Since then, the paper has amassed some 224,000 digital-only subscribers. Another 57,000 subscribe to replica editions delivered on e-readers like the Kindle and the Nook. On top of that, there are the 100,000 people getting e-subscriptions sponsored by Lincoln.
Jeff Bercovici goes on to compare the NY Times with the Times.
The Times of London launched its own, very different pay model about nine months before the [New York] Times. (Briefly: the Times [of London] has an impermeable paywall, while the New York Times uses a metered system that allows non-subscribers 20 free pageviews a month.) It only recently hit the 100,000 mark. The Times of London is smaller, but not all that much so: it has a weekday circulation of about 500,000 and a Sunday circulation of 1.2 million, versus 900,000 and 1.3 million for the [New York] Times.
Importantly, the [New York] Times managed to add a new leg to its business without significantly cannibalising its existing web audience. [The site] averaged 33 million unique visitors per month in the second quarter, in line with its average for the preceding 11 months, said CEO Janet Robinson on a call with analysts.
Forbes’ full post goes on to explain the challenges facing the New York Times.
Tags: Forbes, New York Times, paywalls, The Times
- Should we ‘pay the wall’ to maintain quality journalism?
- Some questions ahead of a News of the World paywall
- Forbes: Gannett to introduce metered access for 80 newspaper websites
- Reasons to be cheerful? Seattle paper, Roanoke Times and magazine publishers turning a profit
- Forbes.com: Circulation revenue is more stable than paywalls, says Scripps senior VP