Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

'Financial Times' Holding Out From iPad Subscriptions

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
63,523
30,815



113316-ft_logo.jpg
With Apple's new in app subscription mechanism for iOS devices now deployed and publications such as The New York Times already moving to take advantage of it, some publications are still holding back over Apple's insistence that customer information only be provided to the publications on an opt-in basis. According to Reuters, influential business newspaper Financial Times is one of those publications unwilling to part with its customer information."We don't want to lose our direct relationship with our subscribers. It's at the core of our business model," [FT.com managing director] Rob Grimshaw told Reuters in an interview on Monday.

He said he was hopeful of a positive outcome to negotiations with Apple, but added: "If it turns out that one or another channel doesn't mix with the way we want to do business, there's a large number of other channels available to us."Grimshaw noted that the FT has "a great relationship with Apple", despite the fact that the two companies don't see eye to eye on subscription billing policies.

The report notes that the Financial Times has already developed a relatively successful paywall model for its online content, with the newspaper bringing in about 40% of its revenue through digital sales. Consequently, the company believes that it has more to lose by supporting Apple's in app subscriptions than publications that have yet to successfully tap into digital access payments.

Article Link: 'Financial Times' Holding Out From iPad Subscriptions
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/04/financial-times-holding-out-from-ipad-subscriptions/
Small White Car

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,966
1,463
Washington DC
Thank you, Apple, for weeding out the companies whose business model depends on selling my information to junk-mailers.

This is the kind of 'crazy-Steve-Jobs-control' I can live with.
 
WiiDSmoker

WiiDSmoker

macrumors 68000
Sep 15, 2009
1,886
7,325
Dallas, TX
Small White Car said:
Thank you, Apple, for weeding out the companies whose business model depends on selling my information to junk-mailers.

This is the kind of 'crazy-Steve-Jobs-control' I can live with.
Click to expand...

So because you don't like Financial Times it's okay for everyone that they are holding out iPad subscriptions. This is exactly what's wrong with you Apple fanboys.

You should be penalizing Apple for allowing this to happen. but instead you jump for joy.
 
neko girl

neko girl

macrumors 6502a
Jan 20, 2011
988
0
FT, do what you're meant to do - provide content. Let's keep my name out of transactions with you, thanks.

Your business model is eroding.
 
Small White Car

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,966
1,463
Washington DC
WiiDSmoker said:
So because you don't like Financial Times it's okay for everyone that they are holding out iPad subscriptions. This is exactly what's wrong with you Apple fanboys.

You should be penalizing Apple for allowing this to happen. but instead you jump for joy.
Click to expand...

You should be penalizing Financial Times for treating you poorly and yet you jump for joy.

This is exctly what's wrong with you Financial Times fanboys.
 
WiiDSmoker

WiiDSmoker

macrumors 68000
Sep 15, 2009
1,886
7,325
Dallas, TX
Small White Car said:
So you enjoy watching them abuse other people, but since it's not you then it's ok?

What kind of a sick attitude is that? You think it's a good thing that they mistreat their readers? Why? Is it just funny to you or something?
Click to expand...

You are obviously missing the point. Apple's new subscription model is preventing choice from coming to it's customers. How is that not a bad thing?
 
Small White Car

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,966
1,463
Washington DC
WiiDSmoker said:
You are obviously missing the point. Apple's new subscription model is preventing choice from coming to it's customers. How is that not a bad thing?
Click to expand...

How many people here want to choose to get tons of junk mail delivered to their house?

Raise your hand if you'd take that option.

Serious quesion. If most posters here raise their hands then I'll shut up and say you were right.
 
cmaier

cmaier

Suspended
Jul 25, 2007
25,405
33,471
California
Financial Timesis mistaken if they think I want a "relationship" with them. I just want to READ their stuff.
 
R

rotax

macrumors regular
May 17, 2010
168
136
WiiDSmoker said:
So because you don't like Financial Times it's okay for everyone that they are holding out iPad subscriptions. This is exactly what's wrong with you Apple fanboys.

You should be penalizing Apple for allowing this to happen. but instead you jump for joy.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with liking or not liking FT. It has to do with Apple protecting consumers by requiring companies to give you the choice to opt in.

I love that Apple is doing this. I wish they would actually make it an advertising point to say that they care about your privacy. If companies want your data they should offer a reduced price for your subscription and let you decide.

I realize with location based services, providing a service and maintaining privacy is a slippery slope, but I think most consumers can see when the exchange of location data is necessary to provide the service and can choose to use or not use the service.

One can debate all day long about the quality of technical services or capabilities being better than the other between say Droid and iOS, but I for one will happily pay for an OS, or a platform that protects my privacy over one that was designed solely to exploit it.
 
Porchland

Porchland

macrumors 65816
Apr 26, 2004
1,076
2
Georgia
Simple solution: Financial Times should put out a browser version of the publication that is optimized for viewing on an iPad and simply require the same login that is does now for its web version.

I don't pay extra for the iPad version of nytimes.com on my iPad, so I use the web version instead (and it's not even optimized for iPad the way the mobile version is optimized for iPhone). I don't get the benefit of the snazzier iPad app, but I'm also not paying for it.

Apple created the iOS platform and allows third parties to develop apps for it as long as you play by Apple's rules. If you don't like Apple's rules, optimize your product to run as a web page for iPhone/iPad or just rely on the web version you have now.

Frankly, I wish more publications would do that: I would be fine to read web-based, iPad-optized versions of the New Yorker, New York Times, Newsweek, etc., if the subscription prices are cheaper than an iPad version and it means the publisher actually makes a web-based subscription available, even if it means I'm giving up some UI coolness, better graphics, etc., but not getting the iPad version.

The market works just fine.
 
W

wovel

macrumors 68000
Mar 15, 2010
1,839
161
America(s)!
WiiDSmoker said:
So because you don't like Financial Times it's okay for everyone that they are holding out iPad subscriptions. This is exactly what's wrong with you Apple fanboys.

You should be penalizing Apple for allowing this to happen. but instead you jump for joy.
Click to expand...

Why? Because Apple does not support publisher's selling your personal information to third parties. Something FT and many others do not even allow you to opt out of? You are seriously coming out in favor of this very consumer unfriendly practice?

Are you also going to criticize Apple for asking their suppliers not to use child labor?
 
Consultant

Consultant

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,314
34
Greedy bastards.

Too bad they know nothing of the Android open wasteland, where few people would pay for apps.
 
B

blubyu

macrumors member
Feb 10, 2010
96
13
Small White Car said:
Thank you, Apple, for weeding out the companies whose business model depends on selling my information to junk-mailers.

This is the kind of 'crazy-Steve-Jobs-control' I can live with.
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to figure out where in the above quote SWC said he didn't like FT :confused:
 
F

Fotek2001

macrumors regular
Jun 16, 2005
106
0
London, England
Small White Car said:
Thank you, Apple, for weeding out the companies whose business model depends on selling my information to junk-mailers.

This is the kind of 'crazy-Steve-Jobs-control' I can live with.
Click to expand...

They are legally not allowed to sell your personal data in Europe without your permission. I realise this doesn't help you if you live in the USA but the whole 'selling my data' issue simply isn't a big deal for subscriptions if you live in the EU.
 
F

Fotek2001

macrumors regular
Jun 16, 2005
106
0
London, England
Warbrain said:
That ability is there. But rather than give its customers a choice of opting in, FT would rather sell your information without your approval.
Click to expand...

Stop with the FUD already. Businesses operating in the EU cannot do this. Just because corporations in the USA can, doesn't mean the rest of the world is the same... :rolleyes:
 
Stella

Stella

macrumors G3
Apr 21, 2003
8,838
6,340
Canada
Small White Car said:
Thank you, Apple, for weeding out the companies whose business model depends on selling my information to junk-mailers.

This is the kind of 'crazy-Steve-Jobs-control' I can live with.
Click to expand...

Do you have any proof that FT actually does sell email addresses?

Just because businesses wants your email doesn't equate to they'll sell your details...
 
farmboy

farmboy

macrumors 65816
Nov 26, 2003
1,296
478
Minnesota
Fotek2001 said:
Stop with the FUD already. Businesses operating in the EU cannot do this. Just because corporations in the USA can, doesn't mean the rest of the world is the same... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

What if they just "share" it and don't formally "sell" it in the EU? Either way, I would want a way out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom