For almost every single podcast Anchor hosts, the cost to us is less than 10 cents per month. That means that hosting your podcast for an entire year costs Anchor around one dollar. If Anchor were to charge you $10 per month for file storage and basic analytics, we would either be grossly exaggerating our costs, or grossly overpaying our vendors. Anchor benefits greatly from economies of scale. The easier we make it for everyone to make podcasts, the closer to zero we can drive the average price of hosting everyone’s podcasts. Our per-user costs drop every time we reach a new growth milestone, and will continue to do so. This is because the incremental price of variable costs (like hosting) go down the more we host, and the static costs (like servers) are split as tiny fractions among the many podcasts on Anchor. People may ask “So if you’re not making money off of me to host… what’s your business model?” We are not in the business of charging you, the podcaster. We want to work with you to help you make money off your podcast, in which case we all win. And that 10 cents per month to host your podcast becomes a negligible cost compared to the revenue we can all earn together as we advance the medium of podcasting together.
Anchor has long been on my radar as a podcasting platform, but their model isn’t what podcasting needs. Hosting costs isn’t the problem with podcasting. It is the fact that companies like Anchor, Sticher and Blog Talk Radio are taking the content that you publish, making it only accessible on their platform, and then pumping ads in it.
I pay $12 a month on Simplecast for both Getting Caught Up and A Slab of Glass. I do it happily because I know that I am supporting developers with my money for hosting, a website, technical support, and download statistics that they share with me on how my shows are doing. I don’t have to hope and pray that Anchor makes their money with ads in order to keep my content alive.
Another point that gets me is the fact that they need a large base of active users to make their model work.
Anchor seems to be going for the YouTube model. They want a huge number of people to use their platform. But the concentration of so much media in one place is one of the problems with today’s web. Massive social networks like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube have too much power over writers, photographers, and video creators. We do not want that for podcasts. Micro.blog podcast hosting isn’t free. It’s $10/month. But for that price you get not just a podcast feed but also a full hosted blog with support for microblog posts or longer essays, photo blogging, custom themes and CSS, posting from a bunch of third-party apps and our iOS microcasting app Wavelength, and most importantly everything at your own domain name so you own the content. The competition for Micro.blog isn’t Anchor; it’s Squarespace and WordPress. Some things are worth paying for. I share Nir’s goal that podcasting should be more accessible and more affordable to more people, but it’s dangerous to give one company too much control over podcasting. Anchor’s business model demands scale. It’s still unclear how that will play out.
Demanding scale in your model is a lot like demanding a raise before you get offered a job. It isn’t practical and it’s actually really insulting to the users of your platform.
I consume YouTube and even have a podcast co-host that posts on it regularly, but YouTubers will be the first to tell you that this model isn’t all that it is cracked up to be. There are issues, and when it is being run by one of the biggest companies in the world and still having problems, there is no doubt this “free to play” model isn’t perfect.
We need to start putting out money where our mouths are when it comes to the things we care about, and podcast hosting is one of them for me. I have tried tons of podcast hosting services and I have seen other “free” options come and go the last 7 years I have been doing this. the only ones that stick around are ones getting capital from their users instead of making them the product.