Might be an absurd proposition, but according to their website, the publisher is a non-profit called NautilusThink, meaning it's eligible for the Pineapple Fund (https://pineapplefund.org/).
Now I don't know what the odds are, but considering there's about $79m left, I'd say they aren't too far from the odds of the potential acquisition talks coming through.
It won't solve the underlying issue, but it will make possible to at least think about better ways of solving it.
This is what a company looks like when it runs out of money...except for the part of admitting it. I know it sucks for the writers that haven't been paid, but a business not paying $50,000 across more than a dozen contractors is hardly news.
I've been involved in the publishing industry as both a freelance writer and a publisher who has hired freelance writers. If you have a modicum of experience and relatively good financial records, it's quite easy to estimate your publication's cash flow.
In this case, by his own words, John Steele is either completely unqualified to run a publication or he is completely full of shit. Grants don't just magically disappear...you know one will expire for several months before it does. Subscribers don't just magically stop subscribing...a qualified publisher will see complaints build and will recognize a groundswell of frustration for what it is.
And, seriously, who keeps commissioning work because they're convinced a merger is right around the corner??
Here's an incredible "How I Built This" podcast with Stonybrook Farms (yoghurt) founder Gary Hirshberg. He over-promised for years to suppliers, customers, investors on things he couldn't deliver, but made it work anyway. It's about the grittiest founder story I've heard. They ended up selling to Danone (I think) and did very well, but the company was on precarious footing for around 10 years.
More accurately, this is what happens when a company operates based on illusion and not reality. Sooner or later reality rears its ugly face. Their business was created on handouts and grants, but when that money dried up they couldn't generate their own revenue. Had they focused on being self-sufficient for revenue since their inception they most likely wouldn't have these problems in the first place.
Mr Steele is, on the surface at least, running Nautilus from his heart. For that, I am grateful, although I'm sure his freelancers see it quite differently. I've read a lot of excellent content there over the years. I hope that there is a way that they can pay off their debts and carry on in a similar fashion.
Their annual digital Prime subscription is on sale for only $12. That's dirt cheap for such quality content. I just bought one. I encourage others to take advantage of this sale price and buy their subscription. (Note - I am not affiliated with them in anyway - just want to support good content.)
I got the yearly print subscription this year. They managed to get me one copy & it was 4 months delayed. I too just want good content but if you can’t provide it without stiffing the content creators or your customers go away.
I tried subscribing a few months ago. Their payment form was busted. The state entry on the billing address was a "smart" dropdown that could only be advanced by keyboard and only one state per focus. Advancing from Alaska to Arizona required switching focus back to the city field, then tab, then down arrow. Getting to Arkansas required doing that again. I closed the tab well before I got to Pennsylvania. Was whatever conversion boost this javascript abomination was designed to achieve worth it?
FWIW, I had earlier subscribed to digital prime at $29 or so when they had a promotion several months ago, and later they ran another promotion for lifetime digital subscription at around $65. When asked about it, they promptly responded and let me pay the difference and upgrade to the lifetime subscription. I value such prompt and relevant customer care wherever it is, and I sincerely hope Nautilus can find a better source of funding for the long term.
I find Steele's argument that his staff never knowingly commissioned work that they knew the magazine couldn't pay for to be a total red herring.
It may be true that his staff were in the dark, but he wasn't, and to the extent that he authorized them to commission that work, he permitted them to commission work that he knew the magazine couldn't pay for.
Nautilus might be a first-rate science magazine, but it's only first-rate because it commissioned first-rate writers.
Do you think it will ever be able to attract and retain that caliber of writers now? I certainly don't. Definitely not with Steele at the helm.
EDIT: I looked up NautilusThink's 2015 IRS Form 990 (the latest available on GuideStar) and found an interesting line item. In that year, John Steele was paid $2,408,000 for "consulting fees" for the publication of the magazine. (The previous year he was paid a more modest $134,000.)
> In that year, John Steele was paid $2,408,000 for "consulting fees”
This isn’t true, and people here should stop repeating it. These payments were to Nautilus Ventures LCC, which Steele owns. It’s not totally clear what this is for, but if I had to guess I’d say these are publishing costs that Steele has spun out into a separate entity (probably for tax purposes). It’s possible that Steele is using these payments to enrich himself, but this line on the 990 isn’t good evidence of that.
> John Steele was paid $2,408,000 for "consulting fees" for the publication of the magazine.
That can't be true, and if true, disgusting. That's half a million more than they claimed to have paid for the totality of their content from the start of publication.
If an editor who made millions from a publication by extracting what must be a majority of its revenue as personal income allowed it to go $180K into arrears with the low-paid providers of its content without even making a personal loan, I'm grossed out.
I'm deciding this isn't true. You should add a link.
I find it very disturbing that other commentators on this post are encouraging to subscribe to this magazine. If you don’t pay your employees that’s pretty bad. If you actively mislead people into thinking that you can pay them that’s even more horrible. I find this behavior reprehensible and we should wait for this joke of a magazine to end.
i don't know, i wouldn't call this magazine a joke. I think the quality of the writing is top notch, and the level of the topics is extremely interesting. i don't disagree that what's going on financially is pretty reprehensible, but at the very least i can still attempt to support the writers who probably spent a lot of time writing these awesome pieces by reading their work.
They stopped shipping my magazines to Europe. I believe I'm two numbers behind since august. I've sent a couple of emails complaining about it and got the same response all the times - "we're facing delays".
Regardless, I believe I got at least 10 emails about donating to the magazine in the last 6 months.
I'm a prime member for nautilus for 2 years now. I can't support all the good journalism sites I visit. But that doesn't mean I (or you) shouldn't support any. Just pick one.
We need an alternative to free content on the web. I often read Nautilus and never pay them anything, it's wrong. Any SV-based disruptors interested in this? These contributors are special, they contribute a lot to society and they are probably underpaid and under-appreciated.
thank you for being forthright and explaining the situation publicly. I am a reader and your open letter has prompted me to buy a subscription.
I empathize with you. Making predictions about the future is difficult and there are times when they will be incorrect. When these predictions concern incoming cash and they fail to materialize, the situation becomes frustrating.
I wish you all the best and hope that you will be able to overcome this challenge, as well as any future ones that come your way. I do so for the very selfish reason of being able to continue to read quality content in the future.
Me too. I resisted in the past because they ask for a phone number and I don't want magazines to have that in their CRMs (fool me once...) but it seems like they can accept an obvious fake.
I am a print subscriber. They do an important job and the articles are mind expanding and very high quality. If you ever read their articles you should consider a subscription, it’s well worth it for what you get and for what you support.
> "I want to again make clear that nobody on the Nautilus staff commissioned any work that they knowingly thought wouldn’t be paid for..."
On one hand I feel for the guy. This is every dreamer's nightmare.
On the other hand he sounds naive, if not a liar. To commission work on a deal that was still 100% unfinalized isn't exactly playing fair.
Entrepreneurs are by definition optimistic. They see the opportunity as brighter and risk dim. That's great when things are going well. However, it's a dangerous trait when things go sideways.
Perhaps he should have been more transparent sooner? Ya think?
[+] [-] napoleoncomplex|8 years ago|reply
Now I don't know what the odds are, but considering there's about $79m left, I'd say they aren't too far from the odds of the potential acquisition talks coming through.
It won't solve the underlying issue, but it will make possible to at least think about better ways of solving it.
[+] [-] zanedb|8 years ago|reply
As a minor technical note: If the site is truly hosted by GitHub Pages as it proclaims, how does it have HTTPS support on a custom domain?
[+] [-] brudgers|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hluska|8 years ago|reply
In this case, by his own words, John Steele is either completely unqualified to run a publication or he is completely full of shit. Grants don't just magically disappear...you know one will expire for several months before it does. Subscribers don't just magically stop subscribing...a qualified publisher will see complaints build and will recognize a groundswell of frustration for what it is.
And, seriously, who keeps commissioning work because they're convinced a merger is right around the corner??
[+] [-] nwatson|8 years ago|reply
EDIT: clarified industry
[+] [-] pmc1|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Allower|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] lunchladydoris|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cma|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] monster_group|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kasey_junk|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tedunangst|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] newscracker|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] paulcole|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tanto|8 years ago|reply
Its definitely one of the best sources for long reads and tbh I never thought about it. They should display a support us banner like theguardian does.
[+] [-] stingraycharles|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] samschooler|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jawns|8 years ago|reply
It may be true that his staff were in the dark, but he wasn't, and to the extent that he authorized them to commission that work, he permitted them to commission work that he knew the magazine couldn't pay for.
Nautilus might be a first-rate science magazine, but it's only first-rate because it commissioned first-rate writers.
Do you think it will ever be able to attract and retain that caliber of writers now? I certainly don't. Definitely not with Steele at the helm.
EDIT: I looked up NautilusThink's 2015 IRS Form 990 (the latest available on GuideStar) and found an interesting line item. In that year, John Steele was paid $2,408,000 for "consulting fees" for the publication of the magazine. (The previous year he was paid a more modest $134,000.)
[+] [-] pdabbadabba|8 years ago|reply
This isn’t true, and people here should stop repeating it. These payments were to Nautilus Ventures LCC, which Steele owns. It’s not totally clear what this is for, but if I had to guess I’d say these are publishing costs that Steele has spun out into a separate entity (probably for tax purposes). It’s possible that Steele is using these payments to enrich himself, but this line on the 990 isn’t good evidence of that.
[+] [-] Angostura|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pessimizer|8 years ago|reply
That can't be true, and if true, disgusting. That's half a million more than they claimed to have paid for the totality of their content from the start of publication.
If an editor who made millions from a publication by extracting what must be a majority of its revenue as personal income allowed it to go $180K into arrears with the low-paid providers of its content without even making a personal loan, I'm grossed out.
I'm deciding this isn't true. You should add a link.
[+] [-] zitterbewegung|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] volkk|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] postit|8 years ago|reply
Regardless, I believe I got at least 10 emails about donating to the magazine in the last 6 months.
Maybe they're just broke, which is sad.
[+] [-] jocatalin|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Rabei|8 years ago|reply
Hope he solves it, not for his sake but that of the people he owes money.
[+] [-] patkai|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] koliber|8 years ago|reply
thank you for being forthright and explaining the situation publicly. I am a reader and your open letter has prompted me to buy a subscription.
I empathize with you. Making predictions about the future is difficult and there are times when they will be incorrect. When these predictions concern incoming cash and they fail to materialize, the situation becomes frustrating.
I wish you all the best and hope that you will be able to overcome this challenge, as well as any future ones that come your way. I do so for the very selfish reason of being able to continue to read quality content in the future.
[+] [-] engi_nerd|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] reeteshv|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lukego|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tbatchelli|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chiefalchemist|8 years ago|reply
On one hand I feel for the guy. This is every dreamer's nightmare.
On the other hand he sounds naive, if not a liar. To commission work on a deal that was still 100% unfinalized isn't exactly playing fair.
Entrepreneurs are by definition optimistic. They see the opportunity as brighter and risk dim. That's great when things are going well. However, it's a dangerous trait when things go sideways.
Perhaps he should have been more transparent sooner? Ya think?
[+] [-] maaark|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 4h53n|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] room271|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] engi_nerd|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tptacek|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] desireco42|8 years ago|reply