The Athletic

[TheGoogler 604]

With my annual subscription coming to an end, just wondered what your thoughts are for anyone who has subscribed?

I've been impressed by the most part of the quality of the articles and insight they have. But I can't help thinking £60 is a lot of money for what you get. 

I would definitely subscribe again if I can get it at £29.99 as I did this time last year.

[Dr Greenthumb 792]

8 minutes ago, TheGoogler said:

With my annual subscription coming to an end, just wondered what your thoughts are for anyone who has subscribed?

I've been impressed by the most part of the quality of the articles and insight they have. But I can't help thinking £60 is a lot of money for what you get. 

I would definitely subscribe again if I can get it at £29.99 as I did this time last year.

I paid £29.99 and read an article a day. Michael Bailey has really come on with his writing too. Can’t say I’d pay £60 for it though!

[CaptCanary 72]

I'm subscribed and have really enjoyed the content. I have a small interest in MLS, MLB, NHL and NFL, so that all helps.

I do find myself looking at it religiously for a few weeks though, then not checking it for a while, then going back over everything I missed. It's been good partaking in the matchday discussions too, something I can't usually do on final whistle as driving home from the game normally. 

I went to turn my auto renewal off during the break in football, and was offered a free 90 day extension - to be fair, that was the same times as they were offering new readers free 90 day trials, so might not be on there anymore. You could try cancelling (it still gives you access until your renewal date anyway), and see if it offers you some incentive to stay?

Alternatively, I've seen the US account reply to tweets about cheapest ways to renew, and they've openly said that you could just buy yourself the 12 month gift subscription and apply it to your own account - £39.99 in the UK.

Edited July 21, 2020 by CaptCanary

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

I’ve found it to be excellent quality. Although £60 is a little on the pricy side. 

One thing to consider is that next season the coverage of Norwich will fall off a cliff. It will basically be the Pink’Un and Michael Bailey - without access to MB’s stuff it might get a bit myopic with just the Pink’Un’s view of things.

[king canary 8,751]

£60 for a year isn't too bad in my opinion.

I read most of the Norwich stuff but I also always read the Ornstein on Monday column along with a few others. I think it kind of comes into its own in this sort of time of the season- they seem to get a decent amount of back room insight into transfers, dressing room turmoil etc etc. 

Also like CaptCanary I also follow a couple of American sports so I read a decent amount of that coverage. So for £5 a month I find it is worth it.

[Bovril 264]

I've gone down the 'gift' route and paid £40 for next year. Like most, I took up the £30 (£29.99) introduction offer last year and have enjoyed the content. 

[kick it off 2,062]

Thinking I might sign up for it. I'm a big NFL fan and have a passing interest in NHL too. Probably worthwhile I guess

[Decemberists 48]

I really enjoy it and not just the City articles. Will be subscribing again next year - hopefully with a voucher code. 
 

Recommend the Tifo podcast which The Athletic just acquired. 

[Uncle Fred 526]

Buy a subscription and copy and paste amongst your mates a very economic way of your friends group seeing the content 

[The Raptor 1,573]

37 minutes ago, Uncle Fred said:

Buy a subscription and copy and paste amongst your mates a very economic way of your friends group seeing the content 

As a friend of the pinkun forum will.you be doing that on here? I'm interested in NBA articles as well as Norwich 😉

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,789]

15 minutes ago, The Raptor said:

As a friend of the pinkun forum will.you be doing that on here? I'm interested in NBA articles as well as Norwich 😉

If you do , might be worth checking the copyright laws , oh and getting a decent lawyer on retainer ! 

[Bill 1,788]

16 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

If you do , might be worth checking the copyright laws , oh and getting a decent lawyer on retainer ! 

they are aimed at commercial use

[king canary 8,751]

29 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

If you do , might be worth checking the copyright laws , oh and getting a decent lawyer on retainer ! 

I know it isn't really a serious suggestion by Waveny but it does hugely grind my gears. People need to get used to actually paying for journalism at some point if they don't want it to descend further into clickbaity nonsense. 

Too many people seem to want high quality reporting, for free, with no adverts anywhere and then act surprised when you get endless transfer rumour guff instead.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,789]

3 hours ago, Bill said:

they are aimed at commercial use

In your own words City 1st, Oh Dear. 

A professional journalist is

"creating copyrighted works that are distributed with the hopes of making money. Those works are backed by the reputation of trademark-protected names and slogans that instil a sense of confidence in the work and help motivate the public to consume it."

An infringement of intellectual property has plenty of legal remedy.

You may be referring to 

The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998, which a journalist would possibly not fall back on , but it has been held that "Artists Resale Rights" would include original works by a writer/ journalist. The Act does cover Works but not Ideas . 

If you think that a professional publication would sit back and allow Waveney to cut and past reams of copyrighted work onto a football forum, clearly with a view to avoiding a pay wall, I'll leave you to it. I suspect that Archant would get there first however.