a year, they’ll wish they hadn’t priced so low at the start.
     
  2. As The Crow Flies

    As The Crow Flies Active Member

    I subscribe, mainly to support friends/former colleagues who are now writing for it. Obviously, I'd really like for it to work.

    A few thoughts:
    _ The amount/quality of writing varies quite a bit depending on the beat. Some of the content is great. Some is just OK. Most of it is the garden-variety sports writing and analysis you get for free in a lot of places.
    _ In general, I think because we're journalists, we overvalue how much good writing matters. If that's how The Athletic is going to try and differentiate itself, I don't think it's going to work. The stone cold truth is that there are very, very few reporters who will make people open their wallets because their prose is just so incredible. I think the writing on the site is very good - better than average sports writing - but I'm dubious that's enough.
    _ The nagging question I continue to have is why would people subscribe to The Athletic when they can get similar content for free in so many other places. One of the few subscription models that has worked in sports is the Rivals/247 genre and that's because they offer something (detailed recruiting news) that can't be found anywhere else. The Athletic just seems like a luxury item for a sports fan, not an essential.
     
  3. LanceyHoward

    LanceyHoward Well-Known Member

    I subscribe. The articles range from mediocre to really good. But it is a convenient way to get extensive coverage of a specific team I am interested in without bumping into paywalls at the local paper.
     
  4. wicked

    wicked Well-Known Member

    The churn rate will be interesting to see, but I bet they hold on to more subscribers than you think. There is a reason many subscription services (NYT, Spotify come to mind) have ridiculously low trial rates. Once they get folks to renew after that first year, they’re golden. Will it be enough, that remains to be seen.
     
  5. wicked

    wicked Well-Known Member

    If you live in Peoria, randomly became a Giants fan and don’t care about anything else to do with San Francisco, you’ll spring for The Athletic before you do the SF Chronicle.
     
  6. lcjjdnh

    lcjjdnh Well-Known Member

    But will you spring for The Athletic before you decide the team website, fan blogs, Reddit, Twitter, etc. are sufficient (and free)?
     
  7. Reddy235

    Reddy235 Member

    I subscribe to NY Times digital. I did the $7 a month one year sale. When the year was up, I got a notice my new rate would be $15 a month. I called their number to cancel. Immediately was transferred to another dept. I said the increase would be too steep for me. The rep said I could get another year at $7, no questions asked. I said ok.
     
  8. Ice9

    Ice9 Active Member

    What about Boston Sports Journal? What did they say?
     
    justgladtobehere and wicked like this.
  9. Reddy235

    Reddy235 Member

    Year’s not up yet
     
  10. wicked

    wicked Well-Known Member

    How many people do that? How many people actually call the cable company and spend 30 minutes haggling over the price? Half of them or more are drones who won’t put in the effort.
     
  11. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    I don't know much about Mather and Hannsman, other than what is public and is related to The Athletic. So don't think I am a cheerleader for them as people. I don't know much about them, and I have no dog in this hunt, other than the one you do. It would be nice for their site to succeed, because I love good sports coverage, and I want it to be a home for a lot of talented people at a time that a lot of those people have been finding themselves displaced. ...

    But I find your distinction between its hires (and yes, they have gotten some great people) and what comes off as disdain for them personally (frat boy owners and their penchant for talking shit), odd. Unless I am misunderstanding you. Am I?

    Those frat boy owners with a penchant for talking shit. ... were the ones who had an idea, created it, were able to raise money, and put together a strategy of making the hires you think highly of.
     
  12. playthrough

    playthrough Moderator Staff Member

    There will always be fans that can't make a distinction between team websites and independent coverage. The Athletic's bosses can't lose sleep over not getting them as subscribers.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page