June 08, 2004

Analysis Of Funding Responses In Reader Survey

Since the entire point of running our recent reader survey was to get a sense of the possibilties in terms of reader contributions to the funding of this site (since our current funding expires in November of this year), we should probably take a specific look at the most relevant question and its responses.

Of the 173 overall respondents 80 gave indications of what they would be willing to contribute on a monthly basis.

  • 33 respondents said they would be willing to contribute $10/month -- making the total for this level of support $330.
  • 8 respondents said they would be willing to contribute $15/month -- making the total for this level of support $120.
  • 4 respondents said they would be willing to contribute $20/month -- making the total for this level of support $80.
  • 2 respondents said they would be willing to contribute $25/month -- making the total for this level of support $50.
  • 1 respondent said they would be willing to contribute $50/month -- making the total for this level of support, well, $50.
  • No respondents said they would be willing to contribute $100/month.
  • 32 respondents chose the "other" response. Of these, 17 said they would be willing to contribute $5/month -- making the total for that level of support $85.

(The remaining 15 "other" respondents answered with various other amounts or ranges -- e.g. $1-5, or $6.54, or $15-20 per year.)

Leaving aside those divergent 15 responses, and totalling up the clearly-indicated amounts ranging from $5 to $50 every month, we get a grand monthly total of $715. Currently, we operate on around $1000/month, although that involves a regular process of bill juggling various items from one month to another (or, sometimes, still another).

Nonetheless (understanding that this remains, for the moment, hypothetical), if every person who said they would contribute on a monthly basis did so, and did so at the level they indicated, we would have nearly three-fourths of our current funding replaced. In addition, the remaining balance up to the current level might be contributed by our family, who also would like to assist this site's continued existence.

So in addition to having the context for discussion provided by the November deadline, we also now have an additional context in the expressions of potential monthly support found in the reader survey.

One thing we would like to ask to those of our readers who are able and willing to go the monthly contribution route is for those of them who might be further willing and able to begin doing so in advance of the November deadline to do so.

This would accomplish at least two things: First, it would give us all a sense, over the months leading to the deadline, of who truly is able to contribute on a monthly basis and who isn't, so that we can look at a firmer set of numbers heading into November.

Second, excepting whatever we might need to pull from this additional income in order to address the usual bill juggling in the meantime, starting such contributions early might allow us to get at least a slight jumpstart on the post-November period by accumulating some padding in the bank account.

But beyond all of these specifics from us, consider this post to also be the official re-opening of the funding conversation, now that you all have the same data in front of you that we do.

Posted at 04:46 PM | PermalinkComments (16) | TrackBacks (0)
More In Meta-Communique

« Previous Next »

Comments (16)

  1. cheap on 08 Jun 2004

    I don't want to pay $50 if someone else is paying $5. The Washington Post doesn't differentiate subscribers- they charge the same for their product regardless of buyer.

  2. The One True b!X on 08 Jun 2004

    Heh, so don't. None of this is some sort of requirement -- it's not like I'm lbocking any content based upon what someone does or does not contribute.

    At the same time, one-size-fits-all pricing is old school mass market stuff. The premise here is that different people can see the same "products" as having different value.

    People can take that or leave it, obviously. As I said, there's no "fixed" price to anything here.

  3. The One True b!X on 08 Jun 2004

    Then again, I happen to know who answered $50/month, and it wasn't you, so what's your point? ;)

  4. PDX Reporter on 08 Jun 2004

    Is Neil Goldschmidt a regular reader b!X, or maybe Randy Leonard is a big spender?

  5. Jim Clay on 08 Jun 2004

    At the same time, one-size-fits-all pricing is old school mass market stuff.

    Part of what I like about the Communique is that it previews new thinking: everything from your content, to your principles, to your proposals for generating revenue. I think this is why you have a hope for creating a sustaining contributor/reader base. I've had enough of old school. You go girl!

  6. Jerry on 08 Jun 2004

    I wasn't able to fill out your survey -- didn't want to play nice with Linux - but you can count me in for at least $5/month (unemployed for 3 years doesn't leave much extra spending money).

    The Communique is making an important contribution to the Portland scene and I'd hate to see it go.

  7. Lynn Siprelle on 08 Jun 2004

    So ad-buying: good for you or bad for you? I know they take a piece off the top.

  8. The One True b!X on 08 Jun 2004

    No, ad buying is perfectly fine. I just wasn't including that in the above calcuations. The amount they take off the top isn't significant enough to make ads not worthwhile if that's how people want to go.

    Of course, I can only display six ads at any given time, I think.

  9. Isaac Laquedem on 08 Jun 2004

    For various reasons, I tend not to contribute money in general by check, but if you received my previous contribution, then I'll send you some more.

  10. Isaac Laquedem on 08 Jun 2004

    I should have added, I'll send you some more, using the same old-fashioned method of delivery.

  11. The One True b!X on 08 Jun 2004

    I did. Hell, this must mean I didn't tell you that to begin with.

    Time to start putting big post-it reminders all over my desk if I'm going to be doing the contribution thing, I guess.

  12. Isaac Laquedem on 09 Jun 2004

    A little more is on its way, then.

  13. JJ on 09 Jun 2004

    two points:

    1. the NYT *DOES* charge differently based upon its subscribership. If you buy it in a box, you will pay more than if you have a subscription. And try buying it out here! Yowza.

    2. where do we send our checks to? The address on the homepage is a good addy for receiving checks?

    JJ

  14. The One True b!X on 09 Jun 2004

    That snail mail address in the left-hand sidebar is a box address, so yes that's usable.

  15. holt on 10 Jun 2004

    and if we were in the mind to send a check, to whom does it pay to the order of...(pen poised above said line)?

  16. The One True b!X on 10 Jun 2004

    Oh, heh. Well, if you scroll to the bottom of the left-hand sidebar, under "Copyright," the name-by-birth of The One True b!X shall be revealed.