garfield Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Was listening to the owner of Flipbook this morning and caught a comment from him that they've been so far unsuccessful in attracting the WSJ to their news, story, and social network consolidating service. Although the WSJ would be the "800 pound gorilla" for them, the WSJ has been very successful in keeping all of their content behind their pay-wall. Is DCI wrong to take the same position as the WSJ by keeping their proprietary content behind their FN pay-wall? Isn't DCI the "800-pound gorilla" of drum corps content? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerguy315 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 all of the WSJ content is behind a pay wall also, there are many places you can go to get basically identical information to what the WSJ puts out, and you can get it for free. There are not many other places to get DCI stuff, but all of the DCI stuff out there isn't behind a pay wall either. all of that said, I am a big fan network fan and will pay for it. But I will never pay for news... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 More than 2 million people subscribe to the Journal (more than a million of those are digital subscribers too) because they perceive value in the content. Millions of people buy billions in songs, movies and TV via iTunes, Google Play and similar digital delivery vehicles because they find value in the content. The fact that there are free alternatives doesn't mean the paid content business model is bankrupt. On the contrary, the Journal example proves the opposite - that companies with differentiated content can make a successful business if they don't price their product as if it has no value. The Financial Times and the New York Times have followed the Journal's example to initial (or more) success. Other newspapers now are wishing they'd been braver (and smarter) sooner. The market might be changing in other ways too. Didn't Google announce that it's exploring a paid premium YouTube service? Hulu has successfully monetized TV and movies from Fox and its partners. There's more. DCI would be foolish not to understand that its content is unique and thus valuable. HH 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 ...I will never pay for news... So, let's see if you are telling the truth. You have 'never' bought a newspaper, a news magazine, or paid for a cable/satellite package that has news networks? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 So, let's see if you are telling the truth. You have 'never' bought a newspaper, a news magazine, or paid for a cable/satellite package that has news networks? Stu! Really! Come on, love ya', man but really, do you have to argue about EVERYTHING?! Lighten up friend. He said WILL never, as in the future. As in from now on. Give him a break, OK? I know this thread is not that interesting, but it doesn't need your fire and brimstone to make it so, OK? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 all of the WSJ content is behind a pay wall also, there are many places you can go to get basically identical information to what the WSJ puts out, and you can get it for free. There are not many other places to get DCI stuff, but all of the DCI stuff out there isn't behind a pay wall either. all of that said, I am a big fan network fan and will pay for it. But I will never pay for news... interestingly enough, the WSJ lets google news readers pull up the full-text of single articles *if* you click on them right from google. so the paywall has a giant hole :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 interestingly enough, the WSJ lets google news readers pull up the full-text of single articles *if* you click on them right from google. so the paywall has a giant hole :-) Kind of like my brother using my FN subscription, eh? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerguy315 Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 So, let's see if you are telling the truth. You have 'never' bought a newspaper, a news magazine, or paid for a cable/satellite package that has news networks? when I was younger I bought a few newspapers... mostly for big events. Like, I have a couple papers from 9/12/01. I do pay for cable and it comes with news... but I do not watch it. So, it is forced upon me (if I want other channels). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 when I was younger I bought a few newspapers... mostly for big events. Like, I have a couple papers from 9/12/01. I do pay for cable and it comes with news... but I do not watch it. So, it is forced upon me (if I want other channels). While the public is aware of the few journalists they see on TV or read in the headlines of a Newspaper, most on-the-ground journalists and photographers, the ones who do the actual grunt work, are independent contractors scrambling 60+ hours a week to make a living. So, if we 'all' follow your philosophy, and we 'all' stop paying for news, these journeymen/women will not be able to secure any funding whatsoever to travel to events, research for accuracy, multi-source for verification, and to get paid for their work. Interesting concept in that you want these noble people to do all this work without you helping to pay them so that you can get your 'free' news. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 Stu! Really! Come on, love ya', man but really, do you have to argue about EVERYTHING?! Lighten up friend. He said WILL never, as in the future. As in from now on. Give him a break, OK? I know this thread is not that interesting, but it doesn't need your fire and brimstone to make it so, OK? Just trying to make the off-season on DCP a little more 'spicy'. And by the way, I will always question when a person posts a definitive statement based on a generalization. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts