**** the New York Times

Oddly I never have trouble clicking on and reading as many articles as I want. Of course I delete cookies, clear the browser constantly.

After reading your post, I checked and 24 clicks later I was still having a grand old time. Perhaps a change will come into place in April where there will be actual restrictions, in which case, I'll find other means of obtaining news.

i get all the information i need from the headlines, anything else is a waste of time, i can just make up the facts to suit my own ideas

Hawkeye must be one of those people who lurk around the trashcans in the subway hoping for someone to put their already read New York Times on the top edge so they can snag it for free.

Joe(they also must read it without looking at any of the ads.)Nation

the other day i'm in our local pharmacy, and the pharmacist is walking from the back to the front with a newspaper, he carefully folds it up as he walks to the front and replaces it in the rack for sale, i'd already bought the paper that day, but the next time i see him doing it and need a paper i'm going to ask if i can have the pre-read one at a discount

Paywalls are a waste of time and money. They actually reduce the value of the website.

Clear your cookies, browse in private mode, or disable Java scripting.

NYT pay wall is a joke.

fixed

You don't have to **** them, they are ******* themselves with this.

Cycloptichorn

I am one of those people who is apposed to letting myself get robbed....have you looked at their rates? FOR INTERNET ACCESS!!??. Their production and delivery costs are about zero, there is no way to justify more than a few bucks a month in charges in order to pay for writers and editors and to leave a profit. As I understand it they sold off their nearly new world-wide HQ building with in a year of occupying it, so I dont need to help to pay that off.....

NY Times Pay Wall Slowly Converting Skeptics
Written By Matt Egan

Published March 21, 2012
FOXBusiness

Reuters
In the face of widespread skepticism, the pay wall at The New York Times appears to be making surprising inroads. Indeed, the plan has the potential to give the company an influx of $100 million in annual revenues and set a roadmap for the rest of the industry.

The New York Times Co. (NYT), in a show of confidence, said on Tuesday it is halving the number of free articles users can access on the website of the Times. It also revealed 454,000 paid digital subscribers to the Times and International Herald Tribune, marking an impressive 16.4% rise since the end of 2011.

“In my wildest dreams when they rolled this out a year ago, I didn’t think they’d be at over 450,000 subscribers a year later,” said Douglas Arthur, an analyst who covers the company at Evercore Partners (EVR: 28.53, -0.50, -1.72%). “The execution, the threading the needle between free and restricted access and harvesting of its huge unique visitor number has been pretty flawless.”

Rolled out in March 2011, the Times pay wall aims to generate revenue by converting at least some of the website’s millions of free visitors into paying customers. For an average of $250 a year, paid digital subscribers receive unlimited access to the site, compared with $629 a year for a seven-day print subscription.

Execution Risk Looms

If the Times is able to parlay its early success into meaningful revenue over the next year, its pay wall could serve as a model for many other companies in the hurting newspaper industry. But that remains a big "if," especially for a company that has suffered a number of recent stumbles and remains CEO-less.

“Their execution effort, if you go back in history, hasn’t been very successful. Justifiably, a lot of people still aren’t giving them a lot of credit and want to wait to see if the momentum continues,” said Kannan Venkateshwar, who covers the stock at Barclays (BCS: 15.20, -0.39, -2.48%).

That apprehension is underscored by Morningstar analyst Joscelyn MacKay, who believes the Times is at a competitive disadvantage with rival The Wall Street Journal, which is owned by FOX Business parent News Corp. (NWSA: 19.76, -0.21, -1.05%).

“As great of a newspaper as The New York Times is, I do view the Times as a ‘nice to have’ and The Wall Street Journal as a ‘need to have,” said MacKay. “We're still very skeptical over here that this is going to be a meaningful revenue driver."

In 2005 the Times rolled out a similar effort, TimesSelect, which required users to pay to access premium content such as Op-Ed and columns. Ultimately, that plan flopped and the paper returned to an all-free model in 2007.

The execution risk at the Times is heightened by the lack of a full-time CEO following the departure late last year of Janet Robinson.

While the company searches for a replacement, Chairman and Publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., is temporarily serving as CEO. Sulzberger has said the Times is searching for someone with a strong brand-building and digital resume.

“I always worry about execution at the Times, [especially] with no CEO in place,” said Arthur.

Eye on Advertisers

Another concern is that the pay wall could cause a revolt among advertisers who are upset about the lower number of potential eye balls on the site.

The Times seemed to allude to that worry, noting in its statement on Tuesday that its digital subscription plan will continue to provide access to a “generous amount of free content” on the website and across other platforms.

Despite the execution concerns and early skepticism, the pay wall does seem to be creating some early believers.

“No matter what benchmark you use, they’ve been extremely successful in just one year,” said Venkateshwar, who pointed to the Journal’s 1.3 million paid digital subscribers and significant head start.

He said the fact that the Times is halving its free monthly articles “proves they are able to retain traffic in spite of the pay wall.”

$100M Revenue Boost?

Both Venkateshwar and Arthur separately said they believe the pay wall is on track to generate about $100 million in annual revenue for the company. Venkateshwar, who has an equal weighting and an $8 price target on the stock, said these additional revenues could boost the equity price by 10% to 20%.

While the pay wall is likely to eat into print subscription revenue by luring subscribers to the digital side, Venkateshwar predicted it would also reduce the churn rate and boost overall digital revenue.

Other papers seem to be catching on, with Gannet (GCI: 15.40, -0.12, -0.77%), the Chicago Sun-Times and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel introducing pay walls of their own in recent months.

“Everyone said it’ll never work. Now they’re seeing the Times rocket ship and you’re seeing pay walls left, right and center,” said Arthur.



Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2012/03/20/ny-times-pay-wall-slowly-converting-skeptics/#ixzz1prgy5hN6

Heh.

In the city, you see people at Starbucks pick up the paper from the rack, walk to the end of the line, read the front page and the editorial as they wait their turn, place their order for the Grande Latte cum Breakfast Bun and REplace the paper back on the rack.

At Barnes and Noble at Union Square, the customers go get their coffee/and, then find a table. They then walk across to the magazines, pick out the latest copy of whatever hobby/fashion/sports/$$/auto/boat/plane/para-sail thing they are into and proceed to thumb through it thoroughly while slurping down their java and sprinkling the pages with the cinnamon crumbs.

I am always stunned that somebody with a B&N badge doesn't ask them if they are going to BUY that $9.50 issue of Teen Vogue?? But nobody ever does.

~
As for the Times, I buy it ($3.00 !) to read on the train from New Haven on Mondays because I like Metropolitan Diary and the (easy) day's crossword. The rest of my news I get from NPR which I subscribe to and which I think is worth it.
Joe(WNYC-am/fm New York)Nation

http://mashable.com/2011/03/28/how-to-bypass-new-york-times-paywall/


Frustrated by the idea of paying for what was once free, some New York Times readers have devised widely publicized methods for subverting its newly erected paywall. Their efforts, it turns out, may have been for naught.

While testing out the paywall Monday afternoon, Mashable readers Dmitry Beniaminov and Yuri Victor pointed out that it’s breathtakingly easy to subvert the paywall. Readers need only remove “?gwh=numbers” from the URL. They can also clear their browser caches, or switch browsers as soon as they see the subscription prompt. All three of these simple fixes will let them continue reading.

We were already aware that the Times doesn’t want to make it difficult for readers who want to access its content to be able to do so without paying — in addition to 20 free articles per month, readers can view 25 free articles per day through search, and an unlimited number via blogs and social networks. But we weren’t aware the Times wanted to make it quite that easy. Especially if, as rumors suggest, the Times paid $40 million to erect its paywall in the first place

You do not chase customers from your store for the benefit of Teen Vogue publishers.

What customers, Bill? Three girls, one bottled ice tea and a table occupado for an hour and half. !!?!

wait.

I think I hear the sound of an old person talking.

Joe(geezer)Nation

They're selling the coffee and baked goods, Joe.

Any unsold magazines get sent back to the publisher, anyway, I think.

Isn't that an N.W.A. song?

no, a New York newspaper version of their song would be **** Tha Post, Please

Haha. Well done

Old person or not I myself spend a thousand dollars or more a year at BN and I do not always buy the magazines ETC that I look at sitting at a table.

If they would try that kind of nonsense that people had suggested here over the issue they could kiss that thousand a year goodbye as there is always Amazon.

Somehow I do not think that I am alone in either looking at such materials or being willing to take my business elsewhere.