Britannica's Doomed Plan To Take On Wikipedia
Imitation is the highest form of flattery: Starting tomorrow, the Encyclopedia Britannica will be adding user-submitted content to its website in a bid to give Wikipedia a run for its money.
It won't work.
Here's the problem: In order to preserve Britannica as a professionally-edited resource, user submissions will have to be vetted by Britannica staff or a freelance editor. And the company has set a 20-minute turnaround benchmark for itself to review submissions.
It's not hard to see the problem here: Assuming the idea of Britannica as a viable Wikipedia alternative ever takes off, edits to the site will doubtlessly outpace traffic. So the cost of hiring 24-7 editors to maintain the site will rise faster than extra ad revenue from pageviews, meaning the more Britannica grows the more money it will lose.
:
Britannica never thought that an open source product like Wikipedia would seriously challenge the credibility of its brand. They were wrong and Encyclopaedia Britannica’s staff seriously misread the global market. They are now very concerned about the widespread use of a free Wikipedia vs their paid subscription model From a corporate and financial perspective, Encyclopaedia Britannica is in serious trouble.
It will be interesting to see if Encyclopaedia Britannica survives, but recent indications do not look good. It is the combination of a) the success of Wikipedia and b) improved search engines that has put financial pressure on Encyclopedia Britannica over recent years. Many libraries, schools & individuals are questioning the need to pay for sets of expensive books, or to subscribe to Encyclopaedia Britannica Online, when the content is free on the internet, and often much more comprehensive.