+416
Answered

New Paywall / Free article limit since Jan 4th 2021

Liberty Investing 4 months ago updated by anonymous 1 day ago 775 231 duplicates

Note from Seeking Alpha:

Please see our announcement here for more details:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4396836-important-update-for-seeking-alpha-users

Answers

-240
PINNED
Answer
Answered

Hi,

Thanks for your valuable feedback. Please see our announcement here for more details:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4396836-important-update-for-seeking-alpha-users

Thanks,

Daniel Hochman

VP Product, Seeking Alpha

-30
Answer
Not a bug

Hi,

Please give the following a read, it may give some context to the recent developments at SA

https://seekingalpha.com/article-new/4396836-important-update-for-seeking-alpha-users

Regards,

Kushal Mehrotra

Data QA Analyst, Seeking Alpha

Duplicates 231

+56

me too.. stop notifying me on old articles if I can't read the comments?? what the hell?? 

+63

Shame on Seeking Alpha- trying to get everyone hooked on interesting articles and providing watch lists; then comes the bait and switch: SORRY- now you have to pay a huge subscription fee to get the same material. What a disappointment! Switching to other services like Yahoo Finance, Reddit, and anything else y'all can recommend. Also, I do NOT want emails with enticing titles in my inbox that I can't even read!!! Shame, shame, everybody knows your name!

+14

sad the way all business try to sneak around and charge you

+2

Seeking  Alpha,  I was a long time reader of SA.  I  delete them from my favor list as they have turned into what is known as money grubbers !

+25

Yes, very disappointing indeed. There are plenty of FREE sites to gather pertinent investing information. I do not like being emailed articles only to find that I cannot read them. Change your model quickly. 

+7

They're moving stuff behind the paywall.  The part that annoys me is that I already pay for some subscriptions to authors and am wondering why I'm doing so if I have to also pay to read articles.  Maybe just charge one price for the site and you get everything behind the paywall.  Wonder how the author's feel.  They write for the site and provide the content for free and Seeking Alpha makes money off them.  Or I would at least hope the authors get paid something but then if this is the case why am I subscribing to authors in the first place.  Seeking Alpha if you're reading this....I'm close to dumping you totally and cancelling my paid subscriptions or not renewing.  

+14

It's pretty screwed up and has been going on for weeks now.  I wouldn't care so much, except that I'm not allowed to respond to folks that I've been engaged in exchanges with over several days or weeks.  

I'd also like to take this opportunity to make a correction.  I reached out to "Lajoy" at Seeking Alpha to perhaps help with this - It should have read "Lejoy". 

+14

I too am experiencing this same issue.  Very frustrating.....

+19

Very frustrating, indeed.  I suppose that a certain percentage of the folks that get the message that they can't get back to the thread without turning on premium will do so and turn on the 7 day free trial. And a percentage of those keep the subscription.  Simple marketing, I suppose. 

Before my bad experiences started with one of Seeking Alphas groups about four years or so ago,  I would have considered a premium subscription. But Seeking Alpha has been a net loss for me over the last several years.  I've spent most of my time on Seeking Alpha over the last 4 years trying to keep people honest instead of doing what one should be on Seeking Alpha to achieve - to learn and share in an honest environment.  


Please understand that I'm not suggesting that all of Seeking Alpha is bad, I can guarantee you that I've had many positive learning and sharing experiences on SA.   But I am I am disappointed that SA allows what appears to be organized groups of folks to pump up certain stocks and try to drive people that don't support their position away.  Sort of a "fake news" kind of situation that SA has turned a blind eye to for years now.  

In my earlier post, I mentioned that perhaps LeJoy could step in to help with this issue.  I've had many email discussions with LeJoy over the years and he has seen the problems I'm referring to for most of his roughly 4 years at Seeking Alpha. 

I'm not very hopeful that the issue will be resolved easily,  but if we don't make our concerns known, if definitely would improve.  

I'd encourage everyone to do there be to let SA know what their issues are.  It won't change if we don't tell them. 

+51

I don’t think this is an “issue” or “problem.” I think it is a very conscious policy decision being implemented by Seeking Alpha. It appears obvious to me they have made the decision to try and leverage users’ prior and on-going engagement in free older articles to entice them to sign up for premium subscription services in order to continue activities which were previously free.

I think they are making a mistake.


Instead of implementing it in a manner which amounts to coercion, they should consider a pay “ad free” model like so many other sites do. Currently, I can employ an ad-blocker and browse for free, if I so choose. But if I lose access to articles of interest, it won’t cause me to upgrade to a premium subscription. Instead, I’ll simply stop navigating to Seeking Alpha in the first place. There are many excellent alternatives available. One of the main aspects SA has offered to users to exploit over other financial sites is the social aspect. If they start blocking that, they will fail.

+10

What alternative sites do you recommend? I am soooo disappointed that the informative articles I used to access for free are no longer available. I am searching for new sites and would be interested in your recommendations.

+3

I am looking for new sites as well

+3

There are many. The one that is less obvious, and doesn't have conversations after the articles is Channelchek. https://www.channelchek.com/news-channel/Class_Action_Lawsuit_Against_Robinhood

+268

Dear SA admins,

I really dislike the new free article limit that has been put in place without warning or communication - as often done by SA when changing pay wall criteria.

Since most of the context is community-based it seems unfair to even limit free articles from now on.

I understand the need for monetization but there have to be better ways - personally I will not opt for premium under such new limitations!

+154

I would not base a complete investment decision on any article I read here. Sometimes I see some good ideas or advice. Not enough to pay for.

+46

I agree / same opinion

+9

If this continues, just stop notifying me

+93

I also was disappointed to see I no longer have any access to free articles. I will not be paying for premium either.  One of the great things about SA is the community forum which allows knowledge to be freely sourced. However, if I am going to have to pay for a stock research platform, I would rather get a more credible source such as morningstar or the motleyfool.

+1

Sono d'accordo! Spero che ne paghino le conseguenze in termini economici. Questa è solo ingordigia. Avrebbero dovuto prima avvisare gli utenti in anticipo, per correttezza, e secondariamente lasciare gratuita l' opzione basic, per chi fa un uso limitato ed esclusivamente informativo del sito! Penso che di iscritti ne perderanno parecchi.

+34

same, ty for the notice SA

+38

Me too - what a shady way of turning people away from your web site......

-240
PINNED
Answer
Answered

Hi,

Thanks for your valuable feedback. Please see our announcement here for more details:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4396836-important-update-for-seeking-alpha-users

Thanks,

Daniel Hochman

VP Product, Seeking Alpha

+106

people are asking what the limit is are you not gonna answer. 

well yahoo finance here we come

+51

You didn't even answer the question...

+187

I was a reader of the free articles that were posted on Seeking Alpha. This new policy of severly limiting the number of free articles available to registered users is difficult to understand.

Rather than driving users to the premium service, it will drive users (like me) away from your web site altogether.   

+77

really? In the darkest hour of the pandemic you go for a money grab? Great timing pr team. Shame on you all

+95

What an absolute nonsense to limit the articles to just like 5 a month. This way SA will go down the drain. I would have preferred you implement more ads.

You guys should be ashamed.

+42

What a pathetic money grab. Shame on you. I won't be back.

+24

This new change is a crock of ISHT. And y'all have the audacity to bash MF.

I'm headed over there to read FREE content - FREELY

+58

This 5 article limit without signing up for your Premium service is absurd.  I agree completely with what others have said here.  The SA community forum of ideas and opinions is interesting and potentially valuable for considering multiple points of view on investments but it is not worth the price of your Premium service.  Bye.

+21

Where do you think you get your readers from? Thin air?

Your response is both weak and disingenuous. All of us have brought you many readers by recommending your website. Many of them have signed up for premium service.

+36

Guess where you get new premium memberships? Answer: From nonmember readers. Guess how you make money off nonmember readers? Answer: advertising.

Guess what your nonmembers are going to do? Answer: Leave!

There are plenty of free websites but I will admit your comments section revealed some pretty intelligent insights. That I will miss but I'm sure another website will fill the void.

Good luck with your new business model.  You'll need it.


+7

почему доступ к официальным новостям стал платным? Я не могу читать новости компаний в моем портфолио! Статья и новости - это разные вещи, если вы просите плату за чтение официальных новостей, то вы типичный мошенник.

+13

Many people have been loyal SA members for many years (in my  case - 8) and contributed numerous comments to discussions, which made  the SA platform more valuable. SA should balance their desire to cash in

with valuing contributions of their long-time members.

+11

So what exactly is the limit? Bad form to not to be clear on what that is.

+9

I subscribed to Seeking Alpha and am in the 2-week free period. I have not read a single article till now and I am getting a message that I have used up my free articles when I tried to access one today. Very irritating. Not sure I want to subscribe to a service that is so buggy. 

+7

Goodbye deleting your app.

+1

Daniel

JUst registered for free trial. HOwever I cannot read the articles. WHat is this free trial for if it does not include articles that are emailed to me, or am i doing something wrong. 315 303-4750


Joan Hebert 

+6

Dear Daniel,

Will this ridiculous policy be changed in the near future? Or limits changed?

If yes, please update as to when we can expect a review to be announced and implemented?

If no, I am sad to inform you that, after many years of being part of and supporting SeekingAlpha become what it was up to this limitation, I will be using other content providers such as Yahoo Finance, MarketBeat, etc.

Please acknowledge the fact that this change in policy only highlights to your user base that SeekingAlpha has become a moneygrabbing service. Maybe if you would have improved/added new features to your service to justify this limitation and the subsequent mandatory paid subscription, you would have not provoked such a negative response. 

I very much doubt this change in policy has lead to the revenue increase you anticipated.

Please let me know when/if SeekingAlpha will reverse this - until then I will cease to use this service and will migrate my information to MarketBeat.

Best of luck.

+4

What is the monthly article limit for the fee account?  I don't see it stated in the linked article. 

+3

This is ridiculous.  How can you NOT tell us how many articles per month a non-premium subscriber can read???  Also, I am paying $777 per year for a couple of authors.  I have paid even more in the past.  People who ARE paying for services should be have access to articles.  That is how I found authors in the first place!!  How short-sighted to limit articles when THAT is how we find the authors to whom we want to subscribe? 

+70

Hello,

What is the free limit? Nowhere in the announcement is written exact number of articles per month. Since the morning I read 5 or 6 and I received message that the monthly limit is reached. 

+24

The articles are not free anymore?

How many are free per day without premium?

+158

I will be going elsewhere for viewing people's opinions of the market. This isn't an app filled with professional opinions, it is the mere ramblings of people who think they have done proper due diligence on companies they need to go up or down. Sad that Seeking Alpha's creators can't see that people don't want to pay for random people's random thoughts on companies. This place isn't for due diligence, it's entertainment. The comment section is what's gold in this community, not the trash opinions of the article writers. Not for me any longer. Reddit's r/investing is literally the same, and it's free. 

+25

Used to like Seeking Alpha but it's becoming more "smarmy" (a la "Motley Fool") every day. Every time I click on an article that "looks" free but throws up the sales pitch I think "sigh, guess we all become whores".

+2

It's not as deep, but Channelchek actually wants you to discover something

https://www.channelchek.com/news-channel/Why_is_the_Silver_Price_Rising_

+27

Exactly what i was going to say. Each of us reading these articles could have or probably have thought of writing an article about our opinion on a stock. Also agree 100% with the lack of transparency. Sad that it has to end this way. 

+116

Appears we were advised Dec 31, 2020 of this new paywall. So not even a week or month grace period. Why the rush and why not specifically saying how many articles are free ? 

I didnt keep count but it appears I read 3 or 4 articles and reached my limit. 

"The paywall will no longer be limited to a group of specific articles. The good news is that even without a paid subscription, you will now be able to access any article on any stock. However, there will also be a monthly limit on how many articles you can read for free. "

The announcement sounded so promising at the start and then disappointment. I dont like the lack of transparency. Only shady businesses do that. Many people will be pissed off.

Why tell me good news that no article is now locked but the catch is that within a few minutes (after reaching your 3-4 limit and certainly not a month) you will be locked out of the site !!...That's great news.. What a joke on the first day of trading 2021 !!

+64

"I dont like the lack of transparency. Only shady businesses do that."

This is exactly right. They couldn't even be bothered to change the descriptions under the subscriptions comparison here:

https://seekingalpha.com/subscriptions

What a joke.

+18

"I dont like the lack of transparency. Only shady businesses do that. Many people will be pissed off."

Spot On.

+97

I hit my free limit before even reading an article. Just by going down my portfolio news page and opening them off into tabs. I completely agree with the above, many of these articles are opinion and not thorough research. To gate for them is a travesty. SA is just joining a long list of websites I'll have to give up because of terrible design decisions. 
 

+49

Same with me. Its not a terrible design decision, though, but a terrible business call. Upsetting longstanding users is never a good idea. 

+17

It looks like they destroyed the free account starting January 4th (by implementing a monthly free article limit). There is a bigger thread about this hovering near the top of the forum. I suggest you comment there. 

+18

is there any other app we can use to get insight ? I hate how this paywall is set up

+12

Etrade and Fidelity if you have account with them. You can also use Benzinga.

+15

Big Thanks! I started a Benzinga account and also Reddit - I currently have a fidelity account will look into the stuff they have a bit more now. I'm new to investing and loved the SA insight and been tempted to follow a few select authors that seem to go with my views; probably would have given some more time. 

*The Reddit forums seem to be filled with some hilarious comments and some "new" prospective. 

Cheers and Thanks @PW13A

+56

What a pathetic attempt at a money grab, 

see ya SA

+27

This is quite upsetting really. No upfront communication. Only found out after opening several tabs on stocks in my portfolio. Go on then, keep your secrets.

+39

I have been following Seeking Alpha for only around 3 months and have really begun to appreciate it.  I understand everyone needs to turn a profit, but I think the fee is way too high.  I would rather subscribe/pay to some of the individual authors who have provided me with much more value than pay the SA fee for all the opinion.  $5-10 a month, maybe.  Not worth it beyond that for me.  

+55

Are you kidding me?  No notice.  No information regarding article limit--which I apparently hit within 1/2 hour of reviewing my emails from you--and no timeframe for the limit.  Am I just supposed to guess?  Also, your "free" subscription option indicates no article limit.  So  you added a paywall to your paywall.  Great business decision--NOT!  Just disgusted. 

+54

This is a disappointing development for SA.  I've been an avid user for SA since 2011 and was a contributor for a period of time.  The value of this community has been the open forum allowing for the sharing of opinions and ideas from amateur and professional investors.   With this new development I'm sorry to say but I and I'm sure many others will be moving on.  It's an unfortunate development for a business to release a notice on a "semi-holiday" with the only notice of the change having been the extended weekend.

I certainly understand the business implications of the paywall, but fully expect that the total web traffic and potential for new subscribers will drop due to a paywall only model.

+23

I couldn't even read any "free limit articles". Every article or news I clicked on was blocked by the screen asking to pay for the premium. I signed up for the 2-weel trial before and honestly it is not worth at all.

+17

I am a paying subscriber to The Savvy Investor service. I will now not be able to even access his free articles  without adding premium as I hit my (unknown to me) limit for the month this morning .  It seems to me anyone subscribing to one of your authors services should have premium included with the subscription.

-130

Hi Hearts and Flowers,

If you subscribe to a specific author's Marketplace service, you will have unlimited access to their free site articles as well. If you encounter an issue with this, let us know.

Thanks,

Daniel Hochman

VP Product, Seeking Alpha

+5

if we are already paying for a premium service $500+, all the basic articles should all be free. I will never pay more!   For everyone else, the price should be much much lower. This is ridiculous and you will loose eyes to sell the premium services too. Very short sighted.

+4

this site is not even worth 5$.

+10

This is not true, I'm blocked from reading even the authors I've subscribed for. Guys at SA, you killed your site and your business. Reverse this stupid decision before you go into oblivion.

+7

Mr Hochman

I access the site primarily for news/data/ etc. Most of the articles by authors that I read are/were for enjoyment, not for investing purposes. I always do my research off this site, as I feel most authors have an agenda . Be that as it may, I would be willing to subscribe for, let's say, $99 annually with upfront payment fine, with an article limit that you deem fair. Most articles do not address my investing mode, which is preferred issues and some income products. I do not know the article limit for the free service because as best I know, it has not been announced. S.A. is useful to me as a consolidated news/data site, not for the articles. Those I was REALLY interested in were very few. Kindly take my suggestion under advisement. The current Premium cost is not of value to me, nor I observe to many others. Of course if folks are paying the cost, you will reject my thoughts. I am a Looong time viewer. If you review my article accesses since Jan 4 you will see that I have not read ANY articles, best I know, but have opened some news reports. Anyways, Thanks for listening

Howard philipson/ PhilipsonH

+44

Wonder why the voting mechanism has been disabled?

+5

Probably because it was run by Dominion Software...know of any other instances where that occurred?

+22

Really disappointing, in the approach it was applied indeed. I join the complaints of all others, by the way 5 free articles is nothing.

+42

Long-time subscriber and now I will be moving on to another platform

+23

I am really disappointed that there was no communication in advance to users about this change. This community thrived upon users and contributors. You should have the courtesy to communicate any upcoming changes. 

+54

This is quite disappointing. SA was what helped me begin investing and I always found the free articles from authors really enlightening, especially as a place to start. No smart investor is only making a decision based on a free SA article, but it can spur future clicks and interest. At least from myself, and what appears to be many others, those clicks are leaving. There’s no shortage of free investing ideas on the web but I did enjoy how SA presented itself, even to free users. 

On top of that, not even a week’s notice over a holiday period. I want to say many more things, but ‘disappointed’ will  have to do. That and I suppose I will just be simply deleting the 20+ articles in my inbox I had planned to review...

+41

Take it easy SA. I am not coming back.

+16

Whoever made this decision, take a look at them a year from now. Loyalty

+74

Fire whoever made this decision.  Your user count is going to fall off a cliff.  Can't believe you simpletons think people are going to pay for the opinions of random people.

+33

LOL... No. The articles are very hit or miss in quality. Unless SA will be doing some QA, which they aren't, then no, I'm not paying to sort through articles for relevance/quality myself. Best guess, based on the limit (which I already hit day 1) seems like its about 10 articles. SA is just one tool of many, not good enough to pay premium for on its own. 

+51

They have to be really crazy to think people are going to shell out 30$+ every month to read basic articles & news. Why won't I just open a "Free" account on benzinga or yahoo finance to get the news that I was checking here? The only thing missing would be the comments that were indeed insightful and engaging but I am sure all the readers will be flocking to these sites after this very stupid move. I might be tempted to spend 5-10$/month for uninterrupted access but they are dreaming if they think anyone is going to shell out more.

+44

Along with all that has been mentioned previously, how does this restriction increase the chance that new authors/contributors will gain exposure to viewers, and the opportunity to gain subscribers, if the probability of their article being read has been greatly diminished by this knuckleheaded move?

+34

You pay your contributors pennies anyways.  $0.01 / page view and nothing from mobile views?  You guys really need help on managing ad revenue...on the page I'm on right now, there are NO ADVERTISEMENTS.  ZERO!


This is nothing more than a pathetic money grab that is going to backfire spectacularly.

+6

Not only will it chase away readers but it will chase away authors too. Authors get paid when readers read their articles. Please don't tell me to go elsewhere by saying I can't read the articles.

+13

I cancelled all my "following" status with the thought leaders.  That probably counts in the secret number of maximum "articles".  If I touch the "notifications" on my iPhone, which gives an article's headline and synopsis,  does that count as a read article?

+8

The GMAB news flash this afternoon is the perfect example. As soon as I got the message that I had exceeded my quota (which really irritated me) I immediately did a Google search and found the exact same news clip on other websites. I enjoyed reading it for free! I thought the point was to make the site "sticky" so people stayed on it. Well, it drove me immediately to other sites, LOL! 

+16

Actually, $20 per month is not a low price. If I would live in the USA that would be not much but you have to take into account other areas of the world that $20 per month is not easy money to give.

+61

The value of SA was primarily in the discussion forum attached to each article. Definitely not worth paying $30 for the pro version and the discussion forums will dry up (I am recreating my portfolio in Yahoo Finance right now), so even less point on paying now. Why would I pay for basic articles that I can get for free elsewhere (sans the discussion)? Hopefully others will follow to Yahoo and bring a (somewhat) high quality discussion there. 

Too bad SA - enjoyed our relationship while it lasted. 

+31

Fully agree. Often times I read a headline and go straight to the comments first. Love the community that SA has created but there’s nothing “sticky” about the forum that warrants such a high cost. Facebook is free. Find a way to monetize ads better. This is the new game. Pay wall is an admission of failure by the Product Management team that they can’t create a mutually beneficial marketplace for both users and advertisers.

+13

One year from now - "remember that website, what was it called?? oh yes, SneekingAlpha or something like that"...

Concur with the many others here.  This was a great place to learn, but much of it came from the discussion below the articles.  Seems the site could better monetize it's readership by placing relevant ads (Fidelity, Etrade, etc) on the pages with pay-per-view for an engaged audience and likely scooped up more than will be left with the remaining subscribers... just saying.

It isn't worth the time to sort through the 5 free articles to see one or two that might be valuable to any extent.  Content is hit and miss, comments is where it's at.

+27

I concur with the above. Going to switch to other providers, Reddit and several other. Not sure what free article limit is but it is much too low for me to continue. There are other ways to monetize. I suspect you will see your active usership diminish rapidly. 

+23

I will add to my comment above. Clicked on the link to try the Premium for free... there was no free trial option. Interested to see how quickly you will realize that you need to monetize in other ways. I also expect you pay lots to paid Contributors who’ve learned to take advantage of being paid by setting up templates that they can easily modify to write new articles without a requisite amount of effort. Not to suggest that there are not many excellent contributors. 
But, I suggest you’ve made a big mistake with your recent change. 

+40

deleted app and bookmarks...adios SA

+28

Not at all happy with this and getting divorced from SA.  It's not worth any price.  Period.

+35

I'm gone too. Terrible customer experience, SA...

+53

I've only read 3 articles since Jan 1st, and apparantly I'm already at the 'article limit'. Just echoing other folks here. Not only is this policy communicated poorly, but also it just doesn't work. Is the limit just 3 articles per month?

I've always considered SA as a classy organization. But this move is a really poor decision (and poor execution) on the part of management. 

+31

Very sad to see SA has gone this path. It seems you can't even open the news items now, such as dividend announcements, without the article limit pop-up blocking the view. So, with the new system you can't see articles or News....what a great plan. I think I will have to shift to Yahoo like everyone else.

+36

Subscribed to 2 author's services after getting exposed to them on SA and was considering signing up for 2 more in 2021... not now.  As others have stated, this change in paywall policy is a very bad business decision on the part of SA and I can't imagine how this could have been communicated any more poorly, either.  This will certainly drive not just readers away, but over time, authors, too.  Apparently SA considers the 70,000 paid subscribers they claim to be enough, as I can only imagine this number going backwards as the access to articles and number of authors goes backwards.  Too bad...

+30

It doesn't even say what the limit is! Doesn't let me read any news, article or comment. I am leaving SA. There are many other free resources.

+34

make sure to unfollow all your authors so they know why they are losing followers

+26

Price is too high.

5$a month would've been ok

+23

Disappointed! Will be moving on.

+74

I'm currently a subscriber but will not renew my subscription since the number of comments will plummet.   That is the most valuable part of the website and why I keep coming back.  The comments add to the articles.  The comment section is strangely not even mentioned in the newsletter.  

+38

Sad, I have enjoyed seeking alpha and mostly go to comments and see how the community is reacting to stock market news. They are going to be losing massive amounts of traffic to their site. 5 dollars per month would be an appropriate amount to have access to articles.

Sad to no longer be using seeking alpha

+4

Sad, I have enjoyed seeking alpha and mostly go to comments and see how the community is reacting to stock market news. They are going to be losing massive amounts of traffic to their site. 5 dollars per month would be an appropriate amount to have access to articles.

Sad to no longer be using seeking alpha

+2

Hello everyone, 

I'm not sure why, but I now seem to be able to access the SA article that I've been locked out of for the last several days where I was trying to respond to comments directed at me.    Just wanted to provide full disclosure. 

+3

until you reach your free monthly limit (4-5 articles / month)... it is a very new and disgusting issue

+35

Like many disgruntled readers, I too am incredibly shocked to see this paywall instilled. The comments and the banter per article is what drove me to this sight, and less so the research and tips suggested by the contributors. 

$5/.mo (similar to Medium) is something that I would gladly accept but the current price is tomfoolery in my mind. Hopefully, y'all did a good pricing analysis and weighed price elasticities to determine the optimal price. 

+27

Sad and disappointed, both in how this was done and in the fact that this is how you guys chose to monetize. Have browsed and commented for years, but it’s just not worth $30 a month for what is offered here with so many other info sources out there. Thanks for the memories and knowledge over the years

+9

exaclty. deleted the app from my phone back in june, when the 1st change was introduced. app was part of my lif for years, but took only 1 week to completely forget about it...and haven't had it since.

i used the website since, like most, for the comments. contributors have proven themselves during the pandemic as unworthy of following or reading..its the general public that drove traffic... sad that SA cannot come up with a sustainable business model that retains freenews article access, but i understand of course.

thank you for the many hours spent here :)

+48

I hit the free article limit without even reading one article. What kind of BS is that. And I can't find any information on what the limit exactly is. Sounds like a ZERO LIMIT policy to try to extort money from all the casual readers.

I get bombarded with banner ads every visit to SA, but the owners of this webspace are not satisfied with the ad revenues. Always seeking more money from its viewers. I have lost feeds from several authors who were told they had to move their content to the Premium Service. They were not allowed to offer free articles. So I don't buy the excuse you need the paid subscriptions to pay the authors.

What kind of shady business are you running!!

Should change the website name to Seeking More - as from the readers wallets.

+44

What a way to start the new year. How do I get the feeling that the dudes running SA have not really understood why people come to this site? Like many others have said before me, the quality of the writing is really a hit or miss. And more often the latter (unfortenately). The user comments on the pieces and news articles was the best part of SA, and I too would be OK if this would cost somewhere between 5-10$ per month. I just unfollowed everyone and will miss especially Jussi Askola, Brad Thomas and Dane Bowler, but it it what it is. Hopefully the content creators have a say in this, and SA eventually listens to them, 'cause this kind of "lets do this overpriced paywall thingy in secret during holiday season" will most definitely backfire big time.

+30

This is bullshit!.. Don't follow your nose and get too greedy. You will lose customers - free or paying. The previous model was good enough and you will do better to revert to it

+20

I agree with rest of the crowd..

+51

I think this is a bad business decision by SA. As I see it, the original business model was that contributors post free articles, so that the crowd can check what they are doing and if they like it then they will subscribe to their specialty services. SA gets advertisement revenues + some percent of the subscription revenues.
If you shut people off from free articles, the subscription base will also decline. You have just pushed SA into a vicious circle.

+13

Exactly the way I saw it.  I am a subscriber to Dividend Kings.  I wonder if my subscription will be fulfilled since I will no longer be using SA the website.

+6

In my investing experience that is called a "death spiral."

-20
Under review

Hi all,

Please give the following a read, it may give some context to the recent developments at SA
https://seekingalpha.com/article-new/4396836-important-update-for-seeking-alpha-users

Regards,
Kushal Mehrotra
Data QA Analyst, Seeking Alpha

+37

Just one tiny news article hidden among others during holidays period? No notification or big banner? Still no information about the number of free articles? No idea how disabling new articles and comments could damage your business model? Seems utterly shortsighted.

-30
Answer
Not a bug

Hi,

Please give the following a read, it may give some context to the recent developments at SA

https://seekingalpha.com/article-new/4396836-important-update-for-seeking-alpha-users

Regards,

Kushal Mehrotra

Data QA Analyst, Seeking Alpha

+8

This doesn’t really answer the issue. I’ve been getting the pop-up premium ad since this went into effect and have not been able to read any articles at all this month.  Does that mean the limit on free articles is 0?

+28

There are some very good authors here, but a majority of the content is amateurish.  Whatever the monthly limit is, I reached it on the fourth day of the month without having come across much of anything that I would consider credible. Now you want me to pay to continue reading?  No thanks, I can get plenty of amateur opinions on Reddit for free.  

+34

Whichever whiz kid marketing graduate you guys hired who convinced you to go behind a paywall should be fired.  I'm unsubscribed and will stay that way until you go back to the way you were.  Come to think of it, I won't even know unless you email me.

As they say on Shark Tank, "I'm out."

+26

Sorry for the decision. I understand you need to make money, but premium is too expensive for me.

Will read the 4 free articles, and look for alternatives. SA was my number one sofar.

+14

Yes, what is the amount of free articles per month? Would have been nice to have seeking alpha inform us of this policy change-

+21

This is outrageous! Bye and hello Reddit.

+15

This approach of holding information that is publicly available on the internet hostage, is shortsighted. I understand charging for access to information that is created and value added - I think that is reasonable. I would understand limiting access to SA created articles every month.

But charging for information that is readily available at no cost will do two things...cause current users (who helped to make SA what it is today) to leave and find another platform and will make the site less attractive to new users/subscribers. Seems to me that some will sign up and that there will be a short term gain, but long term - not so sure.


Funny - I was thinking about signing up for the service so that I could access older articles and review the comments. Not sure what I'm going to do now.

+23

Very upset with the paywall given the low quality of many of the articles. I have been reading SA since 2012. It is getting worse and worse in quality and availability. Like many, I will quit and find free OPINION content somewhere else.

Why not increase advertisement instead of limiting access to the core information to get people to pay a fee?

+20

Total BS, so... buh bye!

+19

This is a shame---hit the limit just now.    Will have to look for other sources now :(

+24

Incredibly short sighted decision.  SA had an opportunity to wrap their heads around what brings people to their site and didn't even inquire with the readers themselves.  I agree that without the robust banter in the comments there is no real value to the service.  You're not going to lure all these people back.  Terrible move.

+18

Same with me! Just hit the limit.  I'm done with you SA!

+30

So you want me to pay $250 a year on top of what I am shelling out for a marketplace author that I know you get a cut of? That's ballsy.

+24

you lost me at "free article limit"

+45

After many years, goodbye, SA. A lot of your contributors have helped to develop my investing IQ and its always interesting to see how others determine valuation, buying opportunities, etc., but a lot of the value created for me was in the public comment section. I guess this move makes sense to someone in your leadership team, but seems to have us, your readers and consumers of content, surprised and upset. Hope this works out for you, but seems like the fastest path to irrelevancy you could possible make in a world where so much information is free.

+47

Really disappointing not to give users the option of seeing lots of ads and also a reasonably priced option maybe $5-$10/month.  Not everyone is investing millions of dollars.  The biggest problem is that the lack of an entry level option and (5-10 articles/month is not that) means that so many people will leave the platform and their comments were as valuable to me as the articles and buying a premium subscription is now worth less without those voices.  I hope SA emails users when you come to your senses and that it's soon because after a few weeks there won't be a way to get people back.  Also now that most users can't read the articles your contributors (paid by page read) will be paid significantly less (which may be the point) and likely will leave SA as well.  Really... just learn to sell ads.  

+19

So long SA and good riddance.

+3

thanks for the free services - hope you'll reinstate the free service in the future

+62

I recall a statement from SA editors just a year or so ago that emphasized basic access to articles would always be free, that such was a founding principle.  Thus, it is hard to accept the sudden change to basic free access.  As others have suggested, your need for greater revenue should have been focused upon maximizing ad fees.  It’s sad to see such a suicidal change in policy by the SA site owners.

+26

Now that you mention it, i recall that statement too!     I would like to see a similar public statement from SA editors explaining this change.....and perhaps reversing it after seeing this feedback from longstanding members.

+4

Agree 100%  -  poorly done, and sad to see

+16

Such a shame that SA is now positioning themselves as a pure paid platform instead of delivering content to the world, a free world. The platform is just totally unusable if articles can not be read after just 5 days into a month. Better throw in some more ads.

CEO must be seeing dollars in his eyes, but pretty sure a lot of users will stop using SA and premium prices have to be raised soon in order to keep some sort of 'growth' while the amount of users will drop significantly.

+25

The moment SA was no longer a "disruptor," and just like everyone else. 


As a new investor since May, SA came highly recommended from close friends and I started recommending it, till now. I get it, you need to get paid, but it appears you will be losing a substantial following. Worth it? Doesn't matter as long as you're making money of the subscribers, right? It is what it is. 

I found the articles and people's comments highly engaging and incredibly insightful. It fed me with an abundant amount of knowledge, that I found myself reading till all hours of the night. 

However, you have finally persuaded me to make a comment on something, which I literally NEVER do, ON ANYTHING. 

As parents might tell their children, "I'm disappointed in you." 

Its been fun. 

+21

I agree with comments above and think you will regret this BAD decision, and w/o notice!

+43

Horrible MARKETING business decision for SA.  I also have a couple paid subscriptions which I will now NOT be renewing.  I also rarely comment but this should sink in.  SA you also need to let your contributors/authors know THEY will be losing clients/customers and income as well.  Will check back in ONE week to see if this idiotic decision is reversed by the 'adults' in the room.  If not, goodbye SA you wont be around much longer without  a robust marketing front-end.

+20

Interesting to see the moderators just ignore our opinion. How do you expect payment for a service if you don't value your user's opinions. 

+26

When the comments dry up, so will SA's worth. 

+65

Like everyone else here, I'm very disappointed with the decision to put everything behind a paywall.  I've been reading Seeking Alpha for almost eight years and consider it a valuable source of information, particularly the news blurbs that make it easy to stay on top of relevant developments in the financial markets.  I'm surprised even those news blurbs have been put behind the paywall, as that information is all available for free elsewhere, SA just organizes it in a way that makes it easy to consume.


The articles are also informative (quality is hit or miss), but as others have said the active community engaging in the comments sections is one of the most valuable aspects of SA.  I'd be very surprised if the paywall doesn't do serious damage to the size and liveliness of the community going forward.

I understand that the site needs to bring in revenue to continue operations, but I don't think a paywall is the answer - or at the very least, not a paywall with a minimum of $20 / month.  I think people might be willing to stick around for something more like $5 / month, but in my opinion the service simply doesn't offer more value than that.  I know you've tried to add other things like the Quant Ratings to improve the value proposition, but I don't think most of us really care - we just want the basic news, articles, comments, and notifications.

Wikipedia is one of the largest websites in the world, and it manages to be funded entirely by donations.  People are willing to donate because they find the platform and the information contained therein useful.  Have you considered just trying to run a simple annual fundraising campaign?  I would think a lot of people would be willing to donate to keep the site otherwise free and to keep the community thriving.

I'm not willing to give up on SA just yet, but I certainly won't be paying $20 / month for a premium subscription.  I guess I'll just wait around and see how everything shakes out, because I seriously doubt this decision is going to bring about the desired results for SA and something is going to have to give.

+32

Bad move for the contributors. I'll leave after having been an early supporter. How do the writers feel? Anyway, easy come easy go. Lame attempt to make more money. There is value here but not at 250+ a year. Bye bye.

+21

Adversting would be okay for me. But Not the Premium fee amount. That is worth a hole month of saving.

+26

This actually prompted me to look at other research sites. Checking out Zack's. Good way to drive people to check out competitors.

+3

I can't read any articles at all now?  Why the lock out?

+12

Can recommend tradingview for chart analysis, massively better chart functionalities than SA.

+38

The value of SA to me was not only in the articles but the comments.  Those will be drying up even if I decided to pay for the premium membership.  For every article pumping a company there is another article calling the same stock overvalued, the best barometer was reading other users talk about the stock ideas.  It was fun while it lasted!  BAD MOVE.  GOODBYE

+19

I have been a regular visitor/user of Seeking Alpha information for a number of years.  Very disappointing now that you have implemented pay for information.  I agree with the other posters-- you stand to lose business.

+27

Been a regular visitor aswell. Very disappointed with the direction seeking alpha is taking here. Value of SA was always that regular investors were able to participate in discussions and able to share ones oppinion. I'm not willing to pay for being able to read articles who often resolve around earnings and presentations. It was always perfectly fine that u had to pay for certain additional and very helpful information provided by seeking alpha website itself (quant ratings etc.) and to pay a fee to be able to participate in certain groups from professional writers like Brad Thomas etc. But if seeking alpha will continue this very wrong road i will definetly step away from using the app and website since its just not worth it anymore. So please remove the article limit since its freaking bull... Will definetly check out competitors.

+19

Implementing a limit on the number articles for the basic/freemium services is a poor decision. That is what drives people/eyeballs to the site.  SA should consider other means to generate revenue while attracting and "retaining" eyeballs, such as in-app advertising on the freemium service, add-free for premium service.   Otherwise eyeballs will be gone, including mine.  Sorry to see what impact this will also have on the writers/contributors.   

 

+7

What is the similar platform  to SA? Can you recommend? 

+8

Yahoo Finance.  Good Charts.  Nice portfolio tracker.  Not as many articles, but decent.

+64

Here is a free article:

BEARISH ON SEEKINGALPHA IN 2021

SeekingAlpha, a long time investor favorite for ideas, analysis, and user interaction has moved to a premium only model.  For years SA has enjoyed a "sticky" user base that has kept users engaged and returning daily for market news. But in the recent quarter Price has outpaced Earnings.  The P/E ratio is far to high and I foresee a deep correction in the coming days.  Market share will crumble in 1Q 2021.  SELL SA, long Yahoo Finance.  

+5

I remember the old Yahoo Finance boards - now a ghost town.  SA  will follow...

+10

I join with others comments. If you continue this policy will leave SA. Have used it to find services to subscribe to. 

+19

What a shame. The free articles in combination with the resulting multitude of comments made SA a valuable source of information (and great fun). A real Powerhouse! 

Happy to pay, but the current fee plan is simply too expensive. 

Will miss it. Thank you all!

+20

What a shame. I don't know where else to find comment quality like this. The paywall will destroy the comments.

Let's try to solve this.....  How about summary bullets and comment access for free?  $5-$10 a month with ads and $20/month with ad-free and other premium features?  Other ideas?  I hope SA course corrects asap.  

+15

Goodbye Seeking Alpha!  It was great while it lasted.  I have deleted my portfolios and will move on to other sites.

Too bad you don't understand users.

+16

Terribly disappointed in your new paywall policy. I agree with most users that $5-10/,month is worth it. I won't pay $20-$30/month. Just drastically curtailed my email alerts, will evaluate leaving the site altogether. You lose. Please modify your policy so I can come back as before.

+8

Bye, Bye SA. Good luck with your new policy.  

There is not only one on earth.
+17

Hi everyone, i'm quitting too.  Bye bye SA.

+6

Actually, I get daily information for my shares in the comments section of this site then SA articles(some of them are poor quality). Much of the commentators are not premium so SA will lose those comments Imho they are more valuable than articles if you take into account the diverse background. I deleted my whole portfolios yesterday and transferred them to other sites. I do not seek free stuff but $20 is expensive for a forum.This is a warning from a user who likes the discussion environment on SA and wants to continue.  

+24

As someone new to the investing world (just under a year) and of modest means I stumbled across SA and enjoyed the site. Some of the authors I found insightful and others drab/dull, regardless of the author the comment section for the most part provided insight on the topic at hand (unless it was a polarizing company as say T or MO where it was either the company was GREAT or TRASH and the commits were the same every article) and sometimes ideas of other investing opportunities. With the change in how the site is going to be I don't feel that the product I liked will be the same. I was considering some of the premium services such as The Dividend Kings for this year but with the "dilution" of the main site value in my eyes I will be on the hunt for a new site to use. Thanks for the few months of a useful product and best of luck attempting to maintain your base followers.

+16

What a bad move. Bye bye seeking alpha.

+28

This site benefits from a network effect.  This policy severely weakens their biggest source of moat.  I'll give them a couple more days to change their policy. After that I'm leaving and will never return.  I don't see the network effect being able to work without a significant ad supported tier.

+21

The decision to force people into an expensive subscription model to read any non-premium articles is just plain ignorant.  I have been a daily reader on SA since for a very long time.   It is easy for them to monetize that access alone.  I certainly will not be paying for any subscription just based on principle.   Definitely time to move on from SA.  They will soon realize that they lost the majority of their regular visitors who are not going to pay their very expensive subscription fees to read very average content. 

+11

Like everyone else, this is a very disappointing decision.    I'm not paying $20/month for SA articles, which vary tremendously in quality.    If SA comes to their senses (making basic free again, or offering it at ~$5/month), I'll stay.   Otherwise, I'm through with SA forever... and will tell others to avoid it.

+11

Bye bye SA; $20/month is not worth it.

+27

100% agree with all the negative views. Never mind the introduction of limited access, but zero notification before hand. Not the way to introduce this. Should have canvassed users via survey and then come out with a pricing plan with at least 3 months notice. Instead, boom, 'you have reached your limit". Even now I can't find on the site what that limit is. By the way www.investing.com is very good too. Lets see what SA management reaction is tomorrow. 

+8

Thank you for the www.investing.com link.  I'll check it out.

+4

Dear SA,


Could you please place a lock logo next to the paywalled articles, as was done in the past? I am sure that many readers would be surprised that they can't read articles, when they would be notified ahead of time that they couldn't read them in the past. I imagine that the removal of the lock logo feature could negatively affect the SA brand.


Thanks!

+8

Well finally found a subscription in the marketplace I liked but no way in hell I am going to now pay extra to access other SA articles. Time to cancel and move on to another service.  

+8

Would really like to know if any current paid users find SA's proprietary ratings system/scorecard stuff useful at all.  It feels redundant since most people who have existing Etrade/TD/etc brokerage accounts already get enough of the "exclusive insight", ratings, and notifications.  Tugging at strings here.  Trying to find an argument that would make it compelling to subscribe.  Is there anyone who truly sees the value in the paid version willing to share their thoughts?  Otherwise I'd prefer a "lite" subscription that continues to hide all that junk and leave the articles available to read and comment.

+11

Just unsubscribed effective March 22.  Please email me when you restore the free and not time limited articles. A third of your articles are good but the comments are more useful.  As investors we all know it is hogs that get slaughtered.

+13

No way I will pay for a pack of amateurs, self promoters and charlatans. It was fun while it was free. See Ya!

+3

also why does the ticker symbols with the company name show on the iPhone though not on iPad? This is very frustrating and hard to track stocks and the ticker symbols they represent. Thanks Tim 

+1

IMHO, they are needing to generate revenues for "upgrades, securing more writers, etc", while displaying they can make money so they can eventually go IPO.

+10

 Seeking Alpha put out a statement that you were only allowed so many free articles per month; please advise the number of articles that are available for free, seems like I was flagged to join the premium service after just one article.   Also please expound on when the free articles start and end,  ie The first of every month?

+13

Been a regular reader for 2 years.  I will now be going else where. Please email me when you restore the free reading. Willing to put up with adds, but not your outragous prices. Might be willing to shell out $5 a month but not $30

+12

yes I’m in the same boat, cannot get articles to read.... please advise of status, how many free articles and the month just started so it makes no sense please advise.... thanks Tim 

+13

l can understand you guys wanting to charge but $20 per month is way too steep and you will lose a lot of customers. I think if you charged around $7 per month, most would stick around, or have an option to pay varying amounts which would allow you access to different quantities of articles. And keep in mind, as you lose your customer base, revenue for the contributors will dry up and they will eventually leave to, causing a viscous cycle. 

Also, not everyone is located in the US. For example, $20 per month converted to CDN dollars is a lot of money to read a few articles each month. Unfortunately, like many others, I will have no choice but to leave too.

+12

I am quite new to SA and have been recommending the platform to my friends - until now. The new paywall will not only drive away visitors, but hurt the revenue of marketplace authors. Charging over $200 a year for opinions is way too expensive. Perhaps SA may consider lowering the price (I personally won't pay more than $50 a year), and introduce various tiers of subscription (a higher price = more benefits, higher article limit, fewer ads and restrictions). If not, I will look for information elsewhere.

+2

yep I’m outa here, this is not appropriate, with no warning... very frustrating.... 

+5

Agree all.  Alpha got to the point where I would see names in an article and check it out on a reputable site like Yahoo Finance, Morningstar, MarketBeat, or my brokerage houses (yes they require an account).  I got to nicknaming the writers as "the writer that picked out any high dividend and chased it" or "the writer that tried to drown readers in stats" or "the person that must have read the same article on ...".  Plenty of other options and easy to slim down my inbox by eliminating Alpha.  

+21

Used this site loyally for a long time. Yes, I didn't pay but I clicked a lot of ads and articles and created traffic. Now I have no reason to come here at all. I am more sad then anything, I enjoyed reading things here. 

+33

Wow this will be the death of SA. With fewer people commenting and reading articles it will be death to the contributors and thus your revenue. 

Such a shame. I don't mind a paywall on good articles and agree for content you should pay. But not your charging for news as well and transcripts which is public information.

Oh well as many above looks like I will be going elsewhere for my finance information in 2021.

It's been a good 2 years SA, shame it ends as it did.

+10

Just deleted all. I came for the comments, not for the articles. The more disagreement, the more I looked into it. It's how I found out that AMD might be on to something early 2017 by reading the clashing between fanboys of AMD and INTC. So long and thanks for all the fish!

+9

Here is a quick way to still read the articles on Chrome (similar to other browsers): switch to developer mode (F12), reload the article, let it load, stop script execution (F8). The article will be grayed, links won't work, but the article is still readable. 

+12

Not much to say that hasn't already been said.  Like many, I enjoyed the comment sections as much or more than the articles.  Time to delete my account and move on.  Best of luck to all!

+8

Bad decision 😪 

+19

Well I clearly slept through this and did not see any preliminary notices.   My days at SA are done then.  $20 a month?   Me thinks SA is fucked!

+11

Good by.  Enjoyed some of the articles, but many were on the amateurish side.  As with others the comments were the best part, but not worth $20 per month. 

+12

Oh well, nice while it lasted. Good luck!

+11

a real shame.  pricing is ridiculous.  would pay something reasonable and/or deal with ads. 

After many years - I'm Out.

+8

Sorry SA not feeling the love!

+17

done with SA, greedy fools, free community made your site worthwhile by sharing thoughts/ideas in comments, the articles are not worth paying for...everyone should leave, you’ve destroyed more than half your value

+9

Agree with others I am enjoying the articles but did not appreciate this article cut-off. I will NOT pay for premimum at the current rate which is too expensive. Personally think you should cut the premimum price in half to attract  subscribers.   This is a great service I hope you wil rethink this policy or adjust your premimum subscription fee. I will be monitoring for your decision. 

+15

Very disappointing SA. I understand charging something ($5/mo) perhaps for access. But, no way is it worth $20-30/mo for me.  I liked the SA format, and truly enjoyed reading/comparing comments. Any Reddit/Twitter alternatives out there?

+9

This is not a good strategy for Seeking Alpha. I will be visiting this website less frequently going forward as a result.

+7

I guess I'll also see you all wherever it is we end up. I know it won't be here. Too bad Seeking Alpha - bye!

+22

I agree with all other posts here. Forcing a subscription from a community based platform is going to lose you business. I am an infrequent viewer, mainly checking in from time to time to research specific stocks. I will not pay you $20 a month to read a handful of articles. In this case you are losing all my add revenue. I've been on SA for years and years and I bet you've made a little ad money from me. Now you will get zero. I don't get how this can be a good move considering your structure. There are some novice writers on SA and that's total cool for a freeish platform. Why would I pay you to read some novice articles? I agree that the prior model made total sense and that the hardcore people would pay. I think you really just lost all of the non-hardcore SA folks. Please reverse this decision. I don't care if you put a popup add on every page. 

+17

Agree with everyone here, been reading SA since 2007.

Will be very sorry to see you go, really enjoyed reading the articles from the various writers.

Being newly retired i cannot justify paying for this service now.

Funny thing about being retired is that when you need things the most, you get the least.

Ex. - Seeking alpha, Heath Care, etc. etc.

+31

I just unsubscribed from ALL SA emails.

Sorry SA.

I dont pay for opinions (which is what most of SA is).  I would hear contradictory SA views on the same investments, read both sides and make my own decisions.  But there are plenty of other free forums for that.  If you want my money: you have to do more than sell opinions and news that is publicly available.

I can get free news and views from MarketWatch, Yahoo Finance, GuruFocus, Zacks Research, Motley Fool etc.

Plus I have in-depth analysis from each of my brokerage accounts: Fidelity, Invesco, WellsTrade, Schwab; plus I subscribe to CNBC, Bloomberg on Direct TV and SiriusXM.

It takes more than contradictory opinions and public news to pry funds out of my investment seed capital into a monthly subscription.

In the past: had Kiplingers and Motley Fool subscriptions but found that the same insights were available without a subscription so I stopped paying for them.  The 1990s subscription model died for me decades ago.

You would need serious in-depth analysis that would need to be significantly better or different than what I already have access to.  SA just lost me.  You value your subscription more than I do, we are at an impasse.  Good luck

+18

smart decision to unsub from emails, the emails are what gets you to return after a break...

I currently pay the following for monthly subscriptions digital issues (negotiated): WSJ @4$, Bloomberg @2$, Netflix @6$, FT @8$, IBKR for "free", and a few other independent newsletters for 14$  A MONTH, without a yearly upfront payment.

This is WSJ, FT, Bloomberg, Netflix and some brilliant minds and in depth analysis for 34$a month - and SA wants the same for its news and bogey "authors" writing click bait articles, "crash is coming" prophecies, flipping from sentiment to sentiment and trendy stocks..

Someone made a serious error in judgement, and i bet it was not the WSJ etc...

+6

Thank you for the years of entertainment for free. I agree with others that an entry level price of 6.99 would have make you a lot more money than simply eliminating so many subscribers who simply don't believe the service you offer for 20 is worth it.

+9

Well this is a hard goodbye.  Anyone who doesn't have loads of money can't really justify spending this kind of money for what one receives.  As a site that claims to help with investing, it would be nice if you understood more about economics.  

-63
Awaiting Customer Reply

Hi,

I wanted to bring to your attention that new items also count towards Freemium quota, do you think you may have read a few news items?

Regards,
Kushal Mehrotra
Data QA Analyst, Seeking Alpha

+11

Even subscribers to a Marketplace subscription have a limitation on articles!!! A complete lack of respect to SA customers. I agree with others that an entry level price of 6.99 would have make you a lot more money than simply eliminating so many subscribers.

+28

Without notice to change policies is not acceptable. Even more, looking at your current plan description, I cannot see any hint about the maximum of accessable articles per month.

Obvious it is time to look for an alternative. What a pity!

+2

Even subscribers to a Marketplace subscription have a limitation on articles!!! A complete lack of respect to SA customers. I agree with others that an entry level price of 6.99 would have make you a lot more money than simply eliminating so many subscribers.

+8

I wonder what kind of group-think SA will fall victim to when it’s left with only folks willing to pay $250/yr for a chat forum. Perhaps they already have which led to the pay wall. 

+18

I've lost interest in the site after every article I clicked is locked. I will probably check back later if this new policy got reversed. Very disappointed at this time.

+19

I used SA everyday. This is absolutely terrible!

+10

To get the really good analysis with a lot of fluff I would pay a dollar per month.  Brad, Rida etc.  I am out of here and will miss all the poorly written analysis by many, but now all SA heads straight to junk mail.  Whoever made this decision, GOOD RIDDANCE!

+13

I thought it was just me. But seems like everybody got surprised by this move. Just be honest and get rid of the free option, since you can not do anything anyway with the free tier. You will lose a lot of readers and I don't understand how you want to attract people to use the marketplace this way. 

+7

I RARELY read the articles on SA and often just for the fun of it, not because I needed to. I go elsewhere to do my research. I primarily use S.A. for news and data, NOT the articles. Usually comments are far superior to the articles. SA will be like cable TV, where you pay a fee to see ads, but in this case, you will pay a fee to pay for subscriptions if you want in depth information. The authors will be hard pressed to add more subscribers to their services in the future when many current S.A. users bail out. I find S.A. a useful site and access it almost daily but NOT for articles. In the future with way fewer vistors, there will be far fewer comments about articles. I will continue to visit here because I don't need the articles, but if they bcome a totally pay-for site, then I will have to drop out. I think $10 monthly would have satisfied most folks here.

+4

That is possible.  And touches on the third issue I mentioned.  How are we supposed to know what counts?  How are we supposed to see how many "Freemiums" we have left?

+10

I'm out. Bye SA.

+23

Lots of comments. Everything is said. And what happens? Nothing, not a hint of admitting a mistake by SA for setting up this ludicrous paywall (5 free articles per month, what a joke!). What a shame!

And not long ago, they had promised the exact opposite.

+15

Ridiculous decision. Go back to how it was before or introduce a cheap version. Who is going to pay 2-3x the price of Netflix, etc. for this?? 

Hopefully SA loses a lot of viewers and realizes they made a mistake. Maybe this is a good time to start my own site that is free and just receives revenue from advertising instead?

+15

Hello to all.    I am elderly and I truly enjoyed reading the articles on SA.  I am so sad to know I cant come here each day and read and research.  I used to be a pretty good investor back when I was a young whipper snapper like the other commenters on here.  I am so sad, I cannot afford to come here any longer.  If you do feel the need to charge  maybe 2.99 monthly would be a good price but even then, doesn't it just start to upward future pricing.     I am just sad.    I wish I knew where to turn now.   

+10

try investing.com as it is similar to how SA used to be before the paywall change. Many people will be switching over there.

+10

No more SA for me.

Like other commenters, I found more value in the responses than the actual articles - many of which were absolute trash.

+7

I have been a long time subscriber. Your greed has overtaken any benefits that are derived from what used to be a great investor source. So long and shame on you.

+6

And now we have to pay for news? (sorry for the grammar)

To quote Voltaire "common sense is not so common"

This certainly applies to whoever decided to destroy Seeking Alpha!

+4

So, now we have to pay for news?

To quote Voltaire "common sense is not so common"

This certainly applies to whoever decided to destroy Seeking Alpha!

+5

Hi Guys...Another investing forum site is siliconinvestor.com

No articles, but plenty of insightful comments.

I have enjoyed it for years.


+9

I'm out.  Unsubscribing from daily emails.  Don't see what was wrong with the Ad supported limited access.  A shame.

I signed up for free account and gave you my credit card info.  when I tried to read an article I still get notified I need to start free 14day trial.  How do we correct this issue?

-7
Under review

Hello,

Thanks for writing in. I have replied to you directly via email.

Best,

Gitanjali

Giving me a list of other peoples problems and opinions does not solve my problem.  If this is what I am paying for maybe I don't need your service.

+2

Thank all of you sweet young people for your suggestions!!  I will be checking into them all.  Does an old lady proud to see such caring young people.  

+10

It might be just a test to see how the free users would convert. Good luck!

Please let us know when you revert the free version of SA back to free...

+8

Like everyone else ... leaving. Seems Seeking Alpha has gotten greedy. Pay for articles and for authors that are there to start a fee-based following. Double dipping. Heading to Motley Fool and tipranks.com where articles are still free.

+8

So reading a short news paragraphs counts to my 5 a month limit, come on now, sort this out. 

I have the same concern. Please stop sending me articles that are for Premium members only. You are wasting my time and clogging my email inbox with articles I cant read. If this is the way you are going to operate please cancel my non premium membership. Please get back to me or stop sending me emails

+8

Ditto on almost all of the comments here, and sadly a goodbye to SA from me. I realize SA has to make a profit and pay for its contributors articles.  Long time almost daily reader at SA and enjoy many of the contributors and especially many of the comments on the articles.  $240/yr for premium is too steep for this investor, I don't mind paying a lower rate or clicking/viewing ads..

+9

Highly disappointed in the pay wall. If it stays I will depart SA. Please inform.

+11

In three years of reading, I have found exactly three authors here who I feel are consistently good for my investing style.  And I would not have been willing to advance $720 on faith to find three authors.  Therefore I am skeptical of SA's prospects for growing the reader base going forward when new visitors are going to hit their article limit in the first hour clicking on all the chaff in search of a useful insight.

+13

i agree $30 (not $20) per month is way too much that's more than most subscriptions...I consumed about 4 articles a day. Would I pay $5 a month maybe but certainly not $30 esp right after a pandemic.  Maybe ask for donations or allow readers to tip author with crypto. Rather than complain lets focus on SA alternatives...what other sites can we read while SA dies a slow death?

+9

Adios Amigo.... Shameful

+4

Like most others on this board, I would pay $5-$7/month but $20-$25 is way too expensive for what you really get here.  My biggest concern is all the readers and comments leaving.  Those were the most valuable part for me.  

+7

It seems like I was not the only one to be appalled by the request of a subscription. I have tried the premium last year on a trial and did not see any reason to purchase at that price, and I sure do not believe multiple threads of AT&T, Tesla or whatever the hot-stock is proves $20 per month worth of value. 

Shameful !

+1

I agree!!!! well said!!!!

+2

Same here, very disappointing

+7

Been a long time user (probably about a decade now).  I don't read many articles anymore, but do click through for the news headlines multiple times a day, and provide ad impressions.  I guess that will be ending.

Sad to see it end!! 

+7

Similar to the others above, I've been a long time user of SA and advocated the site to friends and family - now I'll find new site - bye

+7

Found SA during the time leading up to Sirius and XM Satellite merger. It has been fun. I will miss my daily read here. Regards and GLTA

+2

I've already cancelled the useless drivel Bret Jensen publishes as analysis on his 3 services.

Still subscribe to 3 other services through Seeking Alpha. Now you want me to pay for the flood of flotsam and jetsam that you publish daily? Sorry, but I'm out.

+6

Not worth it to pay for an opinion.  I always make my own decisions.  I hope SA changes their mind

+14

David, I have always admired your vision for creating a platform such as this and your achievements; but, I think you have miscalculated the effect of your current change.

No one knows the threshold limit you have established because you have failed to disclose that crucial bit of information. If you know it, please let us know.

I for one am hesitant to read any articles now for fear of wasting one of my allowed views on an article I unexpectedly find worthless and then regret. So, who benefits from this situation?

Find another, reasonable, way to monetize situations like this.

We need each other, David.

+13

Been reading almost daily for the last 3-4 yrs. I was more into comments, analyst upgrade/downgrade news than the articles. The community was great. Now I guess this is it for me. I never posted a single comment in SA. This is my first and probably last comment :) 

+2

Hi,

Kushal Mehrotra
Data QA Analyst, Seeking Alpha

You said: 


"The good news is that even without a paid subscription, you will now be able to access any article on any stock. However, there will also be a monthly limit on how many articles you can read for free. Once you reach your limit, in order to read additional articles, you will be asked to subscribe to Seeking Alpha Premium."

That seems quite fair,  but what is the limit?  And why aren't you offering  the details to us? Forgive me for asking you for a bit more detail.  My main concern is that your new model allows one to get access to older articles,  but if one goes back to the same older article one time or 10 times, does that count as 1 or 10? 

There shouldn't  be a limit or penalty if one is actively involved in multiple discussions with others on SA  that might go on for months (like I have with @tdot and @ricj).   

So Kushal,

I guess my main point is just this: 

cut any of us off as much as you need to to make your business model work,

but cutting off folks who are tying to respond to others on your network?  Not a good idea.  

+8

I also think the price is just too high. I would prefer to hide everything behind a paywall (no free plan) but make it quite affordable, e.g. 1 or 2 dollars a month. I'm sure almost every user would pay this. Lower the price but get much more subscribers which in the end could bring in more money! :-)

+10

My opinion is that news is not an article and should not count as a free article. This is insane, just copy the head lines of SA news and 10 sites pop up where you can read this news for 'free'.  This is crazy.

+6

oh no, it’s a shame. I would pay 5$ per month but 20$ is way too much. Good bye then 😢

+5

$5.00 plus adds would be ok, we all know you want to make revenue but after years of following....im out!

+12

No doubt, SA has overpriced the ability to read articles. I was blocked from reading on Monday, everyday since I look at the headlines of articles and realize that almost all that interest me are just opinion articles on stocks I already own. SA did lead me to a subscription service from HDO and that has been excellent. Think about this SA and it's most popular authors. Now the your readership will be only paid subscribers and a very limited free articles will be read, this will result in less exposure to individual authors and less subscribers to those authors services. I owned a small business and choose sales velocity over higher prices, SA do the same. I am in for $10 per month or annual at $99 per year. Not worth any more to read how T management is horrible or how T is the best stock for 2021. SA reconsider the cost.

+6

SA, I just blocked emails from you, they now go directly into spam.

+4

I've got the same problem.  I opened an article once, then had to take care of something.  I went to the "articles read" section of the first page and tried to get the article back.  I was greeted with the message to subscribe to premium that I couldn't get by.  As a result, I couldn't re-read the original article that I had opened.  The other question is when was there a limit placed on the number of "free" articles that could be read.  This is highly irritating.

+2

After reading a few of the "management" responses to this very topic, I'm afraid I'm done with SA.  In fact, I'll just reject the e-mail messages that constantly come to my mailbox.  I have Morningstar Premium access for free, so I guess this is "adios SA."

+6

Just signed up for a subscription by the end of last year (DDD which is excellent btw) and now this paywall that comes with crazy pricing. I guess that's it for SA. Feeling betrayed.

+8

Well, I'm sorry to say that I'm finished with SA like many others.  I have been here for years to just browse around.  I tried using your portfolio which I cannot use because it does not support Canadian listed stocks.  How do you expect me to pay for this sercive when there are much better options elsewhere?

+2

Having the same issue.....what's the issue?  Mobile App is working fine.

+2

I CANNOT GET ON MOBILE APP, IPAD OR LAPTOP. WHAT IS THE DEAL?

+1

If SA needs to monetize this all they need do is say so.

+4

Why are news articles counted towards your monthly limit???

+2

why r all the articles locked out?

+8

This is a crazy policy for those who have consistently followed this site.  Let's see how long SA is able to survive with this new pay structure, I'm thinking not long.  Good riddance from a loyal follower.


What similar sites are available?  Thanks for the insight. 

+2

absolutely agree

+7

Been a very loyal member since 2013. I guess I have to go find another site. $250/year is way too much. I'd pay $6 or $7/month.  Bye SA its been a good 8 years 

+6

well its disappointing but your right to do bad decisions. Thats a hard stop and bye. Good luck you will need it...the once who are gone will be hard to get back.

+7

Bye from a loyal follower.

+5

Thanks for the suggestions guys regarding a few other sites to try...I'm definitely going to miss the authors that I have been following.

+6

The old bait-and-switch trick.  Not going to get me to bite.  So long.

+2

Eliminate 'Free' and  charge a nominal $6/mos for Basic membership with access to all articles  within 24-48 hours of publication.  After that the higher levels of membership will allow the pro members to have their exclusive access.  If basic accounts became paying accounts I suspect the additional revenue would be substantial.

+10

I unsubscribed from all emails.  I'm willing to pay for WSJ and NYT, but not SA.

+1

I'll be going elsewhere for market information.  So much noise on this site anyway.

Please post any site finds to receive quotes and news without the hassle.  I left yahoo finance because they made changes that were annoying and unhelpful.

Your broker's site. By the way, it is very easy to get quotes on YAHOO FINANCE. That is all I go to that site for.  

Kushal:

HOW MANY articles can I read BEFORE 

I hit the limit? It;'s Jan 7th and I've been block since the 4th. This blocking is very tiresome. SA isn't the only source of info. 

+2

So. I can read 5 articles a month? That's it? Why allow any articles? Just go to pay only. That would at least save YOU time from defending this stupid policy. I read 5 articles in a morning. Your service is unusable after the 1st of every month. WHY would anytime come back on the 2nd? You guys need to fire your marketing people. you will never have casual readers again. hope you get the $$ you are looking for. But not from me. CYA!

+8

Bad move. Disappointed. More then articles I came here to read insightful comments. I doubt if it will be as Will have to find the next SA.

+5

SA has reinvented itself into an "also ran" resource within my investment research universe. May visit once or twice a month at most in future... maybe not.

+5

Wow that's trash. At least there is still the portfolio functionality. If you make that premium there would pretty much be no reason to go on this site anymore. 

+17

Will wait a short while to see if S/A realizes the folly of their new paywall policy.

If it is not reversed and continue unaltered I will likely completely discontinue my use of S/A.

Terrible decision, 

+2

What a joke.  Trying to create a continuous revenue stream with articles written by others.

+12

My father once have me a piece of advice that I think you will find applies to your recent changes.

"A mind full of greed gets a handful fecal matter"

So long and good luck to you.

+3

Terrible idea. You lost a long time reader. First you hide "editors picks" articles under a paywall now you won't even allow followers to read their authors. I hope the writers desert your site. Such a disservice to both readers and writers. Shame on you!

+3

Let's hope some of the Authors see the light and jump from this quickly sinking ship.......

+4

^^^ Well said!! ^^^

+3

So long Seeking Alpha. Pay wall means bye bye.

+10

The SA news alerts are even subject to the article limit...... 


I can understand the stock analysis but not the news. That is public information. 

+2

Let's give the authors a boost into action by unfollowing them. I did that to the 100 or so that I have been following and received some interesting comments from them regarding SA's new policy. Why continue following authors that you are no longer allowed to read? Combined, readers and authors can generate considerable feedback to SA's new policy.

+6

Been a longtime user but now....no more.

Using SA pre-pay wall as an example,  can anyone else recommend something similar?

+2

likewise. Just unsubscribed from any newsletter

+7

Been with you a long time ... now it's goodbye!!!

+4

Same feedback here. Was a fan for a long time. Not any more.  Maybe you should charge for the Basic service too! 

+4

How do I change to Basic service?? Thanks

+6

I hope the admins are reading the comments.  I agree that’d I’d pay $5/mo to get access to a limited set of tools and articles.  

I enjoyed the articles (until those all went behind a paywall) but kept coming back for the earnings call transcripts and presentations.  I can get those for free elsewhere.  

You’ve built a great app and a great community, but I can get Barron’s for a fifth of your premium rate.  Propose something more reasonable for the non-power user.

+6

Your business, you can charge what you want, but I find limited access unacceptable.  I do not need your premium services, my broker provides almost of that to me now. I am willing to consider paying for article access, but if you continue with these new policies, you are losing these eyeballs for good.

+8

Poor plan to limit to 5 articles, and poor implementation with a 5 day notice

+17

This is a most unfortunate and poorly conceived and executed monetization attempt.

$240 a year for a glorified bulletin board seems excessive to me. Most of us have access to the wires and professional analysis via our trading platforms and subscription to established sources. 

The educated comments of your users were your capital, and this decision will squander that capital by turning many of them away.

Furthermore, the few Authors I found valuable and follow will feel the sting and lose access to potential subscribers. 

I suspect you will have to reconsider, if not the paywall model itself, your pricing strategy.

Thank you for the years of valuable service you provided.

+4

I guess I will have to remove this app if you are going to force me to pay. I will go back to motley fool where at least it’s not constant pump and dump articles 

+11

The articles aren't worth anything, the comments from the NOW PUSHED AWAY users were interesting. A dried up comment section renders this platform USELESS. Goodbye!

+5

Interesting that SA has taken this route.  Glad I signed for Motley Fool Stock Advisor for $59 a year in December.  They recommended LMND for $80 in December and today as well and closed above $150.  Also a great call on FLGT.  I was skeptical at first but after one month I am glad I signed up for their service. 

+6

just remove SA from my phone feed so it's official for me...already found some decent alternatives...

+4

Please share the alternatives you found? Let us all go there. But mask the link (like this --> www investing com or www morningstar com) or else the comment will get moderated.

+2

What kind of alternative have you found?

+4

I just unfollowed all the authors I was following. I suggest everyone does the same so writers realise that this is a dying platform and go elsewhere. I will look into alternative platforms and GTFO of this place. 

So much potential, such incompetent management.

+10

Paywall will lead to less people visiting and commenting. That will lead to less atricles and authors publishing. Less content will lead to even less people visiting SA and spiral of death will continue. 

Than they will try to reverse that by making it free again but it will be too late. Some other platforms will already take their place.

Seen that before many times.

+7

Well, I guess it is time for a new source..

+3

I'm going to disagree with the others on some points and agree on others. I think that the article quality is very high and detailed. I love your contributors and even if i disagree with them, i like to hear the differing inputs. It seems like all your writers spend a lot of time on each article and I'm happy with the service you provide. 

That said, i think the price is too high for a service that used to be free. I think 5 dollars a month is reasonable. Beyond that i think ads should be employed for additional revenue. Also i feel that a greater amount of free articles should be offered. I think generosity in these respects, would go a long way.  

+3

How disapointing.. I'll keep my account and maybe wait 6 months or so, if you keep this shit up I'll go ahead and delete it. Bye...

+1

I have paid the inscription for Premium 3 days agoand I still cannot open any link ... it sucks !

+3

First time I have heard about a "free article limit exceeded".  The Premium subscription is way overpriced.  BAd marketing decision !!!

+1

I agree....just today, I stopped being able to open any article than comes with other articles.  ie.....whenever something is published by itself, I can read it, but when there are multiple articles....I cannot read any of them. I also tried articles by authors who I know for sure do not charge....but it says I am barred.

Please change this.  I will never pay....especially after this.  But, I am sure you want my readership.

+2

I agree, bad marketing. I'll simple use the news and analysis provided by my on line broker.

+1

Do the words "bait and switch" ring a bell?

+11

Long time reader, huge fan, and love the community (refreshingly free of politics, nonsense and articles NOT about investing/companies, etc). 

HOWEVER. Completely flipping the switch is not the answer. While the content is good, I'd agree w/ most commenters that it's not THAT good -- helpful, yes, sometimes insightful, but not groundbreaking. 

Which seemed like a perfectly fair trade off to have free access and paid ads. 

$239/yr for the first tier of subscription is robbery. Will NOT be paying. 

+3

point of diminishing returns...the community says $30 is too much...would you rather have 5% of readers paying $30 or 30% paying $5? 

+10

To: SA Admin Daniel Hochman,

Dan, it's over. It never was Bloomberg, and not worth a fraction of the price you are charging. Plus, the lack of transparency scores -10 on the UX, adding insult to injury. 


SA has been killed, and very efficiently if I may say. It appears that the bloody knife is in your incompetant hands. See you!

+3

I'm gone! Why would I pay for poor spelling, grammar and context. I never put much trust or confidence in the submissions, but once in a while I would find a good one... (Carnevale). Nothing worth paying for here. I am a retired broker, and I am quite capable of doing my own research. Seeking Alpha was really just a few minutes of entertainment every morning, and is easily replaced. I just marked all Seeking Alpha addresses as Junk Mail, Bye Bye...............

+1

My main interest in the site is the comment sections, which probably isn't enough to make me join.  I would like to point out there is a lot of pushback here to SA from many users. I think an important point to keep in mind is many of us have never given SA a dime. Maybe they sold our eyeballs, but it is possible that isn't profitable enough for them. As a businessman I can surely respect their decision, because I know it is pretty hard to turn a profit off the people that don't want to pay for services. Free users (me included) shouldn't really be complaining to SA about them trying to grow more of a revenue stream. At the end of the day I will be grateful for the free services I do receive from SA. 

+6

Most all the articles here are just peoples' opinions - and opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. Most of the authors are rookies and wannabees, who get paid to write. For serious news see bloomberg.com. For serious investment/trading ideas, there are many at SA's price level. Do yourself a favor and give up on reading the opinions, and just follow the price charts. If I were investing in SA, I'd be shorting it as fast as I can.

+5

This site has taught me so much in my quest to take my money from bad money managers and invest myself. Not all of the articles are reliable but the comments gave me the opportunity to see other’s views. Unfortunately, the price is way too much for me. I have deleted my account and will seek other sources to continue my journey. Thanks!

I would consider a low cost basic subscription.  Just read the articles and perhaps some basic info/access.  20 dollars a month is higher than any other subscription I have in my household.  Spotify gives me nearly all music for a fraction of that.  Streaming tv is cheaper.  And the entire family uses that.  I get the need to monetize but the tiers are forbidding and will drive me away.  

+1

You need to fix things..lost article headers today.  No reference to author nor date and time article was written.  Useless ??

+7

Does Seeking Alpha not make money from ads placed on the website?

You cant be serious that all your revenue is coming from subscriptions. There are so many bad (option) articles that you have to read dozens to sort through the junk. You quickly go through the article limit. 

You are losing views based upon your move. As you lose views, you will lose contributors (the good ones at least). Good Luck

+5

It was bad enough when they changed the layout.  Now you can't even read the free articles.  Do the authors know that their free stuff is now being blocked from being read.  It's going to make it really hard for folks like Brad Thomas, Rida Morwa, Hoya Capital, Colorado Wealth Management to get new paid subscribers if we can't even see their free articles.  I'll move back to Yahoo Finance.  Seeking Alpha just doesn't offer anything thing unique unless you spend $30 a month.  There are other options.

+3

This site has gotten so screwed up it's beyond belief.  Not being able to read the "free" articles that I used to be able to read really has irritated me and as a result, I'm going elsewhere.  Monthly fee is just too much considering that I get Morningstar Premium for free.

+1

SA,


Get better at negotiating your ad fees and you wouldn’t have to pull such a minor league move...Bye Bye Felicia!

+1

I have to voice me concurrence with Sfergy1's comments.  I tried to find some documentation of the "free article limit" but don't seem to find it in either the terms and use or privacy policies, other than the generic blip under Misc.  " We reserve the right to limit the availability of the Site to any person, geographic area, or jurisdiction we so desire, at any time and in our sole discretion, and to limit the quantities of any such service or product that we provide."

If you do have some specific article limit, I can't seem to find.   If someone does know the specifics of how many articles are allowed, per day, week, month, year??? please let me know.  thanks 

+11

This is the reply I sent to the SA founder that messaged me privately:

David,

Your contributors are amateurs who you pay peanuts to. I know, as I contributed for several years. The same article I submitted to you guys I was getting paid 4x for by other parties. It's pathetic.

As for advertising, you'd easily be able to sustain your business if your advertisement team wasn't full of failures.

For instance, the webpage I'm replying to you from, there is not one single advertisement. This is common across any pages on your site. It's utter failure to monetize your webpage.

Now, your advertisement business will get even worse, as your readership is going to fall of a cliff.

If you guys want some help on how to run your business profitably, please let me know and I can send you my resume. I have an MBA and 13 years in the market. I'm serious.

+1

I agree; no explanation, just a whole lot of frustration and noresponse from SA. 

A whole lot of people will leave the site as a result, so there will b less comments to the contributors who will also be disillusioned as a result and some will leave.

Seeking Alpha are shooting themselves in the foot.

@lettuce - what other sites do you recommend?

+6

Terrible decision and even worse implementation. Still haven't found out what the limit is or exactly what window it's applied over.  This decision turns the site into pay only, as the free version is now virtually worthless.  Might consider paying $5/mo for it, but it would be my last option after checking out all other alternatives.

+1

For years I have enjoyed reading commentary on Seeking Alpha.  Apparently your policy has changed as I am being asked to subscribe to SA Premium.  All recent news articles have been cut off indicating I have reached a so called limit and requesting a payment if I want to continue to receive the full article. I am not in a position to make these payments thus you can take me off the list for receiving these submissions.  Sad.

+4

Disappointed. See you later. The amount for premium is not worth what SA is asking. 

+15

Seriously?  Are you guys trying to commit suicide?


You could not have executed a more pathetic change to a paywall model if you tried:

- No notice

- No mention of the number of free articles

- Excessively expensive.  No one in their right mind is going to pay this. 


The community here are no fools, but this move certainly is.  Existing readers will leave in droves.  By limiting the number of articles to such a pathetically low (unpublicized) number,  how can you possibly expect to draw new readers to replace the ones you'll surely loose?  You can't, and you won't...


In case you didn't realize, the web is a big place where folks with opinions will surely reveal the "move of morons"; your reputation will soon be in ruins.

The result?  What value their was to SA, which is the readers comments, or what I call "the wisdom of the crowd" will vanish, as will SA's value along with it's viability as a source of info or income generation

Foolish move;  Live by the greedy sword, die by the greedy sword.  


Best of luck; I'm out.  AMF.

+2

I agree. Suddenly I now must pay for what was free just a week ago. I will not pay ........

+2

Your need for greed exceeds my need for this service. Auf Wiedersehen!

+1

Glad I'm not the only one. I can't read anything anymore. 

+23

Seeking Alpha Admins,

I can't begin to express my extreme disappointment with you. No only were we not informed about the recent paywall changes, but your own press release doesn't even say how many free articles we can read each month or how much a subscription costs.

After reading posts here that say that you want $20 a month, I'm deleting the App from my iPhone. It's not worth anywhere near that price.

Let's see, a year of Amazon Prime is $120: Millions of movies and shows, plus free shipping (and more) - that's worth it. Discovery+ just announced their streaming service: 55,000 shows for $4.99 a month. And you think that you can charge $20 a month - Forget it.

Everyone should Google "seeking alpha alternative"

It's too bad. There are a few good writers on SA and I've subscribed to their services. Now, new authors will never even have the chance to reach me because I can't read their free articles. So those authors will lose out, plus, you'll lose the advertising revenue that you receive from the ads that you placed in the articles. No articles, no ad revenue, no chance to discover new authors.........

Way to go SA. What a way to kill a business. How much would I pay? (You didn't even bother asking me to take a survey, but here's what I think)....   For $1.99 a month I'd sign up without thinking about it. For $4.99 I might sign up. For anything more than that, your App gets deleted.

Goodbye SA

+8

Like all above, I am leaving also.  I am going to greatly miss Regarded Solutions - my genial financial father figure.  He has inspired me and given me confidence with his clear and honest appraisals of the market.    RS - please stay well and keep getting the most out of life.   

+5

I was a premium subscriber a few years back and found the "in depth" articles lacking.  Really nothing more than the free section except a lot more charts and diagrams I terminated my subscription after a few months.  I enjoy reading the articles but find the comment section often times, is much more informative and certainly more entertaining. I do not see a value of $20.00 a month, you are not really offering anything. There are a few good authors but to be honest, most of them are throwing stuff on the wall to see what sticks.  There may be a lead to follow, but I would certainly would not buy a stock based on these authors. I have subscribed to 2 of the authors and they are outstanding.  I tried a third but did not fit my needs, but liked his stuff. As mention above, $1.99/month, I'm in, at $4.99/month I would give it a try for a month, but I sincerely doubt I would continue.

+1

there’s probably considerable user overlap here with the group I’m about to mention: if you’re a car enthusiast, there are tons of online forums for every make and model; hell, car forums probably are responsible for the internet itself. Rennlist is the main Porsche forum and to my knowledge the only car forum that actually charges a membership fee. Now to be fair, free users can still use the site but paid members get an exclusive badge on their avatar. I confess I was one of them. But I think it was like $20 a year or something. Anyway, of course only a Porsche forum could get away with something like that.  I’m sure SA is thinking the same thing. 

+2

I've been getting articles on my portfolio for years and now you want to limit what I get to try to get me to sign up for Premium.  I don't need Premium.  I just need the articles.  I am deeply disappointed in your decision to limit users of your website and will source out another company if you don't decide to change this policy.  It is greedy and makes your company look really bad.

+2

I'm joining the chorus in saying good-bye.  Like many others, I never put too much faith in the articles themselves, but did enjoy reading the comments.  I have removed SA from my Favorites Bar and am moving on.

+2

Good bye ...

Its a shame,  no warning whatsoever and reached limit immediately without knowing the limit of free articles. Bye, bye

+2

I really dislike the new free article limit that has been put in place. I cannot understand this decision, why not add more ads instead. Dumb decision, no warning. Paying the fee is not an option so looks to me that I cannot use SeekingAlpha anymore. 

+4

greedy greedy

Let’s all move to yahoo finance

+2

or better reddit wsb investing thetagang...

+3

Good luck SA if you believe you are better off forcing readers to pay $30 for subscription. Not worth the money for me, I'm leaving.

+3

And where do i see when my limit is reached or at least how much free articles i can read in a month or in a week for free?? This changement happen so fast, dear SA that you even forget to give us detail. My limit is reached? Ok which limit, and when can i read news for free again??? For the rest i agree with most of what is written here... if i have to pay 19,99UST per month..ciao ciao caro Seeking Alpha. Not for free articles!! Or at least pay the writers who post the articles for free, that would be an argument.

+2

How can I delete my user / close my account ? In future , please give your customers  time to absorb such a drastic change in your policy. At this point, I want to close my account and move to other sites.

+2

5 reads per month-little restrictive-guess either pay or go -Yes I am/was  a long timtunue reader-

+2

Please can you publish the steps here on how I can delete my account / close ? I am not able to find it . Will appreciate the quick response ?

+9

I just read all the comments above and there's no need to pile on. If SA hasn't gotten the message from all those frustrated users already, then nothing we can say that will matter.

The most valuable asset the site owners have is the Seeking Alpha community and they are heading for the exits. 

I'm holding out hope that we will receive an announcement that this ill advised change is being reversed.

With sincere sadness,

-TMG

+12

Have to strongly disagree, everyone who is not satisfied with the recent changes should definetly speak his mind so that the numbers of unhappy people who still care enough to give there honest opinion about this site will rise as much as possible.

Still sad that so far no Admin gave a some kind of comment that suggests they think about this matter / think about how to solve the problem in a way everyone benefits.

It has been said plenty of times already:

1) rethink pricing strategy
2) think about a "lite" version which is way cheaper 2-4,99 $ with ads
3) most valuable content is the users comments which they are now supposed to pay to give and read

I will check back on this matter within the next days to weeks but I can only advise to be quick about giving some kind of update on this matter / initiate change. In this topic we might don't have thousands of comments yet but most people just leave a website when they are unhappy and those few hundred comments come from heart and come from dedicated users who truly make this website what it is.

+4

I have been a free subscriber for over 20 years.  Guess I am done with Seeking Alpha.  Sad.  

+1

Really, I Firstly think about find new service. and I'm not alone

+1

yep, looking for an alternative. comment sections were the best on SA

+3

i dont understand why i am suddenly "limited" on reading articles without signing up for premium.    Why the change?

+3

In my 50 years of business and investing experience, one of my rules comes to mind to describe your new policy. “ Play stupid games.....Win stupid prizes”

You win, I’m gone.

+2

i still hope that they come to their senses. I think it's not a coincidence that they did it now when exchanges are at all-time highs. But I want to see the accuracy and expertise of their contributors and their ratings when markets get choppy again. It was easy to recommend stocks when 90% are winners anyway.

Vote with your feet and walk out of this insanity. And I hope some contributors put pressure on SA!

+2

indeed! Lots of value is gone now......

+3

This is a lose-lose situation. Seeking Alpha’s article comments section are valuable and entertaining for most users, and it’s truly why SeekingAlpha is here today. If seekingalpha puts it behind an expensive paywall, whoever do not pay for premium could not be able to comment - then seekingalpha is inflicting injuries on itself. This is why it’s a lose-lose situation. What SeekingAlpha can do is to establish another “Plus” tier, say $5 dollar a month, like Disney, and allow access for most articles. Then Put all those premium article under $300 Premium plan. SeekingAlpha should also realize in today’s world, it’s better to have a lot of users paying $10 than to have a few guys grudgingly shedding out $300. Can I also get contributor commission for such a nice idea, SeekingAlpha, since it’s money talk anyway:-)?

+5

+1 to virtually every comment made on this feedback page. I have been a long time subscriber to Barron’s and find their research much more insightful than many of the contributors on SA. The quality and thoroughness of their writing and editorial staff is second to none. And for me the icing on the cake are the daily newsletters that are available at no additional cost. I have found many valuable investment ideas in both the weekly magazine and the daily roundup newsletter. As an added plus Barron’s staff are very responsive to email correspondence. 

+1

Barron or "Investing.com Insights" (new product in collaboration with Tipranks). 

+1

completely agree

+1

nicely said, completely agree with author.

hope to see some reversal

+2

That pricing is outrageous - this was a moderately interesting place to visit for investing ideas but not worth anything like what you are asking.  I will look elsewhere.

+2

You've lost me.  Site is unusable now.  Email me when you regain your senses.  Bye!

+4

Totally irritated by not being able to read a story without a subscription request.

+1

What alternative site does somebody recommend?

May be do rating?

+3

How many news can i read for free per month or per week or per year. Seeking Alpha, you are installing a paywall without having alternative cheaper plans or details about the paywall (what do you mean with limit????) . Poor, very poor

+1

Dandzhen... Yahoo Finance or if you want all news about secific stocks try Finwiz !! It's for free but with alot of advertisment....but ist for FREE

+2

The last few days I could not figure out why the paywall came up when ever I tried to read a free article.  Was there a notice posted?  I checked to be certain the articles were not for the premium service.  One of the authors I follow often has his articles tagged for the premium service.  I have thought I might upgrade in the near future, but this greatly reduces the comment stream behind the articles which I also greatly value.  I must say how greatly disappointed I am that Seeking Alpha would make this change.  This materially reduces the value of the service.  I hope management reconsiders what I view as a poor decision.

+2

Hi, where does SA mention the 5 article limit? 5 articles per month?

+7

I know from personal experience that the only way to get a response from SA staff is to make very aggressive and hostile personal comments, insult their integrity, etc.  They don't care that anyone is "unhappy", and they surely don't want our suggestions.

This is the first time I've posted anywhere on SA in over three years.  I got so tired with the amateurish moderation of the comment threads, it was no longer worth my time to participate.  Now I can't read free articles either?  

I'm guessing that Eli Hoffmann was the lone voice opposing this ridiculous change to SA's business model.  Now that he's gone, you can proceed down the death spiral.

+5

I would do $5 per month....maybe even $10. But $30?! No way. 

-1

Another idea: make it a pay-per-view of e.g., 5 cents per article and 2 cents per news, to be charged monthly. Marketplace subscribers getting a rebate depending on how much they spend.

+2

same here, its awful

+2

This is completely ridiculous, searching for new stock forums, any suggestions?

+5

My recommendation to everybody will be to close the account / delete user id once somebody from Seeking Alpha informs on how to do it .

The advertisement dollars , market cap for any private company is evaluated on how many users are enrolled, active users & participation. There are couple of other free sites that can provide the similar information

+2

Terrible we should do something about that

+5

Thinking of Yahoo finance. They have a lot of views, good stock news and quote, good forums. All They needs now is to lure SeekingAlpha contributors to post articles on Yahoo Finance. And they got advertising $$ to pay article writers. I see where the future is heading now

+4

I just think that this is unfortunate, i liked to just come here to see other opinion on stock that i'm interested in or maybe have new stock to look at. But paying that amount of money for average investor advice.... It would maybe be ok to charge 10$ per month (even though i wouldn't pay a dime). I guess they do what they want, if you think this is worth it be my guess. There's no way i think this is worth it, if you want to learn there's a lot of other places just as good if not better. Just my opinion

+4

this how good products are getting killed. Few days and no users opening the app/website. Yahoo finance will do the work.

+3

Thinking of a Barron's subscription or Investing.com with their new Insights Premium subscription. Cheaper than SA and great analysis insights of real professionals and not amateurish contributors that just throw around biased opinions.

I am fed up. Not to speak of the annoying Android app. Still buggy and slow!

+3

I have signed up 14 day free trial and paid for a subscription, but I am still denied access. I've emailed them but still no response.

+2

SA, you got this far with authors happy to contribute.  Did they all suddenly ask for a (large) fee?  Does your fee now grade them for performance?  Do subscribers get all authors or no authors (I trust some, not others, why should I pay for that?)  Good luck, but not really. 

+10

A point I failed to list in two earlier comments follows:


I have delayed moving on to an alternate site, in hope that you might have second thoughts and relent on your new fee policy.

In light of the unfavorable feedback you have received, is there any chance of you reconsidering your position on the new fee?

Please advise your subscribers on your present intentions.

Thanks, Larry Russell

+3

I will be moving on to another website. Free article limit is ridiculous. Not what I expected from Seekingalpha which wads born out of community contribution. 

+2

Just cancelled the emails... Please let us know if you pull your head out of your...

+3

I was considering subscribing but await your reply to the above.  I am willing to pay $5 to $10 per month.  I will really miss Ploutos and the comments of others who have really educated and benefitted me financially.  BTY, this is my first comment ever on SA.

+2

How many can I read for free? Can you add signs to articles I can't read? Currently it seems I can't read any. It's futile to click on articles and I'm giving up.

+6

What I dislike about my cable company is that they drop my favorite channels and then raise their price.  Here, you create a fee and diminish the number of forum members whose comments are often the best part of each article.  The community challenges the articles that are flawed or have left out relevant facts.  They should be encouraged to stay and participate, not taxed away. Charging more + less value = bad deal.

+4

Good Bye SA. Thanks for the heads up, not!

+4

SA has been my first source of market breaking news for past couple of years. Adding this limit on news alerts is really short sighted. Obviously, SA is not the only website out there that provides such information. There are tons of other websites that make better value proposition with monthly fees than SA. Would be happy to pay money to those websites rather SA. Goodbye!

+6

Perhaps (in their attempt to generate a little more alpha for themselves) this organization will need to rename the site “Discovering Omega” when they realize how many of their users they’ve alienated.

+3

please unsubscribe me from receiving any email from Seeking Alpha starting 1/12021.

+2

Wendy.  Are you stating that was my request??  Related to this, is this the proper location to be directing my request?

+3

I agree with most of the posts. $30 a month or a $240 yearly fee is far too expensive for the product you provide. I have removed the App from my IPAD.

+2

I guess I got in wrong place to do my request, because I was looking around for unsubscribe button, and didn't know it was not right place. It is hard to locate it. Sorry about it. I need to continue to look for the right button.

+2

No bassic

you spam

+3

Funniest is there will be nobody left to write, never mind leave comments....who ya gonner email?   Ghost busters hahaha

+4

If SA came to market with an IPO, I predict a price of 0.000000000001 cents LOL!!

+3

Exactly,  This has just happened to me also. Why?   I just want to read the free articles...not the Premium. And read the free articles from Brett Jensson

+2

My issue as well.  Are there no articles that are fee anymore?

+2

My issue too. All of the sudden MOST content is not available. Is this a change from Seeking Alpha? Please respond!

+5

buh bye. Click...

+19

Conversation between myself and David Jackson:

  • David JacksonFri Jan 08 2021 04:12 AM
  • bikeeagle1,

    I'm the founder of Seeking Alpha. I just wanted to thank you for your feedback in the feedback forum about the new paywall.

    We can't support our business on advertising. For example, advertising doesn't generate enough revenue for us to pay our contributors enough. Since most users read Seeking Alpha articles within the first few days, we had to move to a metered paywall rather than a paywall which blocks articles after a few days.

    This change brings us in line with most other subscription services, such as WSJ, Bloomberg and the New York Times. The difference is that Premium is cheaper than those services, and is far more profitable. See: seekingalpha.com/article/4396836-importa...

    Best Regards,
    David
  • bikeeagle1Sun Jan 10 2021 08:52 AM
  • I would counter that you could make the site supportable through advertising by reducing costs as follows:

    1. Reduce your overhead / management costs. What do you pay yourself? Your other employees? Reduce head count and / or take pay cuts.
    2. Pay authors less per article. Many of them write to generate subscribers to their services, rather than writing for income directly from the article.
    3. Along with #2, provide a tip button at the end of each article or each authors profile page.
    4. Have annual fundraisers, similar to Wikepedia, where users can voluntarily contribute.

    I find it interesting that you want to compare yourself to WSJ, Bloomberg, and NYT. You are very different from all of those companies. They have staff writers that are full-time paid employees, and are really more news organizations than anything else.

    You should realize and embrace the fact that you are more of an aggregator who enables outsiders to share ideas and information with each other. In other words, a glossier and better presented version of a message board, but still a message board at heart.

    Don't try to be something you're not.
+10

As a long time member since 2011 I too am disappointed. Especially with the short notice window.  However my take is not as extreme.  I have benefitted from the 'free' information. I of course prefer a no cost model, and do not mind the advertising, or even the paywall article lockout, but I am willing to pay to have some access.  I just think the cost of the service is a little too much. I do not have many recurring subscriptions but a few - Spotify, Flea Flicker (fantasy sports), Motley Fool, and pay them to be ad-free and post content.  But all of those are $100 or less annually.  Like an add-on premium media service (think Netflix or HBO) I think a price around $10/month is more reasonable.  Many subscription services offer alternate tiers, using filters to match price with varying amounts of posted information and advertising.  Maybe SA could add a couple more tiers of service with different price points.


The open contributor access on SA is both a blessing and a curse to the reader, whether retail investor or otherwise. To find actionable ideas, the reader really needs to filter through multiple articles, and maybe several by the same author, to gain confidence in the support information or dispel unfounded or contradictory opinions. As others have noted below, the response forum is often the first place to start due diligence alerting the reader to facets of an article that may need further scrutiny. So the point is, unlike a service like one of those from Motley Fool, the info is not directed, specific, vetted or filtered - it is often mixed requiring some or a lot of additional research.  It's great for idea generation, but inefficient for actionable investment.  So as a forum, albeit with a lot of talented contributors, it is difficult to say it is worth $240+ annually.  Thank you for reading and considering these thoughts.

+1

” I have benefitted from the 'free' information. I of course prefer a no cost model, and do not mind the advertising, or even the paywall article lockout, but I am willing to pay to have some access. I just think the cost of the service is a little too much. “


I completely agree with you. 

”Maybe SA could add a couple more tiers of service with different price points.”


I completely agree with this too. A tier with access to articles, comments and the portfolio tool could be the first tier.   Maybe limit access to x Premium authors in that tier,.

Hopefully David will consider something like that. It does seem a lower price point would retain a larger segment of the community which has value to all parties for the reasons mentioned in some of the other comments. 

I see no reason or justification to get angry over a business decision by the owner of that business. I also don’t feel entitled to getting something for free that provides value to me. 


+2

I agree the $200.00 pre-pay is to much. You can get a subscription to Barron's for $52.00.

+6

Yeah even companies as arrogant as WSJ knows how to run a promotion for $50/year. SA’s promotion is $200/year?LOL

+4

You are not WSJ, Bloomberg or the New York Times.  They are far larger and are provide the news.  They also have staff writers on their payroll.  You are not comparing apples and apples.  With as many comments as you have received that are negative and people are removing their Seeking Alpha apps and want to delete their accounts, I would think you could come up with a happy medium that would be more palatable to your long time readers such as myself.  I have been using Seeking Alpha since 2012.  You have been given some very good ideas on how to generate more income without charging us $20-$30 per month.  I have a subscription to the Washington Post for $4 per month!  I subscribe to the Los Angeles Times for less per year than you are charging.  You are way out of line and appear to be greedy, not a good impression.  In the middle of a pandemic where people want to keep what they have, this is not the time to start charging egregious amounts of money.  One more time, I implore you to rethink how to generate more income without charging $20-$30 per month.  Take a look at your readers suggestions seriously.  Thank you.

+2

One other suggestion, why not make information such as earnings reports and upcoming dividends on the person's Portfolio  available at no cost.  You are paying no one to provide this basic information.  

+6

So what Jackson told you - but didn't tell the community at large - is that their bad business decisions and their greed have screwed the pooch.  


SA was fully ad-supported for over a decade.  They paid their own salaries and they paid the authors.  They drew enough eyeballs to support this.

But now they aren't meeting their cash flow needs.  The Marketplace subscriptions have hit saturation.  Their content was never - NEVER - good enough to justify charging for, but yes they got a few saps to pay for it. That base has been fully exploited. 


The remaining free authors have been whining that their pay was cut way back.  So the free content will pretty much die.  And finally they're driving away the remaining eyeballs, which will drive down the ad revenue below the present level which already "can't support the business".


They are doomed no matter what they do.  SA cannot be saved.  Plain and simple, they got greedy and now they will go the way of sites like Motley Fool.

Have they cut their own salaries or laid off any employees? We'll never know until the day when the site simply quits working.  Which I unfortunately expect Any Day Now.


David Jackson, I challenge you to reply.  

+4

+1 


Long time Seeking Alpha reader. I will be deleting my app and permanently logging out. I do wish you success with your new format. 

Guess I’ll be using Morningstar and Valueline more often.... I have free acccss via the library. 

+5

The articles are just a vehicle to get to the comments on the forum.  The forum often has comments unrelated to the articles proving this.  When I see an article posted, I say good the forum is open again.  That's it. I se a recent article has 60 posts, that would have been well over several hundred.  Two thirds have "left the building".  Seeking Alpha; a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.  If you must charge, get real about it.

+1

Hey!  I'm getting the same notice! What is going on?   I'm an unsubscribed reader but this has not been a problem before.

+10

Really enjoyed the site and the comments while it lasted.  Would have contemplated paying $1 per month, maybe a little more.  The pricing is shocking. In fact, its outrageous, egregious, preposterous.

+6

It is a sad day. Always is when you see an otherwise good resource destroy itself by making poor business decisions. Closing a business makes sense if it cannot support itself  but to drive away a large customer base because of poor management is something else. Judging from the founder's reply to bikeeagle1 above suggests to me that the founder needs a good business counselor. 

+8

Well, I guess we have to look elsewhere. Great way to kill a site!

+3