Belichick on Burgess

I'm excited. A lot given up for a one year rental though huh Mike. Well hopefully it was worth the compensation.

"The Boston Globe will soon begin charging for its Web site, publisher P. Steven Ainsley told the paper’s union bosses yesterday as the Globe’s parent New York Times [NYT] Co. confirmed in a regulatory filing that the money-losing Hub broadsheet is for sale."

Mike you seem pretty internet savvy between the blog, twitter, etc... So we both know that charging for online content is going to fail and fail big.

Fight tooth and nail to keep your blog free. I am confident that it is the only reason many people come to Boston.com The info here is unparalleled compared to other Patriots sources.

You have a nice budding career and plenty of room to grow. Don't let them cut you off at the knees.

I have to back up what Joe said.

You provide great information for for all fans, wherever in the world they may be, keep up the great work Mike!

Diddo what Joe and Phil said.

I admit it, I recently received a survey from Boston.com which asked me whether I'd be willing to pay for the site, and I said yes. Look, I get all this great hometown info from the Globe, and the idea that it should be completely free is ridiculous. Now, if the site charges $20/mo., I'm sorry, I would do without, but if it's $5-10/mo. for those of us who don't subscribe to the Globe, I'm willing to pay that.

How do you guys expect Mike to get paid if you don't pay for his work?

I don't get it - we used to pay to buy newspapers, what's the difference? If we don't pay, people like Mike leave.

I, for one, will buy a subscription.

I agree. I really hope this doesnt become payment based. This is always the first place I come for pats info. Keep up the free good work!

How do you guys expect Mike to get paid if you don't pay for his work?

I don't get it - we used to pay to buy newspapers, what's the difference? If we don't pay, people like Mike leave.

I, for one, will buy a subscription.

Mike Reiss rocks. I can understand why they will start charging for Boston.com. We used to buy Newspapers but now we all read on line free. The company has to stay afloat.

If it's between paying for Mike Reiss and reading John Tomase free I'll pay for Mike Reiss. The price has to be fair, less than the cost of a daily newspaper.

I might sign up for the site if it is reasonable and they don't force me to buy that rag of a newspaper.

I agree with the earlier posters - MIke is the best Patriot beat writer they have had. Solid reporting and his opinions do not seem to have a personal agenda attached to them like some other reporters that preceeded him.

A 3rd and a 5th doesnt seem to bad for a player of his caliber, especially considering his short price tag. Hopefully he can live up to the expectations

Agree with joe here.

The only reason I come to Boston.com is to read the 4 blogs. I can get the rest of my news elsewhere for free.

I'm in full agreement with Joe & Phil. Especially considering the economy. People are struggling. Very few will shell out any amount of money.

Why do people think everything on the internet should be free? The globe is providing a service to you, I think it is only fair that they get monitary compensation.

I am willing to PAY. and those who are not are a bunch of cheap jerks I said this along along if you want the paper to survive you must pay to read online . Look at the music business now it is in the shitter because of the free down loads

If we fail to sign Burgess to a long term contract and he walks at the end of the year... We would have given up a 3rd & 5th (hopefully) for a one year solution to a pretty glaring hole. This should (in turn) get us a comp pick the next year...

So... In essence - we gave up 1 pick for a player with a HUGE upside. I'm cool with that...

I wonder how many people here would work for free?

The difference between paying for web access and a newspaper is huge. With the website there's no printing cost. Page layout & distribution costs are a fraction of what they are for a printed newspaper. But they still can sell ads. That's what has always really paid the bills & salaries of newspapers anyway, not the subscription cost. I love Mike's columns and blogs, but if they start charging, I'm gone. I'll have to settle for local broadcast media and (gulp!) national outlets. C'est la vie!

The thing that may go unmissed amongst the fans based in the US (and let's face it, they are the vast majority!) is that some of us located elsewhere are a little uneasy about subscribing to something which is not "local".

A number of schemes have started in both the UK and in Germany and they have, for the most part, failed to produce the results for which they were created for.
The readers (I amongst them) thought we would then read *more* as we were paying for it but what happened was that I (and I'm sure many others) tended to read only the one or two sections we had read before, decided that it was no longer worth it and cancelled.

The end result is that a number of papers which had started the schemes dropped them.

I have a number of bookmarks for my beloved Pats (who I have followed since '84 and Mike is simply the best.

This is why the Herald has finally gotten rid of the liar and replaced him with someone who seems a nice guy, but seems to be the Pete Carroll version of a reporter. No matter what, he is a HUGE upgrade over you_know_who.
The Herald saw that the vast majority of us were either with Mike or had gone to Mike at some stage, hence their reaction.

Just food for thought!

Best regards to all Pats fans (and Steelers Fan) ;)

I now live in Arizona and I gave up my subscription to Patriots Football Weekly because boston.com (and eventually Mike Reiss specifically) kept me very well informed for free. I would be willing to pay a reasonable amount (less than $10.00 per month) like Denver Doug suggests because it would still be cheaper than the subscription and much more timely. Mike is truly in a class by himself.

Even though boston.com is not a paysite, the Globe still gets paid via advertisers. The more hits on boston.com, the more money the make. Its about time the common man gets a break and doest have to pay for good information. It should stay that way...

I see a double quarter pounder with cheese flash ad at the top of the page
that's how the globe gets paid, and that's how they pay Mike

I will never pay for this POS paper. Only section worth reading is the Sports section. If that supports the rest of the lousey liberal paper I wont pay. If a group of writers gets together and starts its own site that does not subsidize the leftist Glob. I will pay for that and I will actually pay a premium.

Why not have free web access to those with a paid subscription to the paper and others pay for using the web site?

If the newspaper follows the precedent of the cable companies, you'll have to pay for the whole rag, i.e. all the channels, even if Mike Reiss is the only "channel" you want. There's a lot of money to be made, but a lot of companies will die when they get it wrong too. Personally, I would prefer a "micropayment" scheme to read Mike, rather than being forced to pay as well for some of the other sports writers, whom I don't read now, even for free.

Reiss makes the hack National Enquirer rubes at ESPN look like inbreds. We are spoiled with Reiss and how he is able to be a liason between covering the team and not losing the angle he provides for us at the same time. So many beat writers in Boston get really cocky and then lose all credibility. Shaughnessy is one. Obviously, Borges is another. Tomase tried to sell out and get promoted and ruined his career as well. Props go to Reiss for this coverage we have.

The only reason they want to charge for it is that they broke their business model years and years ago. In the late 90's newspapers tried to charge for content and got absolutely burned.

this is a last ditch effort, but there is no compelling reason to pay for something you can get completely free elsewhere.

Internet economics are not difficult.

I don't get it - we used to pay to buy newspapers, what's the difference? If we don't pay, people like Mike leave.

what about more advertising on this site as a stream of revenue for Boston.com, this has worked well online, and am sure can work here

As some one who works in the advertising field for media, I can tell you that the web advertising does not cover the full cost of content. if you want content you are going to have to pay for it. Sorry folks, that just the state of the industry.
there will be plenty of free blogs out there if you are OK with suspect information exchange.

I already pay for Boston.com every time I click through an ad and buy something. If there aren't any ads users want to click on it's not the users fault; it's Boston.com's. No one on the interent pays for public content. They pay for research articles and survey information and porn. That's it.

They have to charge so they can keep providing the content and keep great writers like Mike. So long as the fee is reasonable I will sign up. I agree with Richard though, if they try to tie the subscription to buying the paper then I will do without. I don't need that rag either.

I would gladly pay to read MIke online but NOT if it is part of the Globe. Mike you rule, but I have to say the globe deserves to go bankrupt for alienating HALF of their potential customers.
Mike keep up the great work, it would seem it's only a matter of time before you go national anyway, but you have really raised the bar around here and it is so refreshing after reading pompous asses like Borges and Shaughnessy for so long.

I would gladly pay to read MIke online but NOT if it is part of the Globe. Mike you rule, but I have to say the globe deserves to go bankrupt for alienating HALF of their potential customers.
Mike keep up the great work, it would seem it's only a matter of time before you go national anyway, but you have really raised the bar around here and it is so refreshing after reading pompous asses like Borges and Shaughnessy for so long.

the problem is, Internet advertising is not raising the same levels of revenue that newpapers used to get., however, i would think a combination of increased ads and a small fee would work

Mike,
The problem with paying a monthly subscription to the Globe is that only a small portion goes into the hands of those who deserve it, such as yourself! Given your following, have you ever considered starting your own private blog charging $5/mo/subscriber? If you can get 5,000 subscribers, that's $25K/month. If the globe is going to charge me $5/mo, I'd rather subscribe to Reiss's Pieces' for the $5.

No question Mike is the best thing going for this paper and in Patriots coverage, and he should get paid. But I'm very unlikely to subscribe to Boston.com just for that.

Here's a thought - let the team or the league pay Mike. There is no better marketing or publicity going on that keeps me interested in the team and the NFL on a daily basis, and tuned into a 3 1/2 hour broadcast overstuffed with annoying beer commercials and other bs so I can see exactly 60 minutes of football action every sunday.

Now I might be willing to pay if they agree to banish Dan Shaunessey...

Being a Patriots fan from Mexico, it's really cool to read news of my team for free, specially because the NFL news in my country starts come September, and they seem to care about the Dallas Cowboys only.
But let me tell you, if I had to pay for Reiss's Pieces (a fair amount, like $10.00 per month) I'll do it .
As they say on "The Girl Next Door": 'Always know if the juice is worth the squeeze'; and in this case I think it's worth it.

Web advertisement is fairly expensive( I work for a direct marketing firm) and any decent firm can track click thru % on specific sites and sell the more trafficked sites at a premium rate, which would certainly make up for any costs associated with writing the blogs or running the site. The Globes problem, minus the sports, is that the paper is below quality standard and no one wants to pay for sub standard quality.

Regarding the subsscription issue, there is always somewhere else to surf to where the content is free. I seldom go to ESPN.com because most of their content is for "insiders". Instead I go to SI.com and get all of the same information for free. Good luck charging a subscription. There is always the herald.com, yahoo.com, weei.com and numerous other sites to get information from.

Can you say Boston Herald.....

As soon as it is a pay for services model I will become a loyal Herald reader. Lets be honest, there is little difference between the papers actual coverage.

Wow! Talk about a thread hijack! LOL

Hey #15 I might be cheap, but I'm definitely not a jerk. It must have taken you a longtime to come up with that masterpiece! Your post makes absolutley no sense you dink.

hey mike ,tell the big wigs at the globe we loce boston.com but we wont pay for it.there are a million web sites to look at news...herald doesnt charge do they???

hey mike ,tell the big wigs at the globe we loce boston.com but we wont pay for it.there are a million web sites to look at news...herald doesnt charge do they???

I would NOT pay a dime for something that should be free. This is the online edition here, not the home delivery edition. There is a difference. Any money they want to charge to view their precious website is greed and nothing more.

When a business is going broke as most print media either is, or will. Then the money has to come from somewhere. The internet has been a boom for sports fans searching for the latest news, somebody has to pay for the research, I am surprised it has taken this long. Sure you can go to THe Herald, but how long before the Herald charges? Trust me as soon as they become the only game in town . The Globe should charge a nominal amount, if that keeps it afloat. I would pay, it's only fair.

And when the Herald starts charging then what?
All the papers will eventually start charging. One thought is to have subscription levels based on the sections that you're interested in reading.
$3/month for Sports
$4/month for Local & National News, etc
$10/month for all news & sports
like they do with Cable TV. Only better if they let users choose a la Cart.....
Ads don't pay the bills. I use Firefox and the AdBlocker Plus extension. I don't see any ads when I'm on any website.
Sure they don't have printing, shipping overhead but they do have Servers, Web Developers, higher electric bills, etc. So there are still many other costs besides the writer.

I'm not happy about it either but it's the only business model that'll keep them afloat.

to all the geniuses. you see the ads on your web page? that is what pays for this. the times company recently reported GREATER than anticipated profits for the last quarter. funny how that was reported after they scared the union into lower pay and benefits.

btw, i use firefox and don't see any ads, so i know you can avoid them.

Mike couldn't even buy a double quarter pounder and cheese for what Mcdonald's pays for an ad on this page for every 1,000 views ($2 - $3). With print subscribers dwindling so are the print ad dollars. These $2 - $3 ads aren't going to make up for what the Globe used to get for print ads and subscriptions. If you want Mike and his coverage of the pats to remain on Boston.com, you're going to have to be willing to pay.

Those ads all over these web pages are paid for. If the writers weren't being read the ads wouldn't be there. This isn't free. They want you to pay for it a second time. It's called greed. Greed is good for the greedy on top and for the bottom line. The guys in the middle, like you and I and Mike and Chad Finn, etc., will lose as usual.

I agree with some, disagree with others. I recently cancelled my globe subscription due to the economic times. This was a pretty big deal to me because I love reading the newspaper, especially on Sunday mornings! Sitting down with a cup of coffee in the morning in front of my computer is not the same. If I am not going to pay for the paper any longer, you can bet I will not pay for an online subscription. I will get my news elsewhere.....

Once they start charging, their "clicks" will go down because people will bail and the traffic on this site will go way down. Since the number of clicks are the "ratings" by which advertising fees are charged, the amount that they get for advertising will drop. The income they pick up for charging folks will get offset against the decreased advertising $$. Unless the entire industry starts to charged, they will get smoked.

I agree with Josh. Look, there's about 1,000,000 different sites, including television media, that offer it for free....To the guy who says "How do they expect to get paid?" It's called advertisements. THe idea is to get people to read online and load it up with ads. I'll deal with that. That's fine. The computer industry has figured it out. Nominal charge for the computer, and then charge for the software. You'll make more money that way. And it's true. Maybe if they charged a small fee, I'd think about it, but probably not. I'll read the Herald, and if they charge, I'll read something else.

What a bunch of galoots.

"I admit it, I recently received a survey from Boston.com which asked me whether I'd be willing to pay for the site, and I said yes. Look, I get all this great hometown info from the Globe, and the idea that it should be completely free is ridiculous."

"How do you guys expect Mike to get paid if you don't pay for his work?"

Y'all're kidding, RIGHT???

It's called "advertising."

***

The problem, here at The Pravda, isn't that online advertising can't pay for an online Site.

The problem, here at the Pravda, is that the vast majority of its fixed costs are tied to Print Journalism.

And Print Journalism is a rapidly eroding Medium.

***

I, personally, have no intention of paying for the upkeep of a decaying infrastructure, just because some clown in an office building lacks either the vision or the testicular fortitude to admit that Newspapers are a thing of the Past.

There IS only one smart move for them: SHUTTER the Print version of the Pravda, and all its attendant costs. Ladies, the Titanic IS SINKING. May I suggest you get the phuck OFF??

If that means they lose some journalists, then that means they lose some journalists. But I don't know if they would HAVE to: A LOT of the support personnel and a TON of the other costs simply won't BE there, when they finally admit the inevitable and shut it down:

No Printing Machinery.

No Warehouses.

No Trucks.

No Distribution Center.

Et Cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

And if the Pravda's masters are stupid enough to go to a Fee Based system, they WILL LOSE, because their Advertising dollars ~ the LifeBlood of any Media company ~ will EVAPORATE.

***

You want Mike to keep getting paid? You want Mike around to provide his work ~ which we can all agree is exemplary? Then pray that they DON'T go to Fees.

This is the Internet, ladies and gentlemen. If the Pravda and the Herald go Fee-Based, they WILL get eclipsed, within 10 years, by a local Site run by people smart enough NOT to commit the OnLine Suicide of Fees.

Heh! What the donkeys who are using the TV argument seem to overlook is the simplest thing in the world:

We have, at most, 3 or 4 choices for TV: 1 Evil Cable Company, 1 or 2 Evil Satellite Companies, and ~ maybe ~ 1 Evil Fiber Optic Company ~ like Fios!

On the other hand, we have, literally, an INFINITE number of Sites that can Eclipse the Pravda's and the Herald's grip on Yankee Market Share...and their Cost of Doing Business is DIRT!!

Ergo: Any time some Site gets greedy and starts trying to charge Fees on TOP of their Advertising Revenue...SEE ya!!

If people were willing to pay for the content, it wouldn't be free on the net in the first place.
I wish you luck.

Pay!!!! ..If that is the case i would hope that the avertising would decrease..It is free becuase they get paid through the advertising. What next Google will charge for each search or a monthy fee..ridiculous !!! Make the rest of your paper as good as Mike is at covering the pats and I realy dont think you will have a problem with the selling of advertising....the Globe would definately stay afloat

Man oh man, no way am I paying to use this site. Not only do they make money from advertising, they have much less costs associated with getting the product out there. I'll get my news elsewhere.

Mike is great but free is best!

pay sites don't last long.

i don't read the newspaper and don't use the website other than this blog. i will not pay.

hopefully mike gets himself to a better company. nfl network maybe?

There's so much free content online that if a newspaper charges for access, like the Globe is thinking, people will simply be displaced to the next website. The people who say they care enough that they'll pay are lying. As soon as "Please enter your credit card information" comes up, they're gone, too.

There's so much free content online that if a newspaper charges for access, like the Globe is thinking, people will simply be displaced to the next website. The people who say they care enough that they'll pay are lying. As soon as "Please enter your credit card information" comes up, they're gone, too.

Granted, Mike Reiss is a spectacular writer, so isn't Peter Gammons. Once they started charging for Gammons, I haven't read another piece since.

I would be willing to pay menu style....In other words, I might be willing to pay a nominal fee for the sports coverage. The rest of the paper is worthless. The reporting is a joke outside of sports, I can get the liberal left wing propaganda from a multitude of sources.

I think you're insight and info is the bomb Mike, but can't say that for the rest of your Globe compadres. Not surprised to hear that the Times is putting you guys on the selling block and hope you land somewhere where your talents can be truly appreciated. I'm a fan of you, but would not spend a penny on a Boston.com subscription (It's full of viruses!!!). It's ridiculous what people do in a bad economy to make money.

"How do you guys expect Mike to get paid if you don't pay for his work?"

Advertising.

As others have said, there are plenty of other websites, and the radio is still free. Going to a pay-for-access format will cripple the advertising revenue, as the number of readers will drop dramatically.

Oh, and Burgess is a great addition to the Pats, and fills a role that desperately needed filling. Gotta like the Pats this year... they've going to be hungrier than they've been in a few years.

I Iive in New Mexico and pay $70+ per year for Patriots Football Weekly delivered first class, and also pay $250 or so for DirecTV Sunday ticket which works out to about $25 per game for the 10 or so games that are not shown nationally. Mike's work is a treasured gift to us all and I would certainly pay for that, too. He works hard for us.

MORONS .... "how is a guy like Mike going to get paid?" You idiots. Ever hear of advertising? WIth all the pop-up ads and the rest of the over-the-top ads on this site, Boston.com should be able to come up with a business model that works. I won't and will NEVER pay one cent for this. Mike's blog is the ONLY reason I come to Boston.com and if they start charging I will happily get my info elsewhere. MORONS. Probably the same idiots that voted for One Big Ass Mistake America!!!!!

Classless ~ # 61 ~

"The people who say they care enough that they'll pay are lying. As soon as "Please enter your credit card information" comes up, they're gone, too."

Hah! It's funny, 'cause it's TRUE!!!

Classless ~ #62 ~

"Granted, Mike Reiss is a spectacular writer, so isn't Peter Gammons. Once they started charging for Gammons, I haven't read another piece since."

Very good point! When I tried to access content @ ESPN, and got hit with that pathetic "ESPN Insider" attempt to panhandle me, I didn't know whether to roll my eyes, shake my head in disgust, or laugh out loud! Hah!

What I DID know, was that I was DAMNED if I was gonna PAY those Chumps! If Millions and Millions on Advertising ain't enough for you: SEE ya! I'll roll with the smart Sites, and help them slowly drive you Chumps out'f Business! Once more, and with feeling: SEE ya!!!

I'd venture to say that most sports fans have stopped even viewing ESPN because every article you want to read is "insider" only, most fans log onto SI.com and enjoy the free content because SI has laid out a smart business model that allows them to offer their web content free while also paying their employees. The Globe has spent the last 20 years catering to a very specific base of people and shut out a majority who turn to their local media for objective, fair coverage. If Reiss is let go by the Globe, due to their mismanagement, he could easily start his own blog and do quite well charging $3 a month.

1.MORONS .... "how is a guy like Mike going to get paid?" You idiots. Ever hear of advertising? WIth all the pop-up ads and the rest of the over-the-top ads on this site, Boston.com should be able to come up with a business model that works. I won't and will NEVER pay one cent for this. Mike's blog is the ONLY reason I come to Boston.com and if they start charging I will happily get my info elsewhere. MORONS. Probably the same idiots that voted for One Big Ass Mistake America!!!!!

AMEN! Finally a good post