Sentinel Port Vale News to be a subscription / Baggers

[Powerline]

31 minutes ago, Granville said:

I have no problem with Mike at all, more the principle that he's being used by an organisation who clearly have very little regard for Vale or him (why would they have scrapped his role in the first place?) as a way of grabbing money off a fanbase when, with another club in the same city, they feel its ok to provide for free.

As I say, I really don't see what it can provide that isn't available anywhere else, other than Mike himself, which, as I'm sure he's a nice bloke and good journalist, isn't worth 40 quid a year for rehashing press conference quotes, a match report we should have to pay to read anyway and then the odd opinion piece.

There's never been more ways to access a variety of opinion and information for free, here, social media, Ale and the Vale, Radio Stoke all provide a lot of free Vale coverage and and interviews and opinion, why should I give The Sentinel 40 quid a year for someone else's opinion??

Yeah can’t decide if it’s worth 40 quid yet, but I’ve got a year to make that decision. Tenner a year is fine by me though.

[Powerline]

40 minutes ago, JoeB2 said:

Before I post this, I want to make it clear that I don't know Mike.

I understand the principles around 'Stoke don't have to pay', but...

Having subscribed and read the post-Bolton piece - it's a bargain for £10 a year, or 20p a week. You're getting 3 pieces a week (4 with mid-week games), so you're looking at 7p per piece. Even next year, with the price increase (though I imagine they will put an offer on in the summer), it's 76p a week, or 25p per piece.

This isn't some freelance journalist doing it - Mike has been reporting on Vale for 2 decades, and understands the history and the fans. I've seen him reporting at EGMs and Supporters Club meetings in the very darkest days. The pieces aren't just 'on the 16th minute X took a shot'. 

In an era when local journalism is in the mud, the idea of having a dedicated, good journalist for Port Vale is excellent. I am pretty confident that this offering will be better than Stoke's, for significantly cheaper than buying a Sentinel every day for £8.50 (almost the same as Mike's annual fee). It will be up to Mike to put on enough to convince us to re-sub.

We can all whine, but the fundamentals are that in-depth reporting on a League 1 club with 6,000 fans is not a profit-making enterprise for a local newspaper, especially when the ads they rely on to survive put people off. This route is the only way we're getting substantive reporting.

I think it's a good deal. If you pine for the days of forking out nearly a tenner a week on the Sentinel to be clearly second fiddle, then fair enough. I'm more than happy with this offering.

Agree, I’d genuinely rather have this model where I pay a tenner than have it for free but have to use the sentinel website. 

[dishydave]

Think of it this way for 20 pence a week you are keeping a good man in a job

[Rampant Zebra]

Good to see Mike in the press box at the Ladies FA cup game today, great result too. 

[Bobnewtonian]

3 hours ago, Granville said:

I have no problem with Mike at all, more the principle that he's being used by an organisation who clearly have very little regard for Vale or him (why would they have scrapped his role in the first place?) as a way of grabbing money off a fanbase when, with another club in the same city, they feel its ok to provide for free.

As I say, I really don't see what it can provide that isn't available anywhere else, other than Mike himself, which, as I'm sure he's a nice bloke and good journalist, isn't worth 40 quid a year for rehashing press conference quotes, a match report we should have to pay to read anyway and then the odd opinion piece.

There's never been more ways to access a variety of opinion and information for free, here, social media, Ale and the Vale, Radio Stoke all provide a lot of free Vale coverage and and interviews and opinion, why should I give The Sentinel 40 quid a year for someone else's opinion??

It’s a tenner a year during which time I m sure the concept will be developed…then  it’s upto people to make a choice I guess. 
At  least it’s an option ..,

[Bobnewtonian]

4 minutes ago, Rampant Zebra said:

Good to see Mike in the press box at the Ladies FA cup game today, great result too. 

How did the ladies get on? I couldn’t make it today unfortunately 

[Rampant Zebra]

6 minutes ago, Bobnewtonian said:

How did the ladies get on? I couldn’t make it today unfortunately 

Won 3-2. 

[Bobnewtonian]

Just now, Rampant Zebra said:

Won 3-2. 

Utv

i guess this picture says it all really.

[jimbo57]

On 01/10/2023 at 13:15, Granville said:

I have no problem with Mike at all, more the principle that he's being used by an organisation who clearly have very little regard for Vale or him (why would they have scrapped his role in the first place?) as a way of grabbing money off a fanbase when, with another club in the same city, they feel its ok to provide for free.

As I say, I really don't see what it can provide that isn't available anywhere else, other than Mike himself, which, as I'm sure he's a nice bloke and good journalist, isn't worth 40 quid a year for rehashing press conference quotes, a match report we should have to pay to read anyway and then the odd opinion piece.

There's never been more ways to access a variety of opinion and information for free, here, social media, Ale and the Vale, Radio Stoke all provide a lot of free Vale coverage and and interviews and opinion, why should I give The Sentinel 40 quid a year for someone else's opinion??

Todays Sentinel -

3 pages on Stoke City with 7 photos.  2 columns only on Vale, no photos.

[Wrex]

10 minutes ago, jimbo57 said:

Todays Sentinel -

3 pages on Stoke City with 7 photos.  2 columns only on Vale, no photos.

Yep, that is just how it is I'm afraid. Pay the £10 subscription and get high quality coverage from Baggaley, or don't get and get nothing.

I'd honestly recommend it for a tenner. After a year it becomes £40 and then there's a decision to be made over whether it's worth it.

I don't buy the Sentinel so it seems silly to me the argument not to pay for coverage. A matchday programme is about £3.50, so that's nearly £100 a year if you get each one. And it costs over a quid for the Daily Sentinel right? Six days a week and you're looking at hundreds of pounds a year for what is now a low quality rag since Reach plc took over and the sad decline in general of local journalism across the country.

Quality journalism costs money and a few pence from intrusive adverts online clearly won't pay for it. The Sentinel was founded in 1854, it's an institution older than Port Vale, Stoke City, and was around before football itself was anything other than public schoolboys kicking the <ovf censored> out of each other in pursuit of a vaguely round ball. Maybe it's doomed, but for a few quid we can maybe keep it's Vale coverage going on for a bit longer.

[jimbo57]

Cover price is £1.40, but you can get 60% off, and get it delivered,as I do. Just apply.

But to cut down Vale coverage so dramatically as they have done today, whilst giving so much to Stoke, is surely a further attempt to get Vale fans to sign up for The Valiant and hard luck if you want to read anything Vale related  in The Sentinel?

 

 

[Wrex]

1 hour ago, jimbo57 said:

Cover price is £1.40, but you can get 60% off, and get it delivered,as I do. Just apply.

But to cut down Vale coverage so dramatically as they have done today, whilst giving so much to Stoke, is surely a further attempt to get Vale fans to sign up for The Valiant and hard luck if you want to read anything Vale related  in The Sentinel?

If that is the what they're doing then they've been at it for about a year because Vale's coverage has been patchy at best for a long time

[Powerline]

6 hours ago, jimbo57 said:

Cover price is £1.40, but you can get 60% off, and get it delivered,as I do. Just apply.

But to cut down Vale coverage so dramatically as they have done today, whilst giving so much to Stoke, is surely a further attempt to get Vale fans to sign up for The Valiant and hard luck if you want to read anything Vale related  in The Sentinel?

 

 

Honestly I actually think what we get in the valiant is better than what we got before. I’m really enjoying it personally for only a tenner can’t complain at all.

I’d much rather this than have it for free but have to go through the sentinels rubbish website.

 

[Frank Mustard]

Very insightful interview with Carol in the latest edition where she covers just about everything at the club. Two weeks in and it’s been incredible value for money.

[Valiant62]

If Baggers was independent and had his own website with a paywall.. maybe but the idea of that rag getting paid and giving the other lot something for free is hard for me to get past. It’s not as if they’ve even been loyal to Baggeley.