Perhaps a few "free" article tokens based on the number of substacks to which one is subscribed. Make your own bundle, as it were, and the more you subscribe, the more you can roam away to sample others?
I'm happy paying for yours and Ian Leslie and Louise Perry (though I wish she wrote more rather than podcasted). I have in the past paid for Andrew Sullivan and Astral Codex Ten, but I tend to cut down when I realise I'm not reading all their stuff (ACT just produces insane amounts of material even on his free plan).
I'm not sure bundling does much for me but perhaps you could have a tiered system so you have free, paid and Athelstan, which is for the real patrons, and you throw them a few extra perks. Seems to work for Tom & Dom.
This is really the reason for "plateauing". For me it's not the money I can't afford, it's the time. Besides various publications, some free, some not that I look at every day I subscribe to about 10 substacks, all but two paid. I just don't have time to read any more than that. To break into that circle, someone has to be really good or interesting.
You were one of my very first subscriptions, Ed, along with Andrew Sullivan. After you wrote that 2020 piece in Unherd I felt like you were the only person in the world who understood me. 😍
I would love a bundle option and probably would subscribe to more writers if one were available. I certainly would have subscribed to Conor Fitzstack sooner than I did had it been available.
Don't quote me on this, but I'd pay at least twice your current rate for your substack.
I tend to build up to 5 or 6 subscriptions over a period of time, then realise I'm paying £40 a month for content I don't have time to read, then ditch some of them. But there are a couple, yours included, that are never taken into consideration for culling.
I think this is a fine market driven system and largely works pretty well. I certainly enjoy only rewarding people I actually rate and enjoy not having to pay the wages of some weirdo fanatic because they got a weekly column for diversity reasons.
I’ve said the same thing in the past: charge more! You fire the articles out frequently and they are a great read. The comments section is really intelligent too. I don’t always see eye to eye, but that’s what makes it so good! £5 a month? That’s nothing!
Absolutely agree. Whenever I'm in review mode, I always keep in mind the BBC poll tax which I do not and will not ever pay. Thus, I'm generally quids in and actually have a choice about who gets my dosh.
Still, when it comes to subs, we should not get too carried away; Mr Smith's observation on the benevolence of the butcher, brewer and baker seems apposite.
We REALLY need your take on Claudine Gay’s controversial tenure as Harvard’s president. The fact that a woman who plagiarized her academic writing became the president of one of most elite Western universities simply boggles the mind.
I find that substack notes is good for short takes.
I have noticed that Twitter has gotten bad. For some reason. I get a lot of pro Stalin slop. Since a significant number of my relatives were annihilated in the Holdomor, I don't appreciate it.
I'm sure it skews towards 1 or 0. I typically have two or three per year. I get a lot of free ones, but don't bother to read a lot of them. At some point, you're paying someone either to waste your time, or for stuff you don't read. I may read some of Ed's stuff late, but I always read it, so there's value for money there. With most of the rest, not so much.
An interesting issue. This substack is very good value. I'm wary of subscribing to many others, though, partly on cost grounds, partly due to laziness/hassle. A bundled model of some kind would be of interest, but limiting it to writers of a similar outlook/quality would be important. Louise Perry would be one, ofc. Aris Roussinos is almost the only reason I still read UnHerd, but if he jumped ship that would be interesting. I like the free article token idea, or perhaps a more informal system where you agree to share the odd article with like-minded writers, to encourage uptake to interesting substacks. For what it's worth, I'd also be willing to pay for Canon Club podcasts with you and Paul Morland, if they ever became a regular thing - I really enjoyed those, and found that format easier to listen to than the YouTube lectures
I pay for 3 substacks; you, the Estranged son of an Oscar winner and a libertarian leaning American podcast that is so successful they've pivoted to video. The most successful one is also the most expensive. I've probably avoided paying for another one (Sebastian Junger has recently joined and is very tempting) because of the cost, so if I could bundle say, 5 together and make a saving, I'd go for it, but like you say, why would you agree to that if you're already raking it in on your own?
Interesting to read the comments - I was *sure* people would be a lot keener on bundling than they seem to be. One solution I have found for reading more blogs is to utilise the Read Aloud add on in Chrome or function in Edge. Especially useful if you have a "clerical" job done a few days WFH that doesn't take up most of your mental bandwidth.
Reading lots is a pre-requisite for those who do writing as a living - so a writer reads more Substacks than a mere reader of Substack which might skew your impression of how useful bundling is? I'm still for it and feel guilty for stringing along those writers who implore for my money.
Yours is the only Substack I have a paid subscription for, currently. Others often have the occasional interesting, high value article, but I find they tend to be too inconsistent to justify the subscription. I think you a do a much better job of maintaining consistent high quality -- it probably helps that you are a professional journalist and editor.
You also don't charge a fortune, which means I don't feel pushed to cancel the subscription -- I think that is a wise approach .
I find this Substack to be required reading to understand what is actually happening in the UK right now, given the mainstream press is increasingly useless.
In terms of laboured analogies, I think the giant robotic Megazords from Power Rangers might work. Individually, the power rangers are limited, though they have different strengths. However, by sacrificing their autonomy and joining together, they are able to create a single formidable construct.
Come to think of it, Marvel's Avengers is another instance of this.
Historically, the best analogy might be a warship. Every man must do his duty, for the ship to survive and succeed in its mission. On their own, they are often hopelessly outmatched. As it is with publishing.
I subscribe to 7 or 8 Substacks and would definitely do more with a bundle option. I like to read a few free or preview articles before I decide someone is worth a subscription, and you are definitely worth it! In fact you are one of my favorite Substacks because your articles touch on a variety of subjects and I love your perspective. I am especially a fan of your history essays
I never realised there was a lower limit in terms of what you could charge. I'm not sure of the logic behind this.
For me to "build my own" magazine under the current pricing, I'd only get 3-4 writers for the price of a Times subscription, meaning I have to be picky. If the limit were removed, I'd be able to mix High Quality Professionals, time constrained amateurs and mid-tier slop merchants (provided they charged accordingly of course). More writers would be able to get paid, I'd get a better product and there would be more money flowing through substack.
There should also be some payment bundling, as it's weird to get a load of tiny payments coming out of your account (I always thought that's why noone charged small amounts).
Perhaps a few "free" article tokens based on the number of substacks to which one is subscribed. Make your own bundle, as it were, and the more you subscribe, the more you can roam away to sample others?
This is an excellent idea. The more you subscribe to, the more tokens you get.
I'm happy paying for yours and Ian Leslie and Louise Perry (though I wish she wrote more rather than podcasted). I have in the past paid for Andrew Sullivan and Astral Codex Ten, but I tend to cut down when I realise I'm not reading all their stuff (ACT just produces insane amounts of material even on his free plan).
I'm not sure bundling does much for me but perhaps you could have a tiered system so you have free, paid and Athelstan, which is for the real patrons, and you throw them a few extra perks. Seems to work for Tom & Dom.
This is really the reason for "plateauing". For me it's not the money I can't afford, it's the time. Besides various publications, some free, some not that I look at every day I subscribe to about 10 substacks, all but two paid. I just don't have time to read any more than that. To break into that circle, someone has to be really good or interesting.
You were one of my very first subscriptions, Ed, along with Andrew Sullivan. After you wrote that 2020 piece in Unherd I felt like you were the only person in the world who understood me. 😍
I would love a bundle option and probably would subscribe to more writers if one were available. I certainly would have subscribed to Conor Fitzstack sooner than I did had it been available.
thank you so much
Don't quote me on this, but I'd pay at least twice your current rate for your substack.
I tend to build up to 5 or 6 subscriptions over a period of time, then realise I'm paying £40 a month for content I don't have time to read, then ditch some of them. But there are a couple, yours included, that are never taken into consideration for culling.
I think this is a fine market driven system and largely works pretty well. I certainly enjoy only rewarding people I actually rate and enjoy not having to pay the wages of some weirdo fanatic because they got a weekly column for diversity reasons.
Thank you. Thats reassuring. I guess I worry that, although I have enough customers, I want them all to be happy customers too.
I’ve said the same thing in the past: charge more! You fire the articles out frequently and they are a great read. The comments section is really intelligent too. I don’t always see eye to eye, but that’s what makes it so good! £5 a month? That’s nothing!
Absolutely agree. Whenever I'm in review mode, I always keep in mind the BBC poll tax which I do not and will not ever pay. Thus, I'm generally quids in and actually have a choice about who gets my dosh.
Still, when it comes to subs, we should not get too carried away; Mr Smith's observation on the benevolence of the butcher, brewer and baker seems apposite.
We REALLY need your take on Claudine Gay’s controversial tenure as Harvard’s president. The fact that a woman who plagiarized her academic writing became the president of one of most elite Western universities simply boggles the mind.
2028 at the latest I promise
I find that substack notes is good for short takes.
I have noticed that Twitter has gotten bad. For some reason. I get a lot of pro Stalin slop. Since a significant number of my relatives were annihilated in the Holdomor, I don't appreciate it.
Just counted my paid subscriptions- 17. Any relief, whether tokens or bundles, would be appreciated.
That’s a lot. I’ve got this sub to Ed and that’s it. I wonder what the distribution curve looks like overall?
I'm sure it skews towards 1 or 0. I typically have two or three per year. I get a lot of free ones, but don't bother to read a lot of them. At some point, you're paying someone either to waste your time, or for stuff you don't read. I may read some of Ed's stuff late, but I always read it, so there's value for money there. With most of the rest, not so much.
An interesting issue. This substack is very good value. I'm wary of subscribing to many others, though, partly on cost grounds, partly due to laziness/hassle. A bundled model of some kind would be of interest, but limiting it to writers of a similar outlook/quality would be important. Louise Perry would be one, ofc. Aris Roussinos is almost the only reason I still read UnHerd, but if he jumped ship that would be interesting. I like the free article token idea, or perhaps a more informal system where you agree to share the odd article with like-minded writers, to encourage uptake to interesting substacks. For what it's worth, I'd also be willing to pay for Canon Club podcasts with you and Paul Morland, if they ever became a regular thing - I really enjoyed those, and found that format easier to listen to than the YouTube lectures
I pay to subscribe to WAAAY TOO MANY (30+)... but when the great cull comes it's a sure thing that THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY will survive.
Phew! Thank you!
I pay for 3 substacks; you, the Estranged son of an Oscar winner and a libertarian leaning American podcast that is so successful they've pivoted to video. The most successful one is also the most expensive. I've probably avoided paying for another one (Sebastian Junger has recently joined and is very tempting) because of the cost, so if I could bundle say, 5 together and make a saving, I'd go for it, but like you say, why would you agree to that if you're already raking it in on your own?
Is that Ben Dreyfuss?
Yes. He's, funny, smart, zero filter and will occasionally write something amazing about a tiny moment in a forgettable Netflix show. He wrote about not speaking to his Dad here https://bendreyfuss.substack.com/p/my-dad-and-i-are-estranged-here-is?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1fea38
Interesting to read the comments - I was *sure* people would be a lot keener on bundling than they seem to be. One solution I have found for reading more blogs is to utilise the Read Aloud add on in Chrome or function in Edge. Especially useful if you have a "clerical" job done a few days WFH that doesn't take up most of your mental bandwidth.
Reading lots is a pre-requisite for those who do writing as a living - so a writer reads more Substacks than a mere reader of Substack which might skew your impression of how useful bundling is? I'm still for it and feel guilty for stringing along those writers who implore for my money.
Yours is the only Substack I have a paid subscription for, currently. Others often have the occasional interesting, high value article, but I find they tend to be too inconsistent to justify the subscription. I think you a do a much better job of maintaining consistent high quality -- it probably helps that you are a professional journalist and editor.
You also don't charge a fortune, which means I don't feel pushed to cancel the subscription -- I think that is a wise approach .
I find this Substack to be required reading to understand what is actually happening in the UK right now, given the mainstream press is increasingly useless.
thank you!
In terms of laboured analogies, I think the giant robotic Megazords from Power Rangers might work. Individually, the power rangers are limited, though they have different strengths. However, by sacrificing their autonomy and joining together, they are able to create a single formidable construct.
Come to think of it, Marvel's Avengers is another instance of this.
Historically, the best analogy might be a warship. Every man must do his duty, for the ship to survive and succeed in its mission. On their own, they are often hopelessly outmatched. As it is with publishing.
I subscribe to 7 or 8 Substacks and would definitely do more with a bundle option. I like to read a few free or preview articles before I decide someone is worth a subscription, and you are definitely worth it! In fact you are one of my favorite Substacks because your articles touch on a variety of subjects and I love your perspective. I am especially a fan of your history essays
I never realised there was a lower limit in terms of what you could charge. I'm not sure of the logic behind this.
For me to "build my own" magazine under the current pricing, I'd only get 3-4 writers for the price of a Times subscription, meaning I have to be picky. If the limit were removed, I'd be able to mix High Quality Professionals, time constrained amateurs and mid-tier slop merchants (provided they charged accordingly of course). More writers would be able to get paid, I'd get a better product and there would be more money flowing through substack.
There should also be some payment bundling, as it's weird to get a load of tiny payments coming out of your account (I always thought that's why noone charged small amounts).
When I got the notification I hoped it would be a piece on Iran …
I'm fascinated by the subject!