Apple Opens Door to Free iPad Content for Print Magazine Subscribers

[davidgrimm]

About time

This is great. Publishers are finally starting to get it. Few people want to pay for an electronic edition if they already get it in the mail. If they don't subscribe in print, few will actually get it electronically for the same money.

Publishers have for years been trying to screw more money out of a shrinking subscriber base. Maybe now they'll start adding value to the print subscription and therefore see a increase their core customers.

I used to read a statewide magazine that split their web content and print content. So you could either subscribe to the print or subscribe to the print and the web site. You couldn't just have the web site. Both subs were about $50 a year. I quit reading it and am still happy.

In my thinking, the electronic versions should be at least 1/2 the price of the print just because there is less cost to produce it.

 

[jeffreyropp]

Revenue Model?

How is Apple making money (directly) on this model? If the apps are free and editions are made available by in-app authentication (not by Apple) - then Apple is presumably satisfied by selling more devices and the individual edition purchases where they take a cut.

Anyone else see something different?

Clearly this frees publishers to offer digital-only subscriptions at a reduced rate.

 

[eme jota ce]

Seems like a good first step.

I like that model as a consumer but share the preference for digital only subscription options.

We don't know the details of the arrangement, and Apple's revenue sources seem obscured for speculation.

I was expecting more like:

A "People-2010" App from the App store that is the same price (or similar) as the print subscription for one year and gives subscribers access to all of the 2010 editions, as they are published.

Then, in 2011, subscribers could purchase "People-2011" and just archive those cherished People-2010 editions into a folder.

This would give me what I want with obvious revenue streams for Apple and publisher.

 

[godslabrat]

because prices do not depend on production cost but on what the market is willing to pay. textbook economy.

This is EXACTLY why I won't easily buy into digital-only products. If I'm paying the same as I would for a physical copy, I WANT the physical copy. If you want to give me a digital version too, thank you very much. But, if you're only selling me the digital version, it had better be substantially cheaper.

 

[dontmatter]

Can't wait for the New Yorker to add to that list - there's nothing like flipping through the real thing, reading in the sun. But I'm still more likely to have a screen in front of me than paper, and why not get the best of both worlds?

 

[JGowan]

This is EXACTLY why I won't easily buy into digital-only products. If I'm paying the same as I would for a physical copy, I WANT the physical copy. If you want to give me a digital version too, thank you very much. But, if you're only selling me the digital version, it had better be substantially cheaper.

That's why I love the push for Combo packs when buying Blu-ray (including not only Digital but regular DVD as well). It won't be long, I believe when book publishers will figure out a way to offer the digital book too, when you buy the physical.

I only listen to AAC music files, but I like having the physical backup and rarely buy tracks from iTunes. I'd rather buy Used from Amazon and rip at 320.

 

[scott911]

bo bice rocks!

 

[sishaw]

Not good enough

Under this system, you're still using paper, still killing trees, cluttering up your house and filling up landfills. With the iPad, there should be no need for paper anything--just go straight to electronic subscription, period.

Apple usually means progress. In this case, Apple is blocking progress.

 

[Milfin]

Why should the iPad version be the same as the newsstand price? They don't have to pay for transport and paper anymore....

All I can hear is cheap cheap cheap. Why don't you think about the guy at the paper mill and delivery that might lose his job. Do you think your entitled to a cheaper price cause you bought an iPad?

 

[aduteau]

This is why I use Zinio ...
Wayyyy cheaper price then the news stand,
Its a real paperless solution, and I don't care for interactive stuff like the Wire mag.

Why I would pay a print edition to then download it to the ipad is beyond me !

 

[SkottDMD]

Maybe I'm missing something but this doesn't appear to offer anything to people who would rather subscribe to iPad editions only? I don't subscribe to any magazine's in print because of the subscription pricing in Canada. I thought the whole issue that started a couple months ago was that Apple offered no way for magazines to offer a subscription option. Right now for the magazines I do get on the iPad I don't mind paying per issue. It works out to be the same, if not cheaper, than the print issues here.

 

[ThisIsMike]

Does anyone know...

if you can SAVE each issue easily to your iPad in some format? Because without the ability to easily do so, this is worthless to me. I don't just want to be able to view it, I want to be able to keep it so I can view it whenever I want. And for that matter, to be able to transfer the saved file to my computer as well.

 

[shoebobs]

Why should the iPad version be the same as the newsstand price? They don't have to pay for transport and paper anymore....

You're paying for the convenience of getting it instantly, without having to go to the newstand. Or at a time of day the newstand is closed, etc.

How is Apple making money (directly) on this model? If the apps are free and editions are made available by in-app authentication (not by Apple) - then Apple is presumably satisfied by selling more devices and the individual edition purchases where they take a cut.

We don't know everything that is involved here. Perhaps the free versions contain iAds or other apple ads, in addition to the magazine's ads. Or maybe they added this "free" feature in return for getting a larger cut from the paid versions. I'm pretty sure Apple knows how to make money.

 

[forensick]

Very cool. Save the paper. Use digital

 

[voidptr]

So, does this mean that Apple caved like a poorly made coal mine? Can't really tell from the writeup.

I don't think so.. There's several other apps out there that require some external subscription to work. For example, AOPA has an app that requires an AOPA membership to work, DirecTV requires a DirecTV subscription, NetFlix requires a NetFlix subscription, etc.

Apple's stance has always seemed to be requiring an external account is Ok, as long as you're selling something that includes more than iDevice content. If you're only selling app content, then they want their cut.

 

[Loonytik]

.....More mags will end up adopting this plan of free apps for subscribers to print versions and it will be the norm in the future.

Exactly, this will be the norm in the future and would make the ipad a useful product for me. Since I have an iphone 4 it's not justifiable. I read a lot of magazines and digital versions on the ipad sells me.

if you can SAVE each issue easily to your iPad in some format? Because without the ability to easily do so, this is worthless to me. I don't just want to be able to view it, I want to be able to keep it so I can view it whenever I want. And for that matter, to be able to transfer the saved file to my computer as well.

I agree partially. I subscribe to at least 5 different magazines but the only one I don't throw away when I'm done is Playboy. Esquire, Maxim, GQ, and Outside all get tossed.

 

[guzhogi]

Why should the iPad version be the same as the newsstand price? They don't have to pay for transport and paper anymore....

Not sure. With paper versions, you have to pay for the paper, the ink to go on the printer, the electric bill for the machines that put the ink on the paper, transporting the paper to the newsstands, etc.

On the other hand, you have to pay for the computers to store & distribute your magazines, the internet connection, the electricity to power these computers, or pay another company (in this case, Apple) to store all the magazines & distribute them.

Not sure how the cost for physical compares to that for digital subscriptions, though.

My question is, how does this work? Is there an app specifically for People magazine, another one for Wired, etc. or is there an app like iBooks where it stores all your magazines?

 

[Kwill]

Clearly benefits subscribers and publisher. Not so clear how Apple profits.

 

[jz1492]

This has nothing to do with the publishers "getting it", but with Apple having to cave in to their ridiculous demands.

- Publishers get to keep subscription purchases off the AppStore

- They get to keep using their old model, with the electronic editions as an extra to keep all bases covered

- All of the subscriber's data remains with the publishers

- They keep their high prices on the electronic editions, contrary to Steve Jobs recommendations, forcing people to subscribe to the print edition.

- Apple may have to force them to include iAds in addition to their regular ads, which they may not be able to exclude.

- Trees everywhere get the worst part, as a large number of printed magazines go unread, needlessly.

So, welcome to the new, old world, publishers!

 

[booned]

Clearly benefits subscribers and publisher. Not so clear how Apple profits.

They may not get much profit other than more incentive for "regular" buyers to actually purchase the ipad. Just another plus for magazine addicts.

Good move Apple.

 

[notabadname]

This will start the ball rolling for fair pricing!

Thank you Time! You just earned another subscriber. I used to subscribe but let it lapse. I didn't want to have to carry the paper versions around on my travels, but I wasn't going to pay the high price for digital. Now I will renew. I just wish their was a slight discount if you didn't want the paper version - call it the "environmental" discount. In time it will happen, but this is a fair deal.

 

[rolphi]

Clearly benefits subscribers and publisher. Not so clear how Apple profits.

In order to answer this, you have to consider what a magazine publisher's business model is.

On the surface it looks like they make their money by selling printed paper to subscribers.

But really, the subscribers are the product, which they sell to advertisers. They would give away the magazine to increase circulation if they could, except that advertisers know that consumers don't value something highly if it was given free. This is why you can get a subscription for substantially cheaper than the "newsstand" price.

Another aspect to the product is that they have demographic data about their subscribers which increases what they can charge to advertisers. It's much more valuable if they know that you are a country music loving 18-34 year old high school graduate subscriber, rather than just a generic subscriber.

If magazines sell through iTunes then who gets the demographic data? Right now the answer is Apple, and they're not budging much on that position.

An app developer doesn't get to know anything about you when you buy their app. Personally, this seems good to me because I trust Apple more than a random app developer. Others would (strongly) argue with that point.

This same fight is going on with data collected from advertising networks and iAd.

Seems like a fun ride, and I can't wait to see how it turns out.

 

[TXCraig]

How about the 1/2 off the price of a paper subscription, an iPad subscription! Save the trees, lower your carbon footprint, and be able to read something on your iPad!

 

[netnothing]

The People App is amazing!

Just downloaded this as my wife subscribes to People. All I have to say is WOW. They did an excellent job on this app. It's not just a digital copy of the magazine. There are interactive sections, videos, additional images, clicks to current content. The navigation is really good within the app.

Color me impressed, as so far what I've seen from Zinio is just a digital reprint of the paper version.

-Kevin

 

[vini-vidi-vici]

Mmmmmm. Carrie Underwood.

he heh heh he you said wood.