THR Model: Seeking Community Input

First things first—and we hope this isn’t news—we are a subscription-based site where the audience comes first. Our content focuses on human-powered backcountry turn making. As far as the resort ski/riding scene, we don’t commingle the disciplines. Our only take is that we prefer you lower the bar while on the chairlift. Other than…

Responses

Ben Coffman

July 9, 2024

Can’t pretend to know anything meaningful about subscription models, but just wanted to chime in to say that the frequency and quality/independence of content this season has definitely been worth more than $27 dollars.

Scotsman

July 10, 2024

I have no idea about the economics of a site like this but I like the annual subscription model but the $27 fee seems too low to me.
I would hate you to adopt a model more beholding to advertisers as the Wild Snow model became very tiresome especially when it went through the various ownership changes.
We knew Lou was a Dynafit fanboi but when Cripple Creek bought it etc., the reviews just became pure marketing and I lost interest. Remaining as independent editorially seems especially important.
The podcast are great as is most of the content.
Id like to see more expedition reports but on the whole it’s an awesome site and one whose opinion I trust.

Slim

July 18, 2024

Disclaimer: I have no business knowledge. So, the first thing I’d say, is choose the model that will allow the site to construe to exist, whatever that might be.

But with that out of the way, here are my thoughts:

I am happy to pay for (quality) content. The website and publishing it costs money, and the writing and editing takes time. I am happy to pay for that. Just like a nice drink or bite to eat costs money, it is worth it because it brings me joy.
I think the current subscription price is on the low side considering the amount of content you put out.
So, I think a slight increase would be fine, while maintaining the current level of information.

After that, if a still higher subscription payment equates to a higher amount of content then I’m all for it. The biggest gripe I used to have in the days of paper magazine subscriptions, was the low quantity. Of course, the prerequisite is good quality, but I trust you already committed tot that.

So, I for one, would love to either have the general subscription rate increase, along with the number or length of articles, or to have a tiered model.

JOHN AMMONDSON

July 25, 2024

I agree with other commenters that $27 for the year has been fantastic value, and would be fantastic value even at a higher price. Also really love the office hours/premium subscription idea. I fear that the public radio model might not pan out quite yet, NPR has such a huge listener base that they can raise $ even if a low percentage of listeners actually donate, and it feels like you’d have to have a relatively high percentage of readers choose to donate for that to pencil out. That being said, it would probably take very little effort to add a ko-fi style donation button for existing subscribers to donate more if they so choose. Keep up the amazing work!