HOTR: Some changes coming to LNA in January

Leeham News in addition to Twitter, Facebook and Linkedin, may now be found on here and on Mastodon here.

Dec. 27, 2022, © Leeham News: There will be some changes coming to Leeham News on Jan. 1, 2023.

The first is that for the first time since 2017, we adjust our subscription rates. We’ve been including notices in our articles throughout December. We provided notice on our Subscription page on Dec. 1. Here are the new rates:

Subscription Rate Adjustment

Effective Jan. 1, 2023, the following subscription rates will be in effect (US dollars):

    • Monthly Rate: $59.95. This is for individuals and not corporate employees.
    • Annual Individual Rate: $652. This is for individuals and not corporate employees.
    • Annual Single User Corporate Rate: $1,632. This is for an individual corporate user.

Enterprise corporate subscriptions begin with Enterprise 3 (three users) and are available for up to 500 users. Please contact us at for more information.

This is the first rate adjustment since 2017.

Accordingly, we’ll make some adjustments to our content.

More paywall

There will be more paywall content and fewer freewall posts. Paywall content has been a regular schedule on Monday and Thursdays. Our Pontifications, also on Monday, and Bjorn’s Corner content on Friday has been almost entirely free. Late this year, a few of these columns were paywall, depending on the content. In 2023, more of these columns will be paywall and fewer will be freewall.

Typically, additional reporting as needed throughout the year typically is freewall, with a few paywall. More of these become paywall. Heard on the Ramp (HOTR) is and will remain freewall. This column is published on an irregular schedule.

18 Comments on “HOTR: Some changes coming to LNA in January

  1. Thank you for the update. We have seen the number of paywall articles per page growing in recent months.
    And the articles with various sub topics and more than 100-200 replies. And probably the number of unique posters decreased.

    I hope the increased percentage of paywall articles will support the overall turn over. The paying/corporate members get more value for money. Also moderation of posts will take less time.

    A side effect might be, non paying contributors facing most interesting aticles are pay-wall, will make other choices. Either paying $1600 a year or moving to other existing or new aerospace sites on the web.

    Seeing the paywall articles don’t get much comments, the interactivety of the site will probably change. But the value of that might be unclear for paying members and the choices have
    been made.

    • I agree that moderation of comments must be an unnecessary draw on available time; unfortunately, Scott has to spend far too much time intervening in the comments section so as to maintain a certain standard of decorum.

      Although I don’t know exactly why LNA bothers with the comments section, it is a known fact that websites with “active content” (such as a comment section / blog) tend to score better in search engine results. This is certainly the case with LNA — Google an aviation topic recently covered here and see how often LNA shows up near the top of the results. Maintaining non-paywall HOTR articles — with comments section — will probably be enough to maintain this effect.

      For analysis articles, there are very few (if any) alternatives to LNA.
      However, for general aviation news, there are plenty of other sites that can be consulted.

  2. I am not corporate reader therefore going behind the pay wall is far too expensive especially if not much comments are in return
    I suggest a reasonable paiement to go behind pay wall once for my selected articles with permanent access on comments for such articles

    • I would very much like such a possibilty too.
      Despite being in air and space design for 15 years, nor my position in my company, nor my respesonbilities justify a professionnal paywall access.
      On the other hand, current freewall access gives me details and analysis to better understand the keys of our business and I would gladly support LNA passionate, dedicated and professional work to keep current access level for a more affordable price.

      That said, even if not possible, thanks for all your work and keep doing that well!

      • I would certainly consider behind the Wall delayed access to subscription though it has to be withing my means.

        Scott clearly has passion to allow the open access part and the head ache of moderation to go with it (and yes I have been guilty of causing him grief though I hope that has toned down)

        Like others it may go full behind the wall and I will regret it but understand as well.

        Then I am stuck watching old tractors get rebuilt!

  3. Thanks Scott & Bijorn. I’ve enjoyed your news and tech articles immensely, but I knew it would end at some point. The comments section provided a sandbox for many to play in, but it seems to, more and more, be used as a kitty litter box.
    I will continue to check in for the free articles and I’m sure there will be insights to be garnered.

  4. As a retired retired 82 year old who has not lived judiciously,LHN has kept me informed, and educated, on one of my interests. Sadly one more old friend is about to depart my life. Thank you for your educational articles in the past.

    • “Sadly one more old friend is about to depart my life.” !!!!

      I am 80 years old … I posted some comments every now and then, received back more comments ….always within the rules
      thanks for keeping my education live for over 30 years

    • Maybe Scott can consider a special fee for 70+ yrs olds. They have often have perspectives &,seldom fall out if tone and are independent.

  5. I think it is fair to paywall customers to compensate for an raise by adding more value. I will also miss the constructive comments, but I am more than happy to see the majority – that at best don’t add value – go.

  6. It will be sad to see Leeham largely disappear behind the paywall but thanks for all the free content and insight you’ve provided over the years Scott. Much appreciated. And fingers crossed for you that the remaining free content is sufficient to maintain sufficient site interest among existing free content commentators that this community doesn’t disappear, leaving the site with very little reader interaction.

    One question. Why the price chosen? In comparison with other sites the subscription seems high. Of course material differs, but eg The Air Current is less than half the rate, at US$299/795 annual personal/commercial.

    Anyway, all the best Scott!

    • @Woody: Our rates were set in 2013, long before Air Current was founded, and content is often technical, justifying the premium.

  7. Thank you for the content this year. The A350 passenger cabin information was helpful for my occupation. I hope this next year will bring good things in the way of aircraft development as opposed to the Boeing hibernation proposed in 2022.

    I wish everyone at the Leeham News company good health and a happy new year.

  8. Its been a good run with all the conversations (based free content articles). Many good nuggets of information have come from the group. With the greying of the current participates (retired-not going to pay for access), the board is losing countless years of tribal knowledge that adds to the conversation!

    • Will this online discussion board go away and morph into a weekly industry insight newsletter that can be emailed to paying subscribers? No real reason to keep the online portion since corporate subscribers really don’t comment anyway.
      The real question is, since the free content is going away and us “aerospace refugees” will not be participating with insight and historical context, do the paywallers get any value from comments? If not, then less of heavy lift for Scott in the future. If so, the unknown, unknown, in the short and long term will subscribers find the product less of value and fly away? That’s the $652 and $1,632 question!

  9. I couldn’t find you on Mastodon and the links above don’t seem to be correct – there is only the link to linkedin. Could you provide your account there? Thanks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *