The Truth About This Website's Future

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

It’s been while since I’ve written about The Truth About Cars (TTAC). As you may recall, we were preparing to turn TTAC into a subscription site when we re-launched. When I discovered that our payment software wasn’t ready for prime time, and the site design needed tweaking, I put the move on hold. I’ve used the interregnum to ramp up our content, familiarize myself with the new site’s back end, commission a few improvements and… think. I’ve re-read all your emails, sent out a survey, talked to a bunch of financial folks and come up with a new plan. Here’s how I see it…

Imagine TTAC as a gated community. By closing the gates (making it members only), we can maintain the site’s high quality housing (our rants and reviews) while avoiding “outside” pollution and crime (advertiser influence). You can play (read and comment) with like-minded enthusiasts, safe from flame-throwers (flame throwers). After surveying our readers, I know a fair few of you believe that our mission is worthwhile, and that paying $5 a month for this little corner of cyberspace is a fair proposition. That said, timing is. Everything.

Before we changed the site design, TTAC had 22k unique visitors per day. When we made the jump, we lost 8k daily visitors, and our momentum. The drop happened for two main reasons. First, our New Content Notification system and RSS feeds went south. Some of the faithful lost touch. (Both systems are back on-line.) Second, our Google links evaporated, which accounted for about 20% of our previous traffic. (These too have been resurrected.) We’re recovering lost ground, one reader at a time. When we get back up to a large and healthy pool of potential subscribers, I can make the switch to subscription-only, confident that the take-up rate will make it worth our while. But–

Once the gates are closed, the chances of recruiting new members will diminish dramatically. Sure, automotive enthusiasts will still find their way to our door. But the vast majority will look at the fancy gates and click on down the road. And then I thought of a golf resort. The general public is free to hang out at the main hotel. If they choose, they can spend some time and money at the hotel’s restaurants and shops. But they’ve got to pay to play. And if they want to play golf on a regular basis, they have to become members. In other words, TTAC needs both an exclusive members-only section AND a less exclusive “free” section.

In practice, the new site’s member section would look and work much as it does now. I hesitate to call the free section “TTAC lite,” but one part of the non-members site would offer mini-reviews, much like the format I designed for Part Two of Jalopnik’s reviews (stars with a few descriptive sentences). Another, equally important aspect would be comparative data for car shoppers. At least initially, we’re talking price, options and reliability info. I’m currently negotiating with a gentleman who collects this kind of data. He's one with the TTAC brand: complete editorial integrity and total transparency.

So, TTAC would have a subscription-only “intellectual” side for passionate, witty and informed reviews and rants. And we’d have a free “practical” side for mini-reviews and useful buying information. The duality would allow BOTH sides of the site to grow and prosper, as the free side entices visitors into becoming paid subscribers while, at the same time, offering us new and exciting revenue streams (which I can’t discuss at the present time). Again, I can assure you that neither side would compromise our overarching commitment to honesty, ethics and public service. It is, after all, our brand. Without that, The Truth About Cars means nothing. Is nothing.

So, what do you think? Is there are a market for what I’ve described? Would a nuts-and-bolts aspect to TTAC cheapen our literary aspirations? Do you think we should hold off on turning into a subscription site until the practical side is in place? At the same time and in any case, how can we increase TTAC’s site traffic? I’m a writer/editor by nature, but now that I’ve got the posting down to a routine, I’ve got time to market this sucker. (NB: From now on, during the weekdays, I’ll be posting new material first thing in the morning, mid-afternoon and early evening.) Any help in this area would be most appreciated. Please leave your comments here.

Meanwhile, I want to take this opportunity to thank TTAC’s writers. I will be forever grateful for their time, talent, humor and integrity. Let no one say that the buff books’ have the best writers. The future of automotive journalism is right here, right now. Thanks guys, for telling the truth about cars. Working with you is an honor and a privilege.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 77 comments
  • Joeveto Joeveto on Jul 12, 2006

    Gentlemen, I will not pay for any website that does not provide nudity. That being said, I do not want to see RF naked. Something better will have to be devised. Please no comments about my momma. But I digress... I truly wish TTAC well with the new direction RF is taking. I do enjoy the website and have killed countless hours in airports and meetings, catching up on the GM Deathwatch and car reviews. It's good stuff. The only way to know if the endeavor will work, is to try. And for that, I give a hearty thumbs up. If the experiment doesn't work? So what. You come back and try something else. If a pay site is something that must be tried, than it must be tried. No apologies needed. And should you be forced to rethink, you'll no doubt be smarter from the experience. Godspeed.

  • Clangnuts Clangnuts on Jul 24, 2006

    I won't pay to view any website. If you charge, I won't visit. Which would be a shame, because this is one of the best car sites out there. If you want to raise money, then advertising is the way. Subscribe and you will loose many visitors.

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next