Here we go again.
30% is gros and you do not know Apple's cost structure.
The link to what the writers, reporters etc. do and have is not working.
They have chosen that profession/business and Apple is in another business.
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.
'The New York Times' Announces Digital Access With In App Subscriptions
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Here we go again.
30% is gros and you do not know Apple's cost structure.
The link to what the writers, reporters etc. do and have is not working.
They have chosen that profession/business and Apple is in another business.
And AFAIK this price isn't even available everywhere in the US, let alone internationally. If you just substitute the paper version with the iPad (and nytimes.com) version ($260) you probably save over $300 bucks a year. So if you go from paper to iPad, you're gonna be happy. If you're just interested in the website, you're gonna be disappointed.
And how would you have prevented that? Craigslist is run by a dozen folks with very little overhead. How would you have countered?
And Morgan Stanley is run by snobby elite guys too (if you mean educated professionals), and Apple and Microsoft. They all deserve to fail too? What's your point?
The Times can bite me. Given their track record in making stuff up, this should be listed as Fiction and not news.
The upside here is given their pricing strategy, The Daily will rock their world.
The upside here is given their pricing strategy, The Daily will rock their world.
Too Expensive!!
This is just too much in my opinion.
They need to realize success in the digital age is about the number of people you deliver your content to and not about the amount of money you get from each customer.
I'd price the subscription at $1 per week. The NYT has the name and reputation to be subscribed to by a huge number of subscribers in the world. Price it low and grow your subscribers.
This is just too much in my opinion.
They need to realize success in the digital age is about the number of people you deliver your content to and not about the amount of money you get from each customer.
I'd price the subscription at $1 per week. The NYT has the name and reputation to be subscribed to by a huge number of subscribers in the world. Price it low and grow your subscribers.
Greedy and unfair.
Wow... those ads really hurt your eyes maybe? Unfair? In what way? Personally, I like the Ads... it's a good way to learn about new services and products. I hate on-line ads that can be obtrusive.... that is annoying! But as long as they just sit there and do their thing, I'm okay with it.
As for greedy... guess what... they are a company in the business of making money. If you don't see the value in their product, don't buy it... as you say, vote with your wallet. But why is it every time a company tries to make money that means greed? People with this attitude... I hate to say it, but it's time to grow up.
Well, and working for Apple can be dangerous too! Imagine the risks employees take when they leave unreleased prototypes behind in bars!
Just being funny.
It's pricey but I don't see the need for the iPad or iPhone version. Even today I mostly use their on-line version directly through Safari.
So assuming they don't gimp their online version for the iPad and Iphone then I will consider the $15 version.
I would like to see an offer of this + weekend Times paper delivery.
So assuming they don't gimp their online version for the iPad and Iphone then I will consider the $15 version.
I would like to see an offer of this + weekend Times paper delivery.
to be fair, the BBC and news sources from other countries are usually supported by mandatory taxes of that countries citizens ... and that's also why the media libraries (almost all of BBC programming is available online) aren't available if your IP address is from outside the country
So, I think your use of "FREE" is a misnomer.
Last edited:
And yet 1 iPhone + 1 iPad cost in average $1,200 (subsidizing not withstanding), with a lifespan of about 24 months it makes $50 a month. But for me it is really the content that has value.
I like reading the NYT, but I am not paying $35 a month for it or anything remotely close to that.
Sometimes, I’m not even willing to wait for its crazy slow load time. Slow load + $20 or $30 out of my pocket? No thanks. How about a dollar or two a week, max?
And for that $5-10 a month, you’d better let me access it ANYWHERE I want. iPhone, iPad, and computer. Charging per device is insane. They should consider themselves lucky that someone subscribes in the first place.
Also:/B]
It really isn't that hard to get around NYTimes current reading limits. Someitmes, when I visit the tech section, it pops up asking me to log in because I have visited too much. All you have to do is pop into Safari's Private Browsing mode and hit refresh and you're in. Or clear your browser. Or use a different browser. We'll see if they fix this loophole, or just figure that 5% who know how to get around it aren't worth the trouble...
Sometimes, I’m not even willing to wait for its crazy slow load time. Slow load + $20 or $30 out of my pocket? No thanks. How about a dollar or two a week, max?
And for that $5-10 a month, you’d better let me access it ANYWHERE I want. iPhone, iPad, and computer. Charging per device is insane. They should consider themselves lucky that someone subscribes in the first place.
Also:/B]
It really isn't that hard to get around NYTimes current reading limits. Someitmes, when I visit the tech section, it pops up asking me to log in because I have visited too much. All you have to do is pop into Safari's Private Browsing mode and hit refresh and you're in. Or clear your browser. Or use a different browser. We'll see if they fix this loophole, or just figure that 5% who know how to get around it aren't worth the trouble...
Pretty sure that most of the people doing the print vs. digital calculations aren't taking into account that you don't need a "full" subscription to get digital access. From the FAQ "Free, unlimited access is provided to all print subscribers, no matter what type of subscription you have (daily, weekday, Weekender, etc.). You'll also qualify for free digital access if your home delivery is provided by a third party (rather than by The New York Times directly)."
So, maybe some of you want to re-do the calculation?
So, maybe some of you want to re-do the calculation?
Waiting to see lower media and book prices.
The price point is too high. So I vote with my wallet...it stays in my pocket.
Where is the reduced price point and value of electronic distribution?
I went to buy the new Chernow book "George Washington" online and it was $20.00...about the same amount I would pay to buy the print edition, plus $1.50 for postage.
So again, I vote with my wallet. No deal. I'll reserve the book online at my local LIBRARY. Cha Ching.
The price point is too high. So I vote with my wallet...it stays in my pocket.
Where is the reduced price point and value of electronic distribution?
I went to buy the new Chernow book "George Washington" online and it was $20.00...about the same amount I would pay to buy the print edition, plus $1.50 for postage.
So again, I vote with my wallet. No deal. I'll reserve the book online at my local LIBRARY. Cha Ching.
That's a fine attitude, if your time has no value. How much time does it take to reserve online and go to/drop a book at library (probably an hour total).
If you get that $15 a month deal can't you just go on nytimes.com in safari on iPhone or iPad instead of getting the app for $20 or $35 a month?
It's probably because they have no real journalists going to where the news is. It costs a lot of money to report in places like Libya. You can go to McDonalds and get a burger for a dollar but it won't be as good as going to Five Guys and paying $6. Unfortunately, the NYTimes "burger shop" would be charging $15 and the burger spontaneously explodes occasionally (their iOS apps are not the best at stability).
In the opinion article they state that articles that are linked through blogs, facebook, twitter etc will be free to read, even if you max out your 20 free articles per month. This is usually how I come across their articles. For example, the most recent one I read was the Grant Hill story which had pretty high social media awareness.
good thing it's free on the internet...so silly
so you pay $15 a month to read the same news in an app that you can get by opening up safari and going to the web site..
I won't argue on the price, but I don't agree with your view that 'information...is free'. This information has a cost that is not easily seen. Someone collected and took time and effort to assemble this information.
Nothing in life is free.
Yeah people should give away their hard work for free.
They are not able to subsidize this as much with ads as the regular print editions. Also this is their base pricing. They already said they would have introductory deals, and I suspect they will often have deals that make access cheaper.
I see no problem with it. People got to realize that content is not free. People have gotten this idea that it is, but it is not. Think about that the next time you run an adblocker script in your browser.
