- interactive
- real time
- available 24/7
- the participants are the stars
- the beauty is in the substance
- an example of new technology we embrace
- free
Hacker News Monthly:
- read only
- time delayed
- available once/month
- the stars are chosen by editors
- the beauty is in the appearance
- an example of old technology we replace
- you pay for it
It's a fair comparison, Ed (though I never think good ol' paper magazine is something that we could be replaced. It's just a different reading experience).
Let's put it this way: This is the only way Hacker Monthly could move forward and sustain.
Don't get me wrong. I love working on Hacker Monthly and enjoyed every seconds I spent on it (this came by surprise, actually). I love sending email to authors asking for permission (and sometimes have a lil conversation), spending days after days on the design, curating articles and so on. I love it all, except one thing, it took too much time.
The money we made on the past issues (advertising + print magazine sales) is, simply put, so little that it could not justify 10% of the time we spent on making for the magazine. I have to spent the rest of my time working freelance contract work to pay bills. And honestly, the past two issues wouldn't be made possible without the voluntary help from Ricky (who worked so much more than just a proofreader, thank you!).
We believe Hacker Monthly provides so much value for the readers that we could charge for it. The subscription revenue would enable us continue to produce really high quality stuff for years to come, without burning ourselves out.
I'm fine with the pricing, mostly because I'm not going to pay it. The reason for me is that HN is worth so much more with the comments and the ability to follow all those links. But I can completely understand that you have to charge this much at the current volume to make it worth the time you invest.
What I don't get about the whole thing though is that you seem surprised by how much time it takes and how little money it makes from advertisers. But that really shouldn't come as a surprise, after all, whether you get this circulated to 50 or 50,000 people the editorial work is the same. Only with 50K readers your financial picture would look a lot better, both at a lower price-point and from an advertising revenue perspective.
Maybe it was too early to start charging, maybe you should have counted on some more runway to get the volume up to a point where the price would be low enough that it would not become a substantial barrier to the success of the magazine?
I'd never pay for it, either. Since you're one of the biggest stars on HN, it might annoy you that some editors are choosing the stars for this monthly publication. But, that's the "killer feature" of the "old media" approach. Curated content has some big benefits. It saves people from the hassle of wading through a lot of marginal posts. It also helps me when I wind up occasionally missing some gems.
It just about kills me to disagree with you publicly, since I so often find myself up-voting your comments on this site.
Wow, what interesting feedback. Also a good (and common) example of when what I say and what I mean don't match.
Here at hn, we are all stars. If it wasn't for us, hn would just be another read-only website. Probably better content than most, but still just a web site.
Make no mistake about it: Hacker News Monthly is gorgeous. I've read every issue and appreciate all the hard work that has gone into each. I understand the value for those who don't visit hn regularly, but there really are enough links and gadgets here to catch almost everything important.
This kinda reminds me of being on a cruise and getting a chance to pay for pictures of your good time at the end. They do a nice job of capturing memories, but can't possibly replace the experience. That's all.
Isn't this a site dedicated to startups? Don't we often say that you should charge for your product, rather than give it away for free? Charging for it isn't a bad thing. If people don't want it, don't pay for it. The market will send the signal.
Many people waste enough time here (myself included) as is. Sometimes 24/7 access is more detrimental than a curated summary. The 24-hour news networks, for instance.
Any of your bullet points for the magazine could be equally considered to be benefits of the magazine over HN itself.
These comments ragging on the magazine don't make sense, coming from startup founders. I'd consider it an unwise venture if they gave it away for free.
Like talking to the guys asking $10/month for access to a site that makes social movie recommendations, grappling with the wisdom of asking for money for an extremely attenuated version of the free Hacker News site fits the ethos of Hacker News just peachy.
Part of charging for your work is figuring out, early, what people are going to find valuable. Simply putting a price tag on everything requires no more business skill than does busking in the subway tunnels.
> Part of charging for your work is figuring out, early, what people are going to find valuable.
Given the feedback they're getting here, along with the revenue (or lack thereof) from the previous month, I think they're doing just that.
I won't pay for it either, but people too often jump against for-pay services just because they aren't free. If HN Monthly wants to charge $10 an issue, fine -- if people don't want it they won't pay for it. edw's comment appeared to challenge the premise of the magazine's existence itself, which I don't think is correct.
There's something pleasant about picking up a physical magazine or book and escaping all the distractions of the internet.
I find myself skipping over the longer articles on Hacker News precisely because of those distractions. The Hacker Monthly gives me a chance to catch up on the best of them.
I was debating whether or not to drop the $100 on a subscription, and your comment reminded me why I liked the Hacker Monthly. Thanks.
I am curious as weren't you (bearswithclaws) advertising to advertisers of the huge reader base, which included free pdf readers, in order to get people to advertise with you.
I for one would be pretty upset if I found out I paid good money for an advertisement and the reader base dropped off insanely because of the new paid model.
Might I suggest throwing something up on the subscription page that advertises the fact that the first three issues are available for free in digital form? As a first time visitor, I was obviously reluctant to subscribe without having seen a single issue. With some nominal site scouring, I was able to find the first three issues, but there really should be something on the subscription page I think.
I think making a few of the older editions available free of charge could be a good way. There are quite a few articles that won't loose their value over time.
Yes, but the articles are all HN reprints. The added value is in the pdfs and I see no problem with them charging for that, it's a ton of work to make them.
I think the whole concept is very nice but the real value for me of HN is mostly in the comments on the articles, that's where I learn the most. So even after reading an article in 'Hacker Monthly' I'd like to re-visit the relevant entry on HN.
"We've already established what you are, madam, now we're haggling over the price."
USD$112 per year feels way too steep. That's on par with a subscription to the Economist, which is a) weekly, b) original, and c) one of the best periodicals in the English language.
If he can get that price, more power to him. But as a potential subscriber of --and an unpaid author for-- this magazine, I think the price is far too high for the value he adds.
I tend to agree, however nice the layout, these are just reruns of stuff we've seen. The next step will likely be using the initial subscription money to start funding some new original columns.
It's tough work, no doubt. plug: http://jsmag.com and http://groovymag.com possibly don't look as nice, but we do get out around 30 pages (each) of original content each month.
I've looked in to shipping for groovymag and jsmag, and the costs would add around $4 per issue - $48/year, which almost doubles the current cost. Not easy doing print in small runs. I was looking at b/w - hackermonthly is color, IIRC, which is even more $. My bet is if magcloud offered b/w, they might get the price down a little bit, but not much.
We actually don't make any money on the print subscription. MagCloud charges $0.20 per page + $1 for perfect bound, and charges at least $2.15 per issue shipping in US/UK.
So yes, if you do the calculation, we actually 'lose money' on each print subscription.
The print subscription plan was made available thanks to the advertising deal we managed to strike with MagCloud, which now only 'break even' with our cost.
You are mistaken about the economies of scale involved, you can't compare to the economist or any other large volume print magazine, the financial picture there is completely different.
So in India, the print will cost me about 10 grand per year and the pdf a grand. I wish I were in college. I could just get my library to subscribe to it.
Issue #3 finally looks like a real magazine. I know, its way too expensive. But I dont care, I love the thing. First time I found a magazine that I'm really actually interested in reading cover to cover.
I realize printing in small runs is more expensive so such a magazine might cost more than, say, Harper's or the Atlantic Monthly or maybe even the New Yorker. More than all three combined, though?
We are trying hard to reduce the cost of the magazine (especially deliver international) and by having the subscription plan is our first step.
Let me explain.
Firstly, the readers get some savings by subscribing other than purchase individually (not to mention the hassle). Secondly, when we reaches a certain number of print subscribers (let say 500), we could confidently do a print run with our local supplier for a cheaper price. Then, we could significantly lower the cost (and thus lower the subscription price). And to be fair to the existing subscribers, they get to extend their subscribing period for free.
It sounds a bit like you want to have your first customers bear your entire initial costs (500 * 88 is over $40k). This is great if you can swing it seems very unlikely if you price yourself entirely beyond what people are used to paying for a monthly print magazine. I think it also cuts out any potential customers who might be willing to pay some non-excessive premium.
There are less blunt instruments than sticker-shocking your entire market - for instance you can offer cheaper print subs and a fancier, Super Platinum Premium Founder's Club version for those who feel like being generous - let's say, 3 years, maybe throw in some advertising space and a mention on a thank you page, etc.
I think this is a reasonable strategy. It's easier to lower prices than to raise them. This is a relatively novel experiment in publishing and as far as I can tell it's totally boot strapped. I'm happy to pay for this essentially "at cost" to participate in the experiment, but I wouldn't be likely to be taken in by a gold star to subsidize other. I think it's ok to try to grow something like this slowly, to buy time to learn without overexposure.
This is actually a really good question. I would think the copyright of each article is owned by the blogger or media outlet which produced it. While bloggers in general probably universally love more exposure, I can't imagine that as a group they would love the idea of someone reprinting their articles for profit... ?
I'm looking for something in magazine format... to put on my coffee table, in the bathroom, etc.
Edit: Thanks for the suggestion, I've actually read a lot of the essays online. Like I said, just looking for something to throw on the table for casual reading material.
1. Ad supported free digital copy (which will help advertisers achieve attention of lot more targeted crowd, that is hackernews readers).
Free version would ascertain the momentum for the product (and probably interest for advertisers).
2. A premium print version _with_ extra premium only content (eg. additional essays, interviews etc.), with probably lesser/no ads (Which I dont find annoying in print, to be honest).
Yeah, I would order it instantly if the shipping would be cheaper... 10$ per issue? Come on, that's 120$ for a year.
edit: just ordered the digital subscription. Please try to find cheaper shipping option to europe, and you will have one customer more :) I order several magazines from US/US to Finland, and they never are more expensive than 80 bucks, including shipping...
Yeah, shipping was the killer for me as well. That's why I went with the digital edition. If needed I can even (selectively) print it myself but I assume I will be quite happy with it in digital form only.
Having a suggested $3/month subscription for having the PDF mailed to you but ALSO having the PDF available for free on the website could be the best of both worlds. Those who can afford to pay, do so, but you can still link to the free version (which could have nag pages inserted).
We will create a 'Content' section in magazine issue page on the website, where we list and link to all the articles appearing in that particular issue, along with its HN discussion.
Hopefully this provide an alternative for other readers.
Is zipped really better? I can see people on mobile devices preferring raw links in email, and maybe not wanting such a big file in the first place, unless they were actually going to use all 3 versions. Should be a option in user settings to enable each format. Then in the monthly email, whichever files they subscribe to. Thoughts?
I think the value-add is the editing and layout. Yes, you could find all of the articles online, but you would have to wade through several hundred articles of lesser quality, and it would not look as nice.
E-Junkie should've that handle. If it miss it the first time (while you're at the shopping cart), it will include it when you are about to pay in the PayPal page.
sorry but these prices are way out of line. It's a monthly and with all due respect, I've read a couple issues, it doesn't compare to something like Harpers which if I recall is about 17/yr. for high quality print and incredible content.
if you guys don't already have an ad out in 2600, i'd suggest it. they'd probably be into it (they take ads from "competing" mags all the time) and ads are free for subscribers.
Hacker News:
Hacker News Monthly: