A la carte?

[FreddiePatek]

Alrighty, folks. Some of you out there know who I am but I need this to be as anonymous as possible, so let's say I have a "friend" whose paper is considering this.

So, the publisher at said paper is kicking the tires on the notion of expanding the sports section, roughly increasing its space by 33-50 percent (without adding resources, of course ... who does that, right?) but offering the section "a la carte." That is, no longer having the sports section as a part of the basic subscription. If you want sports with your paper, it would cost extra.

Now, I could go on for days offering my opinion, but I wanted to get everyone else's unvarnished thoughts. You know ... to help my "friend" figure out how to speak to his publisher on this subject. There's another idea this publisher has happened upon, but I'll save that for later.

Thoughts, SportsJournalists.commers?

 

[RickStain]

I think it's worth a shot.

 

[sportsguydave]

I honestly don't see how that would work.

What is this publisher's opinion of the sports section/sports in general?

 

[Stitch]

I want the whole package, not just a section.

 

[FreddiePatek]

I honestly don't see how that would work.

What is this publisher's opinion of the sports section/sports in general?

The publisher is the Sphinx. No one has any true idea what the publisher thinks of anyone or anything in the paper (not just sports). I'll say this for the sports staff: It's solid, with a perfect mix of vets and young folks. Two staffers took first and second in the state's sports feature contest and one won the gamer category. The SE has his share of APSEs. Very solid design IMHO. The emphasis remains on enterprise despite a massive reduction in space. This publisher recently cut the space so drastically that there were days when almost no wire made the section. One thing I can say is the publisher really doesn't have a feel for why there's interest in a sports section (I'm not offering that in a mean-spirited way; It's just the impression. We all know there are a lot of non-sports newspaper folks with the same issue).

Part of the reason behind the publisher's idea to go a la carte was the resulting outcry from the public over the lack of wire copy in the section.

I guess at this point I'll reveal the other idea the publisher is mulling: Moving all local sports to the "metro" or "local" news section while either eliminating the wire sports or offering it in a small, a la carte wire sports section.

 

[Armchair_QB]

Anybody ask the delivery people what they think of this idea?

 

[FreddiePatek]

Anybody ask the delivery people what they think of this idea?

Might not be a problem. The paper will be spending a large amount of money modernizing the entire operation, from press to front-end system.

 

[Armchair_QB]

Anybody ask the delivery people what they think of this idea?

Might not be a problem. The paper will be spending a large amount of money modernizing the entire operation, from press to front-end system.

Somebody's still got drop it on your porch - or in your bushes - how the hell do they keep track of which house gets which paper?

 

[FreddiePatek]

Anybody ask the delivery people what they think of this idea?

Might not be a problem. The paper will be spending a large amount of money modernizing the entire operation, from press to front-end system.

Somebody's still got drop it on your porch - or in your bushes - how the hell do they keep track of which house gets which paper?

That's one part I really think hasn't been thought out all that well. Carriers don't make enough money to be the ones dealing with that headache. Yet, it's already being done with some of the niche products, so maybe it has been figured out.

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

I honestly don't see how that would work.

What is this publisher's opinion of the sports section/sports in general?

The publisher is the Sphinx. No one has any true idea what the publisher thinks of anyone or anything in the paper (not just sports). I'll say this for the sports staff: It's solid, with a perfect mix of vets and young folks. Two staffers took first and second in the state's sports feature contest and one won the gamer category. The SE has his share of APSEs. The emphasis remains on enterprise despite a massive reduction in space. This publisher recently cut the space so drastically that there were days when almost no wire made the section. One thing I can say is the publisher really doesn't have a feel for why there's interest in a sports section (I'm not offering that in a mean-spirited way; It's just the impression. We all know there are a lot of non-sports newspaper folks with the same issue).

Part of the reason behind the publisher's idea to go a la carte was the resulting outcry from the public over the lack of wire copy in the section.

I guess at this point I'll reveal the other idea the publisher is mulling: Moving all local sports to the "metro" or "local" news section while either eliminating the wire sports or offering it in a small, a la carte wire sports section.

Stupid.

This publisher is a complete dunderhead and needs to read this: http://cronkite.asu.edu/mcguireblog/?p=134<blockquote>Sports should be the centerpiece of newspaper efforts to rejuvenate themselves. . . . I have always believed sports is central to building community, which most newspapers say is the key task. Sports may also be the major link to mass for a lot of newspapers too.

Now is the time to boost sports coverage for newspapers, not shrink it or put it behind pay walls. I do think the proposed alliance by several regional newspapers is great idea and I am thrilled my favorite sports editor, Glen Crevier, is at the center of it. That alliance can allow newspapers to avoid duplication on events like the Masters. The real future of local sports for a newspaper like The Star Tribune lies in covering the Vikings, Twins and even the lowly Timberwolves better than any current or future competitor.</blockquote>Sports sells papers. Period.

 

[I Should Coco]

I see big, big problems with this plan, Freddie.

Besides the circulation nightmare others mentioned, how would this work with advertisers? You would have two different circulation numbers now -- one for the full newspaper, and one for the sports-less version.

And the idea of putting local sports reporting in among the local metro news is really f'd up. It would be like throwing wedding and engagement announcements among the police blotter items. You know, it's all local content!


If there's some way this can produce more news hole in sports (and more revenue for "your friend's" paper), great, but I'm not seeing it.

 

[FileNotFound]

You could do this online, easily. Would be a bit harder with print, but it's not the worst idea I've heard this week.

 

[bob]

"Sports sells papers. Period."

I want to believe that, and I used to believe that, but when we get the monthly accounting of our 100 most-read stories Web stories, Sports stories are rarely on the list. So I would think that translates to print readership, as well.

 

[Rumpleforeskin]

How much extra are they charging for the sports section?

 

[J-School Blue]

The most read story at my old paper was always, every week, without fail, the county "Most Wanted" cops brief. If it wasn't top, it was second or third. But I don't think that's all people want in their paper.

I personally believe, and reader surveys usually support, that there are people who get the paper specifically to read the sports section. And I think there is a larger number of these readers than the people who get it specifically to read the entertainment/features section.

I don't see the "sports-less" paper being more appealing. I'm also not sure, given the current state of things, that readers would pay more for an al la carte sports section. I have a sneaking suspicion the readers who subscribe primarily for sports would get mad and just stop subscribing.

 

[txsportsscribe]

"Sports sells papers. Period."

I want to believe that, and I used to believe that, but when we get the monthly accounting of our 100 most-read stories Web stories, Sports stories are rarely on the list. So I would think that translates to print readership, as well.

i believe we've had a whole lot more surveys and studies cited here that say that's not necessarily true.

 

[wicked]

Sports coverage builds a more loyal, consistent readership than coverage of the local town council, and you could cite a number of reasons for that.

 

[SouthernStyle]

"Sports sells papers. Period."

I want to believe that, and I used to believe that, but when we get the monthly accounting of our 100 most-read stories Web stories, Sports stories are rarely on the list. So I would think that translates to print readership, as well.

Really? Even during football season?

From August until the end of football season, our Web stats say that our state college stuff gets more unique page views than anything other than obits. Prep gamers are also high on the list. Our sports stories see a slight drop after football, and a significant drop after the prep school year ends.

But I'm not sure breaking the newspaper up is the right way to capitalize on this. It's going to force people to buy two papers, which won't go over well. Ad revenue also has to be a concern. If ad reps are struggling to make money for one paper in this market, how are they going to sell enough for two publications?

 

[J-School Blue]

I suspect the way my ex-paper organized its web page hurt the hits the sports stories got. They had Sports sectioned off in its own little tab that you had to specifically click on to see the stories, and rarely put sports items in the four "top story" links on the front.

I don't know how universal this approach is, though.

 

[FreddiePatek]

This paper's Web site is truly horrendous and the opposite of user-friendly. This publisher is also of the opinion that the Web or any emphasis by the paper on the Web is a waste of time. This publsiher, in fact, has talked about "parking" the Web site, believing all people really want is the printed product.

The ad staff utterly has no ability to sell ads into the sports section. They admit they have no one who can do this. Why would any paper have an ad staff that willfully avoids places like Hooters, TGI Fridays and all the sports bars in town because they have no one who can relate to the audience?

This town has spring training and a minor league team. The wall of the park is covered in prospective advertisers. Seems to me an easy place to start.

Anyway, that's the lay of the land. There hasn't been any specific talk on how much extra the paper would charge for the sports section but the rough number is perhaps an extra 25-50 cents per issue.