Q3: I checked WotW/Y, but would have also checked brand-name stories and linkstack.
Q6: I've always had an interest in marketing, but I enjoy ALL of the choices. As a former (small-time) copy editor, just about anything to do with words is in my wheelhouse.
I actually hate video and was hoping no one would request it. I may occasionally record a post for accessibility reasons — I tried it once and enjoyed it — but I promise not to go Full Podcast.
I’m interested in everything, and not “disinterested” in anything you’ve posted. I find it all really compelling. So I skipped the poll on those. As for paid subscriptions, I just started reading you a few days ago, thanks to Kim France. I have more complicated answer to the paid sub thing: One, I trade subs with other f/t writers, those of us in the same boat. Second, I do have a budget for all my “Subscriptions” on everything, every platform, and I rotate them. I enjoy somebody for awhile, and then do a carousel switch, so to speak. I’m probably unusual in that like you, I read and curate and critique for a living, so my reading pile is huge. Wish I could afford it all. I think you should charge the going rate for top quality material, 7 or 8 a month, and then the usual discounts for annual and founder’s fees. Make the “founder” rate just a tiny bit more than the annual rate, you’ll find people go for it. There’s so much more to say about all this, but I hear ya. It’s a science and an art to cultivate paid subscriptions when you’re not a household name.
Thanks for that thoughtful and useful comment, Susie (and thanks for subscribing!).
Maybe it's a form of imposter syndrome, but I don't think I have enough subscribers -- only 2,300, plus another 2,000 or so "followers" -- to make the math work. Only 44 of those readers, about 1 percent, have made subscription pledges. I suspect I'd *lose* subscribers if I switched on payments. For now I'm eking out a tiny income from occasional appeals to Buy Me a Coffee.
Re: paying for (rather than "subsidizing" your writing - a locution I despise, as you may not be doing this now to pay bills but you are a pro). I pay for very little on Substack because my funds are not limitless and its subscription model is insane IMO--each costs more than a heavily discounted New Yorker with all its archives or half of Apple News or 2/3 of Puck. So I go for those where I really need some piece of info that's firmly behind a paywall or that I need periodically for professional reasons. And when I know the writer it feels awful to turn a sub on and off. So that's the hesitation. It doesn't mean I don't think you're a great writer. In a flush year or when I retire I might do a lifetime subscription, as Susie Bright suggested. That's a really good idea.
But now I'm thinking about it, why don't you turn on the payment option NOW and make one option free and then occasionally throw in a paywalled post, and see what happens? That's where I'd myself thinking - oh gosh maybe I DO want to pay! And for early adopters like me you could offer a discount or life subscription in your first year of doing this.
I'll think about your suggestion. Identifying early adopters wouldn't be easy, though, and I'm not sure I want to turn long-standing acquaintances into revenue streams. And the whole bookkeeping aspect to subscriptions seems very un-fun. Still -- I appreciate your support and ideas! Maybe when I reach 5,000 aggregate audience (subscribers + followers) I'll switch payments on. I'm getting close to that target.
Yes navigating the social aspect of it is quite awkward, on both ends.
But I was thinking of "early adopters" as a marketing ploy - it could be anyone lucky enough to be currently signed up in that first semi-paywalled year. Or you could grandfather (or grandmother) in all the current subscribers, and offer them a break on a lifetime subscription, something of that nature. I have a friend who is doing a subscription to her nightclub, which gets you nothing much extra but supporting it plus a party - I haven't done it because I never go and also, it's three substacks! But I bet many would, and then it might take on its own life.
I like all your stuff, Nancy. I would pay just because it's you, if you want me to. Also, could you please put more sex in it? Pornhub has shut down in Arizona.
It all interests me, Nancy. I haven’t read a post yet that bored me. I always learn something. Are amused by something. I can count on your good writing, storytelling and research.
The frequency is fine. I’ve trained Substack to not email me for subscriptions; I prefer to use the following tab on the app.
I don’t listen to podcasts in the app (vs car) because I don’t want to disturb spouse or others in the room. I sometimes watch videos but muted for the same reason.
I subscribe to my local newspaper even as the cost goes up, up because local media matters. Hugely. I stopped subscribing to the NYT and WAPO a year ago as freelance work dropped off and inflation rose. Even as a news junky. So as a person on limited income, I wish I could afford to subscribe to tons of people here on Substack. If I had to pick, it would be *you.*
No matter the topic, your approach to those topics and your writing is brilliant. Keep on truckin! But I’m guessing your followers have interests more broad than the choices offered in your survey. Thanks for what you do, Nancy.
I am very bad at polls, or following directions: The assumption that every question allows multiple answers leads me to tick the "wrong" box first.
Q3: I ticked brand stories, but would have checked all the others, too.
Q4: Least interested in? None of the above, at least in your publication.
Q5: Nothing would "tempt" me; I like the mix as it is and paying or not paying has more to do with my financial situation than with anything you're doing, Nancy.
Q6: I ticked Brands but only because that was first. As a multilingual writer, editor, advisor and copy editor, I roll around with linguistics, name development, and new words all the time. Advertising gets an honorable mention.
Frankly, I am very happy to not have any more bells and whistles thrown at me. I like Substack for the wealth of reading material, not for video or audio. I want to read words, and yours are always good.
I would like to hire you to write my private monologue. It’s always just the way I want to put it. Keep it up, please. I thoroughly appreciate your writing. I must admit a special love for words, and you have a way with words.
"Private monologue writer" may be one of the few writing jobs I *haven't* had in my long and checkered career. But I'm always game for something new. Thanks so much for the kind words, Carol!
I don't "refuse to subsidize your writing," but I've stopped paying for Substack subscriptions because I don't care for the platform's ethics.
I do pay for newsletters, but not on Substack. I'd consider paying if you were publishing on a different platform, but no changes the content are going to do it.
Yeah, one reason I've balked at charging for subscriptions here is the, um, "known issues." It puts me in a bind in two ways: I don't make any money, and Substack -- which favors paid newsletters, unsurprisingly -- buries my newsletter.
I'm especially interested in over-used or what I think of as "lazy" words. On my list now are "moreover", "astonishing", "amazing", "indeed", "remarkable", and "hence". We go through times when people use a word because they are too lazy to spend time finding the word they really mean, or to write clearly. There is no need to use "moreover"; just state your most important point first!
Which posts would I read. I look at the title and subtitle of all of them and if that is interesting at the first sentence. Then it is up or down depending on how engagingly the post begins..
Keep up the good work. I marvel at the depth into which you analyze everything.
Thank you!
Q3: I checked WotW/Y, but would have also checked brand-name stories and linkstack.
Q6: I've always had an interest in marketing, but I enjoy ALL of the choices. As a former (small-time) copy editor, just about anything to do with words is in my wheelhouse.
Thanks, Steve!
Please no audio or video. I like words on screen— I rarely watch Substack creator videos.
I actually hate video and was hoping no one would request it. I may occasionally record a post for accessibility reasons — I tried it once and enjoyed it — but I promise not to go Full Podcast.
I’m interested in everything, and not “disinterested” in anything you’ve posted. I find it all really compelling. So I skipped the poll on those. As for paid subscriptions, I just started reading you a few days ago, thanks to Kim France. I have more complicated answer to the paid sub thing: One, I trade subs with other f/t writers, those of us in the same boat. Second, I do have a budget for all my “Subscriptions” on everything, every platform, and I rotate them. I enjoy somebody for awhile, and then do a carousel switch, so to speak. I’m probably unusual in that like you, I read and curate and critique for a living, so my reading pile is huge. Wish I could afford it all. I think you should charge the going rate for top quality material, 7 or 8 a month, and then the usual discounts for annual and founder’s fees. Make the “founder” rate just a tiny bit more than the annual rate, you’ll find people go for it. There’s so much more to say about all this, but I hear ya. It’s a science and an art to cultivate paid subscriptions when you’re not a household name.
Thanks for that thoughtful and useful comment, Susie (and thanks for subscribing!).
Maybe it's a form of imposter syndrome, but I don't think I have enough subscribers -- only 2,300, plus another 2,000 or so "followers" -- to make the math work. Only 44 of those readers, about 1 percent, have made subscription pledges. I suspect I'd *lose* subscribers if I switched on payments. For now I'm eking out a tiny income from occasional appeals to Buy Me a Coffee.
I wrote about this conundrum several months ago: https://fritinancy.substack.com/p/lets-talk-about-money
That's really good advice. I'm in the same boat.
Re: paying for (rather than "subsidizing" your writing - a locution I despise, as you may not be doing this now to pay bills but you are a pro). I pay for very little on Substack because my funds are not limitless and its subscription model is insane IMO--each costs more than a heavily discounted New Yorker with all its archives or half of Apple News or 2/3 of Puck. So I go for those where I really need some piece of info that's firmly behind a paywall or that I need periodically for professional reasons. And when I know the writer it feels awful to turn a sub on and off. So that's the hesitation. It doesn't mean I don't think you're a great writer. In a flush year or when I retire I might do a lifetime subscription, as Susie Bright suggested. That's a really good idea.
But now I'm thinking about it, why don't you turn on the payment option NOW and make one option free and then occasionally throw in a paywalled post, and see what happens? That's where I'd myself thinking - oh gosh maybe I DO want to pay! And for early adopters like me you could offer a discount or life subscription in your first year of doing this.
Yes, the Substack model is frustrating and can end up being prohibitively expensive. (Although not prohibitive for some wealthy and generous people: David Roberts spends $28,000 a year on subscriptions: https://www.davidnroberts.com/p/i-spend-28000-on-substack-subscriptions)
I'll think about your suggestion. Identifying early adopters wouldn't be easy, though, and I'm not sure I want to turn long-standing acquaintances into revenue streams. And the whole bookkeeping aspect to subscriptions seems very un-fun. Still -- I appreciate your support and ideas! Maybe when I reach 5,000 aggregate audience (subscribers + followers) I'll switch payments on. I'm getting close to that target.
Yes navigating the social aspect of it is quite awkward, on both ends.
But I was thinking of "early adopters" as a marketing ploy - it could be anyone lucky enough to be currently signed up in that first semi-paywalled year. Or you could grandfather (or grandmother) in all the current subscribers, and offer them a break on a lifetime subscription, something of that nature. I have a friend who is doing a subscription to her nightclub, which gets you nothing much extra but supporting it plus a party - I haven't done it because I never go and also, it's three substacks! But I bet many would, and then it might take on its own life.
I like all your stuff, Nancy. I would pay just because it's you, if you want me to. Also, could you please put more sex in it? Pornhub has shut down in Arizona.
Gee, thanks, Michael! I’ll work on that s*x content.
It all interests me, Nancy. I haven’t read a post yet that bored me. I always learn something. Are amused by something. I can count on your good writing, storytelling and research.
The frequency is fine. I’ve trained Substack to not email me for subscriptions; I prefer to use the following tab on the app.
I don’t listen to podcasts in the app (vs car) because I don’t want to disturb spouse or others in the room. I sometimes watch videos but muted for the same reason.
I subscribe to my local newspaper even as the cost goes up, up because local media matters. Hugely. I stopped subscribing to the NYT and WAPO a year ago as freelance work dropped off and inflation rose. Even as a news junky. So as a person on limited income, I wish I could afford to subscribe to tons of people here on Substack. If I had to pick, it would be *you.*
Thank you for all your free posts so far!
Thanks for the thorough and thoughtful response, Susan.
I can’t believe I wrote “are amused.” No royal “we” here…😛
"or" amused?
No matter the topic, your approach to those topics and your writing is brilliant. Keep on truckin! But I’m guessing your followers have interests more broad than the choices offered in your survey. Thanks for what you do, Nancy.
Thanks, Bonnie!
I am very bad at polls, or following directions: The assumption that every question allows multiple answers leads me to tick the "wrong" box first.
Q3: I ticked brand stories, but would have checked all the others, too.
Q4: Least interested in? None of the above, at least in your publication.
Q5: Nothing would "tempt" me; I like the mix as it is and paying or not paying has more to do with my financial situation than with anything you're doing, Nancy.
Q6: I ticked Brands but only because that was first. As a multilingual writer, editor, advisor and copy editor, I roll around with linguistics, name development, and new words all the time. Advertising gets an honorable mention.
Frankly, I am very happy to not have any more bells and whistles thrown at me. I like Substack for the wealth of reading material, not for video or audio. I want to read words, and yours are always good.
Thank you, Caroline! I’m a fan of your words as well.
Oh! Thank you!
I would like to hire you to write my private monologue. It’s always just the way I want to put it. Keep it up, please. I thoroughly appreciate your writing. I must admit a special love for words, and you have a way with words.
"Private monologue writer" may be one of the few writing jobs I *haven't* had in my long and checkered career. But I'm always game for something new. Thanks so much for the kind words, Carol!
I like all the topics and things you cover.
Thanks, Fred!
I don't "refuse to subsidize your writing," but I've stopped paying for Substack subscriptions because I don't care for the platform's ethics.
I do pay for newsletters, but not on Substack. I'd consider paying if you were publishing on a different platform, but no changes the content are going to do it.
Fair enough, and thanks for the explanation. How do you feel about Buy Me a Coffee? https://buymeacoffee.com/nancyfriedman
Zero issues! I’d forgotten you had that option. (I realize the newsletter scene is hard to navigate so no shade on using Substack.)
Yeah, one reason I've balked at charging for subscriptions here is the, um, "known issues." It puts me in a bind in two ways: I don't make any money, and Substack -- which favors paid newsletters, unsurprisingly -- buries my newsletter.
I'm especially interested in over-used or what I think of as "lazy" words. On my list now are "moreover", "astonishing", "amazing", "indeed", "remarkable", and "hence". We go through times when people use a word because they are too lazy to spend time finding the word they really mean, or to write clearly. There is no need to use "moreover"; just state your most important point first!
Not my specialty, but I appreciate the feedback!
P.S. Benjamin Dreyer does a terrific job with this sort of thing on his Substack, "A Word About."
Which posts would I read. I look at the title and subtitle of all of them and if that is interesting at the first sentence. Then it is up or down depending on how engagingly the post begins..
Thanks for that frank answer, Paul.