And although it's just one data point, I've personally started visiting iMore because I came to recognize their content through Flipboard, found it interesting, and wanted more.
Maybe I'd glance past 100 TPM articles on Flipboard and never read them, in which case TPM isn't out the traffic. Or maybe I'd start skimming those articles because I've started to associate their icon with interesting content and convert into a regular view. The odds of that happening are admittedly low, but the odds of that happening if their content isn't available on my news consumption platform of choice is approximately zero.
But ultimately it's TPM's call. If they want to restrict it, then I completely defend their right to do so. I just don't think it's a good business idea.
I just don't think it's a good business idea.
Presumably they've analyzed their traffic and made the better business idea based on the amount of inbound traffic that Flipboard et. al were sending their way.It isn't really interesting to observe that people want free stuff. It is interesting to unite producers to get a better price for their effort, and to tackle the behemoths who can afford to dumb content below cost. It is interesting to try to convince consumers to stop wasting their lives, and to demand better content worth a higher price.
What a publisher can sell profitably to advertisers now is a small, engaged audience - not massive numbers of people who couldn't care less and just pass through.
Also, to that end, it seems to have failed. They want people on their site, and Flipboard apparently isn't doing that. All it does is use the content to keep people on their site.
Taking the article at face value, I'd say ditch it and market in a different way.