FT Tilt, RIP

By Felix Salmon
October 13, 2011
launched with some fanfare in January, has now quietly died.

" data-share-img="" data-share="twitter,facebook,linkedin,reddit,google" data-share-count="true">

It never even made it to its first birthday. FT Tilt, the high-priced emerging-markets blog launched with some fanfare in January, has now quietly died.

This is a sad day: Tilt was run by the FT’s two most innovative journalists, Paul Murphy and Stacy-Marie Ishmael, and was a bold attempt to view the developing world from a novel perspective. The FT could and should learn a lot from Tilt’s innovations, not least the rich and various forms of engagement it had with its readers.

The FT should also learn from Tilt’s failures, which are to be found in the business model rather than in the journalism. Tilt was a blog run by a small team of smart young journalists — but it was priced at thousands of dollars a year, and I could never understand where the value was meant to lie. Those journalists had amazing sources and language skills in countries around the world, but they were ring-fenced from the FT itself, and didn’t really contribute noticeably to the newspaper. Ironically, they might actually contribute more now, going forwards, in the wake of Tilt’s execution: FT spokeswoman Darcy Keller tells me that the newspaper is trying to find jobs for them. I hope it does; as Stacy says, they have done tremendous work, and deserve to be rewarded for it.

The model of charging very large amounts of money for information about global markets which is relatively cheap to collate just doesn’t seem to work — Tilt is now dead, and Roubini.com is up for sale. The fact is that smart, economically-literate people are never going to be that cheap — so you need to have some kind of decently-sized market for what they do. And both Tilt and Roubini.com have been priced way too high to reach even a four-digit subscriber base. What’s more, these kind of services get better as their audience grows — they learn from their audience. Keeping the audience artificially tiny by implementing a massive paywall is self-defeating.

No startup ever achieves success in less than one year, so the FT’s decision with respect to Tilt does seem hasty. What they should have done is make Tilt free to all FT subscribers, and see if it took off that way. FT Alphaville has proved that bloggy brand extensions can be extremely successful, if done right, and Tilt’s material was certainly of great interest to a very important part of the FT’s global audience.

It’s good for media companies to experiment, and it’s necessary that some of those experiments fail. But I don’t think that FT Tilt failed, in terms of its core journalistic output. I think that the FT got greedy for subscription revenues from day one, and never let Tilt grow and thrive as it could and should have done. I absolutely blame the overlords for this one, not the people who did the real work.

Update: Richard Desai-Green, Roubini’s CFO, responds:

We have 1,000 clients.

You seem to be treating info published in the media as fact but in fact the CNBC journalist had his numbers wrong.

We are cash flow positive.

We’re well capitalized.

We are continuing to hire people.

We just opened an office in India and hired 9 people.

We’re continuing to grow our business.

We can never say we won’t sell the company but I can say at this time we don’t have any offers and the executive team of our company is as committed as ever.

September was a record sales month for us and we’ve started October really well and expect our growth to continue.


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

A very fair and balanced analysis, Felix. However I’d be interested to know how you were able to access FT Tilt over the past nine months given the ludicrously high paywall. Did Reuters pay for a subscription?

Posted by IanFraser | Report as abusive

I found it difficult to get into…I rely a lot on RSS feeds to get headlines & enough of a blurb about a story to decide what to read and their RSS feed was solely heds. There was something goofy about the use of the #! AJAX URL pattern that frequently I’d click through to a story and just end up at the tile homepage. The content was frequently good, but although I pay for the FT in print & online, the pricing for tilt was far above any benefit I thought I’d get from it.

Posted by epc | Report as abusive

…as far as accessing FT Tilt (in reply to IanFraser), they must have granted a lot of free accounts, as I didn’t pay anything (there were some minor parts of the site I couldn’t access, but I could access almost all of the articles I was interested in).

Posted by epc | Report as abusive

I had a free account and quite enjoyed it. It got better over time, I thought the quality vector was going in the right direction. But, absolutely over priced. The suggestion of free access to subscribers is interesting. The immediate interest would have been there.

I hear from journalists that FT mgmt is always scrambling to make the business work. But I have to say they have the rest of the business press beat by miles. Say what you will about the paywall, I love my FT.com sub.

Posted by nyet | Report as abusive

FT’s mergermarket wires have made the model work.

Posted by koukla | Report as abusive

right on Felix

Posted by PinkUn | Report as abusive

Felix, your post has sparked off some thoughts. I’ve quoted you in a blog on the closure of Tilt ‘a cautionary tale of product development’ just published bit.ly/rWRUef

Posted by wdowen | Report as abusive