What Australian publishers can learn from The Athletic and why I’m willing to pay for it
Patrick Whitnall, head of content and sport at Publicis Media, resisted paying for journalism until he came across The Athletic. And he suspects its subscription-based, ad-free model may be what Australian publications need to convert readers into subscribers.
I admit it: For the first time in years, I’ve paid for online journalistic content. Until now, I, like most, have refused the paywalls, or reader donation models, despite paying for Spotify, Play Station and Netflix for years.
So, why the change after years of resistance to paid-for, written content? The majority of my consumed content is sport via video or podcast, predominantly the English Premier League and my beloved Arsenal. And I’d gotten tired of clickbait stories: so much was offered in the headline, but the story was shallow. And there were more and more ads breaking up the content – making it impossible to read without interruption.
Then, along came The Athletic.
The Athletic is an ad-free subscription-based online sports publication, which has attracted the attention of investors including Comcast Ventures, raising over US$90m in funding. After enjoying success in the US just three years after its launch, it has now landed in the UK, aggressively signing 55 national and local sports journalists, poaching talent from leading titles including The Guardian, The Times, The Independent and the BBC.
At The Athletic, journalists are offered equity and incentives to drive subscribers. They’re tasked with focusing on in-depth stories, rather than having to churn through multiple articles each day.
This approach in the US has delivered the business 500,000 subscribers, with expectations that this figure will double this by the end of the year, including an ambition of 100,000 in the UK. The average revenue per subscriber is US$64, with a 90% retention rate.
Could The Athletic’s model be viable in Australia, in an environment of ongoing media consolidation, pressure on traditional print revenues, and reliance from digital publishers on ad revenue?
Sport has always been a driver of readership, viewers and commercial revenue, compared to other types of journalism. The TV rights movements in 2018 saw Nine secure the Australian Open for $300m across five years, and Seven/ Foxtel grab the cricket for $1bn over six years. The success of Optus Sport and its EPL, World Cup, Euros and Champions League coverage has driven 700,000 active subscribers this season, while Foxtel’s Kayo Sports launched last November with 200,000 paying subscribers. This has created more choice, access, mobility and demand for sports content.
The recent quarterly earnings report showed that Foxtel had lost 100,000 subscribers from its traditional product in the first three months of 2019, outlining to investors that it would reduce spend on ‘non-marquee’ sport, potentially impacting sports such as soccer, motor racing and basketball. This could have a serious impact on the investment, interest and access in the future of these sports, not just based on viewership, but also poses the question: What sport and content are consumers willing to pay for, or subscribe to?
To answer this, we have to go back to the content, both from an access or exclusivity point of view.
I, and consumers broadly, will pay for something I cannot get elsewhere, hence the competition over live rights. Sports journalism has always focused on the game itself, the stars, scores, highlights and incidences, which are not unique, or necessarily available at the speed at which we want to consume it.
Sports content in Australia is yet to evolve in the area of digital storytelling, which would give fans deeper stories that go beyond the game. We’ve seen how successful this can be through publishers such as The Players Tribune and Unscriptd in the US.
Locally, the recent success of digital publisher Players Voice, with stories such ‘Headcoach’, a feature on mental health in sport, was named this year’s Mumbrella Media Brand of the Year, and could be a driving force toward this change.
My subscription to The Athletic does coincide with my team’s hopeful resurgence. So subscribing to a collection of my most trusted and favourite writers, ad free, for content relating to my favourite sport, at half price for access in the first year, made sense.
Will I last the season? I’m as hopeful it lives up to my expectations as I am for Arsenal’s success.
Patrick Whitnall is head of content and sport at Publicis Media ANZ
Great article, Paul. I have to agree. The quality and depth of content in The Athletic is beyond any sporting editorial that currently exists. There is no equivalent and as such I found myself going to pay for a subscription much faster than something like SMH or NY Times. It has re-shaped the way I engage with football as I feel more connected to the stories of each player, the managers and the politics that surrounds each match.
You’re on the money. Except the part about the Arsenal “resurgence”.
(Sorry)
User ID not verified.
The marketing we were fed is “people will pay for quality content”.
Nice to see someone actually putting that to the test rather than saying experimenting whether people will pay for the rubbish we used to give them for free.
User ID not verified.
I find the Athletic to be over indulgent. 4000 words when 400 words would do. The correspondents appear to be trying too hard to produce “quality” content. It’s already starting to look like an exercise in navel gazing (with some exceptions).
Also, the quality of journalism is iffy at best. You want me to pay to read some blogger like Andy Mitten express his views on football?
Nah.
User ID not verified.
The Athletic is were Arsenal fans go to read about football… because they sure as hell can’t stand watching the dross the team is at the moment.
User ID not verified.
And herein lies the problem. Patrick, do you really think The Athletic will ever be profitable? Or like so many digital startups just raise a bunch of cash, come out with grand plans and burn through it, costing established publishers in the process by suckling at the VC test?
Those other examples you mentioned are all also investor subsidised and in the case of PlayersVoice only ever weeks away from closing down.
This is such a great example of someone in the industry assuming they are a regular consumer (500k in the US is not even close to 1% of the population) and that media companies can survive with these kind of utopian ideals.
Its going to be a mix of as revs and people paying for content, as it always has been since the newspaper started.
You should embrace and push that idea, given you clients will soon run out of ‘quality’ publishers to spruik on…
User ID not verified.
With an agency leader spruiking ad free editorial environments as the future. I guess you can say good bye to the media dollars
User ID not verified.
I’ve signed up to the Athletic, and I feel the same way. I actually dabble in some sports writing myself (you can find me on This Is Anfield) so maybe I’m biased, but I can’t stand short, click-bait style pieces. Part of the joy of following football and EPL is for me the high quality sports writers the UK produces, I hope (probably foolishly) one day the level in Australia approaches those heights. One thing is for sure though, the current models won’t produce it.
User ID not verified.