The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
mr_breen
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 11:53 pm

The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by mr_breen » Sat Feb 11, 2017 2:39 pm

I just came across this article and thought it might be of interest to other Bogleheads. Since this is generally a financial forum, I know that we tend to paste links to a fair number of Wall Street Journal articles. Well, it seems that even the Google search loophole to the WSJ paywall will be closed:

The Wall Street Journal continues to tighten up its paywall as it strives to hit 3 million subscribers to the Journal and other Dow Jones products.

Starting Monday, it’s turning off Google’s first-click free feature that let people skirt the Journal’s paywall by cutting and pasting the headline of a story into Google. The Journal tested turning off the feature with 40 percent of its audience last year. But the eye-popping moment was when the Journal turned it off four sections for two weeks, resulting in a dramatic 86 percent jump in subscriptions. The Journal said the full turnoff is a test, but didn’t say how long it would last.

“A consistent amount of people were avoiding the paywall,” said Suzi Watford, Dow Jones’ chief marketing officer.


http://digiday.com/publishers/wall-street-journal-close-google-loophole-entirely/

It seems there is no way around this, (CORRECTION - there is a trick using Facebook to see these WSJ pages. See posts by "triceratop" below) so I guess my question would be to ask what are the best deals out there for a digital only subscription to WSJ?
Last edited by mr_breen on Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

quantAndHold
Posts: 975
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:39 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by quantAndHold » Sat Feb 11, 2017 2:52 pm

I was one of the 40% last year. I found that I didn't really miss the WSJ at all.

Constant Chaos
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Constant Chaos » Sat Feb 11, 2017 2:59 pm

Interesting! I had noticed the google trick wasnt working this week, and it did indeed drive me to subscribe to the WSJ. I received a special renewal offer in the mail yesterday for $178 for 12 months (that was paper and digital) and went with that. I had subscribed via some reseller on amazon for much cheaper, but after approximately 9 months something went awry and couldn't ever regain digital access.

Here is a recent thread about a cheaper, not direct from WSJ, option:

viewtopic.php?t=210311

User avatar
triceratop
Moderator
Posts: 3609
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 8:20 pm
Location: la la land

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by triceratop » Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:05 pm

The google trick may not be working, but facebook referral still gets the job done.

edit: to clarify, this can be done automatically with a bookmarklet, which I call WSJ in my bookmarks bar, consisting of the Javascript code:

Code: Select all

javascript:window.location="https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u="+encodeURIComponent(window.location.href);


Obviously, this is exactly what the WSJ wants readers to do since they allow it.
"To play the stock market is to play musical chairs under the chord progression of a bid-ask spread."

beardsworth
Posts: 1963
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:02 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by beardsworth » Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:13 pm

Maybe Rupert Murdoch needs a new boat. :)

FedGuy
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by FedGuy » Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:45 pm

mr_breen wrote:I seems there is no way around this

There are plenty of free news sites on the Internet.

User avatar
Bammerman
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 4:58 pm

WSJ subscription "for free"

Post by Bammerman » Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:55 pm

FYI, you can "buy" a WSJ subscription with frequent flyer miles. I have been doing that for years.

mr_breen
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 11:53 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by mr_breen » Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:57 pm

triceratop wrote:The google trick may not be working, but facebook referral still gets the job done.

edit: to clarify, this can be done automatically with a bookmarklet, which I call WSJ in my bookmarks bar, consisting of the Javascript code:

Code: Select all

javascript:window.location="https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u="+encodeURIComponent(window.location.href);


Obviously, this is exactly what the WSJ wants readers to do since they allow it.


Wow. I didn't know about this. Sounds interesting. I am having some difficulty duplicating it, however. Could you maybe elaborate on the steps in more detail?

mr_breen
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 11:53 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by mr_breen » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:03 pm

FedGuy wrote:
mr_breen wrote:I seems there is no way around this

There are plenty of free news sites on the Internet.


Well, I do read a lot of news from other free sources on the internet. It is just that sometimes WSJ articles are particularly useful for learning about business and making financial decisions. Are you saying that there are free sites that republish specific WSJ articles?

User avatar
triceratop
Moderator
Posts: 3609
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 8:20 pm
Location: la la land

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by triceratop » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:14 pm

mr_breen,
If you make that link a "bookmark" in your browser, then when you go to a WSJ that is restricted you can click on the bookmark which will reload the page as if you came from Facebook.

It's really no different in kind than going to the WSJ's facebook page or searching for it on facebook, and then clicking on the link. It's just easier.
"To play the stock market is to play musical chairs under the chord progression of a bid-ask spread."

mr_breen
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 11:53 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by mr_breen » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:26 pm

triceratop wrote:mr_breen,
If you make that link a "bookmark" in your browser, then when you go to a WSJ that is restricted you can click on the bookmark which will reload the page as if you came from Facebook.

It's really no different in kind than going to the WSJ's facebook page or searching for it on facebook, and then clicking on the link. It's just easier.


Thank you. I just got it working. It seems to work great with WSJ. I just had to manually edit a bookmark in Chrome and paste that javascript in the URL section. Now, when I go to a WSJ page that is paywalled, I just click the new FB bookmark I just created and I can read the content.

Thanks so much!

Nate79
Posts: 1341
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Nate79 » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:43 pm

So when will they close this FB loophole because clearly it is not in the spirit of their intention of having paid subscribers share links thru social media. The FB loophole is no different than the Google loophole.

Mav
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2016 10:55 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Mav » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:49 pm

so i tried it, but it doesn't work

say for this article

https://www.wsj.com/articles/yale-renam ... 1486839600

Good Listener
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Good Listener » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:50 pm

This will close the line for me I guess. I went from a subscription for many years to no subscription and an occasional search using the Google method. Maybe once a month. Now I guess I will never read the Wall Street Journal. It is not clear to me what benefit I ever derived from it.

mr_breen
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 11:53 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by mr_breen » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:54 pm

Mav wrote:so i tried it, but it doesn't work

say for this article

https://www.wsj.com/articles/yale-renam ... 1486839600


Hmm, that's interesting. I just tried article that using the Facebook trick and it worked for me. Maybe they are still limiting the free articles using some other technique? The article listed in my original post made mention of the fact that WSJ limited free articles to some percentage of their readership last year. Maybe that means that some percentage of IP addresses get free access and some percentage don't and it is all decided at random? I really have no idea - just speculating.

User avatar
triceratop
Moderator
Posts: 3609
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 8:20 pm
Location: la la land

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by triceratop » Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:57 pm

Nate79 wrote:So when will they close this FB loophole because clearly it is not in the spirit of their intention of having paid subscribers share links thru social media. The FB loophole is no different than the Google loophole.


Their intention is for readers to be allowed access when using social media referrals. I intend to only use their site in compliance with their evident intentions. To do otherwise would be unethical.
"To play the stock market is to play musical chairs under the chord progression of a bid-ask spread."

User avatar
imbogled
Posts: 123
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 4:31 pm
Location: Buckeye State

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by imbogled » Sat Feb 11, 2017 5:05 pm

Check your local library sometimes they subscribe to the online WSJ and offer it as a database to library patrons. Mine does. Your mileage may vary.
Someone is sitting in the shade today because someone planted a tree a long time ago. | Warren Buffett

daveydoo
Posts: 915
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:53 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by daveydoo » Sat Feb 11, 2017 5:09 pm

beardsworth wrote:Maybe Rupert Murdoch needs a new boat. :)


I hear the FOX News app is still free

User avatar
linenfort
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:22 am
Location: #96151D

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by linenfort » Sat Feb 11, 2017 5:28 pm

mr_breen wrote:I just came across this article...


The journalists want to be paid for their journalism? The nerve! :D

Seriously, I appreciate the heads up. I am lucky enough to have access via a family member and I used to share article links. I'll have to find another source.
Did anyone else play Acquire as a child?

mnaspbh
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:26 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by mnaspbh » Sat Feb 11, 2017 6:38 pm

The "Google Loophole" is how subscription sites get free exposure to users via showing up in Google search results and in Google News. In order to show up in those results, the subscription site has to allow users to see a certain amount of information without subscribing ("first click free"). Publishers routinely try to abuse this to gain more free exposure; if you've ever clicked on a Google search result and seen only a few sentences of an article, or had a full-screen popover that demands money before you can see anything else, you've been a victim of this kind of abuse.

Google apparently decided that it's a bad experience for users to get search results the users can't actually see. As far as I know, every other search engine made the same choice.

Social media referrals are different. Every use of a referral link exposes information about a specific actual user (in the vast majority of use cases), so the referral information may be more valuable than a click on a search engine result.

User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Advisory Board
Posts: 26113
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

Link to Wall Street Journal Article

Post by Taylor Larimore » Sat Feb 11, 2017 8:55 pm

"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle

itstoomuch
Posts: 4688
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: midValley OR

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by itstoomuch » Sat Feb 11, 2017 9:05 pm

Have I missed anything today? :mrgreen: :oops: :annoyed
Rev90517; 4 Incm stream buckets: SS+pension; dfr'd GLWB VA & FI anntys, by time & $$ laddered; Discretionary; Rentals. LTCi. Own, not asset. Tax 25%. Early SS. FundRatio (FR) >1.1 67/70yo

gkaplan
Posts: 7034
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by gkaplan » Sat Feb 11, 2017 10:44 pm

I don't do Facebook, so I guess I won't be reading The Wall Street Journal.
Gordon

User avatar
triceratop
Moderator
Posts: 3609
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 8:20 pm
Location: la la land

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by triceratop » Sat Feb 11, 2017 10:59 pm

gkaplan wrote:I don't do Facebook, so I guess I won't be reading The Wall Street Journal.


You do not need a facebook account or use facebook in order to use the referral link/code.
"To play the stock market is to play musical chairs under the chord progression of a bid-ask spread."

User avatar
heartwood
Posts: 1067
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2013 1:40 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by heartwood » Sat Feb 11, 2017 11:10 pm

As others have mentioned there are several ways to get discounted subscriptions. I won't repeat them, but I've had one for many years.

I only post to say that the WSJ has recently rolled out a new e-reader that is so much better than their old version. It's not as good as the NYT e-reader, but its very good. I've been a WSJ reader for perhaps 40 years. It's not the paper it was when the Bancroft family owned it, but everything changes. I read it mostly for the opinion pages, in contrast to the NYT. IMO it's still one of the best papers around. I'd probably get it even if I didn't have a discounted subscription.

blueman457
Posts: 267
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2015 12:19 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by blueman457 » Sat Feb 11, 2017 11:16 pm

I currently read the WSJ on the iPhone app without a subscription. Not sure how or why it works, but that's how I read it.

Blueman

User avatar
FrugalInvestor
Posts: 4483
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:20 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by FrugalInvestor » Sat Feb 11, 2017 11:42 pm

This still works (copy and paste the following into your address bar)....

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/ ... 170211.pdf

The above gets you to section A page 001 of the 02/11/17 edition of the WSJ.

Manually changing the section number and page number allows you to read the entire edition. I use this when I travel because I receive the print version (through survey and airline points) but also like to read it when I'm away from home. I typically look at the list of stories along the left hand side of the front page and go to those I'm interested in and then typically also look at the front page of any sections I haven't already read. This typically hits all the high points without too much effort.

You can read historical editions of the paper this way too. I'm not sure how far back you can go.
IGNORE the noise! | Our life is frittered away by detail... simplify, simplify. - Henry David Thoreau

daveydoo
Posts: 915
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:53 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by daveydoo » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:57 am

FrugalInvestor wrote:This still works (copy and paste the following into your address bar)....

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/ ... 170211.pdf

The above gets you to section A page 001 of the 02/11/17 edition of the WSJ.


It does! Thank you! Slow, but effective...

User avatar
peterinjapan
Posts: 278
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 8:41 am
Location: Japan!
Contact:

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by peterinjapan » Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:44 am

Thanks for the tip. I think I'll make an Applescript that opens the correct pages for me every morning.

Cash
Posts: 1217
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:52 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Cash » Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:07 am

triceratop wrote:mr_breen,
If you make that link a "bookmark" in your browser, then when you go to a WSJ that is restricted you can click on the bookmark which will reload the page as if you came from Facebook.

It's really no different in kind than going to the WSJ's facebook page or searching for it on facebook, and then clicking on the link. It's just easier.


Thanks for this!

User avatar
Vegomatic
Posts: 214
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:16 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Vegomatic » Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:22 am

Link to post with example of a workaround:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13620583

User avatar
FrugalInvestor
Posts: 4483
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:20 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by FrugalInvestor » Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:49 am

triceratop wrote:The google trick may not be working, but facebook referral still gets the job done.

edit: to clarify, this can be done automatically with a bookmarklet, which I call WSJ in my bookmarks bar, consisting of the Javascript code:

Code: Select all

javascript:window.location="https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u="+encodeURIComponent(window.location.href);


Obviously, this is exactly what the WSJ wants readers to do since they allow it.


I didn't fully undersrand the bookmarklet tip but it looks to me that instead of pasting a WSJ article link into a Google search bar that you can just paste it into the Facebook search bar to read the article.
IGNORE the noise! | Our life is frittered away by detail... simplify, simplify. - Henry David Thoreau

bobandsherry
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:07 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by bobandsherry » Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:56 am

FrugalInvestor wrote:This still works (copy and paste the following into your address bar)....

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/ ... 170211.pdf

The above gets you to section A page 001 of the 02/11/17 edition of the WSJ.

I really like this approach. To make page viewing easier I created a Google Sheet that has dynamic links. You can select the date of the issue you want to view and then select the appropriate section / page from the table. I put this together quickly, basic functionality as it does not verify if pages exist. If section / page doesn't exist you'll get a WSJ error.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fu5tkGUb0eWVrbq1cvLhibO-4hvi_Bn6om3f7wUdvi4/edit?usp=sharing

User avatar
FrugalInvestor
Posts: 4483
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:20 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by FrugalInvestor » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:05 am

bobandsherry wrote:
FrugalInvestor wrote:This still works (copy and paste the following into your address bar)....

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/ ... 170211.pdf

The above gets you to section A page 001 of the 02/11/17 edition of the WSJ.

I really like this approach. To make page viewing easier I created a Google Sheet that has dynamic links. You can select the date of the issue you want to view and then select the appropriate section / page from the table. I put this together quickly, basic functionality as it does not verify if pages exist. If section / page doesn't exist you'll get a WSJ error.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fu5tkGUb0eWVrbq1cvLhibO-4hvi_Bn6om3f7wUdvi4/edit?usp=sharing


Well isn't that just the niftiest thing ever? Thanks for that bobandsherry!!
Last edited by FrugalInvestor on Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:11 am, edited 2 times in total.
IGNORE the noise! | Our life is frittered away by detail... simplify, simplify. - Henry David Thoreau

fishandgolf
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:50 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by fishandgolf » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:07 am

quote="heartwood"]As others have mentioned there are several ways to get discounted subscriptions. I won't repeat them, but I've had one for many years.

I only post to say that the WSJ has recently rolled out a new e-reader that is so much better than their old version. It's not as good as the NYT e-reader, but its very good. I've been a WSJ reader for perhaps 40 years. It's not the paper it was when the Bancroft family owned it, but everything changes. I read it mostly for the opinion pages, in contrast to the NYT. IMO it's still one of the best papers around. I'd probably get it even if I didn't have a discounted subscription.[/quote]

+1 I've been a WSJ subscriber for 25+ years. Before retirement I got it free with air miles. Recently renewed print subscription for one year @ $179.00. The WSJ is the only subscription I get (cancelled everything else). Like someone mentioned earlier.....it's relaxing to get away from the computer and pickup a hard copy and.........just relax :happy

User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Posts: 1020
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:40 pm
Location: www.bylo.org in the Great White North
Contact:

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Bylo Selhi » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:50 am

triceratop wrote:
gkaplan wrote:I don't do Facebook, so I guess I won't be reading The Wall Street Journal.
You do not need a facebook account or use facebook in order to use the referral link/code.

My bookmark is labelled "WSJ-FB"—as in The Wall Street Journal Free Browsing. (I don't have a FaceBook account either.) This bookmark is located just below the bookmark to the WSJ itself, which in turn is in a News folder that sits in my Chrome bookmarks bar, so it's very easy to find when needed.

I have mixed feelings about this hack. I already spend too much time reading news articles online. Now I've got yet another site to temp me ;)

Barefootgirl
Posts: 2152
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:05 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Barefootgirl » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:54 am

If one decides to pay for a subscription, I would not recommend giving WSJ your PayPal account for payment. After my subscription ended, they continued to withdraw funds without notice from my PayPal account. It has taken me too many hours trying to work the issue with PayPal.

It's made me rethink ever using PayPal again for anything other than personal payments between friends.

Thanks
How many retired people does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Only one, but he takes all day.

User avatar
iceport
Posts: 3320
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 4:29 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by iceport » Sun Feb 12, 2017 10:14 am

triceratop wrote:
Nate79 wrote:So when will they close this FB loophole because clearly it is not in the spirit of their intention of having paid subscribers share links thru social media. The FB loophole is no different than the Google loophole.


Their intention is for readers to be allowed access when using social media referrals. I intend to only use their site in compliance with their evident intentions. To do otherwise would be unethical.

Hey, thanks for the work-around! I really appreciate it.

However, I do agree with Nate79. If the intent, as you say, "is for readers to be allowed access when using social media referrals," then they clearly don't intend for people like me who do not have a facebook account or use facebook at all to enjoy the access by simply typing a character string into the address bar and hitting "enter." Surely that would defeat the purpose of allowing the use of a social media referral (tracking users' habits and interests), wouldn't it?
"Discipline matters more than allocation.” ─William Bernstein

User avatar
jhfenton
Posts: 2169
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 11:17 am
Location: Ohio

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by jhfenton » Sun Feb 12, 2017 10:16 am

Barefootgirl wrote:If one decides to pay for a subscription, I would not recommend giving WSJ your PayPal account for payment. After my subscription ended, they continued to withdraw funds without notice from my PayPal account. It has taken me too many hours trying to work the issue with PayPal.

It's made me rethink ever using PayPal again for anything other than personal payments between friends.

Thanks

I agree completely on PayPal. Their consumer protection is practically non-existent compared to a credit card. I deleted my bank account information from PayPal several years ago--because I simply don't trust them with it--leaving only the option to pay through PayPal with a credit card. And I still avoid using PayPal if I can pay directly with a credit card.

(And PayPal hasn't gotten better. Last year, I allowed my son to make an online digital purchase with my PayPal account, but he never received the game he purchased--due to what turned out to be a known bug in the merchant's fulfillment software. We disputed the charge on PayPal, but PayPal backed the merchant. We then disputed it with Amex, the ultimate payment source, and received a credit.)

Barefootgirl
Posts: 2152
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:05 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Barefootgirl » Sun Feb 12, 2017 10:40 am

Their consumer protection is practically non-existent compared to a credit card. I deleted my bank account information from PayPal several years ago--because I simply don't trust them with it--leaving only the option to pay through PayPal with a credit card. And I still avoid using PayPal if I can pay directly with a credit card.


This may be something I should do as well. So you "unlinked" your PayPal account from your bank account and just keep a credit card number on file with PP for purchases that require PayPal instead of a credit card? (odd but I guess it could happen)....but then if you still want to send $ to a friend on PP, PayPal would use your credit card for funding?

thanks
How many retired people does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Only one, but he takes all day.

User avatar
jhfenton
Posts: 2169
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 11:17 am
Location: Ohio

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by jhfenton » Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:05 am

Barefootgirl wrote:
Their consumer protection is practically non-existent compared to a credit card. I deleted my bank account information from PayPal several years ago--because I simply don't trust them with it--leaving only the option to pay through PayPal with a credit card. And I still avoid using PayPal if I can pay directly with a credit card.


This may be something I should do as well. So you "unlinked" your PayPal account from your bank account and just keep a credit card number on file with PP for purchases that require PayPal instead of a credit card? (odd but I guess it could happen)....but then if you still want to send $ to a friend on PP, PayPal would use your credit card for funding?

thanks

No. That's the downside. The send $ to a friend thing requires a bank account for funding, because the friend is unlikely to have an "upgraded" PayPal merchant account allowing for credit card payments.

On those rare occasions I want to send money to a friend, I just use my credit union bill pay. It mails them a check. It's rather quaint.

There are a few merchants who only take credit card payments through PayPal, and with some smaller online merchants, I'd just as soon pay through PayPal to avoid spreading my credit card number around. But those are the only times I use PayPal. And I know that I always have Amex to back me up in the end.

User avatar
FrugalInvestor
Posts: 4483
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:20 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by FrugalInvestor » Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:06 am

Barefootgirl wrote:If one decides to pay for a subscription, I would not recommend giving WSJ your PayPal account for payment. After my subscription ended, they continued to withdraw funds without notice from my PayPal account. It has taken me too many hours trying to work the issue with PayPal.

It's made me rethink ever using PayPal again for anything other than personal payments between friends.

Thanks


This is what virtual account numbers (temporary cards) are for - you set the dollar limit and time limit up to 12 months with my bank (when desired). They're very handy and great for online shopping, subscriptions, etc. You can use them for Paypal payments also.
IGNORE the noise! | Our life is frittered away by detail... simplify, simplify. - Henry David Thoreau

bobandsherry
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:07 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by bobandsherry » Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:52 am

FrugalInvestor wrote:
bobandsherry wrote:
FrugalInvestor wrote:This still works (copy and paste the following into your address bar)....

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/ ... 170211.pdf

The above gets you to section A page 001 of the 02/11/17 edition of the WSJ.

I really like this approach. To make page viewing easier I created a Google Sheet that has dynamic links. You can select the date of the issue you want to view and then select the appropriate section / page from the table. I put this together quickly, basic functionality as it does not verify if pages exist. If section / page doesn't exist you'll get a WSJ error.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fu5tkGUb0eWVrbq1cvLhibO-4hvi_Bn6om3f7wUdvi4/edit?usp=sharing


Well isn't that just the niftiest thing ever? Thanks for that bobandsherry!!

I did a little clean-up on formatting to keep the entire table on screen without scrolling. Feel free to use original link to get updated Google Sheet.

Jacotus
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 2:07 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Jacotus » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:30 pm

triceratop wrote:The google trick may not be working, but facebook referral still gets the job done.

edit: to clarify, this can be done automatically with a bookmarklet, which I call WSJ in my bookmarks bar, consisting of the Javascript code:

Code: Select all

javascript:window.location="https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u="+encodeURIComponent(window.location.href);


Obviously, this is exactly what the WSJ wants readers to do since they allow it.

You da man.

Beth*
Posts: 721
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 9:57 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Beth* » Sun Feb 12, 2017 5:13 pm

Journalists need to be paid. I don't generally read the Wall Street journal so I probably won't subscribe, but I am very happy to pay to access the New York Times, the Washington Post, and several other publications I read online. I don't see why anyone would expect to have access to high quality content for free.

User avatar
FrugalInvestor
Posts: 4483
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:20 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by FrugalInvestor » Sun Feb 12, 2017 5:30 pm

Beth* wrote:Journalists need to be paid. I don't generally read the Wall Street journal so I probably won't subscribe, but I am very happy to pay to access the New York Times, the Washington Post, and several other publications I read online. I don't see why anyone would expect to have access to high quality content for free.


Well, the early days of the internet got many of us used to this. It was the content providers' way of getting us hooked and then came the monetization phase. I'm not complaining, just recalling. I'm sure you're too young to remember those days.

I for one don't expect free access, but if it's available (legally) why would I choose to pay a couple of hundred dollars per year for it? Maybe for a more convenient reading experience but that's my value judgement. I get the print edition (for free sort-of but that's another story) so the value to me of online access is very limited. I only read it online when I travel occasionally or to bridge any gap between print subscriptions. If I couldn't read it online for free, I wouldn't read it at those times.
IGNORE the noise! | Our life is frittered away by detail... simplify, simplify. - Henry David Thoreau

Beth*
Posts: 721
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 9:57 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by Beth* » Sun Feb 12, 2017 5:42 pm

FrugalInvestor wrote:
Beth* wrote:Journalists need to be paid. I don't generally read the Wall Street journal so I probably won't subscribe, but I am very happy to pay to access the New York Times, the Washington Post, and several other publications I read online. I don't see why anyone would expect to have access to high quality content for free.


Well, the early days of the internet got many of us used to this. It was the content providers' way of getting us hooked and then came the monetization phase. I'm not complaining, just recalling. I'm sure you're too young to remember those days.

I for one don't expect free access, but if it's available (legally) why would I choose to pay a couple of hundred dollars per year for it? Maybe for a more convenient reading experience but that's my value judgement. I get the print edition (for free sort-of but that's another story) so the value to me of online access is very limited. I only read it online when I travel occasionally or to bridge any gap between print subscriptions. If I couldn't read it online for free, I wouldn't read it at those times.


Thanks for the compliment! I turn 60 this year. I remember punch cards, ticker tape, phone booths, writing letters because long-distance calls were too expensive, and a pre-Internet world quite well. I still think journalists need to be paid. I don't know how the Wall Street Journal works, but most publications where I subscribe to the print edition include free online access as part of the print subscription.

azurekep
Posts: 940
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:16 pm

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by azurekep » Sun Feb 12, 2017 5:59 pm

Beth* wrote:Journalists need to be paid. I don't generally read the Wall Street journal so I probably won't subscribe, but I am very happy to pay to access the New York Times, the Washington Post, and several other publications I read online. I don't see why anyone would expect to have access to high quality content for free.


The Washington Post is free online (unless i'm missing something.)

I've found plenty of free news and financial sites online, including the Washington Post, where articles can be read in their entirety. After that, I personally am content just looking at the front page of the New York Times and WSJ without reading the articles. The headlines are pretty much the same as for the free news sites, where the articles can be fully read. Granted, their are different slants and emphases for the various news sites, but it's easy enough to mix and match the free and limited-access sites to cover all bases.

mouses
Posts: 2305
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:24 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by mouses » Sun Feb 12, 2017 6:02 pm

I used to pay actual money for a subscription to a major newspaper digital edition, because I thought they did good stuff and I should support it. Then they went into the tank during the election. I couldn't believe how corrupt they were. So, no more money from me. Also no sense my reading their "news" since I no longer know if it's factual.

I get news from bbc.com now. They have never asked me to fork out for a subscription (does the UK government support them?) but I would if they asked.

It seems to me that if one reads a newspaper regularly, one should pay for it. Exception for someone who is really poor.

User avatar
FrugalInvestor
Posts: 4483
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:20 am

Re: The Wall Street Journal to close Google loophole entirely

Post by FrugalInvestor » Sun Feb 12, 2017 6:10 pm

Beth* wrote:I still think journalists need to be paid.


If they weren't paid we would have a lot fewer wouldn't we?

But remember that there are other ways for news and entertainment organizations to produce revenue and pay their employees other than subscriptions. I still watch TV for free (antenna) and pay no subscription fee for all of that programming including the news (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, PBS). All of those reporters get paid as well as the actors, producers, directors, camera people, sound people, executives, etc.
IGNORE the noise! | Our life is frittered away by detail... simplify, simplify. - Henry David Thoreau

Post Reply