Is it really The End?

Posted Aug 1, 2002 1:24 UTC (Thu) by lonely_bear (subscriber, #2726) [Link]

I, for one, am willing to pay for the subscription.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 1:48 UTC (Thu) by mjstrom (subscriber, #1012) [Link]

And offering different levels of subscriptions might be good too. Such as the "buy this week's edition" via paypal for a small amount to X months to a year via credit card sort of thing.

And set realistic levels of funding. You guys do a good job and desire to make a decent living at it.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 2:07 UTC (Thu) by jcurious (guest, #2845) [Link]

Posted Aug 1, 2002 3:07 UTC (Thu) by showell (subscriber, #2929) [Link]

I want to further add that I se no reason the editorial staff should work for a minimum amount of money. Good people should be paid accordingly (I certainly do that in my company and I have some very good people).

I am willing to pay because you provide a service I find valuable. Please don't tempt me not to pay by releasing you weekly product too early. Releaseing it a few days late will only mean I will put off my reading for a few days. If you want subscription to work then do it properly. I would suggest restricting the weekly edition for a month

Posted Aug 1, 2002 7:43 UTC (Thu) by kay (subscriber, #1362) [Link]

Kay

Posted Aug 1, 2002 8:07 UTC (Thu) by Manny_Calavera (guest, #2846) [Link]

see you,
- Manny -

Posted Aug 1, 2002 10:42 UTC (Thu) by Felix.Braun (subscriber, #3032) [Link]

Posted Aug 1, 2002 12:06 UTC (Thu) by DaveK (subscriber, #2531) [Link]

Firstly, on the subject of information not being free if you impose subscription only access to the weekly edition. Thats not strictly true. The information remains free, it is still out there, most of it is in the daily updates (or newswire) pages which remain free.
What a subscription buys is not access to information, but access to the LWN team's expertise, their distillation of the news and what is important, and their editorial style. I'll pay for access to that.
It will always be possible to go and read (trudge through) Kernel Traffic, ZDNet, Freshmeat etc. but for a subscription LWN does this for you, and presents a summary of whats important. Consider it a kind of 'News Distribution' somewhat akin to a Linux distribution, you can build your own from scratch by trawling sourceforge, GNU and metalab, and figure out what is important, or you can subscribe to Slackware, SuSE, RedHat etc. have them do it for you and toss in a few goodies.
On the subject of releasing the weekly edition on Mondays, there is always the danger that for most people it will turn into 'LWN Weekly Edition Published Monday'. For subscription to be a real incentive it needs to be delayed until the following edition is out.
As a suggestion, perhaps the summary that is published on the daily page should contain a little more info about what is in the weekly edition, a sort of teaser to entice people to buy a subscription to read more.
Finally, in a previous comment, someone spoke of getting subscriptions towards $50/year, that is only $4/month or $1/week. A decent print publication (full of corporate advertising) with a simillar technical and editorial level costs at least twice that. I too believe a survey is required to determine how many people will subscribe, and the level of subscriptions people are prepared to pay.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 13:00 UTC (Thu) by seanpecor (guest, #2983) [Link]

Take advantage of the level of loyalty and enthusiasm expressed by Linux folks by creating an LWN Yellow Pages area. Make the LWN Yellow Pages area browseable by category. Nothing too vast, perhaps 20 categories each with 5-10 subcategories. Examples: I.T. Services -> Web Designers, Internet Service Providers -> Web Hosting. For each category, sell a SINGLE "Platinum" listing for (example) $500 per anuum. This would appear at the very top (bolded perhaps). Sell a SINGLE "Gold" listing for (example) $250 per anuum. This would appear as the second link. Then, sell as many "Silver" listings as you can for (example) $100 per anuum.

If you look at the NASCAR sponsorship model, people who are fans of a particular driver/car are MUCH more likely to purchase from their sponsors. Applying this to LWN one would assume that being a Platinum/Gold/Silver sponsor would affect the buying decisions of some folks and make the nominal sponsorship investment quite a bargain. I, for one, would spend at least $500 per anuum to have Marketingtool.com's Editor's Pick service recommended in a Web Designers category. I'm sure many other biz folks would feel the same.

A theoretical scenario might have you selling 20 Platinum sponsorships, 40 Gold sponsorships and 120 Silvers. That would imply an additional $32,000/yr in revenue using my above numbers.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 13:01 UTC (Thu) by jerome (guest, #2848) [Link]

Yes, I am recommending that you take something from me. Because I really want LWN to live on. This is a drastic measure. But if I do not feel I have to register, I will only do so to help you guys out. It will still be a donation, whatever freebies I get. And as you know, most people forget to donate.

Whatever you choose to do, I wish you the best of luck. Thanks!

Jerome

Posted Aug 1, 2002 13:31 UTC (Thu) by blah (guest, #3040) [Link]

Here's an idea, though: as well as having yearly subscriptions, allow people to pay weekly as well. Post the headlines of the Weekly Edition where all can see them (maybe with a brief synopsis) and allow the option of paying for that one edition (say $3-$5?).

Posted Aug 1, 2002 13:33 UTC (Thu) by xoddam (subscriber, #2322) [Link]

I *will* pay for a subscription if LWN goes that way. But I
fear it will put a ceiling on the number of readers of the
Weekly News. The updates are valuable in themselves, but
no more than a hundred other weblogs.

The Weekly News *with* its editorial content is what inspires
the loyalty of readers. Take that away from casual surfers
and Slashdot links, and no new readers will ever get hooked
waiting for Thursdays again. Requiring a login would be a
significant barrier even if there was no payment involved;
setting any price would immediately make LWN too expensive
for many potential readers -- the youngest, the users of
public computers in libraries and schools, those in the
poorest countries -- those who have the most to gain from
free software and the free information you have provided for
so long.

I had expected LWN to shrink somewhat after Tucows dropped
you, rather than to have expanded such that editorial and
administrative work fills five full-time positions. I
hate to see LWN's editors begging as you have done for
some months now (blind as we all were), but LWN will not
be the same publication if it turns to a pay-for-content
model.

Corporate sponsorship is of course the ideal way to fund
your work on LWN -- how many system administrators rely
on your security pages, how many software developers and
webmasters on your development pages, how many engineers
on the kernel commentaries? I hope you achieve great
success in this area. Barring that...

Many readers have shown their willingness to donate money
to help out with the publication of LWN, and I'm certain
that some (me, me!) would also gladly contribute their
own time and expertise.

As I understood it in the early days, Eklektix inc. was a
healthy Web services and consulting business, some of whose
staff took some time out to produce a little bulletin.

Eklektix hasn't advertised its services on LWN since the
Tucows acquisition (has it existed?), and there has been
but one position-wanted advertisement. Has no-one put any
work your way?

I am grateful to you and respectful of the amount of time
you have all *donated* to keep LWN alive. As you point out,
you're all experienced software engineers and you're all
perfectly capable of earning an excellent living, so it
has been a significant sacrifice of income -- and your
desired figure for employing yourselves as staff would
not bring an end to that. For LWN to return to being a
bulletin produced in the spare time from more lucrative
pursuits would not be a tragedy.

Closing the Linux Weekly News to the world *would*.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 13:47 UTC (Thu) by ajcpi (guest, #1122) [Link]

I like this sort of arrangement because it asserts that you should be paid for your efforts and creativity and contribution without creating an artificial monopoly on the content produced.

If this can be made successfull, LWN can perhaps sponsor other free content producers under similar arrangements. (for a (small? ) fee?)

Perhaps the authors of the article would be willing to help work out policies and arrangements.

Just an idea, and surely could use refinement.

a.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 13:59 UTC (Thu) by hubert.tonneau (guest, #3042) [Link]

Probably switching to once a month rate is necessary to achieve
such a goal since the most interesting things to deliver to the
reader are either about a young and inovative projects or a
comparison of several solutions, and both need some heavier
investigations to go behond repeating what everybody already knows.

(*) Nowdays, since advirtising is the main revenue of most journals,
they tend to speek fiew of really free issues, and on the other hand,
true users are most interested by these because they bring the
brightest futur.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 14:50 UTC (Thu) by pspinler (subscriber, #2922) [Link]

Instead, I advocate using a voluntary 'pledge' model similar to public radio or public tv, where subscribers are asked to pledge whatever amount they can afford. As far as I know, this funding model hasn't been used yet in an internet publication, but is proven to work for other media.

Here's how it can work: as another poster suggested in the last status update, put a "doom-o-meter" on the front page saying how long you can continue to operate. As long as the amount of money you have exceeds a set threshold, content continues to be free.

On the other hand, if the "doom-o-meter" falls below some set value, perhaps 1 or 2 months funds, then and only then redirect non-subscribers and non-current subscribers to a pledge page, and put a big 'help support LWN' ad in the middle of the content for the rest of us.

I think this is the best of all worlds, your readers know the health of the publication automatically, non-subscribers are chivvied up for cash whenever needed, subscribers only pay what they think your content is worth, and you continue to get the free, open, and widespread exposure needed to keep growing your readership and subscriber base. Again like public radio/tv, sponsoring companies can support you in the form of subscriber contribution matches, which can be used to encourage more subscribers.

Also, please support an option of contributing a smaller set amount every month, rather than one big chunk. I can much more easily afford $10 or $20 a month than $120 or $200 at a go.

-- Pat

Posted Aug 1, 2002 15:40 UTC (Thu) by scglwn (subscriber, #1245) [Link]

Posted Aug 1, 2002 16:34 UTC (Thu) by cpeterso (guest, #305) [Link]

Posted Aug 1, 2002 17:27 UTC (Thu) by dwheeler (guest, #1216) [Link]

First, delaying the release by only a few days isn't really a
sufficient return for my hard-earned money. I would, instead,
suggest delaying release of your material for one week
(when the new material surfaces). In many ways that
makes sense; you release publicly the "old" material when
there's something new. I _do_ think that eventual
public release is important -
it keeps LWN influentual even on non-subscribers, and it's
also important to YOU (the old articles act as advertisement,
showing potential readers what they're missing by not
subscribing), and it's important for the
community (so they can link and respond to your analysis).

Second, you need to reduce your costs. I respect your desire
to include the "Commerce" section, but Linux is so common
in the commercial world now that there really isn't a need
for this section; others are doing most of what that
section contains. Also, couldn't you do what you do with
4 people instead of 5? (I know, letting someone go is
terrible, but if it's done with grace, there's always the hope
that there will be enough money to re-hire later if it's
mutually agreed on... and it beats having EVERYONE go).
This is similar to
what happened in the software announcements; when LWN
started, it listed every new software release, but then
switched to a freshmeat.net link when that list became
a torrent. Things change; you need to identify the areas that
LWN is uniquely capable of doing, and CONCENTRATE on
just doing those things well. Handling subscriptions will
cost money, too, so even if you were sent your target amount,
there's a cost to handling checks, credit cards, software to
implement and track subscriptions, etc. DON'T try to
go to paper print.. that will just increase your costs, and
I doubt you'll increase your readership.

Third, I can't afford a big-buck subscription. $10-$20, yes,
$30 probably, but I can't justify $100. I've no idea what
number you're planning - and you probably don't either.
But I doubt your goal is 10 readers. It'd be far better to
have a lower rate and then work to gain the money through
volume - a lower rate means there will be more subscribers.
I don't know what the "sweet spot" is; perhaps you could
check on other magazines to help you figure out a process
for determining the best rate.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 17:31 UTC (Thu) by sharkey (guest, #3050) [Link]

The basic idea behind a subscription model is to motivate people who otherwise would not have paid to do so. This is a contrast to the donation model, which provides no direct incentive for individuals to contribute funds, other than the general knowledge that if enough people don't donate, services will stop.

It seems to me that you have reached the conclusion that a subscription model might be a practical way to extract funds from readers because readers have just voluntarily donated a relatively large sum of money. This is ass backwards if anything is.

What's needed for the donation model to work is communication. If you read over the posts from last week's announcement, one motif you see over and over again is "we didn't know things were this bad". In order for the donation model to work, it's necessary to communicate how much is needed and how much has been contributed. If this information isn't shared, then potential donors will have no clue whether or not their contribution will make a difference. Last Thursday you made your dire straights public knowledge, and the money started rolling in.

To conclude from that that you need to introduce a subscription model is mind boggling.

Another thing that needs to be considered is the nature of the LWN readership. If you believe Eric Raymond, open source hackers operate in a gift economy. Status is achieved through voluntary giving. It could be that a large number of current donors may walk away if a subscription model is imposed. I've made a donation myself, and I was glad to do so. I'd like to donate more in the future. I have zero interest in purchasing a subscription. It doesn't fit with the relationship I'd like to have with this site or Linux software in general. It's the wrong vibe.

I encourage you to keep trying, but don't start locking away content just when your readers have come forward to show that they can provide support voluntarily.

If you feel the need to provide more incentives, then sell $50 coffe mugs and $75 tote bags the way PBS/NPR does. Don't lock down the site to only paying members, even if it is for just a few days after a new issue is released.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 17:54 UTC (Thu) by maphew (guest, #1147) [Link]

- In the absence of a large corporate sponsor, and none have stepped up to the plate since you first started talking about the financial problems some months ago, I think we all agree some sort of subscription model is a must.

- Restricting content will change the nature of LWN. That is a given. The question is what changes can you, and we, live with happily.

- For subscribers, consider changing to Linux Monthly News, with longer articles. (e.g. spend 2 weeks programming for $$$ and 2 weeks writing LWN for <$)

- The free access edition should be at least one, maybe two, issues behind the current paid for edition (only one if LWN is monthly). A few days will not be enough.

+ crazy idea: Convince Google to buy a subscription so that search results can point to articles which have not yet "ripened" to free public access.

- Allow editions to be purchased individually like newspapers. This will necessitate some sort of teaser summary articles "In this edition of LWN we cover ...."

- Leave a tip jar out on the counter

- I personally find the articles and editorials the most important part of LWN, announcements etc. are available in many other places (and it is very convenient to have them on LWN too).

- Whatever the setup, no part of LWN should ever be permanently unavailable to the anonymous and non paying public.

- Sadly, a staff member or two leaving for other hunting grounds is probably a necessity, at least for ahwile.

Free software *users* (which includes myself) need to understand that there really is no such thing as a free lunch. If we haven't paid anything so far it is because someone else has picked up the cheque already. Our community as a whole needs to come to grips with this reality and respond to it. This is a perfect opportunity to start.

My 2 canadian cents.

-matt

Posted Aug 1, 2002 18:26 UTC (Thu) by cdurst (guest, #2953) [Link]

I have always loved LWN and read it religiously. I donated $100 as soon as I read that LWN was in danger of stopping. (I don't really care whether that gets applied toward my subscription, I considered it a payment I owed for the last several years.)

My Suggestion:
You could put something like a "pledge thermomitor" in the upper left corner of your pages that indicates whether you're operating in the green or the red. When it drops down into the red (and perhaps begins flashing), it would encourage more people to click it and donate.

Alternatively, I suppose you could borrow another idea from public broadcasting and occasionally put a lot of annoying "pledge break" pages in your server that would be turned off for anyone who subscribed/donated.

Anyway, I hope you folks can keep publishing LWN for a long time to come.
Good luck!

Posted Aug 1, 2002 18:39 UTC (Thu) by x_nc (guest, #2633) [Link]

Maybe if I donate Jonathan will publish my letters-to-the-editor again.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 18:44 UTC (Thu) by scripter (subscriber, #2654) [Link]

2. I read LWN from a variety of locations. Logging in would be a bit inconvenient, but I could handle it.

3. The one-week delay for non-subscribers sounds extremely reasonable. I also agree with the previous comment about the power of habit -- let people read on Thursdays. A delay of anything other than a multiple of seven days would be counter-productive.

4. Once a month, make an issue free. Make it the first Thursday of each month. Newcomers will get to sample the content while it is "fresh", and then they will be more likely to subscribe.

5. Maybe the fund drive has merit. Stop producing LWN until neccessary funds are available. Normally I *HATE* fund drives. But I do contribute to my local radio station. During the fund drives, I tune to a different radio station.

6. Doing a giant monthly edition is a *TERRIBLE* idea. I like weekly editions. Monthly news it too much out-of-date. LWN is known as *weekly* news, not Linux-Monthly-News. I would drop LWN if it became a monthly publication.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 19:14 UTC (Thu) by rmassa (guest, #2984) [Link]

Posted Aug 1, 2002 19:19 UTC (Thu) by frazier (guest, #3060) [Link]

1. Delay release the weekly news by two weeks or one week (exactly) to the public. Why?
   • It encourages subscriptions as a value-added proposition.
   • People are creatures of habit, and there is value on having the weekly news come out on the same day whether there's a subscription or not. The Monday public release seems like an insufficient delay of time plus it would involve change for people when they become subscribers. Keep the Thursday morning element active but do not provide the most current edition to the public.
   • It is far easier to get the average employer to sign off on a 'subscription' expense than a donation.
   • The weekly edition maintains worth and exposure to non-subscribers with a two week delay, so you'll still be able to attract new readers while maintaing added value for subscribers.
2. Consider reducing the staff by a person, at least temporarily. Yes, there will be a quality hit to LWN and it's hard to let good people go, but it will keep expenses more in line. Corbet must remain on staff!
3. Merchandising!: Sell something like this mock-up of an LWN T-shirt for too much money ($20) with profits going back to LWN.
4. No print edition. Automating a PDF version for paper-loving subscribers to print for themselves might be a good idea and perhaps an additional value added service. Printed paper editions will likely raise overhead beyond the gain from added subscribers.
5. Allow for people to 'over pay' for subscriptions. Set a floor of $52 or $60 a year but allow people to spend more per year if they desire. Allowing for quarterly subscriptions would also be nice, and should cost more per time unit (maybe $18 or $20 a quarter). No trial subscriptions. The 2 week old edition plas back issues should sufficiently prove worth.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 19:33 UTC (Thu) by pm101 (guest, #3011) [Link]

There's two approaches to reaching profitability:
* Increase income
* Cut costs

We've addressed the former in pretty exhaustive detail, but I think LWN
may want to eventually do both. The publication is gold, and I'd rather
have a little less gold than none at all.

I wouldn't fire anyone, but if one or two of the non-Corbet people get a
better job offer at some point, it might make sense for them to take the
job and leave a shorter publication behind. I would prefer not to
completely lose any of the first five sections, but scaling back the
length of LWN might make sense. Cut out Linux-in-Business, shorten
Linux-in-the-news to maybe links to three articles a week, and cut the
Distributions and Development sections in half.

If you want to add anything, maybe reinstate a two-paragraph version of
on-the-desktop, but otherwise I wouldn't add anything that involves any
amount of labor to sustain.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 22:36 UTC (Thu) by carlos (guest, #3066) [Link]

1) Show in a very visible place, the top 5 contributors of the month, the top 5
contributors of the week and the the top 5 contributors of the day. Add links to lists
of all contributors.

2) Show in a very visible place, how much money is still missing to reach the target
for the current month. The daily updated raised money would show the grand total,
including the donated and advertising money. So people can see: "mmm, the target is
US$ 15,000, today is already 15th and these guys only got 5,000 so far. Let's
contribute to them". or: "This month people contributed already 20,000, and there's
still a week to go, let's save my contribution for the next month".

This way, friends of LWN (and this might apply in the future to other Linux sites)
would know exactly how things are, in a open way, automatically updated every day.
And they can help, particularly when money is more hardly needed, with the little but
important reward of seeing her/his name in the thank you board of the month, of the
week, of the day.

I am not sure if the amount of money raised this way would be enough, of course, but
I think it would be worth to try.

Posted Aug 1, 2002 23:28 UTC (Thu) by DaveK (subscriber, #2531) [Link]

A lot of people harp on about communism in the free software community, and come out with a lot of rubbish, and portray communism and socialism in a very negative light. Communism in its true form, like most socialist veins, is about the workers getting paid a fair due for the work they do, and not being exploited by their paymasters. In a slightly deeper sense it achieves this by requiring that the means of prduction be controlled by the workers.
Expanding this to LWN requires the readers to pay a fair due to the LWN staff for their time and expertise, call it a tax, a subscription or a contribution. These people need to be paid. Anything else could be considered exploitation.
How many readers out there would be happy if their employer decided to stop charging for their goods/services, and decided to let their customers have it for free, only paying their staff should a customer decide to generously contribute. Very few I think. Freeloaders would abound.
In a socialist system, subscribers would have a say, a vote, over what content LWN would carry, its tyle etc. In a capitalist system they would merely stop subscibing if it didn't carry what they want.
If a subscription based LWN is to be successful, I believe it needs to be open to the community about roughly what its costs are, roughly how much it is making from subscriptions, donations etc. and where that money is going.
I think most people will be much happier paying a subscription if they understand that it is going to cover a reasonable wage, healthcare and pension for the LWN team members who produce the great content that IS LWN, rather than to line some fat cats or shareholders pockets.
As for not attracting potential new readers if a subscription system is imposed, It needs to be remembered that non-subscribers won't be cut off from all content as many other sites do, merely prevented from acessing the most recent stuff if the most popular options(s) are followed. They can clearly see what the site is about, what its standards, attitudes and quality are. They have a choice to either pay for the most up to date stuff, or be patient.
As for levels of subscription, perhaps LWN should offer various lengths of subscription, say annual, quarterly, monthly and one-off, with up front or monthly payment options. The longer term ones should be cheaper per issue then the shorter ones since this will allow LWN to plan more for the future knowing that they have longer term support, and encourage people to subscribe for a longer period.

Posted Aug 2, 2002 5:00 UTC (Fri) by Inoshiro (guest, #3070) [Link]

-=-=-=-=-

Hi, guys. I've read your site for a long time, and I've donated. However, I think 3,000$ USD per month per person is really, really high. I do agree with making money with what you know, but I don't agree with your salaries. I will not be donating any more money to you partially because I make 137$ USD a week, and require all my money to live, partially because I think you could get by with 1,000$ a month salary and be reasonable).

With 25,000, you are able to run for 1.6666(..) months. A site like Kuro5hin can run for 6 months. I could live for a little over a year in comparative luxury.

If the money is too low, do what I do. Have a Real Job (TM) and continue to do LWN as a hobby. It can pay like no other hobby does, and it does well to itself. In the future, when there is a large enough subscription base that even your most pesimistic numbers give you more money than you know how to spend, that might be a good time to switch to living off of LWN.

I'm not saying don't make money, and I'm not saying that I reject you because you want to make money, but I question your motives if you work on LWN only for money. Job loyalty and loyalty to subscribers/readers is something I consider important from the people behind a site I read.

If this grew out of a hobby, why is it so hard to have it go back to hobby status (not entirely true as you could still make money, just not boatloads of it, on the side)?

Posted Aug 2, 2002 9:12 UTC (Fri) by someguy (guest, #3079) [Link]

At first, sections may be selled separetely. There are different people, which are interested in different areas. In this case the section should be worthy itself, without others part of lwn, of course.

At second, most valuable segment seems to be in the bussiness area (embedded, servers, corporative desktop and finance news). So, it may be reasonable to seek more bussiness subscribers, then you have already. And make better service for them. Advertisment guys likes rich men too. Here, in Russia, only bussiness news are finance healthy in internet.

Thanks for your work. Glad to see you still have chances to continue.

Posted Aug 2, 2002 16:45 UTC (Fri) by nraynaud (guest, #532) [Link]

Just a reminder.

Posted Aug 6, 2002 9:08 UTC (Tue) by balbir-_singh (guest, #887) [Link]

I think LWN.NET should look at corporates spending billions of dollars on
Linux. Most of the visitors to lwn.net are people who make a decent of money and I am sure the organizations they work for will be willing to sponsor them to ACM/IEEE, etc. Why not use that money to join LWN?

I am all for the subscription model but if it comes with support. I would like my questions answered. I think big corporations can get corporate subscriptions and pledge support for lwn. Lwn has done a great job till date. One model to serve many companies that require information that is relevant to them. They should be able to get a customized newsletter.

As far as paying the journalists is concerned, I think they definitely deserve more than they get right now. Working for free is not practical, reality catches up sooner or later.

Balbir

Posted Aug 6, 2002 21:46 UTC (Tue) by taruntius (guest, #1140) [Link]

In short, LWN saves me uncountable hours (hours which I don't have) in finding, collecting, and analyzing that information for myself. LWN allows me to be a decent sysadmin for the web/mail site I run without turning that into a second full-time job. I would simply be unable to run my site competently without LWN because I don't have time to do the research that would otherwise involve for myself. It should come as no surprise that I'm willing to pay for that value.

I think you have the right idea in charging for the current weekly edition while allowing the previous weeks' editions to become free. That's a good model that works well for people who have a serious need to be ultra-current on the news as well as people who are willing to trade some extra time for reduced cost.

Clearly, LWN needs to find the point on the "price-vs-num_subscribers" curve which maximizes your revenue. I fully agree with everyone who says you should conduct a survey first, and I think it needs to be exactly one question long: "What do you think is a _fair_ price for a 1-year LWN subscription?" Take a histogram of the responses and you'll have a pretty good idea what your subscription price should be, and based on that, whether you also need to sell sponsorships, etc.