Yes but I'm assuming (and could be wrong) that the subscription fee would make up for the money they lose out on with people not buying newspapers anymore? The ads may pay for the website but they are still losing sales.
*the bass, the rock, the mic, the treble, I like my coffee black just like my metal*
Find a better source than the red-neck stomping grounds of news.com.au?
The Guardian's new Aus website
I dunno, I really don't see anything wrong with paying to read online? Newspapers were never free were they? I want to know that our journalists are still going to get paid and our industry won't go belly up- although that is looking more and more likely. Although I will say, I feel less than kind about the ones who are allowing the likes of Gina Rinedhart to buy shares. I think I would just stick with ABC myself!
There's an app for channel 7 news
At that time, you could buy a newspaper for 20c, and it took 2hours to download a newspaper, which cost you $5 per hour for downloading.
Business logic shows that others will follow suit, which means we're more likely to have readers choose to subscribe as there'll be less options to choose from which are free. Only site which I don't think can ask for subscription would be abc.
Makes me think about foxtel. People can get tv for free from lots of other alternatives these days, but foxtel seems to be doing well enough for itself.
Pregnant for the first-time?
Not sure where to start? We can help!
Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!