Comments on: Bad enough the SMH iPad app is just a PDF, forcing a print subscription is insane

By: George Bear

George Bear — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 15:37:09 +0000

If newspapers spent more time on providing a better news and entertainment service they wouldn’t be facing a slow demise. E.g. when I’m reading an online story about F***edif I know wherestan I can click and discover, and maybe also see a display ad that invites me to watch a video ad to win a holiday to its famous whatever. Trouble is the boys and girls that run newspapers would need an atom bomb under there bums to get their brains outside an imaginary square. Just look at the level of innovation they have collectively invested in over recent years. Oh yes, the printing press.

By: curious pink

curious pink — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:38:41 +0000

@Jonathan

You’re actually agreeing with me Jonathan. The numbers are meaningless in the context. The Guardian is rapidly going broke and it has by far the best digital strategy (with the possible exception of The New York Times.)
News Media will have to create products capable of supporting prices far higher than those indicated so far. It;s simply nowhere near enough, even allowing for the shutdown of the print and distribution costs of newspapers.

By: Peter

Peter — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:57:46 +0000

While I agree with most comments, the common theme of print newspaper wastage bothers me. Don’t people realise the whole digital age, with mass production of computers, e- readers, mobile phones etc etc is incredibily wasteful. Not to mention the power required to run these devices and the fact we update them (throw them out) on a regular basis. Don’t be so smug about 21st century media wastage.

By: Jonathon

Jonathon — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:21:34 +0000

@Curious Pink
Wired saw 100,000 downloads of their iPad app (average print circ 70,000). Guardian’s iPhone app could be around a £2m business, with a significant portion of that coming from overseas. True, the vast majority won’t make money, but given that no major Aussie newspaper has developed a truly native, consumer-focussed app experience, and also given the take-up of mobile devices in Australia, there is a solid opportunity there. And since when has releasing terrible products been a sensible business strategy???

By: Curious Pink

Curious Pink — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:01:19 +0000

am wondering if occurre d to any of the above that the evidence of profit in the app biz for news media has yet to emerge. It is hardly surprising that Fairfax and everyone else in that business is trying to hang onto the established business that does make money, even if it’s shrinking.

By: Surly

Surly — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 05:43:01 +0000

I had a bit to do with Fairfax a few years back, helping them develop real-time news offerings for their website. I’m never met a more clueless lot. The fiasco with this app surprises me not at all. I’m very glad not to be a shareholder.

By: snoop

snoop — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 06:31:54 +0000

Great post Sydney Gazette

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 22:53:53 +0000

Just realized why they have gone this way

Sell an app, pay apple 30%

Give an app away and sell a subscription through the web site? Give apple nothing

Bet they won’t sell many subscriptions

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:12:05 +0000

It would have taken longer to get the App approved than it would to develop it. So the only upshot is that it can’t have cost them very much in resource time. Scrap it and start again.

By: Damien

Damien — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 09:39:55 +0000

@Inky – “Putting Fairfax print editors in charge of Fairfax print products has been no less a disaster.”

That’s debatable given the above result! Fairfax Digital has pretty solid track-record, therefore i doubt they would have been so naive as to launch this product.

By: Inky

Inky — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:57:14 +0000

Damien @ #39: Putting Fairfax print editors in charge of Fairfax print products has been no less a disaster.

The whole company, top to bottom, is a case study in whatever journalistic or commercial vice you might care to mention.

If the best the opposition can muster is John Hartigan and Little Dick Freudenstein and Fairfax still come off second best, well you know they are thoroughly stuffed.

By: David Young

David Young — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:18:45 +0000

the NZ Herald is nothing to do with Fairfax – it is owned by APN – I am sure the NZ Herald does not want to be associated with Fairfax who they see a big competitor in the NZ market.

By: tabloidtwit

tabloidtwit — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 05:26:06 +0000

Given I have the squished tree edition, Thurs-Sun, for $52 a year (I think they sold it to me via a cinema membership), why on earth would I bother shelling out an additional $150 just to get the same thing on an iPad?

Might as well put the cash towards the London Times paywall.

By: Damien

Damien — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 05:23:05 +0000

The merits of placing a former print editor to be in charge of their app strategy and implementation is already proving to be a disaster for Fairfax. The digital division of Fairfax does a pretty good job, so why would you put a print dinosaur in charge of one of the most critical digital divisions?

By: Sydney Gazette

Sydney Gazette — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 05:05:59 +0000

But this is what Fairfax does. It’s had a decade or more of this.

Brian McCarthy will be joining Fred Hilmer in the Fairfax CEO “Oops We Missed Another Digital Boat” Hall of Fame.

Under the McKinsey&Co-trained genius of Freddy Hilmer, Fairfax managed to miss out on being;
carsales.com.au (market cap today $1B)
realestate.com.au (market cap today $1.2B)
seek.com.au (market cap today $2.4B)
Totally digital missed opportunity score card: $4.6 billion. oops.

So is anyone really surprised they are stuffing up the monitisation of the ipad?

It’s the great Fairfax CEO tradition. Chin out, talk tough and then have no shame in losing another sqillion dollar digital opportunity.

No wonder John B Fairfax retired last week from the board – it must have been finally too sad to watch.