Very much enjoyed this. One of the really good lines: "We have yet to discover the internet version of printing words onto dead trees and throwing them at peoples’ homes". What do you think of a model where a Canadian News aggregator allows authors and orgs to submit content, people subscribe, advertisers advertise, content providers spl…
Very much enjoyed this. One of the really good lines: "We have yet to discover the internet version of printing words onto dead trees and throwing them at peoples’ homes". What do you think of a model where a Canadian News aggregator allows authors and orgs to submit content, people subscribe, advertisers advertise, content providers split the income from subscriptions and advertisers, with a share reserved for the aggregator service. Allow people to subscribe to unmediated, or to various mediators - a cut needs to be saved for the mediators as well. Sound like a decent business model?
I like the idea and can tell you it's been talked about a lot, both here and in the U.S. Some Canadian progressive outlets have even launched a version of it.
I think the issue is figuring out equity. Lots of small/indy outlets simply don't make enough to pay the bills. Grant money and government subsidy are huge parts of their model. Centralizing can actually decrease the amount of subscription money (I.e. giving people access to many for the price of one) and can disadvantage you with grants. But like I said, some are trying it anyway and I'm keen to see how it works.
But the other problem is that small outlets don't necessarily want to work together. I'm not keen to join the progressive publishing hub because I think their ideology-driven work doesn't mesh with mine.
I would love to consider some kind of group deal with Paul Wells and The Line and maybe some others, if the economics work, but Substack doesn't (yet) make that possible. Maybe soon!
Very much enjoyed this. One of the really good lines: "We have yet to discover the internet version of printing words onto dead trees and throwing them at peoples’ homes". What do you think of a model where a Canadian News aggregator allows authors and orgs to submit content, people subscribe, advertisers advertise, content providers split the income from subscriptions and advertisers, with a share reserved for the aggregator service. Allow people to subscribe to unmediated, or to various mediators - a cut needs to be saved for the mediators as well. Sound like a decent business model?
I like the idea and can tell you it's been talked about a lot, both here and in the U.S. Some Canadian progressive outlets have even launched a version of it.
I think the issue is figuring out equity. Lots of small/indy outlets simply don't make enough to pay the bills. Grant money and government subsidy are huge parts of their model. Centralizing can actually decrease the amount of subscription money (I.e. giving people access to many for the price of one) and can disadvantage you with grants. But like I said, some are trying it anyway and I'm keen to see how it works.
But the other problem is that small outlets don't necessarily want to work together. I'm not keen to join the progressive publishing hub because I think their ideology-driven work doesn't mesh with mine.
I would love to consider some kind of group deal with Paul Wells and The Line and maybe some others, if the economics work, but Substack doesn't (yet) make that possible. Maybe soon!