If the pie itself is growing, but there are more guests to feed (ie more creators), every creator may still end up with a smaller slice of the pie though?
I would also argue that in the finance space too, growth has become much more difficult due to an increasing amount of competition. Ask @heavymoatinvestment as one of the OG writers who has been around long enough (I haven’t), but even in the 18 months I‘ve been writing I seem to observe a noticeable change.
You're not wrong about each creator potentially ending up with a smaller slice of the pie.
That being said, as the pie is growing, I would argue that proves that Substack is not collapsing at all but rather growing.
Eventually, I will assume that some writers decided to leave the platform if it’s not financially viable - in the meantime, I expect that readers will continue growing which will in turn again cause more writers to join and the cycle will continue.
I believe the biggest winner will be Substack and the writers who stay consistent and keep writing despite tough months.
Finance might be less elastic than the other niches. It might be worth it for people who are managing a lot of money to subscribe to multiple newsletters because that could still be less expensive than paying for research elsewhere.
Nice article, but you are slightly mixing apples with oranges. His main point was that the ability to earn 6-figures as a writer on Substack is collapsing. He was not really dwelling much into Substack’s business model from investor’s perspective - he is a writer not investor.
So you are not saying something that is contrary to his point - both of you can be right. Substack as a business is growing, but it is also becoming less viable as a main source of creator’s income.
I responded to something similar in another comment, if the space is overcrowded and it becomes impossible to earn a living, I believe some authors will leave, creating more of an opportunity which will be filled by more people writing etc.
I think as long as the business grows that bodes well for people who continue grinding.
Glad to have such a good example to use! Happy you enjoyed the article!
Definitely right about the bull market tide - will be interesting in a bear market to see what happens… Guessing rebound capital will have a lot more stocks to look at :P
Great points Joseph and another great article. I agree that it’s unlikely that Substack is dying and that it’s likely correlation rather than causation. Unfortunately I think other revenue streams need to be added, including ads.
I personally stopped putting any content behind my newsletter and on my other 2 newsletter I haven’t even activated a paid feature—even though my writing on individual stocks is high quality and comparable to other paid stock research Substacks.
I’d rather build a community of like minded people and eventually make some money later, but only when it’s a subtle and small addition rather than a in your face ad or sub request.
That's very generous of you to not put content behind a paywall, you are another example of authors being generous with their work!
In terms of Substack turning to ads, not sure why they would. I know they had their first positive cash flow quarter in 2025 - not sure the business itself is struggling but could be wrong.
I meant a ad network for creators to choose to add. I don’t plan to have a subscription anytime soon but I wouldn’t mind 1/x ad per article for example*
The issue I struggle with is the immediate desire of virtually every creator to monetize everything. Aside from those whose profession is writing (authors, journalists, reporters, professors, etc.), why can’t public discourse exist for the edification of everyone?
The minimum subscription cost is too high, in my opinion. I wish Substack would offer a $1/month / $10/year subscription options and allow partnership bundles where creators split revenues in exchange for reciprocal subscriber access. These options would allow writers to price their work according to market demand and be rewarded by large followings and sales volume.
Love Psalms 126:5 and Galatians 6:9 — nothing like some morning encouragement to keep sowing!
Thanks Matt and happy I'm encouraging you to keep sowing!
In terms of the need to monetize everything, I agree that certain accounts can feel frustrating. I'm trying to keep as much content free as possible - but that likely causes my paid conversion to be much lower than others.
In terms of subscription prices being too high, you are definitely right about that - I am guilty of a high price but the way I see it is that the work I publish is high quality and the price should reflect that - perhaps I am off, happy to hear feedback.
In terms of cheaper options, I do offer to students and anyone who asks but only a few have taken me up on that offer.
The monetization comment was a generalization of content creators, and certainly does not apply to the high quality value you create. The substance of your passion is worthy of compensation.
If my profile here was professional and not personal, I would definitely consider a paid subscription, but for now all of my subscriptions are free, and my intent is to always keep my publishing free on this platform.
I think the pricing of intellectual property is an interesting optimization problem from a human psychology standpoint. Provide enough visible value that can be easily seen, but simultaneously make the compelling case that even more value is available for a price.
There is no burden to discount, but many writers and consumers could benefit from the option of each writer to set their price as they see fit. Price optimization is extremely complex, and very few entities do it well. Some writers might benefit from lower prices and higher volume, while others might benefit from higher prices while accepting lower subscription volume. Value is subjective, as you astutely stated, but I’d be curious to hear whether you think restricted pricing options are beneficial for writers or consumers.
When someone is talking out loud about a bundle or an all you can read flat rate, the burden is *always* on the writer.
I'm 100% with you that price balancing is a tightrope. I would gladly take 2-3 people paying $200/year over 4-5 paying $45. So would just about anyone. But I write in a crowded field. You (as in you specifically) wouldn't pay that, but I'll bet if my newsletter was about how to 2-3x the efficiency of your jet's avionics suite, you just might. Other people might look at that sentence and wonder what the heck we're talking about.
And that was what was driving my earlier point/comment: what we value and how we choose to allocate our money is a very subjective/individualized choice.
By your logic (and we agree), the burden is always on the writer to provide sufficient value to justify a paid subscription. Although this may be difficult for all to achieve at $8/month, some ways growing writers can present strong value at a given skill level and output are to provide promotional pricing, pay-per-read, flat rate, or content access bundles. Over time, as the subscription base grows, writers can adjust pricing with that growth like an attorney who bills $1,000/hour plus equity as a senior partner when they accepted a salary with a small bonus as an associate. The actionable expertise you alluded to in your hypothetical example would certainly warrant a premium.
In my case as it applies to Joseph, at this time I lack sufficient free capital for his paid subscription content to be actionable at a scale that would justify my payment—this has nothing to do with his value (excellent) and everything to do with my personal limitations. I predict that temporary state will change in the relatively near future at which time I will re-evaluate. In the case I made, as it applies generally to all writers on this platform, there is still work to be done to justify paid subscriptions at the Substack mandated minimum price. My work is free, so I humbly include myself in that demographic.
The good news is, as more writers come over to Substack, many come with audiences, this causes the platform grows as a whole.
With more options available than ever, it’s impossible to read ten different newsletters. Substack needs more readers. The good news is, right now they are getting them.
In terms of longer articles, I go back and forth.
Most of my full breakdowns come out to 20-25 minute read, often almost 40 minutes for those listening. I realize that might be too long but on the other hand I always want to properly cover the company. Perhaps I should be releasing breakdowns in installments, honestly not sure. Food for thought.
Also writing a shorter article that is opinionated is a good compromise perhaps, such as the one above!
And fair enough on the points about Ren and Rebound Capital, I do think that will help Substack's growth long term!
Not sure if I like the idea of big finance publishers from other platforms coming here because a lot of people with huge audiences are publishing slop.
Honestly haven’t seen any evidence that they publish slop more than anyone else.
What is important I think is when they come they bring audiences here, often people who wouldn’t have joined otherwise which is great for the platform.
Substack is a unique platform, no ads yet? Keep it that way , no real direct competitor, that’s a moat, is simple its effect , that’s what people what . Hope it never gets bought out by the big guns , but I’m afraid that’s probable . If it goes public , I would buy there stock .
They did deny an Elon Musk attempt at being bought out so there is hope in that sense.
The real risk is writers leaving the platform after not enough support. I’m hoping that in the next 9 months I’ll have enough support to continue - but I realize it’s dependant on reader’s generosity and that’s a tough pill to swallow.
What will sustain Substack's growth of readers? I think it will be important for Substack to continue working to bring in people with larger audiences. Seeing semi-famous writers/media personalities with large followings move over to Substack, like Scott Galloway, could do wonders for the platform overall.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I share the belief that Substack’s model is still maturing. We are still struggling with price and audience discovery. Market share will eventually resolve to Pareto.
Our substack is doing fine. We’re still growing paid subscribers.
The problem people are complaining about isn’t a Substack problem, it’s an internet problem. When you’re putting stuff out there, you’re competing with a bajillion people and a bajillion different platforms and websites for attention and money. There’s just more people on Substack now, so it gets harder to get a share of peoples attention or money.
I’ve seen the same thing play out on every other internet platform or medium I’ve done business on for the past 18 years. Take podcasting. When I first started back in 2009, there were hardly any podcasts. So it was pretty easy for me to stand out. There was a time when I was one of the top 50 podcasts on Apple Podcasts. Today? There are ton of podcasts that I’m competing with for attention. The amount of people listening to podcasts in 2026 is much much higher than in 2009, but the completion is stiffer. I’m like barely in the top 100 of my Apple podcast category. That’s show biz for ya. We’re still doing well, just not 2012 well. Happens to all mature businesses. It can’t be hockey stick growth forever. Eventually you hit that mature business plateau. Do I miss that early growth? You bet! But bellyaching won’t bring it back. Have to work with the world you live in.
There’s a lot more I could say about this. I’m doing a series about my history of making a living online for nearly 20 years on my substack where I get into it for those who are interested.
I think you're right about the competition over attention span - that's why picking a niche is so important imo although you would know better than me.
The real question I think for most writers is consistency, if you've been doing online media for nearly 20+ years I assume you have adapted enough times when many have simply given up...
I'll definitely be tuning into your history lesson, excited about that.
Thank you so much for this encouraging piece. As a newcomer to the platform, I did not come here to make extra money. Instead, I was simply looking for a creative outlet to satisfy our perfectionism as writers. I actually turned off the paid subscription option entirely because I did not want a paywall to stand between our work and the world. We just want to invite everyone to read our original grimdark wuxia story for free. It is something completely different from the usual wuxia and xianxia out there, and our wild dream is to turn it into an adult, Eastern version of Harry Potter.
Thank you to everyone on this platform who works so hard to keep this community vibrant and full of genuine human connection.
Not every writer becomes a successful author. I see the same here, those that have that special place in the market will surely have success. You may have 100 writers who specialize in a certain area, only a handful will be successful. I love Substack and would love to see everyone be successful, but that’s not the case. It doesn’t mean Substack will collapse. That’s just the way life is!
Time'll tell, but in my orbit, growth is up and to the left. New writers, new readers, and an ecosystem that's thriving. Not as steep a curve as before, but if you stretch the timeline out long enough, it's all upside.
I think a lot of the heartburn on the writer side comes from mismanaged expectations. We're flooded with stories about people "making it,” and there's a whole grifter industrial complex ready to tell you that you're next (for the right price, of course). We're all easy marks- after all, we've all already been sold on the idea of being our own boss, living wherever, etc. The reality is that that reality check stings.
Writing is hard work! It's a long climb if you're not porting an existing audience from elsewhere. And it's doubly hard if you're trying to make it in a niche that’s either flooded or where people can find 98% of what you talk about via Google search. This is why so many of the complaints come from “health and wellness” writers who saw tech bros writing about 4 AM wake-ups and cold showers and thought they could cash in. Or people using AI to spin up SaaS newsletters that read like cardboard. The market doesn't work that way.
Bundling? Sure. Sounds awesome on paper. Even I like the idea. I went so far as to help a guy build a prototype model 4-5 years ago. Now figure out the sticky logistics. What's the revenue split? How will you handle it? Remember, Substack likely won't opt in to something that harms them financially, so we’re going off-platform. Where we going? What happens if I bring 10k to the party and you bring 50? Do we prorate? What if a 3rd writer decides to just coast? The model I mentioned didn't fail because it was flawed; it failed because there is far too much friction and second-order effects to make something like that work at scale.
For the people who go on about how they “just wish there was a $5 option to read everything,” or whatever; I'd ask this: do you walk into Barnes & Noble and yell the same thing in front of the magazine stand? No? Then why’s it okay to do so online? Guess what? We’d all like to pay less for what we consume! We also have choices on where/how to spend our money. Nothing here is compulsory. People are online for two reasons: to be informed or to be entertained.
If you find a writer that delivers one/both of those, why is the first instinct to immediately try and devalue their time/talent?
Some folks may see newsletter XXX as a rip-off (or irrelevant). Others may think it's criminally underpriced. It's all down to what you, as a consumer, personally value— same as Netflix, dining out, or the car in your driveway. The difference is that you don't ever ask the chef if you can cover everyone’s meal at the table for the price of one. The price per plate is what it is, and you can choose to either accept the bargain or not. Easy.
P.S. I’m an SME in pre-dawn wake-ups; if anyone knows a legit way to monetize that, hit me up.
I agree a bundle isn’t the right move. Would likely hurt Substack and I could see it leading to major friction between competitors. I also don’t think it would be the solution that everyone thinks it would be.
And I totally agree that some people have the totally wrong outlook about Substack authors… “Why isn’t your product $5?”
Why should it be?
I think every writer should set a price - with insight if he wants from the readers, if it goes well, it’s probably worth it. If not, the author will likely lower the price.
I need help waking up in the morning, maybe I should send you a message :P
If the pie itself is growing, but there are more guests to feed (ie more creators), every creator may still end up with a smaller slice of the pie though?
I would also argue that in the finance space too, growth has become much more difficult due to an increasing amount of competition. Ask @heavymoatinvestment as one of the OG writers who has been around long enough (I haven’t), but even in the 18 months I‘ve been writing I seem to observe a noticeable change.
You're not wrong about each creator potentially ending up with a smaller slice of the pie.
That being said, as the pie is growing, I would argue that proves that Substack is not collapsing at all but rather growing.
Eventually, I will assume that some writers decided to leave the platform if it’s not financially viable - in the meantime, I expect that readers will continue growing which will in turn again cause more writers to join and the cycle will continue.
I believe the biggest winner will be Substack and the writers who stay consistent and keep writing despite tough months.
I don’t need to outrun the bear, I just need to outrun the guy next to me
Finance might be less elastic than the other niches. It might be worth it for people who are managing a lot of money to subscribe to multiple newsletters because that could still be less expensive than paying for research elsewhere.
Nice article, but you are slightly mixing apples with oranges. His main point was that the ability to earn 6-figures as a writer on Substack is collapsing. He was not really dwelling much into Substack’s business model from investor’s perspective - he is a writer not investor.
So you are not saying something that is contrary to his point - both of you can be right. Substack as a business is growing, but it is also becoming less viable as a main source of creator’s income.
I responded to something similar in another comment, if the space is overcrowded and it becomes impossible to earn a living, I believe some authors will leave, creating more of an opportunity which will be filled by more people writing etc.
I think as long as the business grows that bodes well for people who continue grinding.
Really good article, and I learned a lot. Also, thanks for the shoutout!
One key point to remember for those running a finance Substack is that this is a historic bull market. We have a massive tide behind us. Cheers!
Glad to have such a good example to use! Happy you enjoyed the article!
Definitely right about the bull market tide - will be interesting in a bear market to see what happens… Guessing rebound capital will have a lot more stocks to look at :P
Great points Joseph and another great article. I agree that it’s unlikely that Substack is dying and that it’s likely correlation rather than causation. Unfortunately I think other revenue streams need to be added, including ads.
I personally stopped putting any content behind my newsletter and on my other 2 newsletter I haven’t even activated a paid feature—even though my writing on individual stocks is high quality and comparable to other paid stock research Substacks.
I’d rather build a community of like minded people and eventually make some money later, but only when it’s a subtle and small addition rather than a in your face ad or sub request.
Thank you!
That's very generous of you to not put content behind a paywall, you are another example of authors being generous with their work!
In terms of Substack turning to ads, not sure why they would. I know they had their first positive cash flow quarter in 2025 - not sure the business itself is struggling but could be wrong.
I meant a ad network for creators to choose to add. I don’t plan to have a subscription anytime soon but I wouldn’t mind 1/x ad per article for example*
*at the right price ;)
Got it. That makes sense.... I think they were testing something like that out for Substack bestsellers no?
I think I may have seen something like that, would be nice to expand to the littlest sellers lol!
Another great article, Joseph!
The issue I struggle with is the immediate desire of virtually every creator to monetize everything. Aside from those whose profession is writing (authors, journalists, reporters, professors, etc.), why can’t public discourse exist for the edification of everyone?
The minimum subscription cost is too high, in my opinion. I wish Substack would offer a $1/month / $10/year subscription options and allow partnership bundles where creators split revenues in exchange for reciprocal subscriber access. These options would allow writers to price their work according to market demand and be rewarded by large followings and sales volume.
Love Psalms 126:5 and Galatians 6:9 — nothing like some morning encouragement to keep sowing!
Thanks Matt and happy I'm encouraging you to keep sowing!
In terms of the need to monetize everything, I agree that certain accounts can feel frustrating. I'm trying to keep as much content free as possible - but that likely causes my paid conversion to be much lower than others.
In terms of subscription prices being too high, you are definitely right about that - I am guilty of a high price but the way I see it is that the work I publish is high quality and the price should reflect that - perhaps I am off, happy to hear feedback.
In terms of cheaper options, I do offer to students and anyone who asks but only a few have taken me up on that offer.
The monetization comment was a generalization of content creators, and certainly does not apply to the high quality value you create. The substance of your passion is worthy of compensation.
If my profile here was professional and not personal, I would definitely consider a paid subscription, but for now all of my subscriptions are free, and my intent is to always keep my publishing free on this platform.
I think the pricing of intellectual property is an interesting optimization problem from a human psychology standpoint. Provide enough visible value that can be easily seen, but simultaneously make the compelling case that even more value is available for a price.
why does the burden of discounting always fall to the writer?
You may think pieces are too high, and that’s 100% fine. It’s your money! Someone else may see the same newsletter as a steal.
There is no burden to discount, but many writers and consumers could benefit from the option of each writer to set their price as they see fit. Price optimization is extremely complex, and very few entities do it well. Some writers might benefit from lower prices and higher volume, while others might benefit from higher prices while accepting lower subscription volume. Value is subjective, as you astutely stated, but I’d be curious to hear whether you think restricted pricing options are beneficial for writers or consumers.
When someone is talking out loud about a bundle or an all you can read flat rate, the burden is *always* on the writer.
I'm 100% with you that price balancing is a tightrope. I would gladly take 2-3 people paying $200/year over 4-5 paying $45. So would just about anyone. But I write in a crowded field. You (as in you specifically) wouldn't pay that, but I'll bet if my newsletter was about how to 2-3x the efficiency of your jet's avionics suite, you just might. Other people might look at that sentence and wonder what the heck we're talking about.
And that was what was driving my earlier point/comment: what we value and how we choose to allocate our money is a very subjective/individualized choice.
By your logic (and we agree), the burden is always on the writer to provide sufficient value to justify a paid subscription. Although this may be difficult for all to achieve at $8/month, some ways growing writers can present strong value at a given skill level and output are to provide promotional pricing, pay-per-read, flat rate, or content access bundles. Over time, as the subscription base grows, writers can adjust pricing with that growth like an attorney who bills $1,000/hour plus equity as a senior partner when they accepted a salary with a small bonus as an associate. The actionable expertise you alluded to in your hypothetical example would certainly warrant a premium.
In my case as it applies to Joseph, at this time I lack sufficient free capital for his paid subscription content to be actionable at a scale that would justify my payment—this has nothing to do with his value (excellent) and everything to do with my personal limitations. I predict that temporary state will change in the relatively near future at which time I will re-evaluate. In the case I made, as it applies generally to all writers on this platform, there is still work to be done to justify paid subscriptions at the Substack mandated minimum price. My work is free, so I humbly include myself in that demographic.
Great article!
I think everyone can see that Substack is expanding, and it’s expanding fast.
The Finance space is maybe even an outlier here, with a lot of large platforms on X, Instagram and LinkedIn making the switch Substack.
While it is true that the amount of readers is growing, it also feels like the amount of options they have is getting increasingly larger.
On the other hand, the time they have to spread out amongst different Substacks they like is probably getting smaller.
So what do you do have to do?
Stick out, do something special.
But above all, I think you have to be a great writer.
In essence that's still what people come to do here. Read
That’s my biggest reflection after one year on Substack. I’m still not as good of a writer as I would like to be.
Also, I think a general trend is that people like shorter articles.
The big lengthy pieces don’t usually do very well.
Also, the big and fast growers in the Finance space almost ALWAYS have a different platform to funnel their reader from.
That is the case for both Rebound Capital and Ren.
Nothing wrong with that, I like reading both of their work. But it's not your typical Substack growth story.
Thanks so much and glad you enjoyed it!
The good news is, as more writers come over to Substack, many come with audiences, this causes the platform grows as a whole.
With more options available than ever, it’s impossible to read ten different newsletters. Substack needs more readers. The good news is, right now they are getting them.
In terms of longer articles, I go back and forth.
Most of my full breakdowns come out to 20-25 minute read, often almost 40 minutes for those listening. I realize that might be too long but on the other hand I always want to properly cover the company. Perhaps I should be releasing breakdowns in installments, honestly not sure. Food for thought.
Also writing a shorter article that is opinionated is a good compromise perhaps, such as the one above!
And fair enough on the points about Ren and Rebound Capital, I do think that will help Substack's growth long term!
Not sure if I like the idea of big finance publishers from other platforms coming here because a lot of people with huge audiences are publishing slop.
Honestly haven’t seen any evidence that they publish slop more than anyone else.
What is important I think is when they come they bring audiences here, often people who wouldn’t have joined otherwise which is great for the platform.
Substack is a unique platform, no ads yet? Keep it that way , no real direct competitor, that’s a moat, is simple its effect , that’s what people what . Hope it never gets bought out by the big guns , but I’m afraid that’s probable . If it goes public , I would buy there stock .
Agreed.
They did deny an Elon Musk attempt at being bought out so there is hope in that sense.
The real risk is writers leaving the platform after not enough support. I’m hoping that in the next 9 months I’ll have enough support to continue - but I realize it’s dependant on reader’s generosity and that’s a tough pill to swallow.
Moving up the ladder
What do you mean?
We are also in a small bubble within finance Substack as one of the only vertical worth paying for tbh. But the article remains pretty interesting 🙏
Not the only one but perhaps the most tangible.
What will sustain Substack's growth of readers? I think it will be important for Substack to continue working to bring in people with larger audiences. Seeing semi-famous writers/media personalities with large followings move over to Substack, like Scott Galloway, could do wonders for the platform overall.
Yup!
I think X writers migrating to Substack is also huge!
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I share the belief that Substack’s model is still maturing. We are still struggling with price and audience discovery. Market share will eventually resolve to Pareto.
Happy to hear!
I am of the same belief :) Time will tell!
Great write up.
Our substack is doing fine. We’re still growing paid subscribers.
The problem people are complaining about isn’t a Substack problem, it’s an internet problem. When you’re putting stuff out there, you’re competing with a bajillion people and a bajillion different platforms and websites for attention and money. There’s just more people on Substack now, so it gets harder to get a share of peoples attention or money.
I’ve seen the same thing play out on every other internet platform or medium I’ve done business on for the past 18 years. Take podcasting. When I first started back in 2009, there were hardly any podcasts. So it was pretty easy for me to stand out. There was a time when I was one of the top 50 podcasts on Apple Podcasts. Today? There are ton of podcasts that I’m competing with for attention. The amount of people listening to podcasts in 2026 is much much higher than in 2009, but the completion is stiffer. I’m like barely in the top 100 of my Apple podcast category. That’s show biz for ya. We’re still doing well, just not 2012 well. Happens to all mature businesses. It can’t be hockey stick growth forever. Eventually you hit that mature business plateau. Do I miss that early growth? You bet! But bellyaching won’t bring it back. Have to work with the world you live in.
There’s a lot more I could say about this. I’m doing a series about my history of making a living online for nearly 20 years on my substack where I get into it for those who are interested.
Thanks Brett.
I think you're right about the competition over attention span - that's why picking a niche is so important imo although you would know better than me.
The real question I think for most writers is consistency, if you've been doing online media for nearly 20+ years I assume you have adapted enough times when many have simply given up...
I'll definitely be tuning into your history lesson, excited about that.
All the best
Joseph.
Thank you so much for this encouraging piece. As a newcomer to the platform, I did not come here to make extra money. Instead, I was simply looking for a creative outlet to satisfy our perfectionism as writers. I actually turned off the paid subscription option entirely because I did not want a paywall to stand between our work and the world. We just want to invite everyone to read our original grimdark wuxia story for free. It is something completely different from the usual wuxia and xianxia out there, and our wild dream is to turn it into an adult, Eastern version of Harry Potter.
Thank you to everyone on this platform who works so hard to keep this community vibrant and full of genuine human connection.
Honestly that sounds fascinating. I just re-read Harry Potter so you got a subscriber in me!
Thank you! This means a lot to us!
Wow, the analysis in this article is truly impressive
Thank you so much! Glad you enjoyed :)
Not every writer becomes a successful author. I see the same here, those that have that special place in the market will surely have success. You may have 100 writers who specialize in a certain area, only a handful will be successful. I love Substack and would love to see everyone be successful, but that’s not the case. It doesn’t mean Substack will collapse. That’s just the way life is!
Agreed!
In any area it is impossible for everyone to be successful, I do think there is potential though for many writers who are good to succeed!
Time'll tell, but in my orbit, growth is up and to the left. New writers, new readers, and an ecosystem that's thriving. Not as steep a curve as before, but if you stretch the timeline out long enough, it's all upside.
I think a lot of the heartburn on the writer side comes from mismanaged expectations. We're flooded with stories about people "making it,” and there's a whole grifter industrial complex ready to tell you that you're next (for the right price, of course). We're all easy marks- after all, we've all already been sold on the idea of being our own boss, living wherever, etc. The reality is that that reality check stings.
Writing is hard work! It's a long climb if you're not porting an existing audience from elsewhere. And it's doubly hard if you're trying to make it in a niche that’s either flooded or where people can find 98% of what you talk about via Google search. This is why so many of the complaints come from “health and wellness” writers who saw tech bros writing about 4 AM wake-ups and cold showers and thought they could cash in. Or people using AI to spin up SaaS newsletters that read like cardboard. The market doesn't work that way.
Bundling? Sure. Sounds awesome on paper. Even I like the idea. I went so far as to help a guy build a prototype model 4-5 years ago. Now figure out the sticky logistics. What's the revenue split? How will you handle it? Remember, Substack likely won't opt in to something that harms them financially, so we’re going off-platform. Where we going? What happens if I bring 10k to the party and you bring 50? Do we prorate? What if a 3rd writer decides to just coast? The model I mentioned didn't fail because it was flawed; it failed because there is far too much friction and second-order effects to make something like that work at scale.
For the people who go on about how they “just wish there was a $5 option to read everything,” or whatever; I'd ask this: do you walk into Barnes & Noble and yell the same thing in front of the magazine stand? No? Then why’s it okay to do so online? Guess what? We’d all like to pay less for what we consume! We also have choices on where/how to spend our money. Nothing here is compulsory. People are online for two reasons: to be informed or to be entertained.
If you find a writer that delivers one/both of those, why is the first instinct to immediately try and devalue their time/talent?
Some folks may see newsletter XXX as a rip-off (or irrelevant). Others may think it's criminally underpriced. It's all down to what you, as a consumer, personally value— same as Netflix, dining out, or the car in your driveway. The difference is that you don't ever ask the chef if you can cover everyone’s meal at the table for the price of one. The price per plate is what it is, and you can choose to either accept the bargain or not. Easy.
P.S. I’m an SME in pre-dawn wake-ups; if anyone knows a legit way to monetize that, hit me up.
Kevin thanks for the comment.
I agree a bundle isn’t the right move. Would likely hurt Substack and I could see it leading to major friction between competitors. I also don’t think it would be the solution that everyone thinks it would be.
And I totally agree that some people have the totally wrong outlook about Substack authors… “Why isn’t your product $5?”
Why should it be?
I think every writer should set a price - with insight if he wants from the readers, if it goes well, it’s probably worth it. If not, the author will likely lower the price.
I need help waking up in the morning, maybe I should send you a message :P