We know Tucker Carlson has an audience.
Since leaving Fox News, the controversial host has produced a lot of content on X, and the interviews reach millions. Most notably, the Andrew Tate sit-down eclipsed 100 million views, and according to X, Donald Trump’s interview garnered 267 million.
We also know, however, that Tucker Carlson wants to build an even bigger audience, and even more importantly, he wants to profit from it.
With the launch of the Tucker Carlson Network – or TCN – it’s clear that he was not profiting enough from the linear experience of posting videos and getting a lot of eyeballs on them.
He wants an annuity. And he wants it from you.
The subscription will cost $9 a month or $72 a year. The website tuckercarlson.com will have premium streaming content as well as some free material. On X, that free content will flow, and it likely will serve as a way to tease the subscription service to his nearly 11 million followers, not to mention any other viewers who can consume it on social media.
Beyond the obvious question of whether it will work, the key one here: What about radio?
Yeah, what about it.
Sean Hannity still does it daily and makes at least $10 million from it. However, the better comp is probably Glenn Beck. He founded Blaze Media which streams a ton of conservative content, too, but he also hosts a nationally syndicated radio show. It’s placed just below the news networks, most certainly does well, and doesn’t have much censorship, or so it seems.
Interestingly enough, when launching TCN, Carlson was speaking with fellow former Fox Newser Megyn Kelly, and her show, yes, airs on the same satellite radio channel — SiriusXM Triumph — as Glenn Beck.
Carlson made it clear that he wants to talk freely and not be constrained. Sure, that means he doesn’t want to offer a viewpoint and worry it may cost him his job. Been there, done that. Maybe it also means he wants to be able to, literally, speak however he wants.
Let’s not forget, the FCC still says “piss” is a bad word.
When you think about the situation over the last few months, it certainly seemed like he could say whatever he wants, so looking for more freedom isn’t that compelling a reason. He wants ownership and profit. This way, he can build a true brand and make more money (ideally).
On X and TikTok, the more views you get, the more money you can make. Paid subscribers take pressure off the viewer number metric. The way subscriptions often work is that once someone commits to a sub, it takes effort to cancel. We Americans don’t like effort. If Tucker can get a lot of people signed up on the front end and not get a lot of churn — the business term for those who cancel — then he can create a large revenue base.
We ran hypothetical numbers for his launch on X, but with transparent pricing here, it’s a bit easier to try and project. It’s a dumb but fun game I like to play, so humor me.
A simple and low number of 100,000 annual subs would mean a touch above $7 million in revenue. Obviously, the ambitions are far greater, and say, a million subscribers would mean more than $70 million.
That’s a good number.
Again, Beck is a good comp. His Blaze Media switched to a full subscription model earlier in the fall under the same theme of avoiding censorship. That endeavor costs $5 a month and a value-added version is $120 a year.
The decision was reportedly based on the desire to avoid censorship and also avoid the sometimes annoying – and labor-intensive — ad-based model.
The other question: Can both Blaze and TCN thrive?
Who knows. But I often take a more Motley Fool approach to analyze these things. To me, the Motley Fool approach is to invest in companies you like and use. Using it here, I am paying attention to my listening/viewing patterns and those of my friends.
For me, I am in the car, and I listen to everything – terrestrial radio news radio, terrestrial sports radio, satellite radio, podcasts, and even an occasional audiobook. I would never pay money to a Blaze Media, but I will listen to Glenn Beck or Megyn Kelly on satellite radio.
They may not make money directly off my consumption, but I will talk about it, especially on my morning show, and there definitely can be a positive knock-on effect in spreading their content that way. People may hear me talk about it – or hear it themselves – and decide it’s worth the money. That works for Joe Rogan in the podcast world, and it works for Howard Stern on satellite.
Like many of you, I have several text chains that are a regular part of daily my life. One of my college threads is all male, college-educated, white, and wealthy – and about half are politically conservative.
Only one of them said they would pay that much money for anyone, let alone Tucker Carlson. One said that for $2 dollars month, maybe. Everyone else, it was a hard no.
My point: Tucker Carlson doesn’t seem interested in radio because of censorship and because of limited revenue upside.
I can’t help him on the censorship side, but not being on radio because of revenue is a bad decision. He needs to reach as many people as possible, and whether it be satellite or syndication, it’s still a massive opportunity on the national level.
Don’t believe me? Ask Hannity and Beck.
