Categories
Analysis

Should digital editions really have a print business model?

It’s amazing how much energy is left in the idea of digital editions of print publications. I’m not talking about shovelware Web sites, but about digital replicas of the print product, distributed electronically and read on the subscriber’s computer. The basic formula for these products is PDF+DRM.

This idea has been around forever. Longer, I think, than the consumer Web. It gets a lot of its energy from the perception among publishers that because it duplicates their print product with some digital advantages (e.g. searching) that it can be sold. Yet, aside from licensing fees, the incremental cost is about the same as a Web site — zero. Of course, there are real disadvantages as well. Magazines and, especially, newspapers are not formatted for reading on a computer.

The latest avatars of digital editions, Zinio and Newsstand, are generating a lot of interest.

PBS’s Newshour ran a story on digital editions of newspapers [Real Audio], with some remarkable statistics: about 160 US newspapers, and 225 newspapers worldwide are now offered in electronic editions, and the Washington Post’s digital edition has 800 subscribers. However, the number of actual editions being delivered today may be an order of magnitude smaller than this.

The Newshour described the audience as expatriates and others who couldn’t get home delivery. In other words: the Web audience.

But if it’s true, as Zinio claims, that 83 percent of digital magazine readers click on links in editorial content and 60 percent on links in ads — why not just give away the magazine and make money on the ads, just like you’re doing on the Web?

This maybe already happening. I know of at least one person who is getting a Zinio edition of a normally paid computer magazine for free.

Categories
Analysis

Developing a theory of bundling

I’ve been giving a lot of thought to bundling lately.

Generally, I think bundling is a pretty stupid idea. Bundles don’t exist to solve problems for consumers. They exist to solve problems for producers, either subsidizing products that can’t be sold unbundled (cable packages), to maintain manufacturing volume (magazine subscriptions), disguise the real cost of a product (Tivo, cell phones), lock out competitors (Internet Explorer), or to create the illusion of value where none exists (local telephone services beyond dialtone and call waiting).

Because bundles seldom solve problems for customers, they generally fail. Even when they continue to survive in the market, it’s not clear that if the components were sold individually, the net present value to the producer would not have been greater.

I can only think of a few situations where bundles make economic sense. One is where individual components of the bundle could not be sold economically, but that there is enough value in the bundle to satisfy customers. Norton Utilities is an example of this kind of bundling. So is Microsoft Office. Back in the seventies, this could be said of cable programming, but now cable programming could be unbundled if cable companies weren’t monopolies.

A second example is volume sales. Magazine subscriptions are a good example. Publishers cut out distribution middlemen and increase readership. Readers are given an almost impossible-to-resist bargain as a result.

A third is where you need to create a bundle to solve a chicken & egg problem or, in rare cases, to create a whole that is more than the sum of its parts. Apple Computer is a good example where the combination of hardware and software is genuinely synergistic. The early cell phone industry might be another example where bundling hardware and services might have made sense, but technology has passed this model a long time ago.

The fourth economically successful kind of bundling is the forced buy. Generally, you have to be a monopolist to force customers to buy a product that they don’t want to get something that they do, or give away a product to force a paid competitor out of business. “B” movies and a lot of pre-antitrust IBM software were subsidized in this fashion. Microsoft used this technique (as well as an excellent product) to make Internet Explorer the standard Web browser. Generally, these bullying tactics can be successful, but are bad for end users and markets, and are often illegal.

Outside of monopoly markets, I don’t believe it’s possible to create a successful bundle that doesn’t create real value for the end user by either reducing price or creating something genuinely new.

If you can’t do that, you should be asking what your real motivation for bundling is.

Categories
Uncategorized

FT is giving away its content and selling its context

Mitch Ratcliffe notes that the Financial Times has made much of its subscription-only content available free to users of Yahoo and MSNBC. The FT is arguably one of the few global print brands that should be able to charge for its content.

Mitch wonders whether the message is that the future belongs to syndication, rather than subscriptions. The problem, as Mitch concedes, that the revenues from syndication would maybe cover the cost of a single reporter.

This story may also demonstrate the value of context. Is FT content presented in an FT-only context worth more than FT content presented in a Yahoo context?

Categories
Research

Perseus blog study shows the importance of choosing your sample

The Perseus blog survey that says two-thirds of blogs are inactive has gotten a lot of attention lately.

Cyberatlas does a good job of comparing Perseus’ study to The National Institute for Technology and Liberal Education (NITLE) Blog Census, which shows that two-thirds of blogs are active.

The big difference is that Perseus took the easy way out and only looked at hosted blogs, while NITLE took the trouble to gather a reasonable sample. It appears that NITLE has missed a lot of blogs that Perseus counted.

The two surveys’ blog counts are striking. NITLE measures 1.4 million and Perseus estimates that total is 4.1 million. In any event, the number of bloggers, active and otherwise, is in the millions.

There is some great information on the NITLE site that is worth checking out.

Categories
Research

More demographic pointlessness

Advertising.com tells us that the best click-through rates can be found in New Mexico, West Virginia, Arkansas, and Montana.

Top Five US States for Click-Through Rate
New Mexico 116
West Virgina 114
Arkansas 113
Montara 108
Wyoming 108

Source: Advertising.com, via emarketer.com

What is a marketer supposed to do with that information? Target his ads to the smallest, poorest states in the country? I’m trying to imagine why this information is useful. This is consistent with a quote on Digital Deliverance about how companies compulsively collect worthless information.

Don’t target your customers by where they live. Target them by what they do.

Categories
Research

Newspapers' local Web markets are vulnerable

According to ComScore Media Metrix, monopoly newspaper penetration of their home markets ranges from 4% of Web users in Philadelphia to 16.6% in Atlanta. I left off a couple of nonmonopoly markets and the Washington Times from the bottom, and the more-than-local Washington Post from the top of the list.

Given that major metros typically have around much higher penetrations of their home markets — especially among Internet users — this is a pretty pathetic performance for a free product. Local newspaper sites have plenty of useful local information, yet they can’t muster 20% of their home markets.

The era of repurposed online newspapers must end if newspapers are going to defend themselves against smaller, hungrier rivals.

Categories
News

Despite Yahoo's push for fees, ads still drive its growth

Yahoo’s revenues are up to $356 million from $249 million. What’s especially interesting is that despite Yahoo’s stated desire to increase subscription and user fee revenue, advertising is driving this growth:

  • Marketing services grew 48 percent to $245 million.
  • Yahoo’s branded advertising sales grew 20 percent.
  • Fee revenue (e.g. personals, e-mail and Yahoo/SBC broadband access) grew 38 percent.
  • Listing fees rose 26 percent.

A lot of their fee revenue (personals and listing fees) should be considered advertising.

The WSJ says that the SBC/Yahoo Internet service is a success, but it’s unclear how much of that success is due to Yahoo’s fancy broadband portal and how much is due to good old fashioned competitive pricing and a greatly improved installation process:

With a joint venture called SBCYahoo, the two companies together offer a package of a DSL along with a customized Web portal, priced at $29.95 a month — and as little as $26.95 per month when part of a package with other SBC services — well below the monthly fees charged by rival cable broadband operators

In any event, it’s debatable whether the SBC revenue should be considered subscription revenue or a licensing fee, since SBC is doing the selling and Yahoo is doing the developing and branding.

That’s one problem with bundling, sometimes it’s hard to know if it’s the bundle or an individual component that is driving sales.

Categories
News

Comcast says email isn't part of the Internet

Comcast say that email is not included in its broadband Internet service, according to this item on Macintouch:

I am involved with the swing dance community, and periodically need to send out between 250 – 1000 emails, to let swing dancers know of upcoming events. I have been doing this for the past five years with no problem until now. I called Comcast, and was told that “..in order to keep their servers from being used for sending spam, all residential accounts were now subject to a 10 message limit.”

Comcast gave no notice of this policy, and it cannot be found on their web site. They also told me that this was not really a change in service since “Comcast has never sold you email service. All we are selling you is connection to the internet. The email service has just been provided for free.”

The customer service person said I could get Comcast Business Service, which is unavailable in my area. Business service costs a minimum of $155. Today I was told that my only option was to buy an “Enhanced Messaging” package, which requires a $50 setup fee and costs $25 per month to be able to send 150 emails at a time.

Comcast classifies email with ten or more recipients as a business service requiring a much larger fee. To make this policy stick, they will have to either deny their users access to POP, or charge extra for it.

This is an excellent example of the kind of tiered service we can expect from the access duopolies if the FCC gets its way and declares Internet access is not a telecommunications service. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has put a temporary stop to Michael Powell’s sophistry.