We are making some changes in 2025

Economy / news

To keep our content free for all, interest.co.nz is making some changes for access to our email newsletters in 2025, and to our comment process

23rd Oct 24, 11:00am by David Chaston

We've had a very good 2024 with readership growing substantially. Almost all our articles and resources are free for everyone. We want to keep it that way.

But that is a tough path to be on. So we will be making some changes in 2025.

Starting on Saturday, March 1, 2025, you will need to be a qualified supporter to comment.

And you will need to be a qualified supporter to receive our daily and weekly email newsletters.

Most of our daily or weekly email newsletters include valuable data summaries along with links to the latest news articles that are relevant to that newsletter. This is a very convenient way to stay updated.

You will still have the option to read those stories free, and get that data free, by going to the site directly. But to get the email in your inbox, you will need to be a qualified supporter.

The standards for being a "qualified supporter" are not changing. They remain being a supporter in Press Patron at either a $10/month or $100/year level. And as a supporter, you can also participate as a commenter. Further, you can get an ad-free reading experience.

We love our supporters. They enable us to build and extend our service in a truly independent way.

Until March 1, 2025, there will be no interim changes affecting your access to the site or newsletters. But after that the new standards will apply.

What we are not changing is everyone's free access to all our online content*. That will still be there after March 1, 2025.

If you are not already a Press Patron supporter, you can sign up here.

* _{Like in the real world, there is an exception. Some content we develop and produce for our subscription Banking & Finance Daily Newsletter will still be exclusive for those subscribers, even if we do post the headlines to our main website. Details of that specialised service aimed at senior financial industry executives is here. It is an email-only service, and does not offer special access on the website.}

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

163 Comments

by Thats All Folks | 23rd Oct 24, 11:27am 1729636047

It’s a bold strategy, cotton. Let’s see if it pays off for em.

by longjohndrop | 23rd Oct 24, 1:20pm 1729642810

Adios David

cant call out your bias when you need to fork out $100 to provide critique.

by Yvil | 23rd Oct 24, 4:31pm 1729654311

Adios LJD

by Averageman | 23rd Oct 24, 4:26pm 1729654004

All the property speculators who refuse to stump up $100 annually to post "spruik to the moon" on a daily basis speaks volumes about the value of their contribution... or their cashflow. Bring it on.

Edit: Its $1.90ish a week. Give up one coffee a week and you will save money. Really surprised people cant see the value in that.

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 4:33pm 1729654391

Aye. It’s an old one, but a good one, and it rings true here. That is - put your money where your mouth is.

by GoWokeGobroke | 23rd Oct 24, 6:21pm 1729660902

@ Averageman - All the tenants who refuse to stump up $100 annually to post "my greedy landlord" envy sob stories on a daily basis speaks volumes about their personal financial position...or their lack of. After all, their greedy money hungary soleless landlord who feasts on tenants tears has left them with nothing spare to give right? After rent they barely have enough to cover the ciggies, 2 cups of coffee, netflix, Disney plus, sky, uber eats, after pay, lavish holidays for the gram influencing and multiple consimer loans. What a terrible position to find onesself in, having to pay someone else to house you because ones financial priorities out way out of wack. Bring it on.

I think you'll find all these "greedy landlords" will have far more disposable income than all those entitled tenants. If anything, we will see less tenants complaining endlessly that it's everybody else's fault bar themselves why they can't buy a house.

Edit: (Not just the comments for free, but a bit of free financial advice for ya too, how crazy is that! Tenants just love free stuff) - Temporarily give up the ciggies, the vapes, 2 daily cups of coffee, netflix, Disney plus, sky, Uber eats, after pay, consumer loans & lavish frequent holidays for the gram influencing, get in a boarder or two instead, and you will save money. Really surprised people can't see the value in that.

Delayed gratification - a short term sacrafice for a long term goal. This is how ownership is achieved. That will look different for each person. "Let's do this".

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 6:45pm 1729662323

I'll tell you what tenants aren't.

They aren't rentiers on others.

by interesting1234 | 23rd Oct 24, 7:22pm 1729664540

Guess we won’t be hearing from you next year then?

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 7:43pm 1729665819

The antidote for ignorance is to get informed.

by linklater01 | 24th Oct 24, 8:51am 1729713081

GoWoke...........,

Based on this utterly ridiculous and indeed, unpleasant rant, I won't miss you at all.

by GoWokeGobroke | 24th Oct 24, 1:20pm 1729729207

@ Linklater01 - Lol All of a sudden not quite so nice when the shoe is on the other foot eh. Can't scorn one lot & exact a get out of jail free card for the other lot. Life doesn't work that way bud. Hypocritical.

by agnostium | 23rd Oct 24, 11:39am 1729636772

That's a shame. I really enjoy the breadth and variety of opinions in the comments sections. Restricting it to only have paid subscribers does not appeal.

I have cancelled my subscription.

Good luck with the strategy.

by Yvil | 23rd Oct 24, 4:33pm 1729654408

That's a shame agnostium. Let's see if you really stay away from commenting.

by agnostium | 23rd Oct 24, 5:19pm 1729657141

I've paid up until March 2025 (I pay up front) but cancelled the DD today so it will not roll over.

I assume I'll still have my 'more worthy commentator' green tick until then.

by Zachary Smith | 23rd Oct 24, 4:34pm 1729654468

Seems a bit of a knee-jerk reaction.

by Murray Falconer | 23rd Oct 24, 10:19pm 1729675187

Not really, it could be a perfectly principled decision.

If I pay to comment, does that then mean I get to say what I want without censure?

Also, it seems a bit hard that author writers don't get to comment (eg per PDK he isn't paid for it). In my view those in that contribute an article should be able to comment, even if only on their own article.

This is an interesting move, I recall one time the comments were down and how little time I spent on the site. I wish the owners well even though I think they're underestimating the value of the commenters/comment section.

As a reminder, I've said multiple times before, give me a blue tick or something different to represent supporting the platform only and ability to comment without supporting the notion that this site is 'independent' and I'll subscribe. The regular articles aren't of much value aside from the conversations they generate below to me - could just link to a headline and let the comments flow as far as I'm concerned.

by Zwifter | 24th Oct 24, 10:11am 1729717902

Censorship is rife in our lives now, problem is you look for alternative sources and you get called a conspiracy theorist. Sometimes it doesn't appear as censorship rather just an entire omission from the news like it never happened. Lets be honest here its the housing articles that draw in the 200 comments, there has been some other useful stuff on here and it has received zero or maybe 10 comments at best.

by averagejoe | 24th Oct 24, 10:19am 1729718380

Yep. Discussions on how wrong most people were on house prices and interest rates, and also weird discussions on how to stiff old people out of their pension entitlements just because many people are poor planners and like to moan about it (as they have no planned and like to pen a million excuses here as to why not). They seem to be the most popular types to comment on, and the debate sure is interesting (mostly wrong, but still interesting). I also find it very interesting that this is actually supposed to be a financial web site, but very few people that comment here have the slightest clue about markets, interest rates, or anything related to finance (apart from the fact that many of them know they have made huge mistakes and their finances are buggered). But yes, you are correct, many of the most relevant articles here receive little to no attention at all, as they do not relate to housing or other things that people like to moan about.

by Zwifter | 24th Oct 24, 11:03am 1729721026

Yes its particularly disturbing how so many people on here think they have been screwed over by the Boomers.

by CN - new | 24th Oct 24, 11:26am 1729722405

"I also find it very interesting that this is actually supposed to be a financial web site, but very few people that comment here have the slightest clue about markets, interest rates, or anything related to finance"

Financial web site is different to a financial markets web site. Very small proportion of people in NZ have experience or interest in financial markets.

There does seem to be a larger number of people in the community involved or interested in the property industry and property finance industry.

by kiwikidsnz | 23rd Oct 24, 11:51am 1729637485

I fully agree with these changes & the overall economic value added by interest.co content & commentarys so will be happy to continue my subscription.

by Zwifter | 23rd Oct 24, 12:04pm 1729638256

Don't see a green tick here, ooops suddenly there it is. I suspect about 80% will leave. Perhaps the only bonus is a few that just post a load of rubbish and have 20+ comments on articles will also go.

by kiwikidsnz | 23rd Oct 24, 12:07pm 1729638433

I've been a subscriber for a couple of years now; occasionally I notice the tick has disappeared & I have to re logon again (Patreon) to reactivate it

by David Chaston | 23rd Oct 24, 1:11pm 1729642277

Yes that is an issue. We load the page content first, then the comments, [then the ads], then the PressPatron green tick. Depending on the size of the full page load, the green tick can be slow to load. This issue will go away in the March 1, 2025 update.

by DMC45 | 23rd Oct 24, 8:13pm 1729667584

Hi David,

Yes logging in on Press Patron is a bit cumbersome.

As an aside, an upgrade that would be welcome would be notifications on responses to comments you have made and easy navigation to said comments (click to view comment). Also being able to view all your own commentary plus all the commentary of others individuals. Also, perhaps, being able to message directly other users (who can, in turn, block such correspondence from individuals). These are standard functions of some other forums I am on.

Plus, change the blue color for one of "quotes" or "posts made after initial reading" so they don't look the same.

Just some suggestions. I hope the move to commentators having to be paid up members works well. Cheers and keep up the good work.

by ChrisOfNoFame | 24th Oct 24, 11:26am 1729722409

"We load the page content first, then the comments, ..."

Not quite how it works, David. For standard web pages anyway. For a standard web page, the web server streams an web page to a browser, and then the browser decides how best to render it using established 'rules'. One can construct a 'web page', over which the the browser has less control, but updates to browsers can break such web sites with an annoying regularity. The issue that kiwikidsnz describes can be resolved by understanding how browsers work - which is not quite the same way as the web server orders the streaming of the page. (Note: this is a general comment as I haven't done a network trace to see how exactly interest's pages are rendered, what CMS they may be using, what web server they're using, nor which OS they server is running on.)

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 12:17pm 1729639031

It'll be interesting to see if the comments section cleans itself up.

There's some genuinely good comments in here from many different perspectives, that just gets drowned out by repetitive shrieking and name calling.

by Speedmax | 23rd Oct 24, 5:15pm 1729656911

Agree. Empty vessels and all that…

by rastus1 | 23rd Oct 24, 4:49pm 1729655369

I don’t have a green tick because I pay$5. Also gave wrong email which doesn’t exist when I signed up so can’t alter.

Will eventually create new and sign up.

Gotta support independent media.

by Harry B | 23rd Oct 24, 2:55pm 1729648546

Totally agree

The information that is provided is well worth $100 a year

There is so much false information around its great to have a site you can trust

by Kate | 24th Oct 24, 1:23pm 1729729381

And the Charts - I find them invaluable as one can always be overcome by anecdotal evidence, so it's just great to have access to (near) real-time data all in one place.

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 3:53pm 1729652019

Ditto. Excellent development.Without venturing into identification there have been more than enough commenters who have been incessantly strident going on boorish in deprecating and demeaning other participants and being unjustifiably personal whilst at it . From memory none of whom are green ticked the introduction of which has been quite telling. That attitude in itself smacks of freeloading and personally I will not be sorry to see it disappear. I anticipate the calibre of the site will improve markedly next March once this policy is in place. With a bit of luck some of those of that ilk will filter off well before March 2025.

by Pragmatist | 23rd Oct 24, 11:55am 1729637757

My sub expired recently, and I was pondering whether to renew. I think I have my answer now.

by Chairman Moa | 23rd Oct 24, 11:59am 1729637986

Oh well, all the fun must come to an end.. Going to Reddit and Whirlpool!

by CN - new | 23rd Oct 24, 12:01pm 1729638109

Likely a necessary change in revenue model for survival of the business? Advertising revenues are likely to have fallen substantially in the current environment.

A potential unintended consequence - if there a commenter that breaches comment policy, they will be allowed to continue given that they have paid their subscription? Under the free to comment approach, that commenter's account would have been restricted or deregistered.

by Zwifter | 23rd Oct 24, 12:05pm 1729638345

Correct, there is likely to be a bias towards paid up subscribers.

by kiwikidsnz | 23rd Oct 24, 12:11pm 1729638686

theres been zero evidence of that so far, nor is there any distinguishing in this sites comment policy.

by David Chaston | 23rd Oct 24, 1:14pm 1729642476

No there won't. The comment policy will always take precedence. Besides from my pov as a publisher, one or two wayward commenter's loss of support will have virtually no commercial impact. So we will take the same approach as we do now.

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 12:11pm 1729638690

I think the sort of people that come on here to get censored or banned probably aren't interested in paying to get censored or banned.

by Cynic | 23rd Oct 24, 12:14pm 1729638874

Makes sense, how else do you raise revenue without putting some articles behind a paywall, in which case the comments won't be available at all to non-subscribers. Don't think it is fair to shift more of the burden onto the current paid subscribers either...

I will likely start contributing though I fear the comments section, which is a big attraction for many including myself, won't be quite the same.

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 12:20pm 1729639223

Survival of a niche comment forum like this only gets harder. Have to compete with the likes of Facebook, YouTube, Discord and the myriad other outlets people can release their brainfarts on.

Kinda sucks as online discourse only gravitates towards either being extremely generic, or extremely fringe.

by Averageman | 23rd Oct 24, 12:31pm 1729639897

Different monetisation strategies, or any original content comment to is linked/stolen from elsewhere.

by Zachary Smith | 23rd Oct 24, 4:30pm 1729654222

You do get a rich, Kiwi-centric, commenting experience here. YouTube is dreadful with many comments getting automatically deleted and genuine conversations are rare.

by Eschaton | 23rd Oct 24, 12:24pm 1729639461

How does one sign up for the daily/weekly email newsletters?

by David Chaston | 23rd Oct 24, 1:16pm 1729642616

Either from your log-in page options, or here:
https://www.interest.co.nz/newsletters-sign-up

by jo147 | 23rd Oct 24, 3:00pm 1729648825

Thanks

I subscribe but had never gotten the email newsletters. Signed up now. And weirdly no tick even though I'm logged in. Glad that will be sorted come march. Thank you

by HouseMouse | 23rd Oct 24, 12:25pm 1729639550

While there is plenty of trash to wade through, the most valuable thing of this website, in my opinion, is the comments section. The move is understandable, however the best part of the website might really lose its value

by Harvey W | 23rd Oct 24, 1:50pm 1729644637

Does anyone else sometimes skip the article and go straight to the comments? So if less comments, less attraction to visit the site.

by EarlyRiser | 23rd Oct 24, 3:23pm 1729650214

That used to be me but I find the quality of the comments is not as good as it was a few years back, or at least that is how I remember it to be (and I'll be the first to admit that it might be due to memory issues / recency bias).

by interesting1234 | 23rd Oct 24, 2:27pm 1729646832

Lose some comedy maybe XD

by Nifty1 | 23rd Oct 24, 3:00pm 1729648816

The comments section (property articles) will lose its entertainment value for sure...

by Retired-Poppy | 23rd Oct 24, 3:23pm 1729650184

Watch this space (✅)

by Nifty1 | 23rd Oct 24, 3:48pm 1729651718

There should definitely be a charge to edit/comment excessively... imagine if interest got $1 everytime RP edited or commented the same thing.

by Retired-Poppy | 23rd Oct 24, 4:23pm 1729653783

Oooooh - ouch! My comment was meant in humor - LOL!

Perhaps try imagining if Interest removed the edit button!

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 5:26pm 1729657589

Should cost someone $5 to write a word in capitals also.

by Retired-Poppy | 23rd Oct 24, 6:14pm 1729660442

Pa1nter, will you be commenting on here after 01-March? Yes/No

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 7:57pm 1729666639

Can't answer yes/no. I donate, apparently that might give someone a tick if you login a certain way.

If the pay to play model tidies up the comments section, maybe.

by Retired-Poppy | 23rd Oct 24, 8:48pm 1729669684

Speaks volumes. Complain about the content as an excuse not to pay and has a history of adding to the rivalry - priceless!

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 9:03pm 1729670623

I just said I contribute financially. I'm not a fan of subscriptions generally, and outside of some entertainment and the odd interesting view, potentially I'm better off not being here.

by singautim | 23rd Oct 24, 12:49pm 1729640987

The 'breakfast briefing' and the 'what happened today' may be improved with only comments by paid contributors - its taking too much of my day wading through the comments.

However for other subjects it should be left free. For example a reader may chose to only comment on a narrow range of issues. Some examples: Christianity, Water ecology, Pre-schooling, Bridge building, Railways - if there is a serious article about these issues and a reader has expertise If in 2025 there is an article about replacing the Auckland Harbour bridge we want comments from those who have built bridges and tunnels.

by linklater01 | 23rd Oct 24, 3:27pm 1729650434

singautim,

If in 2025 there is an article about replacing the Auckland Harbour bridge we want comments from those who have built bridges and tunnels.

I think well argued comments from potential users and those directly affected-property owners on the proposed route- would be equally valid.

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 5:46pm 1729658785

So too would be a process of not jumping to conclusions, as would not trying to out comment for other than right/wrong reasons.

Eh?

by tomjones_04 | 23rd Oct 24, 12:52pm 1729641161

I think this is fair play. I've been a member for years now and really enjoy the articles. Just pay the $10 per month! It saves your partners listening to you go on about your property reckons, or your DGM vs Spruiker rants.. think of it like a cheap therapy session.

by Snow | 23rd Oct 24, 1:04pm 1729641851

The amount of time spent on this site reading the articles etc $10/month is worth it for me just for the ad-free aspect. It's certainly a great website that seems to have a fair bit of worth to a lot of regular commenters and would be a shame if they don't contribute financially.

by tomjones_04 | 23rd Oct 24, 1:12pm 1729642333

Particularly as some on here claim to be financial geniuses. Like that guy from Riverhead that's made millions from property... yet $10 is a stretch!! I have a god complex now because of my green tick.. I know how most landlords feel now. ;-)

by Retired-Poppy | 23rd Oct 24, 1:19pm 1729642799

Well said! :)

by Nzdan | 23rd Oct 24, 2:31pm 1729647068

That guy from Riverhead is no longer participating, unless they've signed up for a new account.

by tomjones_04 | 23rd Oct 24, 2:39pm 1729647546

Oh OK. An abrasive character like him comes along once in a while. Burns hot, and then burns out. Wonder if it's the same chap...??

by Chairman Moa | 23rd Oct 24, 4:45pm 1729655128

Did someone say "Riverhead"?

by averagejoe | 23rd Oct 24, 5:08pm 1729656517

I haven't heard about Riverhead for a while. I have no idea what it is, I am assuming some rural area outside Auckland, but was too afraid to ask. I'm guessing one does not really make fortunes there.

by Zwifter | 23rd Oct 24, 8:30pm 1729668642

Its a bit of a swamp way out in West Auckland but not to worry if Trump loses the election he is moving out to New Zealand to drain it.

by Kate | 24th Oct 24, 1:34pm 1729730051

LOL - he won't get a visa with a felony conviction :-). Although I do think some in the National Party do quite like him - remembering the Todd Muller MAGA hat on display in his office :-). Big oopsy, that one.

by redcows1 | 23rd Oct 24, 1:16pm 1729642619

Hope it works well for you.

Also hope that when I next pay it actually gets to you rather than disappearing into where ever.

Great site.

by solardb | 23rd Oct 24, 1:22pm 1729642959

too broke at the moment to contribute to any site, but one thing that has made me consider on another site , is articles been avaliable to subscribers only for 2 3 days , then avaliable to everyone.

by MediumPangolin | 23rd Oct 24, 1:38pm 1729643891

Aaaannnnd there goes the website. Thumbs up if you just come here for the comments, but will likely stop coming if it's just the same subset of paid up subscribers repeating their tired old taking points.

David, I've had nothing but respect for all you've done here, but mate, this is brainless.

by CN - new | 23rd Oct 24, 1:41pm 1729644074

Another poll that might be useful for David to determine the potential revenue impact of the announced change.

For those that don't currently subscribe - thumbs up if you will subscribe when changes are made.

by dumbthoughts | 23rd Oct 24, 2:57pm 1729648665

Agreed (to some extent). My view is this will become a de facto 'referendum' on whether users come to the site primarily:

a) for the articles

b) for the comment section

I hope for the sake of the site owners/editors it is majority a and not b.

I pay for NBR, for example, not because I really care for the comment section (in part because it has such a low character limit that nobody can write anything meaningful comment-wise) but because I typically find the articles to be very good. E.g. their work on the Du Val saga.

If I'm honest, I come here primarily for the comment section. I do read the articles - particularly the briefing ones as they are useful for a quick run down on the day's events, but it was the comment section that has kept me here. That isn't a critique of the articles per se, more an honest reflection of why I personally spend a bit of time here each day.

Yes there are some annoying elements (like the property spruiker vs doomer war, or certain commenters always linking everything back to the end of the world) but I've long thought that the site has one of the more interesting and compelling comment sections. I'd come here for an ear-to-the-ground view of how the economy is performing before trusting the official stats, for example, and I'm not even joking.

I've had business interests in digital publishing for the best part 15 years, and one thing I've seen over and over again is the importance of understanding what draws the audience to your platform in the first place. Once you lose your "USP" it can be tricky to recover.

I fail to see how the comment section can retain its current "utility" and value if restricted only to paid-up readers. I fully respect the decision of the Interest.co.nz to do what they wish with the site ... it's theirs. But I can't help but feel it could be a commercial mistake in the long run.

by Murray Falconer | 23rd Oct 24, 10:56pm 1729677390

I'm firmly in the b) camp, share your sentiments and know how little time I spent here when the comments weren't operating for a period (possibly post an upgrade). I know they will still be operating this time, but I think a thinning out of the ranks (on the basis of paying or not) will lower the value of the comment section.

To me the comments section should be worked on in other ways to increase their value such as only one comment per article for non-payers and the other good suggestions made in this comment section - possibly by non-payers!

Still, I guess it would be easy to reverse if readership takes a hit. I wonder if it's possible to measure the time people spend looking at the article vs the comment section based on scroll position.

by linklater01 | 23rd Oct 24, 5:07pm 1729656421

MediumPangolin,

Great name. In an ideal world, this site would remain free, but I and others are prepared to contribute to try and ensure its ability to continue-and for me, it's worth the cost just to be ad free. I will miss some of those who go, but not others.

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 6:47pm 1729662479

You tried to skew the conversation recently, by invoking in/out demarcation.

Try and win by debate content, perhaps?

by LouB | 23rd Oct 24, 1:38pm 1729643932

Good plan I reckon

by Midnight Singer | 23rd Oct 24, 1:45pm 1729644350

Hi David. I trust the decision works out like you hope. I subscribe, and will continue to do so, because of the quality of the journalists and opinion providers. Comments are a mixed bunch. People like Jfoe are very good and you can actually learn something. Powerdownkiwi not so valuable. There is also a swag of very good information under your headings, which I also refer to. Thanks again, to you all for your efforts!!!!!

by averagejoe | 23rd Oct 24, 5:06pm 1729656381

This is going to be something of a conundrum for powerdownkiwi. How will he justify wasting some worthless token attached to some non-existent future resource to be able to still comment on here. He will have to consume precious resources to rant at everyone not to use precious resources, cos de-growth. It will be interesting to see if the green tick appears above his name.

by Hamish | 23rd Oct 24, 5:15pm 1729656946

He has had a few articles published on this site so adds to the thought and debate.

by redcows1 | 23rd Oct 24, 5:18pm 1729657090

I hope he does. Helps bring a bit of true realism to an otherwise fanciful world of economics. Fact, resources are finite.

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 6:27pm 1729661272

Whatever it is there are two valued aspects to said contributions. Firstly and mostly, sincerity secondly, deep research and resultant thought.

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 7:02pm 1729663347

Thank you

And, funny enough, PDK is paid-up but doesn't bother flaunting green ticks - it ain't my style. Never wore labels, either...

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 7:45pm 1729665942

Perhaps. Would have preferred to choose & display one’s own. For instance in my case💦🎻💦

by kensinma69 | 23rd Oct 24, 2:22pm 1729646532

Good move - I don't agree with all of the editorials but if I did then this would be a boring site ;)

by ChrisOfNoFame | 23rd Oct 24, 2:29pm 1729646982

The conversation just now with she who (likes to think) holds the purse strings:

Me: "Darling, can I spend $100 a year supporting a great financial news site"?

Her: "No! ... [something I can't repeat here in mandarin] ... Too much."

Me: "How about $50?"

Her: "Okay."

Me: [Stunned silence. I'm not even going to ask her what her rationale was - life is too short.]

I guess what I'm trying to communicate is that there may be considerably better conversion rate at a lower price.

by kiwikidsnz | 23rd Oct 24, 2:30pm 1729647014

LOL, should have started with $200...or $2/wk

by ChrisOfNoFame | 23rd Oct 24, 2:38pm 1729647515

That wouldn't have worked. She's not that stupid.

And if I'd started at $200, and then $100, and then $50 and then $25? I'd have got a no all the way to zero. She's not that stupid, either.

edit: $2 per week wouldn't work either. She's annually fixated. ;-) Using $1 a week might have. I'll try that one after a few months. (price discovery is fun, right?]

by Speedmax | 23rd Oct 24, 5:39pm 1729658398

I like bikes. My local bike shop has a notice behind the counter that says “for an extra $10 we’ll give you a receipt that matches what you told your spouse you spent”.

by GoWokeGobroke | 24th Oct 24, 8:27am 1729711650

@ Chrisofnofame - "there may be considerably better conversion rate at a lower price".

There sure is buddy. Called free speech, and it's free. The left believe it is an act of terrism as their dear leader has told them, but on the contrary one need not pay to have a voice, and to be able to use it.

Being charged a fee to voice your approved opinion on an approved subject is not free speech, its paid propoganda.

How high are you willing to jump? How much are you willing to pay? To ensure that you stay within the boundaries of approval?

by Nifty1 | 24th Oct 24, 10:59am 1729720778

Chris - you are what they call, 'whipped'!

by ChrisOfNoFame | 24th Oct 24, 11:42am 1729723335

Maybe.

But I find letting her 'win' on the frequent small stuff means I get 'wins' on the big stuff.

Costs me nothing to smile, and say, "Of course you're right, Dear".

by mark_a | 23rd Oct 24, 2:33pm 1729647233

A thought -

Maybe there is an additional category - 'Wise Gurus' - top 10 contributors as voted here and they get it for free for a year?

The rest of us have to pay and have an incentive to do better next time. :-)

by dotti | 23rd Oct 24, 2:52pm 1729648325

One question: will the comments be read-only or hidden entirely for non-paying members?

by David Chaston | 23rd Oct 24, 3:12pm 1729649541

They will be open as they are now, for everyone to read. But only Supporters will be able to make them. Starts on March 1, 2025. Until then, no change.

by linklater01 | 23rd Oct 24, 3:21pm 1729650115

I raised this issue just a few days ago, unaware of this announcement. I support it and it will be interesting to see who goes and who stays.

by agnostium | 23rd Oct 24, 3:33pm 1729650830

I pay up front so I assume my tick will stay until March next year but I've cancelled DD.

by David Chaston | 23rd Oct 24, 3:35pm 1729650925

correct

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 4:56pm 1729655813

If not due to pay an annual sub until mid 2025 assume it will keep running at 1 March until actual due date, ie 12 months are up?

by David Chaston | 23rd Oct 24, 5:04pm 1729656272

yep

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 5:01pm 1729656099

It will too thankfully, put paid to the little coven of posters that inevitably pop up every election year and post one another in circles, head nodding and upticks.

by Yvil | 23rd Oct 24, 4:46pm 1729655168

Great decision DC, you're running a business and you need income to pay your great staff and other expenses. If someone can't afford to contribute $0.3/day, I doubt they have much financial wisdom to add to the comments section.

by Hamish | 23rd Oct 24, 5:17pm 1729657056

Well I reckon there's plenty of thought provoking comments added below articles that take the debate outside of just $$ and look at the bigger picture. How government and monetary policy are impacting our society.

by Yvil | 23rd Oct 24, 5:55pm 1729659348

Interest's motto is "Helping you make financial decisions", in plain word, helping you make money. It's not "helping you make a better (utopian) world"

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 7:10pm 1729663837

But, Yvil, you miss the point.

If the method of making money shifts the habitat parameter-envelope beyond what we evolved to fit?

You end up with a whole lot of crumbling skeletons lying next to crumbling laptops - which once told them they had some numbers accredited to them.

Do you not, perhaps think, the 'financial' decisions are somewhat subservient, importance-wide? If not, go join the current 3-clown circus; they haven't a clue between them.

by Hamish | 23rd Oct 24, 7:49pm 1729666152

I'd say this website is a lot broader than just financial news.

Chris Trotter and others who contribute opinions on government, opposition, local politics etc.

And now a stream of articles on technology amongst others.

by Murray Falconer | 23rd Oct 24, 11:09pm 1729678190

He's never seen an elephant yet!

by middleman1 | 23rd Oct 24, 6:01pm 1729659701

Hamish. I agree. Comments from subject matter experts, interesting anecdotes from the front lines and some of the humorous exchanges are drawcards for me. I get DC's position and salute his roll of the dice but wonder if the site will be as attractive without the same level of ranting and banter.

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 5:49pm 1729658979

Yvil - I happen to be paid-up a year ahead - but you comment is wrong.

Financial nous is almost always ignorant of realities. As too, is a lot of academic pointy-end assertion.

But the biggest problem DC/Interest has, is that the truth is unfolding reasonably rapidly now, and a lot of journalism is going to have a lot of explaining to do. Few will be seen to have done enough for a mallowpuff.

by Speedmax | 23rd Oct 24, 5:53pm 1729659194

I support the move. There’s plenty of rubbish online but decent content costs real money to produce, so I’ve been very happy to spend $100 pa (only 27 cents a day) to support - regardless of whether I’m coming for the articles or comments. I would hate to see a reduction in content quality due to lack of funding.

I think it’s a good decision and wish you all the best with the move.

by MattG | 23rd Oct 24, 6:20pm 1729660838

Ok how about just showing that someone is a supporter with an icon silver gold platinum, works well with games for qudos, does not put up a paywall, and does not close off comments to regulars. Everyone should have an opinion. That would be a sad move to close off comments to those who can least afford it.

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 6:37pm 1729661878

It used to be like that but regrettably some participants here have used the platform to vent and promote over zealously, personal viewpoints that are simply vacuous, oddities, fantasies and attach often, pure propaganda. The moderators shouldn’t need to suffer that anymore than any of us. All that is being introduced now is a desire for a tightening up of some discipline, objectivity and general standards. Bit overdue I think.

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 7:05pm 1729663533

HMMM - I have come to the point where I can point out untruth in most of what comes from the MSM - Including much on this site. Having challenged journalism on that score, I can tell you it self-preserves, then continues peddling. One - not from this site, but on the Press Council at the time, and maybe still - used methods I would describe as 'unnecessary if one was telling the truth'. So they have a long way to go, and events are overtaking the mainstream narrative.

This is why many - who get that 'economic growth can go forever and is always good' is untrue - have gone down rabbit-holes (convinced the Elite are planning to do away with them etc). Ironically, history tells us they're somewhat right (I'm just reading 'Late Victorian Holocausts'; El Nino famines and the making of the Third World - Davis/Verso - which you would enjoy; we didn't tell ourselves the truth then, either).

Those who got close to it in the past were Kim Hill and Chris Laidlaw. Now Gareth here somewhat, and Danyl McLachlan ditto (he still hasn't questioned money). There is nobody else in the barnyard, and the fox just broke down the door...

by Yvil | 23rd Oct 24, 7:31pm 1729665099

"I have come to the point where I can point out untruth"

That's a big statement PDK, one that shows that you believe you know better than others

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 7:59pm 1729666787

Too right.

We have fallen into 'opinion vs opinion, pick the one which suits you'. It fitted laissez-faire dog-eat-dog growth-forever we are what we consume.

But truth ain't what we like - it is what it is (try coming out of oncology with a 3 month sentence - a second opinion is going to nullify it? I don't think so).

I've spent the last 20 years - and more - researching all things, as they interrelate. More time than a PhD - probably more than two. Probably more casual lecture attendance, than a BSc would require - and a personal (non-fiction) library wider than most. All read a least once. I realised after 2005-8, that finance couldn't be right, so learned about it. And it isn't. By some measure. The interesting aside, is the number of people who need that not to be true, because it would invalidate their narative, ego, whatever. Usually vulnerable-if-pricked types, I've found, maybe adding a reason for the recalcitrance.

Look around, Yvil. When I started commenting here, there were 2 billion less global inhabitants, than now. Every 11 days, since then, we have burned a billion barrels of oil; they're gone while we wrote.. Yes, I'm sure of truths...

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 8:07pm 1729667251

In your greater than PhD level study, why didn't you pick up the population is going to retrench?

I picked up on that at around the age of 8, when I noticed I had less siblings than my parents, they had less than theirs, and much the case for most of my friends at the time.

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 8:33pm 1729668788

Too slow.

Lifetimes, timeframes...

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 8:45pm 1729669552

But the ones that are using the most resources are disappearing fastest.

We can have 10 billion people, if they lived like and Indian, or less.

by Murray Falconer | 23rd Oct 24, 11:17pm 1729678646

Except we're inviting them to come over (and up to our standard) asap!

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 8:23pm 1729668208

Fair enough. The masses though think en masse. For instance in the eighties the Middle East was serviced primarily by Gulf Air, flying primarily 727s. Nowadays at least four major international airlines are flying from that region and often half empty of passengers, A380s, A350s , 777s you name it, to all points of the compass, globally, Fuel for said enterprises is conveniently underground owned by said nation. The world’s population witless you would say, lap it up and climb on board and I would wager it will continue to do so until said nations are reduced to selling dates and sandpaper. Barry McGuire, the “Eve of Destruction” years ago was banned, folk just don’t want to hear what they don’t want to hear. Billions of them in one shape or form, whether they know it or not, until it’s too late.

by agnostium | 23rd Oct 24, 8:30pm 1729668654

I appreciate your posts PDK. I've learnt a lot from what you've posted. When I first read your stuff I thought you were a bit pompous and used complicated words to sound clever.

But I've since done some research on some of the ideas you discuss and you're 100% right. We're breaching planetary boundaries on some many levels, and the systems we have in place are not going to be able to cope as they can't even recognise that there is a problem.

The push back comes from those that can't face the consequences of what you point out, so you get shot as the messenger. Kia kaha.

by linklater01 | 24th Oct 24, 9:19am 1729714760

agnostium,

PDK is indeed clever and climate change is all too real, but I now pass over his comments. Why? Because i know precisely what he will say (which represents an admirable consistency over many years), but more importantly, because he admits of no possibility of error-he reminds me of old testament prophets. I find his absolute certainty on the(very bleak) future of mankind to be repugnant. In his view, Earth's carrying capacity is under 2bn,making global societal collapse inevitable-in the not too distant future.

He may be right, in which case, my grandchildren's future is bleak indeed, but I am not prepared to accept that. I certainly accept that everything we mine is finite, so moving on from fossil fuels makes sense, irrespective of climate change and the process is very unlikely to be smooth.

by Yvil | 24th Oct 24, 10:56am 1729720607

Agreed, PDK thinks he's right and others are wrong, he doesn't believe in nuances. He admits above that he knows the truth ! That, to me, is a clear sign of short sightedness and narrow-mindedness. Life is much more nuanced than black or white.

PDK: "I have come to the point where I can point out untruth"

PDK: "your comment is wrong"

by Murray Falconer | 24th Oct 24, 11:55am 1729724100

thinks he's right and others are wrong

Who doesn't?

he doesn't believe in nuances...sign of short sightedness and narrow-mindedness

He gives a range for when things go tits up i.e. nuanced. Furthermore, he has admitted to being wrong on things in the past which shows an ability to change when new information emerges.

Tell me why you think we can go on the way we have with 'growth' in population, resource use and debt, yet not hit a significant problem in the next 20 years? We already cannot afford ourselves at current levels e.g. health and housing.

Shoot the message, not the messenger. Will be PDK be wrong about some things? Of course, but the elephant doesn't disappear just because you put your hands over your eyes.

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 8:04pm 1729667076

I liked how he said the truth is unfolding rapidly.

It is, but it's not really the same as the peak oil narrative he's vehemently pushed for a while.

- populations are aging

- the US is retreating from being global sherrif and hotspots are flaring

- there's economical upheaval from a COVID black swan

But

Gas price hasn't moved much in 15 years.....

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 8:38pm 1729669089

Your point?

I just wrote that I realised finance had to be wrong... Before 2005-8, I believed that economists must know what they are talking about, and assumed a price of $200/barrel, as did G/Sachs. The difference is that I've realised that you cannot measure joules in keystroked debt...

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 9:05pm 1729670700

My point is you've crafted a story of how the future is going to unfold, tie anything you can to it, and omit the parts that don't fit. It's the exact opposite of the sort of introspective inquiry you're trying to promote.

I'm not sure how finance gets to be wrong. I can see many of the problems and pitfalls, but it's not a game of right vs wrong.

by powerdownkiwi | 23rd Oct 24, 9:45pm 1729673104

It's a game which has chosen not to measure its underwrite.

That sounds wrong to me.

by Pa1nter | 23rd Oct 24, 10:02pm 1729674127

Debt is a fairly old concept, rarely (never?) has the underwrite been measured in an accurate way, because the future is beyond accurate prediction.

In principal, I agree with much of you. But I also don't think anyone is capable of accurately predicting time-frames and means of what'll unfold. You have pinned yourself to a theory, and now need to fulfil it. You see an endgame by X date, I see a trajectory that could unravel quickly, or more likely in a longer, lingering fashion.

Fundamentally, humans haven't managed to avoid the tyranny of a power structure that's tied to larger civilisations. To me, overcoming that is a more pressing question than things like resource depletion, or limits to growth.

Well, freedom from thought is probably the largest pressing question.

by agnostium | 23rd Oct 24, 8:17pm 1729667832

It used to be like that but regrettably some participants here have used the platform to vent and promote over zealously, personal viewpoints that are simply vacuous, oddities, fantasies and attach often, pure propaganda. The moderators shouldn’t need to suffer that anymore than any of us. All that is being introduced now is a desire for a tightening up of some discipline, objectivity and general standards. Bit overdue I think.

Making people pay to comment will not prevent that. Some of the most obvious examples you give are posted by people with a green tick. Paying to be heard has never, never been a way to achieve better discussion. It's the opposite actually. Those who can afford to pay and have time to comment will come to dominate the discussion and create a warped view of what the general feeling is in the community. I really, really oppose this move. Removing barriers to discussion rather than putting them up is what we should be doing.

I wouldn't be surprised if the comment section just moves to another site where a link to the article is posted (which will still be free to access) and where people can comment freely, but now rather than being moderated by interest the comments are moderated by whoever sets the site up.

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 8:40pm 1729669245

Disagree. According to the summary by the editor, here not so long ago, the subscribers, the green tickers if you like, are in a substantial minority. To conclude, even pro rata, that they harbour the majority of comment that is disagreeable is rather disproportionate. Still come 01/03/2025 you should be able to judge that well enough from the sidelines.

by agnostium | 23rd Oct 24, 9:01pm 1729670469

To conclude, even pro rata, that they harbour the majority of comment that is disagreeable is rather disproportionate.

I never said that.

by Foxglove. | 23rd Oct 24, 9:27pm 1729672026

“those who can afford to pay and have time to comment will come to dominate the discussion and create a warped view.” Don’t see how/where your point and/or opinion separates the present subject identities from those of the future?

by agnostium | 24th Oct 24, 12:23am 1729682623

Nowhere did I say those that pay or will pay harbour the majority of comment that is disagreeable. I said only allowing those who pay to comment

1 - does not prevent the type of comment that was mentioned as some commentators with a green tick makes these comments

2 - will result in less plurarity of views as there will be a significant number of people who even if they wanted to could not justify paying the fee, which means that we lose their voices in the comment section. The fact that most of the people with the green tick think $100 a year is nothing shows how disconnected they are from many kiwis. That $100 for some people is the difference between their kids being able to join a basketball team, or have Xmas presents.

You have either misread what I wrote or have a poor grasp of logic. Apologise and move on.

by Rumpole | 23rd Oct 24, 8:23pm 1729668186

Visit the site daily and weclome articles and comments that make me think and review my opinions, will wait and see how the new foramt works out. Would hope to see the charts updated more often as some are very out of date.

by earnedincome | 24th Oct 24, 8:24am 1729711469

Understandable, though I hope you have a plan for assessing the impact of these changes once implemented. I suspect you may see a fall in the number of visitors with less content (yes, the comments are valuable content that is provided to you in return for the hosting of them). Hopefully this doesn't have too much impact on the revenue you collect through advertising.

Personally I would be interested to see what might happen if you were to apply a comment quota to free accounts.

by Richardfromauckland | 24th Oct 24, 8:49am 1729712955

Fair call. In the past I've asked for flexibility on the amount - I am irregular reader, and even more irregular commenter. Would've been happy to pay 50 bucks to support a good site.

More recently the comments hold less and less insight (I appreciate this comment can be added to that pile), and act more as a vehicle for entrenched positions to be communicated. I'll continue to pop in now and then especially for the great currency pieces from Kerr and Wong.

by Ian w | 24th Oct 24, 8:53am 1729713216

Interest.co is by far the best value for money of the subscriptions we pay, sounds fair to us. Lose access and where do we go for market info? Keep up the good work.

by averagejoe | 24th Oct 24, 9:56am 1729716990

I'm on the fence as to whether I would pay to continue to contribute to the discussions on this site. I have a rule where I don't pay for any site, where that site is also collecting money from advertising. Such a site should stand on it's own through the quality of its content. I notice Stuff started popping up some sort of logon and request for money recently, so I simply stopped using it, their news is generally old and not accurate anyway, which is true for most NZ media. They always seem to be several days or weeks behind in international news stories, so mostly I consume news from international sites. This site, is classified as a left leaning site, and it is clear from many of the contributors that they are quite left wing types, which is fine, and has led to interesting debates on many topics. What I will say is that this site is not like "thestandard", which is very feral site. I had heard about that site and went to have a look one day to see what it was all about. Quite disturbing content, far to the left of here. I decided to join and post a comment, obviously disagreeing with something someone posted about the ACT party. I was immediately banned, so I guess that is why they seem to have so few users. So big ups to interest.co.nz for at least letting debate continue here as long as it does not get too unreasonable.

by linklater01 | 24th Oct 24, 10:50am 1729720223

averagejoe,

"This site, is classified as a left leaning site" By whom and on what basis?

by powerdownkiwi | 24th Oct 24, 1:29pm 1729729798

Anyone who thinks in the limited terms of left and right politics, is failing to scope by some orders of magnitude.

Communism (not its real name) draws down resources just as a free-market economy (not its real name) does.

The problem is resource draw-down; by whom? is a side issue.

by Foxglove. | 24th Oct 24, 1:57pm 1729731428

Liberty of a seperate thought. Strikes me now that you have broken cover as a subscriber you may have lost some sense of subtlety, and perhaps strategy. After all, come 2 March 2025, you would still have able to sally forth on here as to be expected, and likely to the surprise of many, and done so without the green tick as if Zorro without the Z slash. Just a thought.

by averagejoe | 24th Oct 24, 2:21pm 1729732898

I think you are the one that thinks in limited terms, i.e. you are right no matter the question or the subject matter. Whatever you blurt out is correct, and everyone else is wrong. That is what I would call very limited thinking. I have seen you blurt out something, and then someone agrees with you (doesn't happen often I know), and then you launch into some tirade about how wrong are. So, limited and bizarre thinking going on there.

by averagejoe | 24th Oct 24, 2:18pm 1729732690

There is this information that I see most years, this link appears to be from 2020.

https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/06/which_media_are_seen_as_most_left_an…

Interest is left leaning, as I said, well according to those that completed the survey.

...and from powerdownkiwi's confusing mutterings it seems he would prefer it to be far left.

by Hamish | 24th Oct 24, 3:04pm 1729735462

So -9 on a scale of -100 to +100 is a left leaning website?

Just below the results is this very quote from the author.

Interest.co,nz comes closest to neutrality.

I think you're seeing things that aren't there. I'd say interest.co is about as close to neutral as you could get. Whatever the flavor of any political thought pieces, the comments are only policed on rules and any comment that is strongly supportive or negative against the article is left alone unless it's abusive.

by averagejoe | 24th Oct 24, 5:32pm 1729744326

Left leaning, means left of center, (which means close to neutrality in my book). Different words, same meaning.

by taiko | 26th Oct 24, 3:54pm 1729911261

I'm centre right - probably +10 - 20 on the scale. I find Interest.co.nz columns informative and balanced. I've cancelled subscriptions to most NZ media and don't watch TVNZ as I find it biased ( and poor quality). Keep up the good work. I've been a long term press patron and will continue to be.

by interesting1234 | 24th Oct 24, 2:12pm 1729732338

I have a rule where I don't pay for any site

Understandable, but this is the real world today, where it becomes harder and harder to get a full product with no additional subscription costs, or having to pay to continue using after a period of time. The world is out to extract as much money as possible from you as possible of course. I don't pay for any other sites, and although I don't have to pay for this one, I find the diverse and educational discussions in the comments section, as well as the range and quality of the journalism is both refreshing and worth supporting. As you say, stuff went to the dogs and effectively lowers ones IQ by reading it, but intetrest.co.nz provokes thought, reflection, and analysis from various angles which is more than any other site I know or read.

by Here.for.the.c… | 24th Oct 24, 1:30pm 1729729843

Any chance Jfoe can create a substack and just provide commentary? The insightful comments are the main draw card for me.

by K.W. | 24th Oct 24, 7:54pm 1729752880

I dont recommend this. Every site that has made comments only available to subscribers has ended up dying a quick death due to lack of comments. Like Macrobusiness, which used to get hundreds of comments on an article when it was free to comment but now gets just one or two. Macrobusiness lost so many commenters that I actually stopped paying my subscription because the site just wasnt delivering the additional content. The comments section is the best part of Interest - will people still pay for Interest if there are no comments?

Also the comments section will rapidly devolve into a small group of commenters who start to use the site as a personal chat room, discussing their weekend plans and other boring stuff because they are the only ones there. Which turns other readers right off.

People come to this site often just to read the comments. A substantial reduction in comments and people will lose interest (pun intended).

by kiwiriwi | 24th Oct 24, 10:45pm 1729763156

I am one of the freeloading commentators and I think it's a really good change. If we can't spare a $100 a year considering the value the platform provides, we really shouldn't be able to get away commenting can we...

I mean, I still won't get approval from the wife to spend $100 on interest.co.nz vs on the mortgage, but nevertheless I'm in support.

by Zachary Smith | 28th Oct 24, 1:21pm 1730074919

If you choose the $10 a month option the statement will have the word "interest" in the line for the deduction. This will trick your wife into thinking it is an interest credit payment.

by taiko | 26th Oct 24, 3:44pm 1729910692

Fully agree with the move. We need truly Independant media. It has to be funded. Hopefully the trolls and ill-informed comments will reduce. I've read some great comments and learned from them. But I often struggle to get thru the useless rubbish to find the occasional gem. I do agree that writers of the column should be able to respond to comments even if they aren't a subscriber.

by The Man3 | 27th Oct 24, 4:57pm 1730001428

Personally havent paid the subscription solely because “ The Man2” was blocked for expressing opinions that were in contrast with the doom and gloom merchants.

At the end of the day, if Interest.co need to charge to keep the site going then so be it, it is a business decision for financial reasons.

Hopefully it will not backfire on Interest.co as it gets rather tedious reading the same postings from many about how the housing market is tanking, when it is not in many parts of NZ .

Interest.co is meant to be a forum that assists people to make good financial decisions, which you would have to question often?

Reality is that the ones that actually are investors or landlords are the ones that people should be taking notice of, as they are the financially savvy ones who have improved their lives by investing rather than moaning continuously.

by interesting1234 | 27th Oct 24, 7:34pm 1730010869

Hopefully it will not backfire on Interest.co as it gets rather tedious reading the same postings from many about how the housing market is tanking, when it is not in many parts of NZ .

All you state is that the housing market in Christchurch is doing fine, which if that works for you then great for you. Perhaps try engaging in a more broad range of topics of discussion in an intellectual manner and things would improve 🙂

by Zwifter | 28th Oct 24, 4:40pm 1730086806

There is a real possibility it will just turn into a bit of a daily DGM meeting on here which will be similar to an AA meeting where they can have a cry and talk about when and where they fell off the wagon.

by Small Kev | 27th Oct 24, 6:24pm 1730006696

One less source of entertainment now that people can’t participate in the comments.

This choice could end up pushing people away, it seems risky, as readers might just decide to skim or stop visiting altogether. But I suppose they’re trying to do what they need to survive.

by youngdumbandfullofit | 27th Oct 24, 10:20pm 1730020832

This is smart. Always thought about contributing just due to the excellent articles this site offers, probably the right cost/incentive for me personally. All the best interest.co.nz team!

by The_Golem | 30th Oct 24, 3:41pm 1730256110

Excellent news: it will stop the nonpaying commenters treating you and the subscribers as a charity.