Ever wish you could easily see every post a particular CT author has contributed? Me neither. But capitalism is all about the creation of new needs in the mind of the consumer so that afterwards market researchers can give PowerPoint presentations saying this new feature “satisfied a clear demand amongst CT customers.” So now, over there in the left sidebar, you can just click the ∞ symbol next to each contributor’s name to see a list of the titles of all their posts from newest to oldest.
In phase two of the rollout of this technology, we will charge a $10/month subscription fee to users. We are convinced this is an exciting and viable business model and that the world is ready for pay-to-list services of this sort, particularly given that CT is the dominant player in the burgeoning market for eclectic left-leaning quasi-academic online commentary. Prospective investors should see Confidential IPO Memos #7 (“Yglesias Graduates, Sells Out”), #15 (“Semi-Daily Journal Accounting Scandal Ready To Break”) and #27 (“Marshall‘s Head Falls Off When Hand Is Removed“).
{ 13 comments }
Gerry Hyde 08.26.03 at 10:43 am
Kieran,
I want to pay $20/month is possible. Also, how much for an evening of cocktails and oysters in Atlantic City with my favourite CT blogger? Is it true that your worn-once socks are now retailing for forty dollars a pair on ebay? Relatedly, I see Colin Farrell as you in “Crooked Timber: Cradle of the Black Pearl (Reloaded)”, altough others may wish to differ. Maria?
Kieran Healy 08.26.03 at 10:50 am
Also, how much for an evening of cocktails and oysters in Atlantic City with my favourite CT blogger?
Depends on the blogger. My time is of course very valuable, but less popular CT contributors may vary — e.g., I hear Henry is anyone’s for a ham sandwich and a copy of the current issue of the American Political Science Review.
Is it true that your worn-once socks are now retailing for forty dollars a pair on ebay?
Possibly, possibly. Twice-worn pairs go for eighty dollars.
Maria 08.26.03 at 1:51 pm
Only if Janeane Garofolo plays me.
BTW it’s laundry day in mine this Saturday. best offer gets the lot.
Jacob T. Levy 08.26.03 at 4:04 pm
Heh. Think we can work out some kind of barter or receiprocation deal?
Ophelia Benson 08.26.03 at 6:58 pm
‘CT is the dominant player in the burgeoning market for eclectic left-leaning quasi-academic online commentary.’
Oh really?! Is that so! Dream on, CT. What is B&W, chopped liver?
(You get a prize [thrice-worn socks?] if you understand the chopped liver idiom, because my colleague the Self-elected Hippest Man in the UK was baffled by it.)
brian burgess 08.27.03 at 1:00 am
$10/month to access the site? Isn’t that a bit steep? It’s more than almost all magazine subscriptions I can think of, even subscriptions that include access to the content (and additional contents, even blogs) on the web.
I’m all for supporting websites that provide value (I’ve contributed to two blogs to date) but $120 seems a bit rich.
sidereal 08.27.03 at 6:59 am
I’m with brian. Although I think your value proposition merits a long look, I’m not entirely convinced it falls within your sweet spot, and it may not take full advantage of the available synergies.
gerry hyde 08.27.03 at 9:40 am
Ophelia, if understanding the “chopped liver idiom” is as simple as recognising (talentless hack) Eminem’s recent appropriation of stereotyped Ashkenasim argot, then I would very much like to claim those thrice-worn socks. Although, actually, I don’t want to get a reputation for that sort of thing, not under this name anyway, so, um, what are we talking about anyway? Oh, I like butterfliesandwheels a whole bunch and while I wouldn’t like to make a call between it and CT, I would certainly recommend both above, say, a back wax or an evening with Elton John.
epistole 08.27.03 at 9:50 am
I have to say that this is the best leveraging of impacted channelized partners I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen a lot of them.
Now, about this $10/month thing. I can get this guy for a bottle of Mad Dog 20/20 and a little sweet talk about a Schlafly/Limbaugh/Goldberg threesome, so I’m having trouble seeing where I should pay you more than the $1.50 or so the MD costs me.
I’m open to negotiation, though. Maybe if you throw in the disembodied head of Ann Coulter, because, really, who WOULDN’T want a disembodied head of Ann Coulter?
(As long as it doesn’t speak)
Heh, mother<CENSORED>.
Barry Ritholtz 08.27.03 at 12:44 pm
This note is to epistole:
A request: There are some people who engage in such ridiculous polemics, spew crass vitriol, and utter any venomous thoughts they can muster for the sole purpose of generating publicity to hawk whatever they happen to be whoring at that moment.
By merely mentioning their name, you give them essence and strength. (The Shrill Blonde Harpy you mentioned by name is a textbook example).
They utter outrageous comments (such as: “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity” ) simply to generate publicity and hence increase book sales.
They are, in a word, whores.
I say, thwart their evil plan. As in the movie BeetleJuice: so long as you don’t speak their name, they cannot appear or gain power.
If you refrain from speaking that which should never be uttered aloud, you will have earned the undying gratitude of the universe, and sentient creatures everywhere
Rant continues here . . . . http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/2003/08/shrill_blonde_h.html
epistole 08.27.03 at 6:07 pm
Well, maybe, but I have the strength of ten because my heart is pure.
Ophelia Benson 08.27.03 at 6:49 pm
Okay Gerry, the socks are yours, reputation notwithstanding. Of course the chopped liver question seems to me as transparent as a window, but not everyone agrees. I’m delighted you like B and W; I agree that both it and CT are much more fun than a back wax – which would have been as opaque a cultural reference to me as whatamIchoppedliver is to other people, had I not seen a glimpse of a back wax in a trailer for ‘Queer Eye for the Straight Guy’ the other day. But now I have that reference up to date; what a relief. Clearly ‘Queer Eye’ is going to be a terrific resource for those of us who are bad about Keeping Up with what’s New and Hot.
Nabakov 08.28.03 at 3:58 am
Pleased to to see CT’s new value-adding strategies are generating a strong market buzz, especially in merchandising spinoffs like foot apparel and dress advice for academics- although I think online delivery of back waxes may be problematic.
Anyway looking forward to The CT Bumper Book of Cocktail Recipes (“Shivered Not Shaken” perhaps?).
Comments on this entry are closed.