Paid archive: how SA will kill the vitality of comments and community. FIX

Avatar
  • updated
  • Completed

After thinking on this a few days, I've concluded SA is making a massive mistake with its paid article archive. Please backtrack before you totally wreck what's good about SA. A few issues:


  1. The best feature of SA is ongoing reader comments on its articles, as company news changes  and a thesis is proven or disproven. You're basically killing the vitality of that. Once people get out of the habit of making informed comment on articles they can read and continue to read, they will not go back.  
  2. Seventy five dollars a month is too much. Thirty dollars a month is too much. I say that as someone who subscribes to three SA Marketplace services, and I've paid as much as $300 a month for single SA Marketplace services in the past. I might pay a token $10 or $20 a year for archive access, because without a vital comment stream.... 
  3. ... the SA archive really isn't that valuable at all. It's mostly old news and old speculation that goes on to be proven or disproven in time. The truly astute or comprehensive article is quite rare, probably less than 1% of articles would be publishable in traditional sources. I certainly wouldn't rely on the SA archive to reliably give me a "deep dive into less-followed companies" or other marketingspeak. That's frankly wishful. 
  4. What was previously good about SA was that almost ANYONE could write and publish quickly. Previously you had choruses of voices weighing in on a stock, some professional, some amateur, some astute, some not-so-astute: many points of view. Readers could read everyone's take and reach their own conclusions. Now there is no ability to compare and no competing voices  from the archive.
  5. As a marketplace subscriber to three services, I am frankly ticked off that you would abruptly lock me out of the archive, as well as hiding the articles I've taken the time to comment thoughtfully about. I've supported SA for a long time, and your thanks to me for this support is to ambush me with a change that breaks SA's entire model. 
  6. As a consumer I do not like it when companies break trust with their longtime customers. Not long ago Evernote pulled a similar stunt: massively jacking up subscription prices and breaking the longstanding paradigm of "Your data on your devices."  I had used Evernote for seven years and was a subscriber and fan. In one afternoon I pulled all of my data out of Evernote and put it into Microsoft OneNote; I haven't been back since. Users lost often don't come back once they lose patience. Your format and your platform is replicable. 
  7. In addition to reversing this ill-conceived policy, SA leadership should consider meeting to craft a small-scale "SA Commmunity Bill of Rights" to help guide future policy, and give angry and future members of the community of what you generally will and will not do. The businessfolk in you probably bristle at the idea of handing any sense of control to the rabble -- after all, this is your property to monetize -- but "community" cuts two ways. If you want it, you can't just dictate to it, you have to appreciate it and grow it. Places like Facebook have little sayings and mini lists of users rights: one of Facebook's taglines is: "it's free and it always will be". If you're going to ask people to make a commitment of time to your community, you need to give a better sense of what they're buying into. 
  8. Finally, if an issue driving this change is mobile ad revenue, or ad revenue generally, it may be partly because your mobile application(s) need a lot of help. They do only a subset of what the website can do, including frankly basic things like offering an integrated SA Marketplace chat. One user in one of our groups reports there is a separate "SA Chat" app, but he also reports that it was eating 10 gigabytes of cache data. Android users can enable "Desktop Mode" to get some functionality of the SA website back on their phones, but I have not found a way to persist this setting as I navigate between pages and articles: I'm continually led back to the lame mobile app. Many kids these days just don't use desktop or notebook computers that much, and an online property that doesn't do mobile is disadvantaged. 
Avatar
Quote from RealRural

SA Admin Richman: This is a great asset (contributor's performance) if it exists, but I looked at the top right of the screen and there is nothing there on your example link for LYFT. Can you be a little clearer on how this works? Is this only for subscribers perhaps? I also do not see any analysis on your link that cites a review of contributors' performances.. 

Sorry I thought you were an Essential subscriber (confused with someone else on this thread). Perhaps consider a free trial (easily canceled before charged within 14 days) to see what I mean? 

Avatar
RealRural

SA Admin Richman: This is a great asset (contributor's performance) if it exists, but I looked at the top right of the screen and there is nothing there on your example link for LYFT. Can you be a little clearer on how this works? Is this only for subscribers perhaps? I also do not see any analysis on your link that cites a review of contributors' performances.. 

Avatar
SA Admin Amitai Richman
  • Completed
Quote from salpilotmd

Not sure if this is the right place to discuss this but given the price model I would love to have an intelligent rating system of your contributors.  I won't name anyone here but it's frustrating to read a barrage of comments on say a biotech stock by someone with 18 followers, two articles and no biotech experience (they're insurance salesmen essentially for a local mutual fund).  It doesn't help me as an amateur investor to have to filter through their useless noise to get intelligent information.  Then the articles and subsequent discussions become glorified Facebook and Twitter feeds.

Hi - you can track Contributor's performance by clicking on an article and checking on the top right of the screen what the author's sentiment was on the stock at the time of publication and what the stock has done since then. 

You can also click on a Contributor, then click Coverage - and you will see a list of stocks/charts the author has written about and what the stock has done since that rating/article. 

For example look at this article: https://seekingalpha.com/article/4252445-3-reasons-lyft-good-investment and see that LYFT dropped 13% since his bearish article 10 days ago. Then look at the author's coverage and see how he has been mostly correct with his articles/ratings: https://seekingalpha.com/author/niki-schranz#regular_articles

Avatar
jmcgoo- CMT

As long as the creds are available, we can make our minds up on the basis of what's written and the background

of the writer.  I have no problem with that.  Investigate, then invest, right?

Avatar
salpilotmd

Not sure if this is the right place to discuss this but given the price model I would love to have an intelligent rating system of your contributors.  I won't name anyone here but it's frustrating to read a barrage of comments on say a biotech stock by someone with 18 followers, two articles and no biotech experience (they're insurance salesmen essentially for a local mutual fund).  It doesn't help me as an amateur investor to have to filter through their useless noise to get intelligent information.  Then the articles and subsequent discussions become glorified Facebook and Twitter feeds.

Avatar
jyearly

I do not know what happened to SA, but the format has changed.  Specifically, when reading an article I have to click from page to page (what happened to the one page articles), and there is no longer a comments section.  I do not like the new format at all, and wonder why the change from the way it was done for years.  This may be the wrong place to comment, but I did not know where else to go.  Sometimes the "old ways" are best.

Avatar
n403xv

This very expensive paywall has already changed my behavior Seeking Alpha ... I look at SA far less than before.


As AZNNP77 has stated, why would I pay for articles that have factually incorrect information.


Good luck with this model.

Avatar
aznnp77
Quote from 14596212

@daniel

Solution: Post useless comments within 10 days, to avoid the paywall in the comment section. This can't be your intention and your standard.


Maybe there's a difference in the statistics between a stock/theme, which is covered daily and once a year.

That's a good idea. Wish I knew I could do that. I think I'll do that from now on if they don't get rid of this pay wall. Thanks. "Just commenting so I can read the comments in the future"

Avatar
aznnp77

I see that they've taken my suggestion and implemented something to force people to turn off their pop-up blockers in order to read articles, which I am completely fine with. Hopefully with the extra ad revenue they're able to revert back to letting small timers like myself read older articles to get background information on companies we could potentially want to invest in.


P.S. I read one of the non-paywalled articles a couple of weeks ago about a stock that I've been following closely, and the author didn't even present the factual information correct. You expect people to pay for opinion articles where the authors barely take the time to research a stock before giving their opinion?

Avatar
SA Jacob Maltz
Quote from kennethfine

All I see is an interface with short blurbs, very similar to Twitter, and a few replies on those blurbs. Is the the major new feature you're talking about? It doesn't seem to have much at all to do with articles and article comments. Though this presentation has its strengths, I can't imagine an ongoing durable conversation centered around this sort of design. Am I looking at the wrong thing?   


The strength of a written article is that it can articulate a thesis about an company or group of companies, and a strength of comments attached to that article is that the discussion is generally guided and informed by the content of that article. I don't see any such unifying structure here. 


Is there any assurance or promise that the StockTalk discussion won't be paywalled sooner or later? Based on precedent, if it becomes useful or popular, SA may decide to monetize it by paywalling it. If you intend for it to remain free forever, SA's leadership should probably articulate that really, really clearly: many people aren't going to waste their time creating content that vanishes with the whims of policy. 

Thanks for your feedback.  Even though StockTalks has been around for a while, we have not improved the feature for quite a while, so it is still early days in terms of content and community.

Our plan is to add features to StockTalk and see how it develops and how people use it, given that it is a more open platform with no limitations on size of posts, but is controlled by our moderation team.  


While it is impossible for management to give "assurances" or "promises" around features like this,   I can tell you that we have no plans to put StockTalk behind the paywall and we would like to make it useful for our community.   We envision that it may be used to continue the discussion and share information on a stock even if there is no recent article on it.   We will also add hashtagging to allow for community driven discussion on topics of interest to you.    We have now updated the StockTalks UI on Quote, Portfolio and Author /User profile pages, as well as the "All StockTalk" page, and we are actively working on further improvements.