You must be joking. That looks like a stretchy dress pulled over a Hippo's caboose.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hearst Magazines Join Apple's 'In App Subscription' Program
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You must be joking. That looks like a stretchy dress pulled over a Hippo's caboose.
Yeah, bringing a market of 15 million to publishers, hosting and distributing their content is doing nothing.
This price should apply to new subscribers only.
Just like paying extra to the carriers for tethering to a data plan you already paid for... I don't understand this "double dipping" by the publishers to charge you twice for the same thing. (the print version and the e-version). Give current subscribers free access to the iPad version.
Just like paying extra to the carriers for tethering to a data plan you already paid for... I don't understand this "double dipping" by the publishers to charge you twice for the same thing. (the print version and the e-version). Give current subscribers free access to the iPad version.
LOL! "The Daily" kicks ass in gross sales. Go to the community forum to rant about FOX news hatred.
print subscribers Free access or not?!
what they didn't mention anywhere is, will current print subscribers of these magazines get free or cheap access to these ipad versions??...I think there are some which DO offer this now right? (i guess the ones which just inked the deal with Apple like Time, etc??)
Anyone have any insights on this?
what they didn't mention anywhere is, will current print subscribers of these magazines get free or cheap access to these ipad versions??...I think there are some which DO offer this now right? (i guess the ones which just inked the deal with Apple like Time, etc??)
Anyone have any insights on this?
I just love the fact that we are now starting to really reduce how much we print. Now that they are in electronic form, I might just pay extra to not have ads! Somehow I don't think they will offer that...
The only content that Apple distributes is the FREE application... like I said, paid to be hosted by the $99 annual subscription fee.. just like any other FREE ( that Apple don't demand extra fees from) application.
The actual digital subscription content never touches Apple's servers.
The cost to the company should be really low - the magazine is already digital before it gets sent to the publisher for printing. Converting to a iPad version shouldn't be that complicated or expensive - your just converting one digital format to another.
I'm guessing the magazines don't want to eat into their full cover sales - which is, I'm guessing, where a lot of the money is made.
This is my definition of a fail. It can get all the good reviews it want's but it is losing LOTS of money.
Does anyone know what publishing platform Hearst is using for these magazines?
I know that Esquire is/was using Scrollmotion.
Is Hearst using this for their other publications, or are they using a different system like Adobe DPS, Woodwing, etc?
thanks!
I know that Esquire is/was using Scrollmotion.
Is Hearst using this for their other publications, or are they using a different system like Adobe DPS, Woodwing, etc?
thanks!
Digital subscription should not be higher than the print subscription ... this is just wrong. I have not checked the digital version of those magazines mentioned here, but I understand that digital version are sometimes enriched in a nice way, but on the other hand they safe on shipments.
I like the model that Time Magazine has that you get the digital version for free when you have the paper subscription and the digital version is not just a 'pdf equivalent' but somewhat enriched ... might switch to digital only at some point (the wife still wants the paper version). Digital can be a nice 'upgrade' if done right (I liked e.g. how the daily is handling all the multimedia addition - I didn't subscribed since it is too expensive for the contentent they have, but the 'multimedia experience' was great.
I like the model that Time Magazine has that you get the digital version for free when you have the paper subscription and the digital version is not just a 'pdf equivalent' but somewhat enriched ... might switch to digital only at some point (the wife still wants the paper version). Digital can be a nice 'upgrade' if done right (I liked e.g. how the daily is handling all the multimedia addition - I didn't subscribed since it is too expensive for the contentent they have, but the 'multimedia experience' was great.
Have you used Zinio? It is clunky, slow and only offers you a pdf version of the magazine.
The official Esquire app is a iPad specific version of the magazine with interactive content, additional iPad only content and a great UI.
I'd love to see a $20 or $25 all-in-one subscription that gets you the print and the iPad version.
Um, you do realize that magazines are actually created in digital format before being sent to print?
Hey, Wait a Minute
I thought that Apple's "greedy, extortionist" subscription policies were going to mean disaster for the iPad as a platform! Apparently not, since major publishers are lining up.
As for the subscriptions being more expensive than the paper, very simple: those low, discount subscriptions on paper are paid for by selling your name, address, age, sex and all the rest to junk mailers. So, the in-app rate means you get the same rate, most likely, but you don't have to put a blowtorch to your junk mail.
I thought that Apple's "greedy, extortionist" subscription policies were going to mean disaster for the iPad as a platform! Apparently not, since major publishers are lining up.
As for the subscriptions being more expensive than the paper, very simple: those low, discount subscriptions on paper are paid for by selling your name, address, age, sex and all the rest to junk mailers. So, the in-app rate means you get the same rate, most likely, but you don't have to put a blowtorch to your junk mail.
iPad magazine != PDF
sure the print magazin is created digital - but if they add interactive multimedia content, that requires extra work since this is not done for the print version ...
And this is another reason .... one paper subscription I have has a typo in my name and shortly after I got the first magazine I also got plenty of junk mail with the same typo (mostly credit card offers).
Actually, I have subcriptions to about a dozen magazines, through Zinio, on my Ipad. They're relatively inexpensive and provide a perfectly acceptable platform, virtually indistinguishable from the print version . They're only "slow" when downloading. To each his own, but, I find the "interactive" features of other digital magazines to be overblown and, not something that I'm particularly interested in when I read a magazine.
Not only that, but Zinio is cross-platform, which means that I can access my subscriptions on my iMac at home, on my MacBook when I travel, or on any other device I chose to move to in the future.
Apple's scheme is a total ripoff, and I don't understand why even the few who got suckered into it, did it.
People seem to ignore the model that print publications, and more specifically magazines have used for years.
Special deals and discounts, renewal packages and the rest.
This is their base price. If you look at the base subscription price for any of their print copy magazines they are ALL likely more than $20 a year.
This is the starting point. This is the unfortunate consumer point where the person pays the most will pay.
At first there will not be a lot of discounts but ultimately there will be ways to get discounted subscriptions, that is how these companies work.
I get some magazines for $10 for 60 issues, that if you went by a normal subscription price would be $80. People get too carried away with this introduction pricing, and start comparing apples to oranges.
On top of all that though, they are afraid to cannibilize their remaining print subscriber bases because they have proven revenue streams for those, and they don't know how the digital versions will work out in terms of ad sales and the rest.
People need to understand magazines are heavily subsidized by advertising costs. If they make a lot less money with ads in a digital version, which is likely the case, they are making a lot less money. People talk about print and distribution costs, but that potentially pales in comparison to the amount of reduced ad revenue they have per subscriber in a print magazine versus a digital magazine at this point.
So if the amount of revenue they take in is significantly less than they take in for the print version, and is not offset by the reduced distribution costs, what would you like them to do.
The issue is simply much more involved than "OMG IT MUST BE CHEAPER BECAUSE IT IS NOT PRINT"
Special deals and discounts, renewal packages and the rest.
This is their base price. If you look at the base subscription price for any of their print copy magazines they are ALL likely more than $20 a year.
This is the starting point. This is the unfortunate consumer point where the person pays the most will pay.
At first there will not be a lot of discounts but ultimately there will be ways to get discounted subscriptions, that is how these companies work.
I get some magazines for $10 for 60 issues, that if you went by a normal subscription price would be $80. People get too carried away with this introduction pricing, and start comparing apples to oranges.
On top of all that though, they are afraid to cannibilize their remaining print subscriber bases because they have proven revenue streams for those, and they don't know how the digital versions will work out in terms of ad sales and the rest.
People need to understand magazines are heavily subsidized by advertising costs. If they make a lot less money with ads in a digital version, which is likely the case, they are making a lot less money. People talk about print and distribution costs, but that potentially pales in comparison to the amount of reduced ad revenue they have per subscriber in a print magazine versus a digital magazine at this point.
So if the amount of revenue they take in is significantly less than they take in for the print version, and is not offset by the reduced distribution costs, what would you like them to do.
The issue is simply much more involved than "OMG IT MUST BE CHEAPER BECAUSE IT IS NOT PRINT"
I'm not sure I really need interactive content... not if it raises the price so much.
If I'm happy with them shipping me 1,000 pages over 12 months through the mail... I'd be even happier just getting them on an iPad instead.
This is what I'm trying to prevent:
