Apple News+ publishers see subscriber benefits amid low revenue
Apple News+ is still not providing enough revenue to publishers, a report claims, but the platform is still assisting content producers in extending the reach of publications.
Over the nine months of the existence of Apple News, numerous reports have suggested publishers are unhappy with its ability to generate revenue. As the end of the year approaches, yet another report offers a similar view, with the service only providing modest income and relatively little in the way of benefit to publishers.
An unidentified magazine executive speaking to Digiday claims "We're happy to be on there because it's another way to increase subscription revenue, but not like it's a huge boon for our business or anything like that. It's not really relevant."
That particular publication is claiming that the $20,000 per month that it earns isn't enough. But, the gain in subscriptions is apparently just enough to keep the firm sufficiently interested in renewing its contract.
The level of success in outreach is where another publisher, Essence, is seeing positive results, with it "encouraged" by how much it has increased subscriptions since joining. The publisher added Apple News+ was also beneficial in helping grow Essence's audience in territories outside the United States.
How publications are presented to subscribers has split opinions, with the unnamed publisher suggesting it was hard to distinguish magazines between properties on the service. Essence chief content and creative officer MoAna Luu offered her magazine appears "as if it were a native Essence property."
Apple's overall control over the service is a problem to the unnamed publisher, specifically Apple's ability to serve advertising with third-party ad tracking. A way to encourage Apple News+ customers to subscribe directly is sought by the publisher -- but is unlikely to occur anytime soon.
The primary concern for the publisher is how it could make money via new revenue streams on the service, and it would likely renew its contract for another year.
Throughout 2019, multiple reports have claimed that Apple News and Apple News+ are less than stellar for publishers in terms of performance. Before the launch of Apple News+, one February report indicated publishers were seeing low revenues in part due to a minimal number of ads shown alongside content.
In April, Apple was accused of giving unequal aid to participating Apple News+ publishers, with most of its assistance provided to larger publishers. In June, Apple apparently sought to refine how Apple News+ operated, following complaints from publishers over the service failing to meet promises of increased revenue.
By August, some publishers in Europe were seeing improvements in Apple News revenue, despite Apple News+ not being made available in most of the markets. Some publications saw ad impressions for April to June triple with revenue doubling, seemingly suggesting Apple's changes were working.
However, notable names in publishing like Conde Nast are still waiting for Apple News+ to be a significant earner. Speaking in November, Conde Nast CEO Roger Lynch complained the publications saw an initial burst of new subscribers, but interest failed to continue.
"I hope Apple News+ is wildly successful," Lynch said at the time, "[However] I think the jury is out."
Over the nine months of the existence of Apple News, numerous reports have suggested publishers are unhappy with its ability to generate revenue. As the end of the year approaches, yet another report offers a similar view, with the service only providing modest income and relatively little in the way of benefit to publishers.
An unidentified magazine executive speaking to Digiday claims "We're happy to be on there because it's another way to increase subscription revenue, but not like it's a huge boon for our business or anything like that. It's not really relevant."
That particular publication is claiming that the $20,000 per month that it earns isn't enough. But, the gain in subscriptions is apparently just enough to keep the firm sufficiently interested in renewing its contract.
The level of success in outreach is where another publisher, Essence, is seeing positive results, with it "encouraged" by how much it has increased subscriptions since joining. The publisher added Apple News+ was also beneficial in helping grow Essence's audience in territories outside the United States.
How publications are presented to subscribers has split opinions, with the unnamed publisher suggesting it was hard to distinguish magazines between properties on the service. Essence chief content and creative officer MoAna Luu offered her magazine appears "as if it were a native Essence property."
Apple's overall control over the service is a problem to the unnamed publisher, specifically Apple's ability to serve advertising with third-party ad tracking. A way to encourage Apple News+ customers to subscribe directly is sought by the publisher -- but is unlikely to occur anytime soon.
The primary concern for the publisher is how it could make money via new revenue streams on the service, and it would likely renew its contract for another year.
Throughout 2019, multiple reports have claimed that Apple News and Apple News+ are less than stellar for publishers in terms of performance. Before the launch of Apple News+, one February report indicated publishers were seeing low revenues in part due to a minimal number of ads shown alongside content.
In April, Apple was accused of giving unequal aid to participating Apple News+ publishers, with most of its assistance provided to larger publishers. In June, Apple apparently sought to refine how Apple News+ operated, following complaints from publishers over the service failing to meet promises of increased revenue.
By August, some publishers in Europe were seeing improvements in Apple News revenue, despite Apple News+ not being made available in most of the markets. Some publications saw ad impressions for April to June triple with revenue doubling, seemingly suggesting Apple's changes were working.
However, notable names in publishing like Conde Nast are still waiting for Apple News+ to be a significant earner. Speaking in November, Conde Nast CEO Roger Lynch complained the publications saw an initial burst of new subscribers, but interest failed to continue.
"I hope Apple News+ is wildly successful," Lynch said at the time, "[However] I think the jury is out."
Comments
I prefer the more curated experience of News, and only rarely do I stop and see an article that's only available in News+ that I want to read.
Most of the problems would be solved if Apple would simply do an Apple "Prime" subscription service with an Apple Music, TV, News, Arcade and iCloud storage bundle. Be glad to pay, say, $199 a year for it.
In addition, features that were once part of a magazine are no longer there. As an example, there was a feature for The New Yorker that allowed a user to "Read the cartoons first". That's now gone. In other words, the new News app is less functional and harder to use and navigate than Texture was prior to Apple closing it.
The failure of News to catch on with a large audience will stay that way until Apple realizes that it's not always the best arbiter of what constitutes a good UI and what doesn't. It may be time for them to hold a marketing session to find out what real subscribers want, not the engineering department's idea of a magazine app.
I would jump on an all in one subscription like you mention..
’News+’ better not (being a paid subscription)
They’re mashed together in this article, just like in the News App...which is the whole problem.
The Apple News thing (including the stocks app) points to stories that are paywalled and it also includes sources that I have no confidence in as reliable or unbiased. There is a big difference between opinion on the editorial page and when it guides the selection, tone and content of what is supposed to be straight reporting. I like reading opinion pieces from a spectrum of political viewpoints from Conservative to Liberal, but do not want opinion shaded news reporting.
If it is owned/controlled by the Murdochs, I have no confidence in it as factual and unbiased.
I also use Flipboard, but I'm getting rather put off by the toxic, troll-filled commentary, and overly hyperbolic and partizan user generated feeds that get dropped on me. Crowd sourced news keeps ending up as an echo chamber of turds.
That some publishers are not on board with the format and force you to page through their magazines is unwise. But Apple isn’t forcing them to do it.
I've subscribed from day one. It's worth every penny.
If Apple is able to roll it out in its secondary and tertiary markets, they will get more subscribers.
Sometimes I wonder if the issue is with the content providers, who want to geo-fence their content, or whether it is an issue of news and content being more localised, as opposed to music, which is more universal.
While I would love to get access to paid sources like the WSJ or Bloomberg, I cannot justify their exorbitant subscription prices. I thought News+ might help alleviate that problem but it hasn't done much. So, I stick to my free, web based sources.
I'm hoping News+ will up its game - but I'm not holding my breath for it to happen.