The Athletic ... any thoughts ...

... about their business model, their coverage of sports in their cities, any ideas on expansions?

Just looking for any pertinent information. Thanks!

 

What the hell is The Athletic?

 

I don't know how they're doing, but the Toronto edition has some real heavyweight talent behind it.

 

I have read a few pieces that Joe Sheehan linked off his baseball newsletter and enjoyed it.

Is it pretty much a Chicago version of what Dejan Kovacevic is doing in Pittsburgh?

 

It's where the unathletic go to learn.

Seriously, I have no idea. In the absence of links and context, I guess we'll have to Google it.

EDIT:


The Athletic

 

Oxford comma before an ampersand?

 

yeah, but no ads, no fluff. interested to know how they generate money. Maybe I'll look into it tomorrow. I'm done Googling for today.

 

They sell subscriptions. Think that's it.

 

Yeah, it's a subscription-based model. City-specific coverage of pro sports, although I think a sub grants you access to all the sites. (I could be wrong on that.) In Toronto, they hired a bunch of well-regarded newspaper people. I believe the plan is to expand to other cities.

 

Know next to nothing about The Athletic, but it seems very similar to what DK's doing in Pittsburgh. As for DK Pittsburgh Sports, that site is thriving far better than I could have imagined. He's brought in great writers, they produce pretty solid original content, they price it fairly, and subscriptions are up every single week. They seem to spend a lot of money, too. That partnership with the soccer team seems to be working out swell.

 

What? Nobody will pay for news. Anybody can write a sports story. Newspapers don't need talented, famous columnists, veteran writers who know their cities' teams better than anyone. Anyone can do that job ... That's what the clueless think-tankers said in getting newspapers to give away their products for free on the Web. The rise of The Athletic and the other organization cited above PROVE there's still demand for what newspapers were doing 20 years ago. You think there's not current demand for those huge sections of the past, incredible analysis and columnists, all the box scores in one area for fans to read, incredible coverage of high school sports, satisfying grandmothers and grandfathers and mommies and daddies happy to pay for subscriptions.
Just think ... all newspapers had to do to continue thriving was not panic at newsprint costs, resist the urge to cut page after page from the newspaper. All it would have taken for newspapers to continue making $$$ is HIRE BETTER ADVERTISING PEOPLE and develop innovative ways to ADVERTISE. Instead, papers took the easy way out, shrinking the newshole to nothing, firing people, changing deadline times to make the product worthless. Of course newspapers are failing. Compare a gawd-damn newspaper now to one 20 years ago. You need your head examined if you pay for a newspaper today.

 

i pay for the washington post. paper is damned incredible.