Totally understandable, these are difficult days for many, myself included. I hope things get better for you, my friend, and for all of us. Hang in there.
I do have a free sub already and enjoy it. I'm 69 and have cancer with the medical bills to prove it. My only income is Social Security (which I paid into for 50 years). I'm not looking for sympathy or anything free. I am just explaining my situation. You are a good person.
Ummm... a couple of comments from a free reader, and free writer:
1) If you have posts for free subscribers, it seems odd to complaint that free readers read them.
2) Perhaps substack will eventually be able to 'up to a certain number of articles'.
3) I am on a fixed income, and am working on deciding which stacks to subscribe to. Value for money and all that. It isn't easy. It would be nice if substack could keep track of how many articles I've read by people.
4) I am very serious in paying with re-stacks, comments, and likes.
I don't subscribe to anyone, I don't like the model. I will donate, sometimes that takes the form of a one year subscription that I cancel after the payment is made.
That is a good point, John. I have seen others that feel the same way. Some people just don't like subs, and that's fine as many do what you do and all of it is appreciated by writers. 👍🏻
Typical Substack subscriptions cost as much or more than buying a monthly magazine at the newsstand price. Monthly magazines generally feature more than one writer. To make paid the norm, prices would need to drop by a factor of ten or more -- which would still be more money for most writers.
I'd love to see more of the Internet move from freemium to cheap model, but the Internet resists...
That is why I mentioned bundling or some other variation of the substack business model. As I noted, I am not a business guy but some of you probably are so I figured I'd solicit some suggestions.
I do wonder how substack will continue to grow if readers can't afford so many paid subs.
I think Substack would have to seriously change its business model to go from freemium to cheap. The way to go would be to have users buy tokens from Substack and then distribute them to favored writers. This cuts the number of card transactions down, and if large batches of tokens are cheaper than small batches, a sunk cost mode cuts in.
The big downside to this is that Substack gets more involved in the process legally. Currently, the main contracts are between authors and subscribers directly with Substack acting as a broker. This is why I doubt that Substack would make the switchover.
Interesting points, I do not know what Substack is thinking. I haven't seen anything from them about changing their business model.
But I will say they better hurry up if they are going to do it. Elon is aiming at them, as are other companies. So they better not sit on their asses for too long.
It will grow through more people joining it - which was presumably why the Nazi smear thing was orchestrated, to try to prevent that. Also through well-known writers joining, like Stephen Fry, who I can see draws a lot of attention and almost has a mainstreaming effect (though I'm sensing not that many paid subscribers, seeing the amount of comments - which he's paywalled - on his posts compared with likes).
Agree. Something like 50 cents per month would see people supporting 10-20 writers in my view. This would not be cost effective to do so it would need to be purchased as a block. Say you pay $10 per month to Substack, and nominate 10-20 Substacks you wish to support. Something along those lines could work.
The current model really features superstars. A handful probably get a lot of subscribers, many get a few, and a high number get zero.
oh, I should clarify what I said before. You can only lower to five dollars for the monthly charge. You can lower it under that if you want to for the yearly subscription. For example, right now I have a 20% off subscription price for a year that’s just $40.so it is less than five dollars per month if you do it on a yearly basis.
But I think it’s still somewhat confusing for people when they go to get a subscription and they see just the five dollars has the lower lowest price possible
well, I think you can only lower your price to five dollars a month minimum. I know that when I started my Substack I tried to lower it to two dollars or something and I wasn’t able to do so.
I agree with you that the higher prices seem to work for larger well-known writers but not for newer writers. So we don’t have the opportunity to lower our prices to two dollars or something like that that would encourage more people to pay for a subscription.
This fits in with the problem of Substack business model.I don’t really know what they plan to do about it though, they have not said anything about being able to lower prices or bundling or anything like that that I’ve heard.
I unsubscribed form Rurik because of the way he goes on. I used to support him in all the other ways I could, because when he is not slagging off his free readers, he is worth reading. Bottom line, I cannot afford subscriptions - note the plural. If I support one, how do I in good concience stop at one with so many worthy writers here? In ny case, why does Rurik bother to offer a free post only to whine because the reader does nnot subscribe? Because I cannot afford to support all to whom I subscribe, I will continue to only post free articles myself - call it penance for penury. When I have pledges who actually pay, then I will have to face the music and decide who on substack among my subs gets the dosh - all of it. If ever I am independently wealthy, I may think again and include Rurik.
It's understandable, I would probably be annoyed too. I wonder if his tactics might not cost him more subs than he gets? I do not know, but good luck to him anyway.
My analogy is a little rough around the edges, but I liken the plethora of excellent newsletters on Substack to panhandlers in downtown. Many of them look like hard luck cases who really do need help and I wouldn’t mind pitching in some change to one but then I feel it is only right to give to all of them who strike me as sincere.
I can’t afford to give all the deserving ones money, so I give none. I would be quite willing to pay for a bundle so I can read a good cross-section of excellent writers.
Something like a bundling option would be really cool, and solve some of the economic limitations of the business model.
It’s true, when subscribers have to pay for every subscription a la carte they hit their limit relatively quick. Compare Substack to a traditional newspaper. I can spend $50 a month to subscribe to 10 writers on Substack or $50 a year (for some digital papers) to get an entire newspaper every single day.
Substack creates a Pareto distribution of incomes for writers, whereas the old newspaper model created a normal curve. Some writers get wildly wealthy off of Substack—far wealthier than they could writing for a traditional outlet—and the rest make relatively little. That’s because readers have a limited number of dollars to spend on paid subscriptions, and most go to the top 10-20% of writers. Newspapers on the other hand don’t pay any single writer nearly as well, but they pay many more writers each a reasonable salary.
A bundling feature could allow Substack writers a way to get around the gatekeepers that control who can write for a newspaper, while also allowing them to pool their talents to create a product that draws in more subscribers, and flattens out the distribution of dollars spent by readers a bit.
I’m not sure if Substack already offers the option, but micro-payments could help as well. Like the ability for writers to offer access to a single article for .50c-.99c.
There are a lot of writers whose work I don’t necessarily want to read all of. But every now and then, the preview hooks me and I’d be willing to pay a small amount to read the entire article one time.
This would also help flatten the curve of subscription dollars. The typical writer posts once a week, so that’s four articles a month. And the typical basic subscription is $5 a month. So that’s $1.25 per article. However, if writers could take micro-payments, then readers could spread that $5 over 5-10 articles from different writers.
Good points, Thomas. I hope Substack is listening. I posted a link to this thread to Hanish yesterday, but didn't hear back from him yet. Lot of good ideas being posted, so I hope Substack will listen and add what you mentioned at some point.
BTW, my substack is $19.50 for a full year, so only $1.60 per month or something like that:
Elegantly expressed. I believe this is functional and practical. Details need to be worked out, but I like it. Also, thank you for including statistical information.
Indeed, I would add, from a free reader and writer to other free readers:
1) If you enjoyed a post, hit 'like'.
2) If you think a post is important, hit 're-stack'
- If both, do both!
3) When posting an important comment, hit 'also share as note'.
4) When writing a post about a subject, when you received info or ideas from another post... put a link! At the end, or in the text. Honour where honour is due!
Hesitant to jump in here. Having been a member of the working poor for more than four decades, I take not even $1 for granted. As a Senior on a 98% fixed income, I prefer a roof and food as my core needs. I love Substack, I write on here myself and certainly would like to financially support a few writers I resonate with. If this gentleman wants a "writer's strike" against the parasites who read for free, go ahead. I would not read him for that very cold take. I could likely offer one or two dollars. If large numbers of us could offer one or two dollars to the pile or month, wouldn't that help SOMEHOW?? A humble and heartfelt thanks to all who write and read on here. Thank you, Morgthorak, for ferrying us through this tempest. I will respectfully check out your Substack!
Thanks for the thoughtful post, Wendy. If you do a free sub send me an email at morgthorakATprotonDOTme and I will comp you for life. I just need your email to find you in the list of subscribers on the backend.
Be aware that my content is sometimes political and it might not be your cup of tea so check it out first.
And yes, one or two dollars certainly would help. I am changing my annual sub fee to $19.50, and that's about $1.66 per month or something like that. I'm bad with numbers so you should check my math.
But based on the poll results and people's feedback in the comments, a cheaper sub price is much more in line with what people can afford to pay. $50 per year per publication is simply too much.
Morgthorak, you are indeed a kind person. I am going to visit your site tonight. I am actually quite political, former Leftist, now Conservative, but avoid the " rage wars" right now. I know we all need $. Part of the sorrow and exhaustion of the poor is the relentless pressure over money. I humbly appreciate your very kind offer of comping me but that is not fair to you! Bless you for your time!!!
No worries, Wendy, happy to do the comp. If you do a free sub, you will get a welcome email. Look inside of that for links to some of my most popular articles. That will give you a good idea what to expect.
Paywalls are a lose lose. In my opinion, the only practical and ethical monetization method is voluntary payment. Free readers play an important role in that --
I have five paid subs and a hundred free. Subject to change based on my financial picture. Certain writers outside my paid five certainly deserve to be paid (you are one). I'd be interested in an "up to 5, 10, 20, group subscription" option but I try to support by sharing which, I think, brings value to the free writers.
This is touching a very raw nerve in so many of us. There is so much gold to read on Substack, overwhelming at times. I do sincerely want writers to be blessed and for Substack to survive. I just do not have the answer. At least this has been a good discussion for the last 24 hours or so. I still think if large numbers of us who are on limited income, could contribute even $1 or $2 to a common fund, perhaps that could bring some help. I do not know how this could be administered…but just an idea to throw into the very-stirred pot of the last day.
I agree with you that some type of flat fee for X number of writers would be tempting.
There is an immense amount of content available on Substack. Too much sometimes. I am not sure the current payment model works best for the readers or writers. It comes down to we only have so much time to read and so much money to pay.
I am a free reader of a dozen Stacks. Also living at the margins on a fixed income in relative poverty, voluntarily. No way I can afford 12 x $50 or $600 annually for news or opinion.
As the meltdown of the US Empire gains momentum , more ppl will be unable to pay for news, no matter how vital. So, those that CAN afford should pay. But creators need to recognize that many CANNOT. A tiered system that does not paywall content is a moral imperative.
Also, “Rurik” is an arrogant asshole whose opinions are often interesting and snark sometimes funny, but he’s still a jerk with a gigantic chip on his shoulder. Please don’t become a Rurik.
Also, if you have a free sub of mine, I will comp you. Just send me an email at morgthorakATprotonDOTme. I need to look you up based on your email I believe.
Thanks! I will reply when I have a secure email, perhaps proton. I'm increasingly security conscious for all the obvious reasons but still using gmail. I know.. foolish..
I think the problem that Substack has is funnily enough the same as OnlyFans. There are people were who are massively famous who makes serious bucks from subscribers (not as much as the top whores on OF but still). Whilst the majority of writes like your average girl barely makes a money let alone a living on here.
I saw someone saying this model favours superstars and that’s very true. Subscribers like women will gravitate towards the cream of the cream. It’s intellectual hypergamy.
Actually, as an Elder woman, I like the unknown and hidden. The famous may have some good stuff but I also seek the gems hidden under the rocks and bushes. The top gets too loud for me, to some degree.
I agree and like all intellectual and artistic endeavours there will be the normie and the esotericist on the side of the audience and the grifter and the hermit on the side of the author. Unfortunately, being a hermit doesn’t pay very well.
Simon, this is unfortunately true...but I cannot take all that money with me when God calls me Home...so as long as I have the basics and can also encourage someone else, I can live with not having large amounts of money. That is just me, the hermit, though!
Fair point, though this does mean we writers have to keep working our craft, keep improving in order to get to the superstar status you just described all without quitting our day jobs.
Yes I totally agree. But the really of the fact is that the majority are never gonna make it. Like all artists ever, most will be penniless. Which is why I think this really should be a passion and a hobby.
But for more practical purposes. I think we need to start collectivising (lol). Which is why I really like that you can have other people post on your Substack. Eventually a Substack is going to be like a magazine, with a roster of authors.
This is where I think it will go if the payment model isn’t going to change.
Hmm, interesting kind of what I do over on my stack already then, I tend to gather all the fantasy-fiction writers and then post up a quick comment on their story and thus promote each and every one of my fellow writers.
WORK???? What is that??? (cue rueful laughter from a Boomer...) We all have our stacks of idea piles, waiting patiently for us to use them! Oh, dear, this thread could get long and I have to go...carry the torch, everyone! Thanks, Simon!
Morgthorak, you’re an Undead after my own heart. Thank you so much for this post.
There are several writers here who I’d love to support because I enjoy reading their posts, but being retired as well as handicapped, my means are limited. My 3 special needs rescue cats come before my own needs.
I try and Re-Stack those posts as much as I can when I scroll through them, I often add a comment.
The post you are quoting feels like a vendetta against non-paying subscribers. I wonder what would happen if this group were to boycot such writers. Or even block.
I can truthfully say that I enjoy reading your posts, often saving them for a more quiet moment. Thank you !
Thanks so much for your kind words, Joyce! I do appreciate knowing that you like my content. That alone is motivation to keep writing, and comments are always appreciated too as they give me ideas sometimes for other articles, and I like seeing what people think. Sharing also helps a lot too, it gets newer writers more eyeballs and helps them to build a larger readership. Thanks for that!
Rurik has a...er...certain writing style that I think his audience understands. So it seems to work for him and them. I would not write in that tone or style about this topic, but that is me.
Well, I'm very glad that you both wrote in the comments as I updated the article to include a section at the end. I should have included it by default but my mind was all over the place this afternoon with offline stuff.
👍🏻
But it's in there now so thank you both for prompting me.
One additional option is for authors who sell books to buy one. Perhaps Kindle books on Amazon. A one off of $4.99 helps, especially if you leave a review.
I appreciate everyone who reads my Substack. It is gratifying that my words mean something for people. It is a wonderful surprise when people subscribe but I don't disdain those who read my work without paying.
As for the Substack model, I think what is needed is a micropayment model (and I am a global capital markets and fintech expert, in case you are wondering) so someone can pay 5 cents, 10 cents or whatever if they like an article. That is impossible with Stripe. We are building a micropayments solution which we will make available to Substack writers.
Pay per view. I bank money on substack and when I start to read a paid article there is a button. 5 cents, $1 or whatever rate the author sets. I click OK and get the rest. No sweat. I don't feel like my pocket is being picked by auto-renew subscriptions. I set my budget and canl read whoever I want.
I would be happy to pay for subscriptions through Substack but as far as I can tell the only payment option is Apple Pay, which I do not want to use. Is “Buy me a coffee” different? I have bought books through Substack affiliates before. That is a good option.
Some people, like me, just plain can't afford it.
Totally understandable, these are difficult days for many, myself included. I hope things get better for you, my friend, and for all of us. Hang in there.
BTW, I didn't find you in my list of free subs, but if you wish to subscribe, I will comp you for a year. No worries about paying.
I do have a free sub already and enjoy it. I'm 69 and have cancer with the medical bills to prove it. My only income is Social Security (which I paid into for 50 years). I'm not looking for sympathy or anything free. I am just explaining my situation. You are a good person.
Oh okay, gotcha. Sorry to hear about the cancer, I shall say a prayer for you tonight. Please take good care of yourself. May God bless you.
Thank you
🥰
I subscribe to over 100 different Substacks. I’m using Substack as my replacement for Facebook and Twitter…
Ummm... a couple of comments from a free reader, and free writer:
1) If you have posts for free subscribers, it seems odd to complaint that free readers read them.
2) Perhaps substack will eventually be able to 'up to a certain number of articles'.
3) I am on a fixed income, and am working on deciding which stacks to subscribe to. Value for money and all that. It isn't easy. It would be nice if substack could keep track of how many articles I've read by people.
4) I am very serious in paying with re-stacks, comments, and likes.
I don't subscribe to anyone, I don't like the model. I will donate, sometimes that takes the form of a one year subscription that I cancel after the payment is made.
That is a good point, John. I have seen others that feel the same way. Some people just don't like subs, and that's fine as many do what you do and all of it is appreciated by writers. 👍🏻
Typical Substack subscriptions cost as much or more than buying a monthly magazine at the newsstand price. Monthly magazines generally feature more than one writer. To make paid the norm, prices would need to drop by a factor of ten or more -- which would still be more money for most writers.
I'd love to see more of the Internet move from freemium to cheap model, but the Internet resists...
That is why I mentioned bundling or some other variation of the substack business model. As I noted, I am not a business guy but some of you probably are so I figured I'd solicit some suggestions.
I do wonder how substack will continue to grow if readers can't afford so many paid subs.
I think Substack would have to seriously change its business model to go from freemium to cheap. The way to go would be to have users buy tokens from Substack and then distribute them to favored writers. This cuts the number of card transactions down, and if large batches of tokens are cheaper than small batches, a sunk cost mode cuts in.
The big downside to this is that Substack gets more involved in the process legally. Currently, the main contracts are between authors and subscribers directly with Substack acting as a broker. This is why I doubt that Substack would make the switchover.
Interesting points, I do not know what Substack is thinking. I haven't seen anything from them about changing their business model.
But I will say they better hurry up if they are going to do it. Elon is aiming at them, as are other companies. So they better not sit on their asses for too long.
I would be devastated if someone else took over Substack. That could pull the heart out of it. I always back up my writing pieces...just in case...
It will grow through more people joining it - which was presumably why the Nazi smear thing was orchestrated, to try to prevent that. Also through well-known writers joining, like Stephen Fry, who I can see draws a lot of attention and almost has a mainstreaming effect (though I'm sensing not that many paid subscribers, seeing the amount of comments - which he's paywalled - on his posts compared with likes).
Agree. Something like 50 cents per month would see people supporting 10-20 writers in my view. This would not be cost effective to do so it would need to be purchased as a block. Say you pay $10 per month to Substack, and nominate 10-20 Substacks you wish to support. Something along those lines could work.
The current model really features superstars. A handful probably get a lot of subscribers, many get a few, and a high number get zero.
oh, I should clarify what I said before. You can only lower to five dollars for the monthly charge. You can lower it under that if you want to for the yearly subscription. For example, right now I have a 20% off subscription price for a year that’s just $40.so it is less than five dollars per month if you do it on a yearly basis.
But I think it’s still somewhat confusing for people when they go to get a subscription and they see just the five dollars has the lower lowest price possible
well, I think you can only lower your price to five dollars a month minimum. I know that when I started my Substack I tried to lower it to two dollars or something and I wasn’t able to do so.
I agree with you that the higher prices seem to work for larger well-known writers but not for newer writers. So we don’t have the opportunity to lower our prices to two dollars or something like that that would encourage more people to pay for a subscription.
This fits in with the problem of Substack business model.I don’t really know what they plan to do about it though, they have not said anything about being able to lower prices or bundling or anything like that that I’ve heard.
Some kind of micropayment tip jar would help. You buy $10 worth and can send $1 for an article you enjoyed. I know that has been suggested.
Unlocking micropayments would be a gamechanger. There needs to be more experimentation with payments.
I just published a separate poll about yearly sub prices. Check it out here:
https://morgthorak.substack.com/p/what-is-your-preferred-price-for
I am very curious about what people are willing to pay. I'll promote it on Notes in a minute.
I unsubscribed form Rurik because of the way he goes on. I used to support him in all the other ways I could, because when he is not slagging off his free readers, he is worth reading. Bottom line, I cannot afford subscriptions - note the plural. If I support one, how do I in good concience stop at one with so many worthy writers here? In ny case, why does Rurik bother to offer a free post only to whine because the reader does nnot subscribe? Because I cannot afford to support all to whom I subscribe, I will continue to only post free articles myself - call it penance for penury. When I have pledges who actually pay, then I will have to face the music and decide who on substack among my subs gets the dosh - all of it. If ever I am independently wealthy, I may think again and include Rurik.
It's understandable, I would probably be annoyed too. I wonder if his tactics might not cost him more subs than he gets? I do not know, but good luck to him anyway.
My analogy is a little rough around the edges, but I liken the plethora of excellent newsletters on Substack to panhandlers in downtown. Many of them look like hard luck cases who really do need help and I wouldn’t mind pitching in some change to one but then I feel it is only right to give to all of them who strike me as sincere.
I can’t afford to give all the deserving ones money, so I give none. I would be quite willing to pay for a bundle so I can read a good cross-section of excellent writers.
Something like a bundling option would be really cool, and solve some of the economic limitations of the business model.
It’s true, when subscribers have to pay for every subscription a la carte they hit their limit relatively quick. Compare Substack to a traditional newspaper. I can spend $50 a month to subscribe to 10 writers on Substack or $50 a year (for some digital papers) to get an entire newspaper every single day.
Substack creates a Pareto distribution of incomes for writers, whereas the old newspaper model created a normal curve. Some writers get wildly wealthy off of Substack—far wealthier than they could writing for a traditional outlet—and the rest make relatively little. That’s because readers have a limited number of dollars to spend on paid subscriptions, and most go to the top 10-20% of writers. Newspapers on the other hand don’t pay any single writer nearly as well, but they pay many more writers each a reasonable salary.
A bundling feature could allow Substack writers a way to get around the gatekeepers that control who can write for a newspaper, while also allowing them to pool their talents to create a product that draws in more subscribers, and flattens out the distribution of dollars spent by readers a bit.
Excellent post. 👍🏻
I’m not sure if Substack already offers the option, but micro-payments could help as well. Like the ability for writers to offer access to a single article for .50c-.99c.
There are a lot of writers whose work I don’t necessarily want to read all of. But every now and then, the preview hooks me and I’d be willing to pay a small amount to read the entire article one time.
This would also help flatten the curve of subscription dollars. The typical writer posts once a week, so that’s four articles a month. And the typical basic subscription is $5 a month. So that’s $1.25 per article. However, if writers could take micro-payments, then readers could spread that $5 over 5-10 articles from different writers.
Good points, Thomas. I hope Substack is listening. I posted a link to this thread to Hanish yesterday, but didn't hear back from him yet. Lot of good ideas being posted, so I hope Substack will listen and add what you mentioned at some point.
BTW, my substack is $19.50 for a full year, so only $1.60 per month or something like that:
https://morgthorak.substack.com/subscribe?coupon=0a44d500
Elegantly expressed. I believe this is functional and practical. Details need to be worked out, but I like it. Also, thank you for including statistical information.
Indeed, I would add, from a free reader and writer to other free readers:
1) If you enjoyed a post, hit 'like'.
2) If you think a post is important, hit 're-stack'
- If both, do both!
3) When posting an important comment, hit 'also share as note'.
4) When writing a post about a subject, when you received info or ideas from another post... put a link! At the end, or in the text. Honour where honour is due!
Bravo!!!
Hesitant to jump in here. Having been a member of the working poor for more than four decades, I take not even $1 for granted. As a Senior on a 98% fixed income, I prefer a roof and food as my core needs. I love Substack, I write on here myself and certainly would like to financially support a few writers I resonate with. If this gentleman wants a "writer's strike" against the parasites who read for free, go ahead. I would not read him for that very cold take. I could likely offer one or two dollars. If large numbers of us could offer one or two dollars to the pile or month, wouldn't that help SOMEHOW?? A humble and heartfelt thanks to all who write and read on here. Thank you, Morgthorak, for ferrying us through this tempest. I will respectfully check out your Substack!
Thanks for the thoughtful post, Wendy. If you do a free sub send me an email at morgthorakATprotonDOTme and I will comp you for life. I just need your email to find you in the list of subscribers on the backend.
Be aware that my content is sometimes political and it might not be your cup of tea so check it out first.
And yes, one or two dollars certainly would help. I am changing my annual sub fee to $19.50, and that's about $1.66 per month or something like that. I'm bad with numbers so you should check my math.
But based on the poll results and people's feedback in the comments, a cheaper sub price is much more in line with what people can afford to pay. $50 per year per publication is simply too much.
Morgthorak, you are indeed a kind person. I am going to visit your site tonight. I am actually quite political, former Leftist, now Conservative, but avoid the " rage wars" right now. I know we all need $. Part of the sorrow and exhaustion of the poor is the relentless pressure over money. I humbly appreciate your very kind offer of comping me but that is not fair to you! Bless you for your time!!!
No worries, Wendy, happy to do the comp. If you do a free sub, you will get a welcome email. Look inside of that for links to some of my most popular articles. That will give you a good idea what to expect.
Paywalls are a lose lose. In my opinion, the only practical and ethical monetization method is voluntary payment. Free readers play an important role in that --
https://fatrabbitiron.substack.com/p/secede-information-wants-to-be-free
So that sort of leaves Buy Me A Coffee, and crypto, right?
I think you could still do monthly subscriptions but just not put anything behind a paywall.
You can. Our Substack is set up that way.
I have five paid subs and a hundred free. Subject to change based on my financial picture. Certain writers outside my paid five certainly deserve to be paid (you are one). I'd be interested in an "up to 5, 10, 20, group subscription" option but I try to support by sharing which, I think, brings value to the free writers.
This is touching a very raw nerve in so many of us. There is so much gold to read on Substack, overwhelming at times. I do sincerely want writers to be blessed and for Substack to survive. I just do not have the answer. At least this has been a good discussion for the last 24 hours or so. I still think if large numbers of us who are on limited income, could contribute even $1 or $2 to a common fund, perhaps that could bring some help. I do not know how this could be administered…but just an idea to throw into the very-stirred pot of the last day.
👍🏻
I agree with you that some type of flat fee for X number of writers would be tempting.
There is an immense amount of content available on Substack. Too much sometimes. I am not sure the current payment model works best for the readers or writers. It comes down to we only have so much time to read and so much money to pay.
I am a free reader of a dozen Stacks. Also living at the margins on a fixed income in relative poverty, voluntarily. No way I can afford 12 x $50 or $600 annually for news or opinion.
As the meltdown of the US Empire gains momentum , more ppl will be unable to pay for news, no matter how vital. So, those that CAN afford should pay. But creators need to recognize that many CANNOT. A tiered system that does not paywall content is a moral imperative.
Also, “Rurik” is an arrogant asshole whose opinions are often interesting and snark sometimes funny, but he’s still a jerk with a gigantic chip on his shoulder. Please don’t become a Rurik.
Wait, I found you. You are comped for life, so no worries.
Also, if you have a free sub of mine, I will comp you. Just send me an email at morgthorakATprotonDOTme. I need to look you up based on your email I believe.
Thanks! I will reply when I have a secure email, perhaps proton. I'm increasingly security conscious for all the obvious reasons but still using gmail. I know.. foolish..
Excellent points, I agree on the collapse of the empire.
You need not worry, I am not Rurik. 😂
I think the problem that Substack has is funnily enough the same as OnlyFans. There are people were who are massively famous who makes serious bucks from subscribers (not as much as the top whores on OF but still). Whilst the majority of writes like your average girl barely makes a money let alone a living on here.
I saw someone saying this model favours superstars and that’s very true. Subscribers like women will gravitate towards the cream of the cream. It’s intellectual hypergamy.
Actually, as an Elder woman, I like the unknown and hidden. The famous may have some good stuff but I also seek the gems hidden under the rocks and bushes. The top gets too loud for me, to some degree.
I agree and like all intellectual and artistic endeavours there will be the normie and the esotericist on the side of the audience and the grifter and the hermit on the side of the author. Unfortunately, being a hermit doesn’t pay very well.
Simon, this is unfortunately true...but I cannot take all that money with me when God calls me Home...so as long as I have the basics and can also encourage someone else, I can live with not having large amounts of money. That is just me, the hermit, though!
Fair point, though this does mean we writers have to keep working our craft, keep improving in order to get to the superstar status you just described all without quitting our day jobs.
Yes I totally agree. But the really of the fact is that the majority are never gonna make it. Like all artists ever, most will be penniless. Which is why I think this really should be a passion and a hobby.
But for more practical purposes. I think we need to start collectivising (lol). Which is why I really like that you can have other people post on your Substack. Eventually a Substack is going to be like a magazine, with a roster of authors.
This is where I think it will go if the payment model isn’t going to change.
Hmm, interesting kind of what I do over on my stack already then, I tend to gather all the fantasy-fiction writers and then post up a quick comment on their story and thus promote each and every one of my fellow writers.
I need to get of my lazy zoomer ass and actually do some work (very foreign to me I know). I have quite a few essays I feel like I could write.
WORK???? What is that??? (cue rueful laughter from a Boomer...) We all have our stacks of idea piles, waiting patiently for us to use them! Oh, dear, this thread could get long and I have to go...carry the torch, everyone! Thanks, Simon!
No worries! Nice little chat here Mrs (?) Williams
Yes I think that’s great tbh man! Keep it up.
Merci
Morgthorak, you’re an Undead after my own heart. Thank you so much for this post.
There are several writers here who I’d love to support because I enjoy reading their posts, but being retired as well as handicapped, my means are limited. My 3 special needs rescue cats come before my own needs.
I try and Re-Stack those posts as much as I can when I scroll through them, I often add a comment.
The post you are quoting feels like a vendetta against non-paying subscribers. I wonder what would happen if this group were to boycot such writers. Or even block.
I can truthfully say that I enjoy reading your posts, often saving them for a more quiet moment. Thank you !
Thanks so much for your kind words, Joyce! I do appreciate knowing that you like my content. That alone is motivation to keep writing, and comments are always appreciated too as they give me ideas sometimes for other articles, and I like seeing what people think. Sharing also helps a lot too, it gets newer writers more eyeballs and helps them to build a larger readership. Thanks for that!
Rurik has a...er...certain writing style that I think his audience understands. So it seems to work for him and them. I would not write in that tone or style about this topic, but that is me.
Thank you for being you!
🥰
As Cygnus X1 wrote… you are a good person 💙💫
Well, I'm very glad that you both wrote in the comments as I updated the article to include a section at the end. I should have included it by default but my mind was all over the place this afternoon with offline stuff.
👍🏻
But it's in there now so thank you both for prompting me.
I do hope the weather conditions have improved so you can do your delivery job again and that you are well 🙏💙
🙏💙
One additional option is for authors who sell books to buy one. Perhaps Kindle books on Amazon. A one off of $4.99 helps, especially if you leave a review.
I appreciate everyone who reads my Substack. It is gratifying that my words mean something for people. It is a wonderful surprise when people subscribe but I don't disdain those who read my work without paying.
As for the Substack model, I think what is needed is a micropayment model (and I am a global capital markets and fintech expert, in case you are wondering) so someone can pay 5 cents, 10 cents or whatever if they like an article. That is impossible with Stripe. We are building a micropayments solution which we will make available to Substack writers.
Pay per view. I bank money on substack and when I start to read a paid article there is a button. 5 cents, $1 or whatever rate the author sets. I click OK and get the rest. No sweat. I don't feel like my pocket is being picked by auto-renew subscriptions. I set my budget and canl read whoever I want.
I would be happy to pay for subscriptions through Substack but as far as I can tell the only payment option is Apple Pay, which I do not want to use. Is “Buy me a coffee” different? I have bought books through Substack affiliates before. That is a good option.