Online paid content model found alive and well in Yonkers

Hat-tip to Craig Newmark who points out (via NYT) that Consumer Reports continues to achieve what conventional wisdom and the collective experience of online newspaper publishing tells us is impossible - not only do they charge readers to access their content online, they charge them the same as they do for the print product.

The apparent secret? "What they do is useful, practical, needed". I would add "unique", the other necessary condition for a successful paid content model.

Comments

[Noah Brier]

Scott over at Publishing 2.0 makes a good point on this: "Consumer Reports is actually a great example, but not for why everyone should be able to charge for content on the web. Consumer Reports is a great example of just how hard it is to produce non-commodity content that people are willing to pay for — how many web publishers are going to run their own testing lab?"

[Adam]

I'd argue that the only thing they really have is reputation. I'd bet in the long run they find themselves in the same boat as the NYT.

[Ron Davison]

Consumer Reports is almost a form of insurance as much as a source for information.

[Seamus McCauley]

Adam - I agree with Noah / Scott K. They have a cost base that's not easy to replicate as well, and though reputation is a big part of their value it didn't arise in a vacuum but is an outcome of the resource dedicated to producing original content.

Ron - yes, very true. I tend to find consumers don't necessarily care that they're getting the very best deal, just a way of checking that they're not getting ripped off too badly.

Thanks for commenting guys.

[Mark]

Since Consumer Reports magazine is part of Consumer's Union, a non-profit organization.

Another reason for newspapers to be held in a non-profit trust, ala St. Petersburg, FL and Anniston, AL

[Martin Stabe]

All this also applies to the UK equivalent of Consumer Reporters, Which?

It claims 170,000 paying subscribers.