Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Time Warner Properties May Only Be Available Through AOL

Posted by chrisd on from the since-it's-already-bought-and-paid-for dept.

ryman writes "According to MSNBC, Time Warner is considering making its online content available without charge only to AOL subscribers. Sounds like a desperate move to redeem AOL, but this will have to take on a big toll on its online readership."

6 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Tying sites to a particular online service... by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 3, Informative

    You could. Just sign up for the BYO access plan.

  2. Well, there's the BBC by autopr0n · · Score: 3, Informative

    Check out BBC Americas. Quality news, and it's all subsidized by the British tax payers!

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  3. Okay, I'm sure to get modded down for this... by DwarfGoanna · · Score: 3, Informative

    But with all the TV ads I see touting MSN against AOL.......

    Sorry, but I just look at MSNBC as a slightly skewed news source when it comes to things like this.

    --

    "You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo

  4. Re:Why shouldnt they by Ezubaric · · Score: 5, Informative


    TW does not make money off of online content (or not much, anyway). They make it off of print adv. Online versions are supplements to the ones in print. The print revenues pay for creating the content. The online ads pay for the infrastructure to display them.

    Unless this hurts their print readership, this seems like a good idea.

    --

    ----------
    I am an expert in electricity. My father held the chair of applied electricity at the state prision.
  5. news.google.com by jamesoutlaw · · Score: 3, Informative

    I stopped reading CNN and other web sites exclusively when I found out about http://news.google.com ... it's sill in beta, but it's got links to all of the news I want to read.

  6. Re:Why shouldnt they by ACNeal · · Score: 4, Informative

    This has been addressed in the near past here in a different light, maybe about salon going under, or something.

    If you aren't paying me for my content, I don't care if you are happy.

    I would rather have only 5 paying readers than 5 million non-paying readers.

    Numbers don't matter unless they are paying you for your service.

    Business doesn't get much simpler than this. The elusive 2nd step to profit, is selling something.

    I don't understand how people can continue to think like this, and it is a common thought process:

    "It isn't a good idea for company A to start charging all of us non-paying, never-gonna-pay users, because we may never become paying customers."

    If they never start charging, you wouldn't become paying customers either, so they aren't out anything by pissing you off.