Comments on: The Future of Journalism from Warren Buffet’s Viewpoint

By: ginidietrich

ginidietrich — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 23:04:55 +0000

@Carole Mathewson If I had the answer to that question, I’d be rich! I don’t know…it sounds like he thinks small-town newspapers are profitable.

By: Carole Mathewson

Carole Mathewson — Sun, 02 Sep 2012 04:15:29 +0000

Please tell me why Mr. Buffett is purchasing newspapers. Would it not be more cost effective to start new papers and put ineffective newspapers out of business?

By: Are Local Newspapers Facing a Renaissance? » GRNLive

Are Local Newspapers Facing a Renaissance? » GRNLive — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:34:59 +0000

[...] Gini Dietrich in Spinsucks sheds some light on Buffett’s business model, in his letter to publishers and editors of the newly acquired newspapers: “The original instinct of newspapers then was to offer free in digital form what they were charging for in print. This is an unsustainable model and certain of our papers are already making progress in moving to something that makes more sense.” In short, Buffett believes that what did not work on the national and international news level, would work at the local level; that people would be willing to pay for exclusive near-home information. [...]

By: Responding (Or Not) to Blog Comments | Spin Sucks

Responding (Or Not) to Blog Comments | Spin Sucks — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 12:21:38 +0000

[...] for instance, the conversation we had a couple of weeks ago about Warren Buffet buying 63 local newspapers because they’re cashflow [...]

By: ginidietrich

ginidietrich — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 15:06:47 +0000

@Muhammad Umer Toor Interesting…I’ll have to take a look at it.

By: Muhammad Umer Toor

Muhammad Umer Toor — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:54:47 +0000

@ginidietrich Perhaps, competing like Google … My strategy professor told their strategy is based or inspired by Brown and Eisenhardt’s “Competing on the Edge” … Just a thought.

By: ginidietrich

ginidietrich — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:03:10 +0000

@Muhammad Umer Toor I wish I had an answer for that question. I don’t know what it is. I think the value in paying for content is in having access to pieces that you can’t get anywhere else. But that also means the people who do pay for it have to honor the paywall and copyright and not copy and paste it into another free format. I”m not sure that can be controlled.

By: umertoor

umertoor — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 05:00:30 +0000

@ginidietrich Thanks for replying. I’m little new to US newspaper industry situation, want more explanation.
Do you think a heavy consumer of NYT would take this tedious route of getting every article from indirect sources?
Or, NYT deliberately created this leakages, as we know, to keep up its traffic, and unlike London Times, its traffic didn’t fall? WSJ also has leaks in its paywall.
But I can see that paywall alone, as strategy, never really worked for other conventional industries hit by web disruption. What strategy do you suggest for NYT so that it can monetize in a better way its content?
Thanks

By: ginidietrich

ginidietrich — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 21:06:23 +0000

@umertoor It failed from the perspective that people figured out how to get around the paywall and started posting the content in places where you don’t have to pay to get it. It’s not right. It violates copyright laws. But it’s happening and it’s something all subscription-based, online media are facing.

By: umertoor

umertoor — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 20:10:08 +0000

Can you explain how NYT’s paywall has failed, despite getting around half a million subscribers? The unique visitors haven’t dropped, if not increased. Or, is it that the enticing promo pricing couldn’t lure them to pay full price? Or, do you mean that growth is halted and it won’t grow much?