Dr. Mr. Hartwick,
In direct response to your comments, you do have some point in saying that quality content deserves to be paid for. However, I disagree intensely that the people who are against paying for the top notch articles are free loaders. If I could, I would pay for Modern Nexus articles, but I am 15 years, have no method of payment, and could not in a million years convince my mother to allow me to pay for this.
I have not missed an article for 10 months, and I do not intend to miss anymore.

I’m sure you guys will figure out something that works for readers and the company, and I’m sure you already know that there are consumers out there who will gladly pay for good content. It just looks bad when every comment so far is freeloaders acting like paying anything for written content is blasphemy. These people probably also still pirate music with napster.

Good to know, thanks! I look forward to hearing more next week.

No paywall, no premium content, no changes here. Can’t say never but we didn’t jump in to MN to juice y’all for money. It’s because we really like this site, we find the content valuable, and it’s cheap to maintain. We’ve got existing QS resources, like large-scale hosting plans, that allow us to reduce the overhead. We’ve got existing editors to put on the job here. We get an advantage because if a writer who loves Modern also wants to write about finance in addition to MN, we can offer them a shot at QS for that.

The only change is that the bills for everything are now coming to us, which is a change nobody else is likely to see! The benefit to readers is “everything looks the same except someone else (who still isn’t you) is footing the bill for all of it.”

Honestly the paywall model only works for very specific niches, and we don’t think Modern is one of them.

Hey hey. Tyler from QS here: nothing to fear. 🙂 Things will continue as they have been, and we don’t plan on implementing any sort of paywall in the foreseeable future (as in, we don’t have plans or plans to have plans about it).

As you may or may not know, a couple of years ago QS “acquired” MTGCast as it faced going under. Our goal as a site and company is never to suck money out of assets, but rather sustain and grow communities. You could say that QS’s Insider subscriptios (which include forums and Trader Tools, in addition to Insider content) allow us the flexibility to do so.

So don’t worry. There won’t be any reimaginings of MN. The reason we decided to follow this path is that we like what Sheridan and the community have done, and disrupting that would be… Well, silly. 🙂

I don’t want to steal any of Jason’s thunder or that of the QS team’s, but I gave some pretty concrete examples in my announcement above. For instance, I do not have the capacity or resources to make a formal deck/metagame database happen. This is a critical point for Nexus’ development, and I know QS is interested in doing this and making it happen in a way that would make any Nexite proud. They can also bring on more authors, particularly data-driven authors and not just people who want article clicks with sensational claims. Those are just two examples of where I see a QS transition really benefiting the site and our readers.

To my knowledge, there are no plans for any Modern Nexus to go premium in the foreseeable future. As I said in an earlier post, I wouldn’t 100% rule it out for the site’s entire existence, but it’s not in the immediate cards as far as I know.

Site is keeping the same server, domain name, look, etc. In fact, I’m going to add this to the article as an edit because it’s important to clear up. As for volunteer contributors, yes! Those will just go to Jason and/or a future editor position at Jason’s discretion.

As far as I know, no, we are staying free for the foreseeable future. I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of premium content PERIOD (it could happen eventually, like it does on many sites), but I know of no immediate plans to change this.