sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

As the economy stumbles, it is vital that reporting on what is happening stays comprehensive, open and free. We need our Supporters now more than ever. If you can support us you can go ad-free too

Personal Finance / opinion
As the economy stumbles, it is vital that reporting on what is happening stays comprehensive, open and free. We need our Supporters now more than ever. If you can support us you can go ad-free too
We need you as a Supporter
Image sourced from Shutterstock.com

It is again time for me to ask for your support. (If you already support us, thank you. This message is not for you.)

Each week more than 120,000 readers join you at interest.co.nz for our reporting, expert analysis, thoughtful commentary, podcasts and videos, content that connects our readers to our economy and the world we live in.

A key part of this work is made possible by reader support.

Yes, we still take advertising, but direct reader support is vital for what we do. Which is why we are appealing again for your support (if you are not already doing so).

Your support matters

Less than one in 20 readers financially support us. We need this to be higher so we can hold on to the independent ethic we have built.

Our content is free for all readers and we want to keep it that way. We don't use paywalls, or hide our content behind expensive email subscriptions. For readers who don't support us, the cost of reading like that is the ads you see.

But there is a way to way to read us ad-free, one available only to supporters.

We have a growing team and a growing number of research projects, none of which are being done for commercial purposes, and all of which are about informing you about the New Zealand economy and key financial developments.

And that is why we need your support.

We work for you, so being supported by you makes sense to me.

You know us - what we do and the resources we make available to everyone. None of this is inexpensive. But we are keen to keep almost everything free.

We know most readers appreciate the open access, but only a tiny fraction financially support us. We need you to join that exclusive group.

We are asking you to join our band of readers who know this is worthwhile: holding banks, insurers, the real estate industry, politicians and regulators to account with coverage that isn't constrained by 'sponsorships' or large advertisers, nor funded by government journalism subsidies. 

If you join us as a supporter and do so for at least $10/month or $100/year (or more) you get:

  • 100% ad-free website browsing
  • Satisfaction you are supporting an independent, home-grown professional and passionate news team.

Keen? Here’s what to do

Just click the ‘Become a supporter’ button at the top of the page to start your support of $10 a month or $100 a year, and you’ll get the best, ad-free interest.co.nz reading experience. Or click here. You can also specify the amount, or choose the one-time option if you prefer.

Finally, thank you for your readership. Can you go one better and become a supporter?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

68 Comments

Ok, the guilt finally got to me....      I have become a supporter on the basis that per post, its a bargain, and its the best online community in NZ.

edit 

NZ politics live: Golriz Ghahraman fined $1860 for shoplifting, discharge without conviction declined

 

I am ok with that, she has suffered more justice then most in NZ do, and no point in bankrupting here.

 

Up
30

I've got half a guilt as being paying $5.  But yeah, time to up it and get the tick.  Will do next time my reminder comes.

We need independent journalism more than ever.

(yeah...having the conviction is a major blow)

Up
1

Why wait Rastus, this article IS the reminder and the link to become a supporter is right there.

Up
3

.

Up
0

You were doing so well ITGUY until you did the edit with Golriz 😏

Up
2

I hope GollyG never darkens our door again. Another waste of space, hopefully soon to be forgotten…and the end of yet another embarrassing chapter for the Greens, with more to come for them (migrant exploiter Tana soon to leave the tent).

 

 

 

Up
8

we are paying for that QC, 103 days so far

 

Up
3

jeremyr,

I would be really happy if you "never darkened our door again". You are quite prepared to use this site to spray us all with your misogynistic views, but without contributing to it. You are as you say, "Another waste of space".

Up
6

Why is there no tick at my name? I have contributed for some years now

Up
0

It is ironic if not downright disappointing that some that do not contribute are some of the most active, and actively vociferous too,  posters that  use the platform not only to broadcast their views but lambast opposing viewpoints. It does not cost that much to be registered as a supporter so that in itself,  provides  a question as to both the motivation and integrity of the relative post. Having made that comment, now wonder how many of the usual suspects will leap on it.

Up
9

30c a day

Up
1

Good on you ITG !

Up
4

Welcome aboard 

Up
1

I paid up a while ago but two points of note . I struggled to get the payment to go through, took many attempts with no inkling as to why it wouldn't. Finally went through after sitting 24hrs as pending  .

So I hope it got to you guys as I do appreciate the site and your work.

But I don't have a tick?

---------------------

[ Please see my email to you. Ed. ]

Up
2

Ditto - and no tick but still with the adverts.

 

Meh, if it means interest.co.nz gets two bites of the cherry that just means they are shrewd business operators!

Up
0

Please see my email to you.

Up
2

Cheers!

Up
0

Gremlins at play this evening. Poor old Foxglove. One moment green ticked, next moment unticked and cast out of the club. Identity crisis looms. A minutes silence please. 

Up
1

Have you logged off & then logged on again under the separate Presspatron account? IIRC it took a couple of hours to activate the new account 

Up
6

Same here, for the last few years. The press patron thing doesn't seem to work so i still see ads with standard log in.  My press patron seems to be linked to a username that is not my current one (when it asked me to link the accounts, the other username comes up in a log in box and I cannot change it) . Is there anyway I can fix this?

Up
0

Log in via Press Patron, not standard login, and the ads are gone. 

Up
4

Testing testing, I think I solved it. Yay for Matariki - finally had time to do some life admin.  Everyone to busy working and distracted, especially by money.

Up
2

Suggest a move to comments only for contributing subscribers?

 

Up
5

Times are tough, many spruikers would not be able to afford their multiple accounts 

Up
24

Perhaps some are not funding their own time? There's  sometimes a Mon-Fri trend

Up
1

Maybe there's a more targeted option - comments for anyone, giving out thumbs up reserved for those who pay. 

Up
1

You make it sound as if having a lot of thumbs up is a good thing. To me having lots of thumbs up just means that the author thinks like the masses, a sure sign of average thinking!

Up
5

Yes, just having thumbs up is a flaky  copout, there should also be thumbs down for peer moderation. Even $tuff had both  these until a few  years ago, perhaps until someone told them that they were triggered & felt unsafe

Up
5

I do not read Stuffed much anymore, its just too woke.

cool green tick works.

Up
4

Stuff is always good if you want a woke story about what is not the news though. It’s half comedy and it’s free, except with poor spelling and bad grammar.

Up
0

It doesn't bother me, but if there are people with multiple accounts to upvote their pithy remarks then Interest could at least get some money out of that. 

Up
2

Don't think that is a good idea. I am just as interested (probably more interested) in the person who reads 100 articles and makes 1 comment than the person who makes a comment every article.

Up
10

Maybe just limit the number of comments for non subscribers? 

Up
0

Yes, limit them to "0"

Up
1

The site has evolved to what it is by being open to all comers and really, that is a basic and intrinsic part of its success. It is being run though in the manner of an honesty box in terms of subscribers, so again that comes down to the integrity of contributors. On the other hand if all were paid up , how would that then attract advertising revenue?

Up
2

We're saying all commenters should be paid up, that still leaves the majority of readers attracting advertising.

Up
1

True. Point taken. Should have thought about it a bit deeper myself.

Up
2

Should people pay for a publication that allows derogatory comments? A recent example (I intentionally won't repost it) was the racist and ableist comment made by chemistpeter@g and double downed by Zwifter on the Morning Briefing on 31 May. The comments shouldn't be made in the first place but if they are surely they should be removed and possibly the user/s banned? 

Agnostium asked (rightly in my opinion) for the comment by cp@g to be addressed but nothing was done. I'd like to acknowledge and thank M0ral Hazard, redheadonist and Foxglove for acting as unofficial moderators and calling out the comments and posters on that day.

 

Up
3

Welcome to the f****** show

Up
6

Yes let's get more woke and politically correct and while we are at it turn up the tone policing and school hall monitoring where we start noting down the names of the delinquent, that will surely improve the discussion. Alternatively we can act like adults who understand that not everything that is said is going to be polite, prim or proper.

Up
3

I think it's reasonable to expect the moderators to uphold the standards of their own comment policy. It seems to be enforced haphazardly, when it is enforced at all.

Up
4

I've previously defended more than once interest commentators internal peer moderation, despite occasionally being on the receiving end of personal abuse from people who disagree with others opinions.

I think that works better for a healthy, robust & respectful debate than the site owners stepping in (except in very blatant unacceptable abuse cases such as racism or sexism which they have done). Otherwise the site management will be accused of deliberately framing the discussion for their agenda (cf $tuff).

Up
3

All that. But also I’d rather idiots were out in the open where we can all see them. 

Up
0

I'm very happy that blatant abuse is removed. However it should be possible to make racist and sexist comments - for an example John Cambell's question on TV tonight asking if young, brown women should avoid a political career. I also insist on expressing hate because it is an honest emotion shared by all people. I'm thinking of an American president who made it clear he hated brocolli.

It is a matter of how arguments are expressed. When threats of violence, murder and rape are expressed then the police must be involved immediately; at a lower level of abuse then the editor should delete the comment leaving his comment about the removal. On this site I found some of the disapproval of Jacinda when she was PM descended into rude abuse that actually weakened the authors argument and left me defending her. It is almost impossible to define abuse but this site seems to get it its censorship about right; leaving me to keep learning.

Up
1

Am I right when I interpret your comment to mean that you think saying "young, brown women" is racist and sexist? To me it is stating facts but I'd like to read your opinion if you come back to the thread.  Something to ponder for me the idea of expressing hate because it is an honest emotion. 

Up
0

by 26@MainHide All | 27th Jun 24, 4:20pm

Should people pay for a publication that.......

YES

Up
0

I agree. And I have said before that the lack of moderation of trolls and offensive commenters is a turn off. As is the apparent lack of regard for readers and readers’ suggestions and feedback.  I have emailed in the past on certain things and radio silence.

I have been signed up to other websites where these sorts of little customer-friendly things are done well. 

Up
1

There is a lot of heavy moderation if you link meticulously referenced Thomas Cranmer @CranmerWrites posts detailing Jacinda, Bloomfield and Chippy's dodgy covid calls that ignored MOH, Medsafe etc. advice to the detriment of fellow kiwis.

In the good old days I used to get Biden elder abuse comments deleted, but perhaps that worm is turning.

 

Up
0

Ahh… you snow flake

Up
9

Watch it, or he will leave for good.... Again!!.

Up
5

This publication does regularly reprimand commenters and sometimes bans them. I think they do more than enough already! I miss all those that have been sent into exile.

Up
1

Went to the article out of curiosity. It would appear the comments you are speaking of were taken down.

Up
0

Maybe take another look 1689 Baptist.

Readers are surely aware that it is hard work checking every comment posted and the occasional unsavoury one may slip through. Personally, I think calling for even upvoters to be banned is worse that the odd comment slipping under the wire. I'd like to think this is a site for grownups.

Anyway, people are not "paying" for a publication, they are supporting a publication.

Up
1

Agree that supporting would have been a better word choice than paying.

Up
0

I'll continue to subscribe. Thanks to all the team at interest.co.nz for providing quality reads and critical thought. The articles and think tank of comments usually leave me feeling like i've learned something more valuable than with most other news sites, long may this continue.

Up
4

LOVE the no ads bonus when becoming a supporter!

The information, charts, articles and commentary is the best in the business, but to have the reading experience ad free is just a perfect icing on the cake!!!!!

 

Up
6

So good not having to constantly clobber the video ads.

Up
1

Careful Kate. In the words of the immortal Denis Norden, you should know by now - “ you can’t have your kayak and heat it.”

Up
2

100%… common ya tight arses

Up
1

Commenters should try and contribute if they are able to. There aren't many websites like this where you can have worthwhile and amusing conversations and develop an online persona. 

Up
3

That’s true. At least you can have a debate and some banter here. I heard of the standard (or the stranded as people refer to it) and I did read it a couple of times. They talk absolute nonsense (amongst their subscribers of course they all agree they are right), but if you read, occasionally someone comes along and disagrees with them (on anything), which is meet with a final warning or just an outright ban. It’s a bit pathetic but it is what it is, and that’s why there appears to be no one using that site, apart from the developer (and moderator). So, wouldn’t like to see the same approach here.

Up
2

The Standard died when their moderation went absolutely out of control i.e. they decided that anyone holding a politically opposing or politically incorrect view deserved to be banned.

Up
1

I got charged $38 for a 15 box of Heineken last night. The irony is... the shop was right over the road from DB brewery!! Makes the $10 for this site look like the deal or the century 

Up
5

Well said lol. BTW I think Countdown (Woolworths) has a deal on for 2 doz Heineken - $43!

Up
0

I'm two years in to subscription: Interest.co.nz is value for money, and seem to make a decent fist of reporting the facts and cautious analysis that stands apart from a broader media landscape of incompetence, editorial agendas, opinion masquerading as fact, pointless (and apparently endless) vox-pops, and echo-chamber reporting to niche markets.

Up
5

I fully agree so have decided to support the site as well.

Up
4

Fine choice sir!

Up
0

Well done CV

Up
0