The move by online publishers to introduce subscription-based news content is inevitable but will only be successful if content is targeted and the price is right, according to industry analysts Frost & Sullivan
Mmm, as Bruno would say "Ich don't think so"
You're joking me right? Has anyone at Frost and Sullivan seen the internet? Bottomless pit? Multitude of content to choose from? And, the sweetest and juciest part- if someone decides to make something 'paid for', some other company sees an advantage in making exactly the same content available for free. There's already been a lot of commentary about the Facebook example- if it became paid for the majority of members would just move to something else. One article here.
Don't even start to think about blogs as a way out of paying, where more and more people look to for opinion on news stories, but rather think about the concept of piracy - 41% of all software is pirated. A huge massive figure and a testament to the nature of people v IP.
It's looking like the software, movie and music industries appear to have gotten that chestnut "under control" and I don't think news would be any different. Yes there are some properties seeing some traction in a paid for model, but in the end you can get the content anywhere if you look hard enough and know the right search string.
Frost and Sullivan, you got the wool over your eyes. Yes, some people are honest and they'll pay, but the internet is anonymous. Which means most people won't pay because they cloak themselves in the fact that they can be dishonest because no-one knows who they are and that, Frost and Sullivan, is the bott-om line.