In other words (following on from my previous reply), to me the salient figure isn' the 7,000 'Dark Medium' pubs, but the 100 nomming pubs. If frustrated but talented writers for those 100 pubs set up their own, covering the same ground, and divert their writing (as well as attracting that of others) towards those new pubs - let's say 200 new titles that wouldn't have existed without the Boost - then inevitably the obvious Boost pool of the 100 shrinks, until such time as the 200 new pubs become boosters themselves.

Ask 100 nommers what they think of the Boost, and over 90 will say 'it's brilliant'.

Ask 100 writers, and over 70 will say 'it's crap'.

Ask 100 readers, and they will all say 'Boost? What's that?'.

So it has pleased 90 people, pissed off several thousand, and made no noticeable impression on the mass that it was designed to persuade to part with their money. Or at least none that can reliably be statistically demonstrated given the numerous overlapping factors involved, I presume.

I'm not sure that counts as a policy success.