Late spring, that is, as in:
Farmer’s market today: Organic apricots, white peaches. (Also cherries, but not yet Bings or Rainiers).
In other words,
It’s stone fruit season!
Late spring, that is, as in:
Farmer’s market today: Organic apricots, white peaches. (Also cherries, but not yet Bings or Rainiers).
In other words,
Posted in Food | Comments Closed
My somewhat downbeat previous post has been up for nearly a week–and has yielded three responses. But hey, it’s Friday, so I’m not going to read that level of response as “almost nobody gives a damn.”
Instead, I’d like to focus on the second part of the post regarding possible changes in Cites & Insights if it makes sense to continue C&I. I’ll quote the whole discussion, but precede it with a tight summary and one new possibility:
Or, if C&I has become a big yawn or a place you open, check to see if you’re mentioned and then leave, well, it would take four bimonthly issues to reach the magic Gross number (or the Buffy number, if you prefer) and call it a day.
Here’s the previous discussion:
I’ve been pondering a revamp that would make C&I “web-first” in some ways: That is, essays would be prepared (still using Word) using a template tuned for the web, with HTML versions posted after they’re edited–possibly (possibly?) even on a rolling basis before an issue is complete. I might even make essays or the issue as a whole available in ePub format, if future conversions work out better than in the past.
The canonical C&I would still be the PDF, I think, and it would still be designed to be space-efficient in printed form. I say “canonical” because copyfitting could result in some words and, occasionally, sections of composite essays being changed or removed to achieve the almost-exactly-to-the-end-of-an-even-number-of-pages goal.
If I do all this, which would involve some deliberate effort, I might also do one other thing to make C&I more web-native: Adopt a new CC license, dropping the “-NC” so that the only requirement is attribution.
If I had new sponsorship–or thought I could successfully adopt a “by the issue” sponsorship/ad model that would yield, say, $5,000/year in revenue–I’d be encouraged to make this package of changes and refresh C&I’s overall design in the process. I’m also wondering whether it’s worth trying a Kickstarter approach to pay for the next, say, 18 months of C&I…
I’ve never used public numbers for what I’m actually looking for in C&I sponsorship. Here’s a possible set, more modest than I’d like, but hey:
To underwrite a single issue without explicit advertising and without a sponsorship line on the home page (but with sponsorship noted on the first and last page of each issue and the closing paragraph of each HTML essay): $400. For a full year of such underwriting: $4,000.
With explicit advertising–up to a full page in the PDF issue, up to a text paragraph in the HTML: $600. For a full year, $6,000.
C&I home page sponsorship–with a credit line and possibly banner, but without actual issue underwriting: $250/month or $2,500/year
Home page and issue underwriting without display ads but with other forms of credit (the ideal): $500 for an issue, $5,000 for the year. For all of this and ads in the issues: $700 for an issue, $7,000 for the year.
All of these are negotiable. If I go the Kickstarter route (and am accepted, and achieve the goal), those who provided high donations would be the sponsors, and there would be no advertising.
Thoughts? Responses? Should I just let C&I dwindle off to nothingness…(that is, would I add more value to the field by spending my time with the Friends group bookstore–just as I’d certainly add more value to our household budget by spending that time greeting people at the local Walmart, if I was willing to do that…)
Posted in Cites & Insights | 5 Comments »
You are currently browsing the Walt at Random blog archives for May, 2011.
Walt at Random is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).