I'm sad to hear Substack is going to capitalize more on the work of it's creators, the writers on this platform who donate free work every day. But that's life! I enjoy the few people I've met here. I donated about seven works and am not here for the money. If Substack puts ads in my little posts, I'll move on. They won't miss me. It's all good. It's been fun. I'm sure other upstarts will join in the competition. Medium is also an alternative.
I doubt they will add ads to anyone’s Substack without asking them, at least at first.
But the reality is that Substack just got $100M from investors, and those investors will want to see that money start coming back to them. They will be pushing for ads as one way to do this I suspect that’s why the co-founders seem to be changing their tune toward them.
I used to work in service development at a global tech company and suspect the $100m is less than they would have liked so they'll need to dial back on some of the goals or only get half-baked results.
At the moment I see Substack only growing organically - marketing is done by users - often off platform - YouTube doesn't have that issue it has a preinstalled app on my TV - we watch more YT at home than anything else - it doesn't have to market itself it is embedded in our home entertainment. To get people onto Substack is much more problematic.
Apps development - hmm... I don't use the app as much as the desktop version - I need them to work out that I want to see comments easily under notes on my feed without having to click on the note just give me a rollover at least. I don't have an easy way to engage with others without getting pulled off the main page... even LinkedIn got that right.
As for ads they could or might already be making bank by letting the bots learn from the content - it works for reddit...
Just based on past development experience I'm not sure the $100m is a game changer, more of a lights on maintenance... it will add some new roles, do some tweaks, strengthen the weak spots that must be occurring with their move to multi-media
Interesting thoughts, David. I think your comment also speaks to how efficiently they spend the money. If they do a good job, the value of the money will compound over the next few years. On the other hand, if they invest it poorly, results will suffer, investor demands will increase, and it could easily create a downward spiral.
I agree with you that Substack has a big opportunity for organic growth, but again, who are their key community people? It just doesn’t seem to be a priority for them. Maybe this funding round will change that. Appreciate your thoughts.
Hm… key community people is tough as a lot of celebrities right here and they might be considered growth magnets… I hope the money is not thrown their way…
As for ads I suspect they would go on free subs first - as most people prefer adfree subscriptions… that said ads are creeping into paid subscriptions elsewhere so maybe the time is right here.
David that makes a lot of sense. I could see ads put on free subs first, and it will be pitched to publishers as a way to convince more readers to upgrade to paid, to avoid ads.
Ads feel inevitable, but I hope they keep creators’ interests front and center with revenue sharing. Excited (and a bit nervous) about what this means for independent writers.
I like your idea about sponsorships within Substack, it feels like a smart way to grow organically while building community. I will probably do the same.
As Substack grows, how do smaller creators avoid getting drowned out? I’d love to see more features that help emerging voices get discovered, maybe some kind of curated spotlight (not that shitty rising voices bs) or algorithm tweak that favors quality over popularity.
Hi Neela. I totally agree with you, it feels like Substack is moving toward being an all-encompassing media platform. And I also agree that it will be key for Substack to keep what’s best for the individual creators in mind as they grow, especially the smaller ones.
To that end, who is Substack’s Head of Community or Chief Community Officer? Who is the person over the company’s efforts to make sure feedback from users reaches people like @Chris Best and @Hamish McKenzie? I have no idea who that person is.
This is encouraging news for Substack! It’s evolving into a comprehensive media platform. It’s interesting to see them shift their focus toward competing with platforms like YouTube. I understand the VC funding comes with conditions and that Substack needs to fulfill its agreement with the VC. I also recognize that ads are an inevitable part of the business, but I hope they don't overshadow the independent creators in the process. I’m excited to see how they use this funding to improve the platform and foster further growth for everyone!
Great breakdown, finally happy someone broke it down for me.
This is so true, and I've seen it play in many companies I've worked at: "The bottom line is Substack just got a huge check, and that check comes with strings attached. It’s just how it is, so we all need to be open to the idea that we may see some tweaks or even big shifts in strategy from Substack over the next few months."
The dawgs at Substack can say anything, but ultimately money speaks, and we have to wait and watch what they actually 'do' because it could be very different from what they've said all this while.
No ads, are you crazy? There's no reason to put that room there for them. If we're not doing doomscrolling then there are zero points to ads. I just think ppl may even avoid some substacks for it. Certainly some bigger substacks could do ads, and ppl would still read them, but they make so much more than ads would give. It'd have to be something well beyond what ads pay I order to try to normalize that. That doesn't make sense just given what you've said. I would avoid ad substacks. It really doesn't pay that much.
What would I do with the 100m for substack? I would lean so heavily into the fact that substack is a better newsfeed than Google etc. The articles are unique, perspectival, in a sense that can't be captured by a lot of newspapers (not to say they don't have unique advantages). I think having a substack "newspaper" would be cool. I'd go over whether users can create their own or whether it's just a substack thing. The "popular" stuff at the top of the categories are an absolute toxic mess. They completely undermine everything about substack. Everything there is mostly ragebait and reinterpretation of every one of those topics into current news segments. My feed is 100 times better, and that's the sentiment that I've gotten from other people on substack about theirs. Look at this: https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/the-network-in-the-worlds-of-the. I don't have any opinion on it whatsoever, but this is, at best, front page of opinion columns section, but it probably wouldn't be hosted in it (given how personal it is). This is real stuff I would read.
So, I'd probably spend it on fixing the leaderboards posts, fixing notes a bit, so all that coalesces more into what substack does best. I may have a personally developed substack newspaper which extends a bit beyond my current feed, but not to the point which has the ragebait politics. May put more into developing growing writers a bit. The video thing I'm neither here nor there for it (I don't watch video except some games, but I see the benefit for substack). Wish them all the best for whatever they do.
I'm sad to hear Substack is going to capitalize more on the work of it's creators, the writers on this platform who donate free work every day. But that's life! I enjoy the few people I've met here. I donated about seven works and am not here for the money. If Substack puts ads in my little posts, I'll move on. They won't miss me. It's all good. It's been fun. I'm sure other upstarts will join in the competition. Medium is also an alternative.
I doubt they will add ads to anyone’s Substack without asking them, at least at first.
But the reality is that Substack just got $100M from investors, and those investors will want to see that money start coming back to them. They will be pushing for ads as one way to do this I suspect that’s why the co-founders seem to be changing their tune toward them.
I used to work in service development at a global tech company and suspect the $100m is less than they would have liked so they'll need to dial back on some of the goals or only get half-baked results.
At the moment I see Substack only growing organically - marketing is done by users - often off platform - YouTube doesn't have that issue it has a preinstalled app on my TV - we watch more YT at home than anything else - it doesn't have to market itself it is embedded in our home entertainment. To get people onto Substack is much more problematic.
Apps development - hmm... I don't use the app as much as the desktop version - I need them to work out that I want to see comments easily under notes on my feed without having to click on the note just give me a rollover at least. I don't have an easy way to engage with others without getting pulled off the main page... even LinkedIn got that right.
As for ads they could or might already be making bank by letting the bots learn from the content - it works for reddit...
Just based on past development experience I'm not sure the $100m is a game changer, more of a lights on maintenance... it will add some new roles, do some tweaks, strengthen the weak spots that must be occurring with their move to multi-media
Interesting thoughts, David. I think your comment also speaks to how efficiently they spend the money. If they do a good job, the value of the money will compound over the next few years. On the other hand, if they invest it poorly, results will suffer, investor demands will increase, and it could easily create a downward spiral.
I agree with you that Substack has a big opportunity for organic growth, but again, who are their key community people? It just doesn’t seem to be a priority for them. Maybe this funding round will change that. Appreciate your thoughts.
Hm… key community people is tough as a lot of celebrities right here and they might be considered growth magnets… I hope the money is not thrown their way…
As for ads I suspect they would go on free subs first - as most people prefer adfree subscriptions… that said ads are creeping into paid subscriptions elsewhere so maybe the time is right here.
David that makes a lot of sense. I could see ads put on free subs first, and it will be pitched to publishers as a way to convince more readers to upgrade to paid, to avoid ads.
Why are yall so obsessed with clearing an avenue for ads here? There's no way to tie ads into substack culture.
Ad share revenue would be good and sponsorship, too.
Hi Susan, thanks for commenting! I think both are on the way, one thing Substack does well is it helps publishers monetize their content.
Yeah, it'd be the best 2 cents of your life.
Substack is becoming a full-on media platform.
Ads feel inevitable, but I hope they keep creators’ interests front and center with revenue sharing. Excited (and a bit nervous) about what this means for independent writers.
I like your idea about sponsorships within Substack, it feels like a smart way to grow organically while building community. I will probably do the same.
As Substack grows, how do smaller creators avoid getting drowned out? I’d love to see more features that help emerging voices get discovered, maybe some kind of curated spotlight (not that shitty rising voices bs) or algorithm tweak that favors quality over popularity.
Thank you for breaking this down, bro.
Very helpful.
Hi Neela. I totally agree with you, it feels like Substack is moving toward being an all-encompassing media platform. And I also agree that it will be key for Substack to keep what’s best for the individual creators in mind as they grow, especially the smaller ones.
To that end, who is Substack’s Head of Community or Chief Community Officer? Who is the person over the company’s efforts to make sure feedback from users reaches people like @Chris Best and @Hamish McKenzie? I have no idea who that person is.
I hate change, but staying stagnant is also not an option. I am excited to see what happens next.
We're not doing ads. This guy just wants an extra few bucks every month to ruin substack culture.
This is encouraging news for Substack! It’s evolving into a comprehensive media platform. It’s interesting to see them shift their focus toward competing with platforms like YouTube. I understand the VC funding comes with conditions and that Substack needs to fulfill its agreement with the VC. I also recognize that ads are an inevitable part of the business, but I hope they don't overshadow the independent creators in the process. I’m excited to see how they use this funding to improve the platform and foster further growth for everyone!
Excellent insights, Mack! Happy Tuesday.
Thank you, Lucille! It will be very interesting to see how they react moving forward. Overall, very exciting news, let’s see what happens next!
Great breakdown, finally happy someone broke it down for me.
This is so true, and I've seen it play in many companies I've worked at: "The bottom line is Substack just got a huge check, and that check comes with strings attached. It’s just how it is, so we all need to be open to the idea that we may see some tweaks or even big shifts in strategy from Substack over the next few months."
The dawgs at Substack can say anything, but ultimately money speaks, and we have to wait and watch what they actually 'do' because it could be very different from what they've said all this while.
I agree completely, Parves. And it will likely be that the investors will push for changes down the road that they aren’t pushing for right now.
I get it. We’ll see how things progress, but I think we all need to remain open to the possibility that some changes will likely happen soon.
No ads, are you crazy? There's no reason to put that room there for them. If we're not doing doomscrolling then there are zero points to ads. I just think ppl may even avoid some substacks for it. Certainly some bigger substacks could do ads, and ppl would still read them, but they make so much more than ads would give. It'd have to be something well beyond what ads pay I order to try to normalize that. That doesn't make sense just given what you've said. I would avoid ad substacks. It really doesn't pay that much.
What would I do with the 100m for substack? I would lean so heavily into the fact that substack is a better newsfeed than Google etc. The articles are unique, perspectival, in a sense that can't be captured by a lot of newspapers (not to say they don't have unique advantages). I think having a substack "newspaper" would be cool. I'd go over whether users can create their own or whether it's just a substack thing. The "popular" stuff at the top of the categories are an absolute toxic mess. They completely undermine everything about substack. Everything there is mostly ragebait and reinterpretation of every one of those topics into current news segments. My feed is 100 times better, and that's the sentiment that I've gotten from other people on substack about theirs. Look at this: https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/the-network-in-the-worlds-of-the. I don't have any opinion on it whatsoever, but this is, at best, front page of opinion columns section, but it probably wouldn't be hosted in it (given how personal it is). This is real stuff I would read.
So, I'd probably spend it on fixing the leaderboards posts, fixing notes a bit, so all that coalesces more into what substack does best. I may have a personally developed substack newspaper which extends a bit beyond my current feed, but not to the point which has the ragebait politics. May put more into developing growing writers a bit. The video thing I'm neither here nor there for it (I don't watch video except some games, but I see the benefit for substack). Wish them all the best for whatever they do.