The Athletic

[Dahnsouff]

1 hour ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

What a bunch of gimps. Information costs nothing to replicate from one platform to the next. Pirate whatever you want people.

Never heard of IPR then, or just believe everyone else's hard work is fair game once its online?

[Mark]

25 minutes ago, MPH said:

 just for clarification...posting a full article is different to quoting 2-3 sentences from that said article isn’t it? @Mark

Just don't post the full article. They've been complaining about it since the beginning of the year and I've been removing the posts but they need to not be posted at all now..

[AjcW]

28 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

FoxesTalk is genuinely one of the best football forums in the country. If you take a look at some of the others out there in comparison, you don't know how lucky we are to have it.

 

Rob Tanner clearly does look at the forum though and I'd love for him to get involved a bit more like Geoff from TalkSport. He could just link to his latest articles when they are out, etc. That might even stop people posting their articles and instead promote them.

This part is really interesting to me, I work in Marketing and it's always puzled me that the football club and indeed as you reference, other businesses haven't used this place as a marketing tool more!

If Rob came on here and posted a message in the style of one of the Athletics click bait tweets, it would drive traffic to the site from the exact audience they want! Then once we are there we can see a small preview of the article and decide whether we want to subscribe to read more.

Similarly with the club.... exclusive access to shop sales, offering left over tickets at discount, even starting threads to gather feedback on comms.... his is a captive audience of the most engaged Leicester fans across the globe, and they don't even attempt to use it  (well they probably spy but that wont give them much value)

[Kingleicester]

 Who the hell is the Athletic??? Is it the sun football cartoon thing I always enjoyed looking at the results on a Saturday??

[Strokes]

4 minutes ago, Kingleicester said:

 Who the hell is the Athletic??? Is it the sun football cartoon thing I always enjoyed looking at the results on a Saturday??

It’s not quite as in depth as that.

[Voll Blau]

Given the wages The Athletic have taken most of their recruits on at, it's hardly surprising they're having to be aggressive in stopping their stuff getting out for free. They have taken a few more on recently though so they're obviously confident it's working.

 

The moral of the story is if you want good news and journalism, then be prepared to pay for it. If not, belt up and get the scraps you're given for free.

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

Speaking from no insider information at all (and I am an Athletic subscriber, but also an American, so it is more bang for the buck for me), I doubt it is Rob Tanner lurking. My guess is their legal department is visiting most football forum sites. 

[HankMarvin]

7 minutes ago, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

Speaking from no insider information at all (and I am an Athletic subscriber, but also an American, so it is more bang for the buck for me), I doubt it is Rob Tanner lurking. My guess is their legal department is visiting most football forum sites. 

or maybe Journalists are googling their articles after writing and seeing where they spring up then reporting back to the Athletics legal department

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

1 minute ago, HankMarvin said:

or maybe Journalists are googling their articles after writing and seeing where they spring up then reporting back to the Athletics legal department

I don't think the journalists care -- the lawyers do.

[Kingleicester]

25 minutes ago, Strokes said:

It’s not quite as in depth as that.

👍

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, L3n9a said:

Just summarise in your own words if its really time sensitive news. A lot of their stuff is player exclusives & in depth and well worth the subscription. Copy & pasting word for word is just wrong. But if Ndidi picks up and Injury and Athletic are first to report, a thread saying "Bad news, Tanner has just mentioned Ndidi has an injury" is not breaking any copyright laws at all.

 

And Tanner usually tweets that stuff too.

[Sharpe's Fox]

39 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Never heard of IPR then, or just believe everyone else's hard work is fair game once its online?

Yep. Other than the silicon and the electricity needed to store and power said content there is no cost in replicating it, thus its value is near zero. The early internet pioneers like Napster and Pirate Bay did this until the media conglomerates destroyed a free market with their copyright laws.

[KingsX]

1 minute ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Yep. Other than the silicon and the electricity needed to store and power said content there is no cost in replicating it, thus its value is near zero. The early internet pioneers like Napster and Pirate Bay did this until the media conglomerates destroyed a free market with their copyright laws.

 

"Yep" ... no way in hell should a musician, author or journalist expect to get paid for merely arranging bits and bytes into something of interest.  The absolute nerve 

[Sharpe's Fox]

11 minutes ago, KingsX said:

 

"Yep" ... no way in hell should a musician, author or journalist expect to get paid for merely arranging bits and bytes into something of interest.  The absolute nerve 

All of those have made money for centuries by trading their content in commodities with scarcity. They're  called tour tickets, books and newspapers.

[Lambert09]

It’s fair enough. I’ve always wondered if these sites would ever really make much money as there’s so much free news out there. 

 

Im sure eventually they will just swap the model for the good ol ad revenue. 

[boots60]

Surely, once you have paid your money, then it's up to you what you do with the product you have just purchased. 

This goes for any product for sale.

 

[MPH]

9 minutes ago, boots60 said:

Surely, once you have paid your money, then it's up to you what you do with the product you have just purchased. 

This goes for any product for sale.

 

 

its all in the terms and conditions you signed up to ( that few people actually read).

 

 

It will like say they you are purchasing access for you only and that sharing publicly is forbidden.

[KansasFox]

Can we change the colour of the banner as it is in breach of my OCD 

[HighPeakFox]

1 hour ago, boots60 said:

Surely, once you have paid your money, then it's up to you what you do with the product you have just purchased. 

This goes for any product for sale.

 

No, because there is something called 'intellectual rights' - you don't assume those rights because you bought access to read them.

[filbertway]

Jesus, I'm in shock at some people's entitled attitudes on here. 

[Footballwipe]

1 minute ago, filbertway said:

Jesus, I'm in shock at some people's entitled attitudes on here. 

Probably the same who cry about what the Mercury has become, and the ever declining quality of free "tabloid" news website. By and large you get what you pay for...

[nwl fox]

3 hours ago, eblair said:

would love to know stats compared to the other forums, imo easily the best forum i have been on for ease of use and layout etc.

I reckon @StriderHiryu can do you some analysis on that! 

[nwl fox]

12 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Jesus, I'm in shock at some people's entitled attitudes on here. 

Its a very small minority though tbf

[Leicester_Loyal]

First masks now this, it's political correctness gone mad I tell you!

[ALC Fox]

3 hours ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Yep. Other than the silicon and the electricity needed to store and power said content there is no cost in replicating it, thus its value is near zero. The early internet pioneers like Napster and Pirate Bay did this until the media conglomerates destroyed a free market with their copyright laws.

 

2 hours ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

All of those have made money for centuries by trading their content in commodities with scarcity. They're  called tour tickets, books and newspapers.

 

How much is a book or a newspaper worth? Guaranteed the new paperback you last read isn't physically worth the £8.99 you paid for it from Waterstones. The price covers all sorts of costs including the royalties that the author rightly deserves. A few quid a month for a regular slew of online articles is worth the money in my opinion.

 

You pay the licence fee for the BBC's news programmes on TV. If you watch ITV's news you may have purchased something advertised during a break. Either way you're paying for the content so why should we be entitled to quality online journalism for nothing?