AfterDawn: Tech news

AOL considering starting subscriptions for its content

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 21 Jun 2011 19:54 User comments (9)

AOL considering starting subscriptions for its content In news that has been unanimously panned, AOL CEO Tim Armstrong has said that the company may begin offering premium versions of its online content via subscriptions.
The company is also looking to partner with traditional media companies in an effort to "help create great content and monetize it properly."

Adds Armstrong:

I think content subscriptions on the Internet can be a very viable business.

AOL purchased the Huffington Post in February for $315 million and TechCrunch for $25 million last year, in an effort to add popular content to its portal and network.

The company is best known for being a dial-up giant that purchased Time Warner for $164 billion in 2000, at the height of the tech bubble. The merger is easily the worst transaction in the history of the industry as the bubble popped the next year and AOL never recovered, heading down from a market cap of $240 billion to its current $2 billion, even after being spun off by Time Warner in 2009.

Previous Next  

9 user comments

122.6.2011 1:07

AOL Cost more than cable internet, why bother still using dialup? Might as well get Netzero same speed as AOL.

222.6.2011 4:51

I loved reading how AOL bought Time Warner at the height of the tech bubble... of all the years of ridiculous dial-up costs and refusal to cancel subscription to AOL to customers and plenty other gripes.. it really was karma to see how they suffered from it.

322.6.2011 11:43

Just to echo what's already written... yes, "still" overpriced, captured audience, re-directed & ONLY AOL's version of what the internet is dial-up service, which I would already call "paid subscription". These people are daft to say the least.

I doubt the people they are pitching this idea to read these columns/forums, but it would behoove them to take their noses out of their Asian palm civet latte to read what us low life commoners have to say; seeing as we're the ones that aren't buying. But frankly, AOL, Sony, M$ & several ump-teen other business models need to savagely 'go away'. It's not that we don't like their products. It's the quality, service, attitude and baggage that have to be dealt with after the sale that John Q Public is piss pot tired of dealing with.

Matter of fact that gives me a blog idea...

422.6.2011 16:41

You got to marvel that such a dumb company is still alive. They have been free falling for what 15 yrs? It goes to show there are some suckers even dumber.

I still have a hotmail account so I can't talk too loudly.

522.6.2011 16:45

My original hotmail account was free though, as I hope yours was too... Originally, AOL, was a paid for account. I don't think they went free anything... did they? Except the messenger thing maybe...

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 22 Jun 2011 @ 16:46

622.6.2011 17:52

I thought AOL was just a portal now. I think it's all free.

722.6.2011 18:25

My Hotmail used to be free. I stared paying for extra space and didn't have to delete all my emails. When they moved to live mail they blew away 5 yrs of emails by mistake. They don't back up anymore. Not even with corporate accounts.

823.6.2011 8:43

Aaah, the free puppy thing... or possibly the bait & switch routine. They just did it over several years so that a statute of limitations would kick in.

924.6.2011 14:40

At the time $20 for a mid level plan was reasonable. Then g-mail started giving it a way. My then I had dozens of orgs pointing to my hotmail account. Because it was paid for, when a hacker hacked into my mailbox and changed my password I was able to get it back. That was worth the $20/yr.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive