> I'd be pretty scared.

Scared of what, exactly? It looks to me like the site is primarily static content, so operational costs should be reasonable. He could scale down to just static content, and even if traffic decrease, it is not an existential crisis. Or am I missing something?

The cost of purchasing the property from digital ocean and the cost of his team.

Have we seen a price tag?

No, but is it a reasonable assumption to think it is Zero? Or that the upkeep is Zero too? No.

The blogpost literally says he's making this his full time job. What's reasonable is to ask how that will pan out. And to, after answering oneself, tell the relevant party to be weary of it.

I can only assume DO took a bath on this. Buying CSS Tricks from Coyier to largely sit on it silently before rolling it back off the books seems like a terrible investment strategy.

How does one pull a 6 figure salary from a blog site in 2026?

How does one pull a six figure salary from anywhere in 2026!? Might as well make a go of it

Attract an audience of people who make purchasing decisions, then attract sponsors who want to be put in front of those people. Quality of readers is more important than quantity.

You're saying that like it's straightforward hard work. But that strategy has been on the decline for years, with no sign of reversing. High-value technical audiences aren't Googling for educational articles, videos, and courses. They're just asking LLMs, and getting answers. Sometimes the LLMs are searching the web, but LLMs approximately never click on the ads.

I didn't say it was easy. I'm doing this myself at the moment, so I have a sample size of one showing it's possible.

I didn't say "easy" either, I said "straightforward hard work."

What you're doing is hard work, but it's way more straightforward than building out CSS Tricks.

You're a successful marathon runner. CSS Tricks will have to run a marathon with both legs tied together.

What makes your subject matter (LLMs) work is that it's a very fast moving topic, much faster moving than CSS, so people come to you for news.

Plus, it's difficult to test new models effectively, so people are looking for trusted names to do meta analysis, fast. Is the new OpenAI model better than Claude? Better how? Quality of output? Evaluated how? Even comparing prices can be difficult, as different models (at different settings) can generate different numbers of tokens (and different numbers of cached tokens) for the same tasks.

None of that applies to CSS Tricks.

CSS fundamentally can't move that fast, as long as changes in CSS require Apple, Google, and Mozilla to all agree on standards. Hardly anybody needs to know about the latest CSS news. Mostly you only need to know about Baseline Widely Available CSS features, which are at least 30 months old by definition. And when you do learn about new CSS features, it's usually pretty obvious (either to you or to an LLM) whether those new CSS features apply to something you're working on.

It's going to be very, very hard to keep CSS Tricks alive, even with a lot of hard work.

I don't disagree with any of that.

Something can be both simple to execute and extremely difficult to execute well. Simple and easy are not synonymous.

> High-value technical audiences aren't Googling for educational articles, videos, and courses. They're just asking LLMs, and getting answers.

You're right, but the high-value audiences are also looking at the sources the LLMs cite, guiding the LLMs to use specific source and exclude others (even if it's just "eschew blogspam and listicles" in the prompt). So being one of those sources is still valuable. Perhaps less so, but it's not without value.

> LLMs approximately never click on the ads

In future LLMs will make buying decisions and this strategy can become viable again.

[deleted]

Run a relatively small political Substack and just bide your time till you get picked to run CBS News.

[deleted]

[flagged]

Scared of wasting one's limited time on an ambition that can't pan out.

I published a magazine for a few years. Off the top of my head:

- publishing is fucking hard. Early on, you need a constant stream of dependable writers who do not value their time. Later on, you have a constant stream of writers but have to figure out who will make you hate your life the least.

- good writers are flaky and they always have options. A little less than half of good pitches get published. 100% of good pitches take work.

- there is a difference between good and dependable writers. Early on, you need dependable even though each one eats a lot of time. Layer on, you need good. You won’t know when to switch until your readers tell you that you suck. Then it’s too late to save your publication.

- I published before generative AI was possible but at each stage of popularity, I dealt with more PR shit bags. Add in generative AI and I’m not sure my naïveté would have survived as long as it did.

- at its best, publishing is a very expensive way to harm yourself. Back in the day, Jim Rose would have paid me to fuck myself up in equivalent ways. Naïveté convinces you that you’re changing the world through self flagellation, but when that’s gone you’re just beating the shit out of yourself.

- my co-founder handled editorial and I handled publishing. The gap between them is so massive that we really needed double the headcount. Alas, publishing is totally fucked so our budget was so low that we needed slave labour yet couldn’t even afford the slave in the first place. Without the editorial/publication divide, I would have had a heart attack five years before I did.

- there’s this thing in publishing called the trough of zero ideas. You won’t believe it’s possible in the beginning but it will hit you hard. It’s not so much there aren’t ideas; it’s that you’re tired and ideas stop feeling good… they feel like work because they are.

- in publishing it’s really easy to come up with business models. Unfortunately, every single business model requires consistently exceptional content, a reality distortion field and a lot of hand holding.

- all those membership plans etc will be invaded by sales or PR fucks as soon as you launch them. $25 a month makes a lot of people feel entitled to explain your dreams to you.

Edit - This sounds very negative and it is… but I want to publish again.