NYT Says Wordle Drove 'Tens of Millions' of New Users, Record Growth (arstechnica.com) 30
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the New York Times: The New York Times' seven-figure purchase of viral hit Wordle in January was "incredibly valuable" to the company and was responsible for "an unprecedented tens of millions of new users to The Times," the media giant said in announcing its quarterly earnings (PDF) Wednesday morning. And while New York Times Co. CEO Meredith Kopit Levien said the "majority of these incremental users only played Wordle, many... stayed to play other games, which drove our best quarter ever for net subscriber additions to Games."
Levien said during an earnings call that the number of average weekly users for the Times' non-Wordle games "nearly doubled" during the quarter ending in March. The game "played an outsized role in the quarter's engagement and subscriber growth," she added. The Wordle acquisition was part of a larger effort to make The New York Times seem "more valuable to more people by helping them make the most of their lives and passions," Levien said during the call. [...] Despite all the Wordle love, Levien's remarks also offered a small hint that the Times doesn't necessarily expect the game to remain quite as strong of a draw going forward. Levien said the Times is "moving swiftly to leverage [Wordle's] massive audience to introduce Wordle players to our other games, recognizing that its audience may moderate over time." In other words, the Times seems aware that, across months and years, players may start to grow less interested in Wordle and that the simple five-letter daily guessing game may not be as consistent and long-lasting a draw as deeper and more complicated puzzles like the crossword.
Levien said during an earnings call that the number of average weekly users for the Times' non-Wordle games "nearly doubled" during the quarter ending in March. The game "played an outsized role in the quarter's engagement and subscriber growth," she added. The Wordle acquisition was part of a larger effort to make The New York Times seem "more valuable to more people by helping them make the most of their lives and passions," Levien said during the call. [...] Despite all the Wordle love, Levien's remarks also offered a small hint that the Times doesn't necessarily expect the game to remain quite as strong of a draw going forward. Levien said the Times is "moving swiftly to leverage [Wordle's] massive audience to introduce Wordle players to our other games, recognizing that its audience may moderate over time." In other words, the Times seems aware that, across months and years, players may start to grow less interested in Wordle and that the simple five-letter daily guessing game may not be as consistent and long-lasting a draw as deeper and more complicated puzzles like the crossword.
Have to say that was probably a good idea (Score:5, Insightful)
The selling of Wordle was good all around.
The guy who sold it said he did so because he could se the flood of clones, and just wanted some way to have a reasonable return without everyone on earth but him making money.
And now we see the Times lets us know from their standpoint the purchase works really well for them also.
I have to admit though I still play Wordle daily I don't play any of the other Times games, but I can see the appeal and ease of moving over to do so.
It's nice to see something work out so well for everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
The guy who sold it said he did so because he could se the flood of clone
He should definitely be able to identify the "clones", since that's exactly [nypost.com] what Wordle is [cnbc.com].
Also the clones are perfectly legal, unless they use the "Wordle" branding in some way.
hard hitting (Score:3, Insightful)
Good to know that NYT is focused on real hard hitting news, and not just entraining people for advertising dollars.
Re:hard hitting (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't a problem with the news. It's a problem with humanity. We're more motivated by idle entertainment than the world. Hell, if you know too much news, it's almost a negative for a lot of people. That might morally obligate you to do something. Heaven forfend.
It's hardly new either:
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Come for the games, leave for the news. If you need games to attract users to a news site you're doing something wrong. Very wrong.
I'll take crosswords and ken ken puzzles over all the other forms of clickbait that attract eyeballs "new media", fuck you very much.
Re:hard hitting (Score:4, Insightful)
Good to know that NYT is focused on real hard hitting news, and not just entertaining people for advertising dollars.
Still better than Tucker Carlson hawking testicle tanning [google.com] ... and when Glenn Beck would shill for buying gold -- for example -- on Fox "News".
Re: (Score:2)
Tucker Carlson is an entertainer and commentator not a journalist. Fox News makes it clear who are the journalists and who are the commentators, they even specify it on their website, unlike the NYT and CNN and MSNBC. The problem with leftists is they cannot discern the difference between news and opinion and commentary because in the leftist media there is no difference.
Good point.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
'Tucker Carlson Tonight' is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness and group think. We ask the questions that you would ask - and demand answers. Catch us weeknights at 8 p.m. ET!"
Well, so glad that it's clearly marked as "entertainment" there. Slight problems (1) It ISN'T (2) Carlson is one of the smugest trolls on the planet.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, NYT put itself in the same category as Jerry Springer, I mean Geraldo Rivera - entertainment. Which makes NYT not better than a clown car.
Re: (Score:2)
Once you realize that 99% of all news is and always has been entertainment, you will be able to relax, ignore it, and enjoy your short, brutal existence.
Re: (Score:2)
Best for the bottom line to replace that 1% with Wordle?
Re: (Score:2)
Good to know that NYT is focused on real hard hitting news, and not just entertaining people for advertising dollars.
Noting that those "advertising dollars" pay for the news research/reporting ... And I imagine they can focus on several things at once -- you know it's not just one guy named "NYT", but a whole staff of people at a company, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Good to know that NYT is focused on real hard hitting news, and not just entraining people for advertising dollars.
ALL newspapers including the heavyweights have always had entertainment in the form of crosswords and comic strips. I read a lot as a teenager in the 1980s, and grew up on Calvin and Hobbes, Dilbert, Doonesbury, Peanuts, ... I'm thinking of heavyweight serious newspapers like International Herald Tribune, Guardian, Telegraph, Financial Times, Economist, Independent. The only one I ever read that lacked comics was "Le Monde Diplomatique".
In short, your snarky comment is misplaced.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh yeah, they're in big trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a dilemma.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who would refer to the NYT as "leftist" is either a moron or a fool.
Re: (Score:2)
Haha! (Score:2)
NYT new business model (Score:2)
As NYT "news" is more universally ignored, they have a new business model: gaming.
Are they thinking? (Score:2)
Short term growth.
Not likely it is a good business choice for executives to think that people will come for the game and stay for the new.