The problem with SUBSTACK for some of us fans & readers is that there are so many writers we would really love to have a paid subscription to that it very quickly becomes an economic burden especially in these terrible economic times. So if we are on a fixed income this becomes really difficult. The fact that we are not paid on some of the pages that kindly allow comments & interacting is not because we, or maybe I should just speak for myself, is not out of choice, it is out of necessity. I am grateful that you, Jordan, are one of those writers. When I am able I will become a paid subscriber.
Agreed, bundling would be one of the best ways for substack to increase revenue and get more writers some income. I say this as a long-term paid subscriber to The Dossier (and other writers here), but would like to increase my reach even more.
I follow about 50 substacks to varying degrees; (6) +/- are paid, costing about $35-40 per months, & I question the value of some of them (not Free Press, Racket, Public or Sasha)
If I paid for all 50, that would be about $280 a month - no way.
The teaser articles some substacks are a big turn-off.
In light of its success, Substack needs the re-examine its business model - but keep it simple.
a long time ago there was this idea that micro payments would eventually allow hundreds of thousands or even millions of individuals to support content creators at like five, ten or twenty cents an article. but I don't know what ever happened to that. my guess is that the transaction overhead costs charged by credit card companies and others were never going to go low enough. but I feel like I'm missing something. or maybe $5 per month actually is a micro payment by today's Putin Price Hike / Bidenflation standards. LOL.
The beauty of Substack is that you don't have to pay money to read the articles. For those who can't afford it, the info is free, for those who wish to donate they can donate to their favorite authors. One of the many reasons why I love Substack.
People somehow believed that their Musk-savior could short-circuit a censorious culture and restore freedom in a day, for a low, low price of 44 billion dollars. We are all learning that the real price of freedom is much, much higher (and much more difficult to obtain) than that.
I never trusted Musk. I think Twitter has gone in a better direction since his purchase, but it still teeters on the edge of mainstream media and potential betrayal. I approach his moves with a large helping of skepticism. BTW, EVs and their imposition on the world are a hoax and a net negative. Rare earth minerals, child labor, earth polluting non recyclable batteries, spontaneously combusting fires. No thank you
"I would never in a million years commit to a long form writing application on Twitter, knowing that its new leadership has a poor record on defending free, open speech on the internet."
-------
This is the key. I'm sure you're like most other 'Stackers and regularly export your subscriber list -- just in case.
I think one thing not being integrated in these discussions is the basic difference in revenue models. Substack makes money as a cut of subscription revenue (a small slice of the merchant discount Stripe applies). When a paid subscriber to a Substack leaves and goes to browse an embedded Twitter link, doesn't affect Substack revenue at all.
The converse is not the case for Twitter. When a Tweeter clicks and leaves to head over to a Substack, that affects Twitter ad revenue. The eyeballs are gone. Retweeting and Liking Substack links multiplies that revenue loss.
Twitter was tolerating that because there's cross-pollination, of course. Then Substack decides to create a direct competitor, Notes.
An email I just sent out and made a tweet thread of, about a Substack post by Eugyppius, "Why crippling Substack links on Twitter is dumb, counter-productive and bad for everyone:"
This is his my-2C best point:
"Substack links on Twitter are Twitter content; they are one of the reasons to browse Twitter every morning. Disconnecting Twitter from closely aligned platforms, which share many of the same journalists and readers, makes the site less interesting and much less useful.”
(But, caveat down below.)
Second, he makes good distinctions. Subs are primarily accessed directly by email…it’s direct while unless you set up a list or go directly to user profiles, you’re stuck with Twitter curation of feeds which is a balancing act for them since they’re advertising based.
…So, one takeaway is there’s a core “incompatibility” that makes the cross pollination work. Posting your Subs links to Twitter gets eyeballs to your articles, the tradeoff to Twitter being they lose those eyeballs for advertising revenue, which ads up. (People need to truly integrate that tradeoff from Twitter’s perspective and they aren’t, so far as I can tell). OTOH, because so many of a Twitter user’s following have Subs, going to Twitter is a good way to have them curated for you.
BUT, on that last point, it’s not a big deal so far as I can see, since Subs are primarily accessed via the email list. In my case, I MAY click to a Subs via a Tweet, and especially one I don’t subscribe to, but yours and the others I follow are 99% accessed via the emails.
So, I see marginal harm to those trying to build their Subs via Twitter, but no real harm for those Twitter users already subscribed to particular Subs, nor the Substers whose subscribers have Twitter account too…the emails aren’t going to be blocked.
Finally, it needs to be kept in mind that Substack started this by starting a Twitter clone, direct competition. Perhaps they should rethink that first, since they started it.
OK, so shots have been fired. In terms of Elon, he's playing hardball, as he should. He’s running several many-billion-dollar companies. I just laugh at all the “he’s being such a meanie!” bunched panties about it.
Thank you for your informative perspective on this development.
Rather than criticising or choosing sides, you have elevated the discourse to the examination of potentially conflicting business models and loss of revenue that would affect Twitter. Kudos!
Little ol me was blocked from Twitter must be a year ago now. Cannot reconnect as they want a cell number. I live in an area, up until now, that has no cell coverage. I've made no attempt to rejoin as I had already found Substack. You all here that I have discovered are the most brilliant people I have ever come across! Down with Twitter, Up with Substack!
I love substack and would love it they had bundles so I could subscribe to multiple authors. I used to be on Twitter and deleted my account. It made me a very unhappy person to get dragged down rabbit holes. Substack helps me learn from a variety of authors. Maybe substack notes will be good replacement for sane Twitter users
We agree. After only 4 months on both platforms, with most of our subscribers coming from Substack, we have half a mind to ditch Twitter. (But, we do love ClownWorld....)
Twitter used to be important to me, I developed “lists” of accounts that I thought had worthwhile things to say on various topics … when I discovered Substacks (through Twitter), I was truly hooked. There’s just no comparison with reading someone’s work in bits and pieces. I am a now paid subscriber to a fair number of writers, and I am astounded by the quality I am finding, not only in the essays but also in the comments! Can’t say that about Twitter … 🤣 ! All I can say about Elon Musk is that … like all of us … he is neither heaven nor hell but a little bit of both.
I like and very much appreciate substack and all the interaction here. I don't tweet and despite having recently opened an account (to read other tweets without restricion) am not a twit.
The problem with SUBSTACK for some of us fans & readers is that there are so many writers we would really love to have a paid subscription to that it very quickly becomes an economic burden especially in these terrible economic times. So if we are on a fixed income this becomes really difficult. The fact that we are not paid on some of the pages that kindly allow comments & interacting is not because we, or maybe I should just speak for myself, is not out of choice, it is out of necessity. I am grateful that you, Jordan, are one of those writers. When I am able I will become a paid subscriber.
Appreciate your kind words. Perhaps they will roll out some bundles
Bundles would be a good idea - as long as we get to chose the bundle: kind of like 'pick 5, 10 for the price of...'.
I agree that being a paid subscriber to all the writers I read gets too expensive.
BTW Ishare on GETTR & Truth Social , so your substacks don’t only get seen on Twitter & I get far more interactions on both of those.
Also support the idea of bundles. In the same position of following a large number of authors but unable to subscribe to several.
Agreed, bundling would be one of the best ways for substack to increase revenue and get more writers some income. I say this as a long-term paid subscriber to The Dossier (and other writers here), but would like to increase my reach even more.
I follow about 50 substacks to varying degrees; (6) +/- are paid, costing about $35-40 per months, & I question the value of some of them (not Free Press, Racket, Public or Sasha)
If I paid for all 50, that would be about $280 a month - no way.
The teaser articles some substacks are a big turn-off.
In light of its success, Substack needs the re-examine its business model - but keep it simple.
a long time ago there was this idea that micro payments would eventually allow hundreds of thousands or even millions of individuals to support content creators at like five, ten or twenty cents an article. but I don't know what ever happened to that. my guess is that the transaction overhead costs charged by credit card companies and others were never going to go low enough. but I feel like I'm missing something. or maybe $5 per month actually is a micro payment by today's Putin Price Hike / Bidenflation standards. LOL.
Many of them are $50-$60 a year, not $35. Dr. Paul Alexander lowered his subscription fee, and he puts out volumes of content.
The beauty of Substack is that you don't have to pay money to read the articles. For those who can't afford it, the info is free, for those who wish to donate they can donate to their favorite authors. One of the many reasons why I love Substack.
That's only sometimes true. Lots of people paywall. Usually though, above the paywall barrier is enough to get the gist of the article
And some people paywall for only a few days. Subscribers get the info first... later, free to all. I've got no problem with that
I second that!
I wish there was a "tip" option to make a one time donation.
Some of the authors have a ‘Buy Me A Coffee’ option. That’s like a tip.
and a sign of appreciation.
I would pay $15/year for The Dossier. that's it. Since that's not an option, I do the free route.
Everybody has their limit.
Substack is a hard blow in the Class War.
Usual hammer, usual victim.
Evil will grow here like a cancer.
Putting greed at the center of the interface reveals their core beliefs; $.
Worshipers of Moloch.
https://vikoren.substack.com/p/class-warfare-substack-matt-taibbi
Free > https://envmental.substack.com/p/politics-fear-and-science-pfas
Everyone has their limits or boundaries.
Blue check vs orange check is friendly fire. Hope this gets resolved soon so we can refocus on pushing back against the the GAE rainbow Color revolution that is stomping on the USA red white and blue https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/how-to-execute-a-color-revolution.
For sure
Well, begs the question - why did this happen in the first place.
Inquiring minds want to know.
I read something about 'substack notes' bothering twitter; don't know any details beyond that.
I don't get to say "told ya so" very often, so I'm going to take the opportunity now 😆: https://thefreethinker.substack.com/p/will-twitter-now-be-a-haven-of-free
People somehow believed that their Musk-savior could short-circuit a censorious culture and restore freedom in a day, for a low, low price of 44 billion dollars. We are all learning that the real price of freedom is much, much higher (and much more difficult to obtain) than that.
I never trusted Musk. I think Twitter has gone in a better direction since his purchase, but it still teeters on the edge of mainstream media and potential betrayal. I approach his moves with a large helping of skepticism. BTW, EVs and their imposition on the world are a hoax and a net negative. Rare earth minerals, child labor, earth polluting non recyclable batteries, spontaneously combusting fires. No thank you
Watching closely to see how this plays out. Jury still out on Musk. A big step in the wrong direction though.
There are many questions about Musk.
The musketeers are fellows of the world economic forum. 190% owned kleptocrats.
Twitter is the modern equivalent of Chairman Mao's "Hundred Flowers Campaign" best to stay well away
As is ESG just a corporate struggle session.
"I would never in a million years commit to a long form writing application on Twitter, knowing that its new leadership has a poor record on defending free, open speech on the internet."
-------
This is the key. I'm sure you're like most other 'Stackers and regularly export your subscriber list -- just in case.
I think one thing not being integrated in these discussions is the basic difference in revenue models. Substack makes money as a cut of subscription revenue (a small slice of the merchant discount Stripe applies). When a paid subscriber to a Substack leaves and goes to browse an embedded Twitter link, doesn't affect Substack revenue at all.
The converse is not the case for Twitter. When a Tweeter clicks and leaves to head over to a Substack, that affects Twitter ad revenue. The eyeballs are gone. Retweeting and Liking Substack links multiplies that revenue loss.
Twitter was tolerating that because there's cross-pollination, of course. Then Substack decides to create a direct competitor, Notes.
An email I just sent out and made a tweet thread of, about a Substack post by Eugyppius, "Why crippling Substack links on Twitter is dumb, counter-productive and bad for everyone:"
This is his my-2C best point:
"Substack links on Twitter are Twitter content; they are one of the reasons to browse Twitter every morning. Disconnecting Twitter from closely aligned platforms, which share many of the same journalists and readers, makes the site less interesting and much less useful.”
(But, caveat down below.)
Second, he makes good distinctions. Subs are primarily accessed directly by email…it’s direct while unless you set up a list or go directly to user profiles, you’re stuck with Twitter curation of feeds which is a balancing act for them since they’re advertising based.
…So, one takeaway is there’s a core “incompatibility” that makes the cross pollination work. Posting your Subs links to Twitter gets eyeballs to your articles, the tradeoff to Twitter being they lose those eyeballs for advertising revenue, which ads up. (People need to truly integrate that tradeoff from Twitter’s perspective and they aren’t, so far as I can tell). OTOH, because so many of a Twitter user’s following have Subs, going to Twitter is a good way to have them curated for you.
BUT, on that last point, it’s not a big deal so far as I can see, since Subs are primarily accessed via the email list. In my case, I MAY click to a Subs via a Tweet, and especially one I don’t subscribe to, but yours and the others I follow are 99% accessed via the emails.
So, I see marginal harm to those trying to build their Subs via Twitter, but no real harm for those Twitter users already subscribed to particular Subs, nor the Substers whose subscribers have Twitter account too…the emails aren’t going to be blocked.
Finally, it needs to be kept in mind that Substack started this by starting a Twitter clone, direct competition. Perhaps they should rethink that first, since they started it.
OK, so shots have been fired. In terms of Elon, he's playing hardball, as he should. He’s running several many-billion-dollar companies. I just laugh at all the “he’s being such a meanie!” bunched panties about it.
Thank you for your informative perspective on this development.
Rather than criticising or choosing sides, you have elevated the discourse to the examination of potentially conflicting business models and loss of revenue that would affect Twitter. Kudos!
Musk is buddies with the WEF technocrats. His grandfather was a known globalist who left Canada because of this.
Trans is still a protected class on Twitter that you may not criticize.
Very little truly changed.
I’m glad the Twitter files were selectively released but I doubt the juiciest bits will ever see the light of day.
Whatever happened to the Fauci files?
PS: Here's something that might help. Canada is creating a freedom creators channel on Roku TV, joining all freedom groups across the globe on Rumble. I can't explain clearly well enough how this will work. Just have a look, https://rumble.com/v2bvus2-canadian-freedom-fighters-roku-app.html?mref=6zof&mrefc=2
Thanks for the link! 😊
Little ol me was blocked from Twitter must be a year ago now. Cannot reconnect as they want a cell number. I live in an area, up until now, that has no cell coverage. I've made no attempt to rejoin as I had already found Substack. You all here that I have discovered are the most brilliant people I have ever come across! Down with Twitter, Up with Substack!
absolutely.
Twitter will lose. Twitter is 💩
I love substack and would love it they had bundles so I could subscribe to multiple authors. I used to be on Twitter and deleted my account. It made me a very unhappy person to get dragged down rabbit holes. Substack helps me learn from a variety of authors. Maybe substack notes will be good replacement for sane Twitter users
We agree. After only 4 months on both platforms, with most of our subscribers coming from Substack, we have half a mind to ditch Twitter. (But, we do love ClownWorld....)
Twitter used to be important to me, I developed “lists” of accounts that I thought had worthwhile things to say on various topics … when I discovered Substacks (through Twitter), I was truly hooked. There’s just no comparison with reading someone’s work in bits and pieces. I am a now paid subscriber to a fair number of writers, and I am astounded by the quality I am finding, not only in the essays but also in the comments! Can’t say that about Twitter … 🤣 ! All I can say about Elon Musk is that … like all of us … he is neither heaven nor hell but a little bit of both.
he's a parasite, living off others' efforts. now this, favouring 'green energy' (what's that anyway?) over fossil fuels - https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/elon-musk-claims-fossil-fuels-will-be-more-expensive-renewable-energy
I like and very much appreciate substack and all the interaction here. I don't tweet and despite having recently opened an account (to read other tweets without restricion) am not a twit.
I would call substack and Twitter feuding for market shares free market capitalism. Let them duke it out and may the best platform for us win.