What Is True/Slant?
275+ knowledgeable contributors.
Reporting and insight on news of the moment.
Follow them and join the news conversation.
 

Oct. 7 2009 - 11:35 am | 13 views | 0 recommendations | 1 comment

AP Embargoes; extorts?

This is a plastic kitchen funnel.

Image via Wikipedia

Charging for individual stories online, like personal jet packs and painless dentistry, is a wonderful idea. The AP is hoping to do just that with its customers.

Embargoing stories and charging for access to their early release is possibly workable as a minor feature in an overall larger offering, but not something that’s likely to generate significant revenues on its own. Consider the hurdles and shrinking pool of potential paying customers for such a service:

  • Customers must need to have breaking stories
  • The story must have been broken by The AP (rather than another outlet who may or may not be a member of the AP and may or may not have given it first and exclusively to the AP)
  • We must have the news story now, 30 minutes ahead of my competitors
  • We are willing to pay for that 30 minutes of “exclusivity”
  • We are willing to pay for that 30 minutes of “exclusivity” though we understand that “exclusivity” online is at best fragile, even for a half-hour

Each of the points above is a funnel and filter: The potential audience of paying customers coming out the small end of the funnel is smaller than that which has gone in the wide end. By the time you get through the final funnel / filter, the potential audience is significantly smaller than the one with which you started. Because of this, pricing for those potential customers who fit the above criteria will reflect this relatively small pool (i.e. the service is likely to be expensive for those who “need” it).

Embargoing stories, also, generally does not work; if it’s something worth telling, someone – perhaps even a paying customer – is going to release it more widely and earlier than was hoped.

The time spent during funneling / filtration also presents opportunities to competitors offering like services with more attractive terms and conditions: while you’re shrinking your pool of potential paying customers, you’re giving all of your customers time and incentive to shop elsewhere.

As another revenue stream for selling news stories, it would be great to see this work. Putting many eggs in this basket, though, is likely ill-advised.


Comments

1 Total Comment
Post your comment »
 
Log in for notification options
Comments RSS

Post Your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment

Log in with your True/Slant account.

Previously logged in with Facebook?

Create an account to join True/Slant now.

Facebook users:
Create T/S account with Facebook
 

My T/S Activity Feed

 
     

    About Me

    I've been building web stuff (pardon the argot) since ~1994. Since we started up, I've lead technology for True / Slant. I spent the previous 8 years working with the magazines and web properties of Condé Nast; the last 18 months of that were working on parade.com and with their hundreds of newspaper partners. Before that I built cool products and businesses for About.com, Prodigy and IBM.

    See my profile »
    Followers: 22
    Contributor Since: October 2008
    Location:New York City

    What I'm Up To

    WordCampNYC – Nov 14-15

    I’ve been given the opp to talk up True/Slant to an impressive audience of bloggers, business and technical folks