So interesting, thanks! :)

I am really glad for your engagement on this question, Mia! I found this part of your comment interesting, especially the bolded part:

We have seen in Europe that welfare in cage-free systems improves over time as producers gain experience. The cage-free system has a high ceiling for welfare potential; the furnished cage has a very low one.

Do you have a quick explanation for why this is the case? I guess it makes sense intuitively to me (e.g. cages impose a fixed physical restriction on how much space a hen can have).

It is also really interesting and encouraging to hear that you think welfare in some cage-free systems is continuing to improve over time. I didn't realize that! If you have a quick sense for how much you think welfare is empirically improving in the European context, I would find this very interesting.

No worries if you don't have capacity to respond :)

That's really interesting, thanks for sharing! I'll pass it on :)

Responded on the dashboard above, but wanted to quickly say thanks @MHR🔸 and @Vasco Grilo🔸 for letting us know you are invested in this project, that kind of feedback is useful for us.

I think it would also be helpful to see the number of people engaging in each tier across time. [...] Many past annual changes in engagement up or down of 10 % to 20 % would make a 25 % increase from 2024 to 2025 less impressive relative to a past downwards trend of a few years.

Thank you for the feedback, Vasco. As you have noted, we have some older data on growth trends (although not cost trends) in the dashboard. This is of course not formatted the same way, and plus how we think about growth (i.e. our funnel approach) has changed over time.

The team is presently busy preparing with EAG SF, but I'll make a note of your feedback so we don't lose it.

Thanks Vasco! Here’s the graph of EA Newsletter subscribers over time. We’re about to hit 64K subscribers :)

(Edit: replaced the tooltip to show our end-of-January totals, the last full month of data we have)

As a side note, the reason why we track actively engaged subscribers as our central growth metric is because many people who are subscribed never open the newsletter, and therefore we don’t think they get value from it. In general, we think “flow” metrics (like active engagement, attendance in a given year) are a better proxy for our present-day impact than “stock” metrics (like the number of people who have ever come to an EAG).

I’m glad the dashboard has been useful for you! Hearing about user demand is definitely valuable data for us. Unfortunately we’ve had to deprioritize maintenance on this for a while, due to higher priority M&E and engineering projects taking precedence over the last few quarters.

Relatedly, we will soon be hiring for a software engineer to join the Online Team and work on engineering projects across CEA. I’m really excited that we are building out our technical and analytical capacity (hi @Rory Fenton!). If any software engineers reading want CEA to have more capacity to execute on projects like this, I encourage you to apply!

Our companion post with more detail on CEA's growth results is now out as well.

Thank you for the kind note, and for your work on building the EA community!

Wow, I've never seen that print before. That is absolutely horrifying. I feel kind of sick looking at it. What a stark reminder of the costs of getting morality wrong. Thank you for painting it, for sharing it, and for the reminder of this day.

I found this a very readable explainer of a core insight. Thank you!

That's a catchy tagline, I might have to start using it :) Thanks!