1/ The biggest misconception in the media space is that people inherently like *only* directly subscribing to/supporting to one writer a la @Patreon.

Like @ne0liberal, we want access to great content/writers. The more the better. Bundled content is the way to go. https://twitter.com/ne0liberal/status/1265042007912853504

2/ The misconception stems from ppl misusing critiques of the cable industry:

"I pay $100+ a month for 500 channels when I only watch 4-5. I wish I could unbundle my cable subscription and only pay $20 for CNN, HBO, and Comedy Central."

3/ By contrast, a @SubstackInc newsletter costs $0 to make. So there's no need to charge $100/month to subscribe. Instead, writers charge $5-20.

Writers could bundle together, charge $10-20, and the unit economics would still be favorable given the low cost of content.

4/That's why the @nytimes is crushing it despite claims that the mainstream media's over. For $15-20 per month, they offer a huge bundle of writers across every topic area.

Op-eds, newsletters, games, cooking apps, etc....

5/ There aren't any NYT readers who're asking to unbundle the paper right now. Even if you only read @MikeIsaac or @karaswisher, their unbundled newsletter offerings wouldn't be much cheaper (or would be more expensive) than your original NYT subscription.

6/ Sum: The last 20 years in media have been defined by unbundling (craigslist, eBay, new digital players, etc...)

Moving forward, expect more focus on rebuilding content bundles.