This is super interesting. I’m tempted to draw conclusions — but it’s not entirely evident they’re under-pricing.
What’s missing is the demand side of the picture (I doubt — sadly — this data is readily available)
But I strongly suspect women writers on here have a heavily skewed female readership.
What’s the gender mix of Substack users overall?
Is there a gender gap in terms of willingness to pay and average spend for content across the platform? (Regardless of topic)
An alternative plausible explanation: they’re pricing “right”, but women — thanks to gender pay and leisure gaps — have less discretionary income and time — and are therefore harder to convert🤔 - I.e. A biased system rather than those writers lacking pricing confidence
Interesting thought. That women writers have a female readership and hence female paid subscribers. Getting data on that would be amazing. I also don't know what the gender mix of Substack users overall would be. That would also be interesting. You have some strong theories, Lucy!
I’d like to understand the “why” behind the lower price. One thing is the disproportion in wages, but other thing is proactively setting up the paid tier and dictating your own price. Every time this comes up that women are making less $$$ it deeply bothers me, I’d see the opposite trend. Because women are not less skilled, they just have less audacity.
We would like to see the opposite as well. We were heartened to see that the overall price excluding the very top of the bestseller list was very close.
The ARR point is really interesting. If two writers are growing, but one has to gain many more subscribers to reach the same revenue signal because their price is lower, then the gap is not just about money. It becomes about discoverability, momentum, and who gets seen as “successful” faster.
I also love that you don’t overclaim what the data can prove. The gap is there. The reasons still need to be understood. But even naming the pattern gives women writers a better question to ask themselves: is my price still aligned with the value and maturity of my work now?
Thanks for this. I did my a similar personal analysis. Time to raise my prices. Here's what Claude had to say, "Among writers who have appeared on both the Technology Rising and Bestseller lists, women's median monthly price is $10 versus men's $15 -- a $5 gap at the median among the most successful writers. Only 9% of women charge $15 or more per month, compared to 28% of men. Substack
The Substack Bestseller list ranks by Annual Recurring Revenue, not subscriber count -- meaning a publication charging $15/month reaches the same ARR as one charging $10/month with 50% more paid subscribers."
This is super interesting. I’m tempted to draw conclusions — but it’s not entirely evident they’re under-pricing.
What’s missing is the demand side of the picture (I doubt — sadly — this data is readily available)
But I strongly suspect women writers on here have a heavily skewed female readership.
What’s the gender mix of Substack users overall?
Is there a gender gap in terms of willingness to pay and average spend for content across the platform? (Regardless of topic)
An alternative plausible explanation: they’re pricing “right”, but women — thanks to gender pay and leisure gaps — have less discretionary income and time — and are therefore harder to convert🤔 - I.e. A biased system rather than those writers lacking pricing confidence
Interesting thought. That women writers have a female readership and hence female paid subscribers. Getting data on that would be amazing. I also don't know what the gender mix of Substack users overall would be. That would also be interesting. You have some strong theories, Lucy!
Such great points, Lucy. It's tough to price for women's hesitancy to pay and the implied low value of low priced services.
I’d like to understand the “why” behind the lower price. One thing is the disproportion in wages, but other thing is proactively setting up the paid tier and dictating your own price. Every time this comes up that women are making less $$$ it deeply bothers me, I’d see the opposite trend. Because women are not less skilled, they just have less audacity.
We would like to see the opposite as well. We were heartened to see that the overall price excluding the very top of the bestseller list was very close.
The ARR point is really interesting. If two writers are growing, but one has to gain many more subscribers to reach the same revenue signal because their price is lower, then the gap is not just about money. It becomes about discoverability, momentum, and who gets seen as “successful” faster.
I also love that you don’t overclaim what the data can prove. The gap is there. The reasons still need to be understood. But even naming the pattern gives women writers a better question to ask themselves: is my price still aligned with the value and maturity of my work now?
Exactly. One woman has already changed their pricing. We will also keep collecting this data to see how it changes over time.
Thanks for this. I did my a similar personal analysis. Time to raise my prices. Here's what Claude had to say, "Among writers who have appeared on both the Technology Rising and Bestseller lists, women's median monthly price is $10 versus men's $15 -- a $5 gap at the median among the most successful writers. Only 9% of women charge $15 or more per month, compared to 28% of men. Substack
The Substack Bestseller list ranks by Annual Recurring Revenue, not subscriber count -- meaning a publication charging $15/month reaches the same ARR as one charging $10/month with 50% more paid subscribers."
That feels like claud pulled it right out of this article?! lol. How did you do the analysis? Did you pull the data as well?
Had Claude retrieve the article and use it to analyze Substacks in my space (women's advancement) in a similar way.
Ah. That makes sense!!! Glad it was so useful!!!!