Shortly after WSJ.com came online, I signed up for a subscription and, except for one brief break, I've been a subscriber for nearly a dozen years. I find the online version easy to scan and search. It's available whenever I want it. Also, I don't have to toss out yet another daily paper. Oh, and one more thing, it was particularly handy when I doing a lot of business travel. I could read the Journal whenever and wherever.
OK, now that's nice, a good free newspaper instead of just the USA Today that's typically left outside my hotel room. Nevertheless, it's odd that the WSJ doesn't understand why most people, particularly business travelers, subscribe to the online version - so that they can read the paper online whenever, wherever.
3 comments:
This is actually a Marriott initiative, not a WSJ one. (I read a lot of hotel trade newsletters for work, and read something about this the other day.) Many people aren't requesting papers anymore, so Marriott is using this as an opportunity to give their customers a choice (USA Today or WSJ) and stand out from the competition. This should cut down on unused/unwanted papers in the hallway and maybe save Marriott money. This will likely negatively affect USA Today's circulation, as much of the numbers they report come from hotels; however the switch will probably HELP WSJ's. So even if you don't read it at the Marriott, they can add all the Marriott guests to their reported circ figures. Make sense?
Thanks for the clarification. A letter such as this is probably better than one from the WSJ saying, "Please help us inflate our print circulation numbers." or from Marriott saying, "Want a real newspaper for a change?"
It looks as though the WSJ plan is working. Their print circulation is the only one of the major dailies not to show a decline in the last six months: New FAS-FAX Shows (More) Steep Circulation Losses
Post a Comment