This article was written by Ann-Kathrin Wind & Marvin Suder at Handelsblatt Media, Germany.

> Handelsblatt Media Group, Germany's leading business publisher, had a paywall conversion problem that wasn't a product problem. Its four H+ tiers were each well-positioned. The mistake was showing all of them at once, at the moment of highest reader impatience

> Step one was removing the higher-priced products from the paywall entirely. It felt like hiding revenue. Conversion rose significantly instead, because the reader no longer had a package comparison to work through before checkout

> The new default is a single offer: H+ Standard digital access, with a trial or a three-month commitment at 30% off the monthly price

> Step two put choice back selectively. A Likelihood-to-Subscribe score decides who sees Premium, on the hypothesis that high-scoring users have both a higher willingness to pay and genuine use for the extra features

> The decisive metric was never initial conversion. Premium converts from trial to paid less reliably than Standard, so a failed Premium trial doesn't just underdeliver, it replaces a Standard subscriber you would have kept. The question became which offer generates the highest sustainable revenue per segment, not which offer converts best

At Handelsblatt, the problem was clear: our paywall conversion rate was too low, and we were not generating enough subscription volume. 

However, product diversification was not the issue. We already offered a strong portfolio  tailored to different use cases: 

• H+ Standard, including digital access to all articles on the website and in the app
• H+ Premium, adds the e-paper and a paid newsletter 
• H+ Premium Student, the Premium experience at a student price 
• H+ Premium Business, users who also want business-focused content, events  and professional learning opportunities 

Each product was relevant and well-positioned. The mistake was showing all of them at once, at the moment of highest reader impatience.

We set two objectives: Reduce the number of decisions a reader has to make and make better use of our Likelihood-to-Subscribe scores. 

The post How we segmented our paywall audience to optimize ARPU  appeared first on Audiencers.

From a “Free to read” section on The New York Times, to “Pay what you can” campaigns in Canada, we’ve brought together a collection of case studies published on Audiencers to share the latest strategies being tested by publishers around the world to increase conversion rates to subscriptions.

Paywall and subscription tests publishers ran in 2026, collected by Audiencers:

> Stop advertising what's locked, start advertising what's free. The New York Times and The Verge both run "free to read" sections on the homepage, reversing years of premium tagging. The logic: conversion should happen on the article itself, not be pre-empted by a warning icon that ends the journey early

> Sell access in smaller units. The Washington Post's day passes, week passes and pay-per-article found an untapped market, with 42% of flexible access buyers brand-new anonymous users. Over 180 days, up to 8% of week-pass buyers, 4% of day-pass buyers and 3% of pay-per-article buyers became full subscribers

> Let readers set the price, then anchor it. Quebec's Les Coops de l'information took an average of $3.12 a month against a $1 minimum for the first three months. The suggested figure in the field did the work: $5 lifted the average to $3.39, $6 lifted it to $3.50. 84% of acquisitions had never subscribed before

> Sell less, not more. SFGATE kept its entire site free and sold a separate paid app alongside it. Les Echos' "La Sélection" is 9 to 15 articles a day chosen from a daily output of 120 to 150, at an early bird €9.90 a month

> Don't ask on day one. Figma asks six onboarding questions before showing pricing, and The New York Times tested a homepage whose only button top right said "log in". Each step gets a single goal, and early on that goal isn't the sale

Personalising paywall text around the reader’s interests

Dynamic paywalls, that adapt to a reader’s profile or context, are becoming increasingly more common as an effective way of increasing conversion rates. One such dynamic element that publishers seem to be testing this year is the use of personalised text based on the reader’s interest or the current article being read.

The post Steal this strategy: paywall and subscription trends to test to increase conversion rates appeared first on Audiencers.

In this guide, we share the various ways that publishers can segment their audience to develop a dynamic paywall model, with examples for each type of segmentation: 
> By content type: free vs premium, user needs, date of publication...
> By user profile: level of engagement, user status, location...
> By acquisition channel: Google, social media, newsletters...

Some quick definitions: 
> Audience segmentation: grouping users based on their profile or context, i.e. data that could impact their behaviour, inform us on what could convince them to subscribe or make them more or less likely to convert in that moment
> Dynamic paywall: a paywall that adapts for different audience segments. This could be in terms of the paywall design, messaging or even the journey itself (e.g. seeing a paywall or not). Note that "dynamic" doesn't necessarily equate to AI-driven. It's often rule based - i.e. a user reading a "politics" article sees a different paywall to a user reading a "sports" article.

There are 3 main buckets of audience segmentation with the goal of increasing conversion rates:

• By content type
• By user profile
• By acquisition channel

The post Guide: how to segment audiences for a dynamic paywall appeared first on Audiencers.

In Fall 2025, Les Coops de l’information, a collective of six Canadian media outlets (Le Soleil, Le Droit, Le Nouvelliste, Le Quotidien, La Tribune, and La Voix de l’Est) launched an innovative subscription drive named internally as the “Pay what you can project”.

Designed to coincide with the 2025 Municipal Elections, the campaign aimed to lower the barrier to local news while reinforcing the value of independent, cooperative journalism.

Results were beyond their expectations:

• 4.2% increase in subscribers
• Despite the minimum amount being $1 per month for the first three months of subscription, the average amount paid was $3.12 per month. This increased to $3.50 after increasing the suggested price

Principal Director, Audiences and Platforms, Marc Gendron shared how this strategy boosted subscriber growth and increased ARPU for those on this offer.

> Les Coops de l'information, a cooperative of six Quebec news outlets, let readers name their own price for the first three months, timed to the 2025 municipal elections. Subscribers rose 4.2% in five weeks

> Against a $1 minimum, the average paid was $3.12 a month, and some new subscribers chose more than the regular subscription price

> The suggested figure in the price field did the work. Suggesting $5 lifted the average to $3.39 and suggesting $6 lifted it to $3.50, with more people simply taking the suggestion each time

> 84% of the new subscribers had never subscribed before, which is the number that matters most for a local publisher wondering whether it has exhausted its market

> Their own caveat is worth repeating: the resulting ARPU still came in below their fixed-price promotions and well below regular rates. Get stakeholder buy-in first, and manage expectations, including your own

“Pay what you can” strategy

The core of the initiative was a flexible pricing model for the first three months of a new user’s subscription.

“We wanted to make an audacious promotion that would be too good to ignore! It shouldn’t rely solely on a heavy discount, but also on our unique value proposition at a time when it’s more relevant than ever.

Our gamble was: we know that there will be more interest towards our local politics content during the municipal campaign, so let’s surf on that wave and make sure our new promotional subscribers get the most out of their plans, that they feel that they are getting much more than what they are paying for. Instead of opening up access to our elections coverage, or setting up a fixed promotional price, we wanted to give more power and autonomy to users by letting them choose their price.”

Key components include:

• Democratic access: The campaign was rooted in the belief that a strong democracy requires exhaustive and impartial electoral coverage.
• Price autonomy: Prospective subscribers were invited to “fix the price” for their initial three-month period.
• Transparency and trust: Using the slogan “Un média qui vous ressemble, un média qui nous rassemble” (A media that looks like you, a media that brings you together) the group highlighted its status as an employee-owned cooperative.

“Our goal was to increase the total number of subscribers, between 3.5% and 4.3% of total subs. 

We mobilized everyone we could in order to achieve these targets. The new features we needed to implement, flexible pricing mechanics, everything was put on the development roadmap early in 2025. Our collaborators from Wizeline, who take care of all our platform development projects and Arc XP integration, worked tirelessly to have every feature ready for the fall campaign.

We also got the help of Drakkar Digital (renamed deRabane since), our long-lasting marketing partner, in order to create the visuals, copy and plan the delivery of all the marketing messages.

The editorial team was mobilised too, because the success of the campaign relied heavily on their capacity to deliver unique, useful and original content during that specific period.

Finally, our small digital growth team (including the IT and customer service team) operationalized the whole process.“

Feature gating: creating a product worth paying for

Of course, a promotional project is only as good as the product you’re selling! Les Coops has worked on developing strategic “feature gating” to build a subscription worth paying for, with clear value and strategic steps through registration towards subscription: 

Interactive engagement: Features like the “Question of the Day”  required users to be connected to vote and view live, constantly updated results.

Bookmarking across devices: Registered users gained access to a bookmarking feature, allowing them to save their favorite articles across web and app platforms.

Premium audio: Audio versions of articles were restricted to “All-inclusive” and “Ultimate” subscribers, serving as an upsell for basic plan holders.

Access limitations: To maintain account integrity, the platform limited simultaneous access to four devices, automatically disconnecting the oldest session when the limit was reached.

Premium content: Chroniques (articles written by columnists) and archives (articles published more than 30 days ago) have been hard paywalled as a key part of their subscription value proposition 

Marketing across site

As with any campaign, design and messaging needs to be consistent across the website and platforms, including the paywall. 

Dedicated paywalls: Les Coops d’Information built dedicated “Pay what you can” paywalls in Poool, including a live countdown to create urgency.

Subscription landing page: To ensure continuity of messaging through the user journey, dedicated subscription landing pages were also created in Poool, highlighting the value proposition, sharing subscriber testimonials and providing reasons why users should subscribe. 

Multi-channel promotion

The campaign was supported by an intensive five-week marketing blitz:

Email campaign: 72 unique emails (12 per media outlet) were delivered, each utilizing different angles and value propositions.

Targeted ads: The group targeted known non-subscribers through Google Ads, StackAdapt, and Bing Ads

In-app and newsletters: Non-subscribers were greeted with dedicated “Pay what you can” headers in free editorial newsletters and pop-up messages upon opening the mobile app.

Results 

“The final results were pretty impressive. By the end of the five weeks of promotion, our total subscriber base had increased by 4.2%, more than our targets and very close to our most optimistic forecast.

What was the most interesting though was the fact that, despite the minimum amount requested being 1$ per month for the first three months of subscription, the average amount paid was 3.12$ per month. This average increased to 3.39$ when we suggested 5$ in the price field and to 3.50$ when suggesting 6$. Each time we changed the suggested amount, we saw an increase in the number of users choosing to go with the suggested amount.

There are even some new subscribers that paid more than the regular price of a subscription!

Another really encouraging fact: 84% of these new subscribers had never subscribed before! This is probably one of the most encouraging findings of this adventure. It means that there is still room for us to grow.”

What’s next?

“This kind of campaign is a little more complicated than one with a fixed set of promotional prices. But the results we got were pretty impressive.

The fact that the user sets the initial price does add a layer of interactivity however, and it lowers the entry bar to a level where they feel comfortable. The core of the challenge remains though: to convince newly converted subscribers that our offer is worth the regular price.”

What should another publisher make sure of before testing this same project? 

“They should immediately get the buy-in from all important stakeholders as the impact on ARPU can be unpredictable. In our case, we feel that we were quite lucky to get an average ARPU of more than 3$ despite the fact that the minimum amount required was 1$. But that is still below the average ARPU we got with fixed price promotions and way below our regular numbers. Make sure that you manage everyone’s expectations. Even your own! 

That being said, as we have been galvanized by the nomination we got for this project at the INMA Global Media Awards, we will reactivate the Pay what you can promotion for two weeks in order to see if we can get similar, or even better, results this time around.”

The post Les Coops de l’information “Pay What You Can” Campaign appeared first on Audiencers.

Spektrum der Wissenschaft, a leading German science journalism publisher, embarked on a multi-phase journey to optimize its digital subscription model, Spektrum+. Facing the challenge of engaging a broad audience with “deep, heavy, nerdy science content,” and understanding the limitations of resources, the publisher turned to a rigorous, data-driven testing strategy to build a product based on actual user behavior rather than internal assumptions (what a crazy thought, I know!).

At Audiencers’ Festival in Hamburg, Ann-Kristin Ebert, ecommerce Manager at Spektrum, shared their two phases of getting started with segmentation. 

> Spektrum der Wissenschaft, a German science publisher, tested its way into segmentation rather than assuming it. Phase one was testing everything to prove segments behave differently, phase two was testing only where it mattered

> A free trial banner moved conversions far less than a blocking wall, in every group. On the wall itself, a single offer performed worst everywhere while three offers with a highlighted "Best Offer" won

> Switching Facebook referrals from formal "Sie" to informal "Du" nearly doubled click-through. Most segments also preferred shorter copy on the offer page, except print magazine subscribers, who converted better with more detail

> The device finding mattered more than the winning variant. "Unlock article now" beat "Continue reading with Spektrum+" on desktop for both clicks and purchases, but on mobile it lifted clicks and lowered purchases

> With a small team, they work in three to four month OKR cycles and accept the limits. As ecommerce manager Ann-Kristin Ebert puts it, "we can't bake big pretzels with tiny ovens"

Phase 1: “Testing Everything” (test like Darwin was watching!)

In the initial phase, Spektrum adopted an exhaustive testing philosophy, described as “testing as if Darwin was watching”. The goal wasn’t necessarily to find a single winning variation immediately, but to build a comprehensive understanding of how different tests performed across diverse user segments.

Strategy and implementation

Spektrum focused on rapid, lightweight tests at the beginning of the purchase funnel to gain quick-win insights while minimizing cross-team dependencies. They initially targeted user groups they already knew well or could reach directly.

Key learnings from phase 1:

• Free trials: A banner promoting a free trial across all user groups had a significantly smaller impact on conversions compared to blocking walls in any usergroup. This led Spektrum to shift its focus toward testing its “hard paywall”.

• Contextual messaging (Facebook): Testing informal vs. formal language for Facebook referrals revealed that informal messaging (“Du” instead of “Sie”) nearly doubled click-through rates (CTR) for these audiences.

• Paywall design: Spektrum tested walls with one, two, and three offers across the 4 engagement groups defined in Poool’s dynamic paywall dashboard. While a single offer proved least effective across all segments, a three-offer wall with a central “Best Offer” highlight emerged as the strongest performer for the general audience.

• Text density: On the subscription offer page, most segments preferred shorter, concise text. However, a notable exception was print magazine subscribers, who converted better when presented with more detailed information.

Ann-Kristin shared that this first batch of testing proved very helpful for understanding the behavior of different segments, convincing the team that dynamicity is essential, and that they should start adapting to actual user needs, not just team assumptions.

“Evolution is a perfect way for the perfect adaptation for everyone – if you have some million years of time (spoiler: we didn’t).”

Phase 2: “Testing What Matters” (Test as if Marie Kondo could knock on your door at any time)

Recognizing that they lacked the “million years” required for total evolutionary adaptation, Spektrum moved into a more focused phase: “testing what matters”. This phase prioritized high-impact user groups rather than every possible variation for every segment.

Priority segments

Spektrum identified four key segments for prioritized testing:

• Biggest Group: currently “Volatiles” on mobile devices.
• Most Overall Conversions: currently “Volatiles” on desktop devices.
• Best Converting Group: currently newsletter subscribers.
• “Hidden Gems”: High-potential audiences, a segment that’s hard to identify. Ann-Kristin described this as like playing poker! At the moment, they think these audiences are those receiving mailings already

Device-based segmentation

A critical finding in Phase 2 was the difference in behavior between desktop and mobile users. While an “Unlock article now” prompt outperformed “Continue reading with Spektrum+” on desktop (raising both CTR and purchase rates), the same prompt on mobile increased CTR but dropped the purchase rate. It wasn’t so much the variations that were important here, but simply the proof that mobile and desktop users need to be treated differently. 

Operational framework and final lessons

To maintain this rigorous testing loop with a relatively small team, Spektrum implemented several organizational priorities:

1. Alignment through OKRs and RACI: They used three-to-four-month Objective and Key Results (OKR) cycles to define focus and RACI matrices to establish clear accountability for who is responsible, consulted, or informed for every task.
2. Data visualization: Spektrum emphasizes that seeing user segments visualized (e.g., in donut charts) makes it impossible to ignore the importance of the largest and highest-value groups.

3. Pragmatism over perfectionism: The team adopted “Zen mode,” accepting that “we can’t bake big pretzels with tiny ovens”. They focused on what could be accomplished immediately rather than future ideals.

Spektrum concludes that there is no “final version” of their product, only the next iteration, as user behavior and opportunities constantly evolve.

The post Spektrum’s evolution of audience segmentation and testing appeared first on Audiencers.

This article summarizes the session presented by Maxime Moné (CEO of Poool) and Virginie Clève (founder of Largow, a consulting agency) at the Audiencers Festival Paris on September 16, 2025. Together, they explored the question of “SEO & Paywalls: how can you combine audience and subscriptions in the age of AI?”

This presentation summarized in 5 points: 

- Choosing the paywall type (super hard/hard/soft) should be a strategic decision, not a technical one: each option has a different impact on visibility, content protection, and subscription conversion.

- Anticipate AI: allowing Google to read your content also means opening the door to ChatGPT or Perplexity; blocking Google risks a drop in SEO.

- Secure markup, and calibrate text before the paywall to prevent content leakage and find the balance between SEO (≥ 800 characters) and conversion.

- Adopt a hybrid blocking model: adjust the level of openness according to the value, lifespan, and type of content, rather than a single rule.

- Don't confuse protection with growth: blocking AI protects your content, but only a strong brand and a clear offering will create subscribers.

The post Paywalls & SEO in the AI era appeared first on Audiencers.

Max Moné is co-founder and CEO at Poool, the dynamic journey builder to boost subscription conversion, engagement, and loyalty.

This article is the second in a 6-part series where Max shares what he learned from studying 100 subscription business models across 15+ industries. If you haven't read the first one yet, start here. 

Why we’re focusing on media for this one

In most subscription businesses, the rules for accessing the paid offer are simple. You subscribe to a box, you get the box. You hit a usage limit on Claude, you’re asked to upgrade. You want to get access to Calm for guided meditation? You get 1 week, then have to pay. Each model has its logic, but it’s tied directly to the product.

In media, it’s different.

Media online was historically free (almost always). Then publishers moved to paid models, and products got more complex: apps, newsletters, podcasts, games, bundling, community. Because of this, an enormous variety of access models emerged.

So we decided to go deep into media alone in today’s episode. Because the question “what’s free and what’s paid” is one of the most consequential product decisions in our industry.

And there’s no right or wrong answer. The right model depends on your organization, your editorial DNA, your content, your business model… It’s specific to each media, each newsroom, each audience.

The goal here isn’t to tell you what to do. It’s to show you the range of what exists, so you can figure out where the opportunities are for your unique context.

The engagement-frustration trade-off

The data on this has been clear for a while now.

In 2021, we published the Digital Media Review (DMR – a research initiative with Google and Le Geste – a french association for publishers) at Poool. One data point stood out: the relationship between the share of traffic exposed to paid content and conversion. The correlation is clear: the more you expose, the more you convert. But only up to a threshold. Past that, conversion plateaus or falls. Frustration alone is not a sufficient reason to subscribe.

The post What’s free, what’s paid, and why it’s really an engagement trade-off: episode 2 appeared first on Audiencers.

Lindsay Ederheimer is Director, Consumer Revenue at The New Yorker and Vanity Fair.

> Games are a top-three category for engaged minutes at The New Yorker, averaging 25 minutes per user on crossword pages. Over half of players arrive directly, making the section unusually insulated from algorithm shifts

> Puzzles had been free since 2018. Rather than wall them outright, the team built a windowed hardgate: the last seven days free, everything older behind the paywall

> The window is a dial rather than a decision. It can tighten to three days or open to fourteen, and players still get five crosswords a week, so the paywall arrived without a shock

> Archive players self-select. Anyone hunting a puzzle from more than a week ago is already showing higher propensity to subscribe, which is why that is where the wall sits

> Games have their own paywall rules, separate from articles. People behave differently playing than reading, and it lets the team test games paywall copy without disturbing the site meter

The post The power of puzzles: How The New Yorker approached a games paywall appeared first on Audiencers.

Heiko Scherer is CEO at tschop and champion of a community- and audience-first' approach to digital media.

When it comes to paywalls, Heiko find that most teams focus on optimisation whilst missing the real question: what system are you asking users to join? 

The wall doesn’t create value, it reflects whether it was there to begin with.

For over a decade, the paywall has been the most visible signal of value in digital publishing. It’s where revenue meets retention, where UX meets editorial judgment and where the funnel becomes measurable. Teams debate how high it should be, how wide, when to trigger it and what language best converts.

The post What your paywall says about your product (and why it matters) appeared first on Audiencers.

Paywalls screenshotted as readers see them, from publishers around the world. Collected since October 2022 and added to every month.

Click on any paywall to open it in full size.

Paywall best practices to takeaway:

Consider a soft conversion strategy, such as registration, to increase engagement prior to fully blocking the reader

Ensure users have the chance to discover the value of your premium content

Communicate a strong value proposition

Include brand colors, selecting a single color to represent subscription across site

In a freemium model, consider labelling premium content to reduce frustration

Integrate other funnel steps into the paywall (such as the offers, payment or data collection) to reduce clicks and potential friction points

Work on optimizing paywall visibility rate, aiming to balance frustration and engagement (we found 80% to be optimal, but A/B testing is recommended to find the best visibility for your publication)

Make subscription easy, such as by offering account creation through Facebook/Google or payment through PayPal or Apple

If you’ve already collected key data points (such as name or content interests) make use of it to personalize the paywall and experience. For instance, you could build a subscription offer suited to content consumption habits, or adapt the value proposition to their profile

The post 200+ paywall examples to inspire your subscription strategy appeared first on Audiencers.