I wonder if we’re in a newsletter bubble There’s something off about the unit economics
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Those are some strong feelings there You’re like a 1-person cult

- 2 more replies
-
-
-
Or $60/yr* but they also let you set annual price at $30 min
-
Well you can discount annual and I have mine at 50, but yeah, still Somethings not adding up Why are people paying so much? How long will they continue? Where is the spending being cut? Who the hell are these rich people?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Mental model is wrong. Substack subscription is like a Twitch subscription. $5/mo is to become a patron and feel like a supporter, not for content. Content is free, signaling belonging is paid.
-
This doesn’t fit at least the data I’m seeing for my list
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
In a way, this has already been happening with online courses where people pay a premium to get an online course from a best-selling author while Linda and others offer a whole bundle for much less.
-
I think when people associate with personal brands, they are willing to pay a premium despite lower volume. For me, It's getting a peek into someone's brain (if I like how they think) than just a source of news. I may be the exception here so the unit eco argument may still hold.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
But I don't want to read New Yorker. I want to read
@artofgig.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But if you feel you're getting more from those 2 writers, makes sense! My hypothesis is tons of room for growth in subscriptions b/c it aligns value so well. In the grand scheme $100/yr isn't that much for many. As a (non-rich) infovore I could see spending $1k+/yr on subs
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.