4 ms·
There is value to them in having you as an active subscriber on a paid plan, even if they've given you a discount.
by fencepost 6y ago
There is value to them in having you as an active subscriber on a paid plan, even if they've given you a discount.
- EvilEy3 6y agoSeriously???
- fencepost 6y agoTried to expand on it but I missed the edit window. If you're a subscriber (even at a discount) you count in their circulation numbers. Those numbers affect their advertising costs, the value of the news outlet (not just the NYTimes), and probably the internal performance reviews of lots of people who really don't want to lose you. Traditionally newspapers didn't make enough money from subscription revenue to cover their costs - advertising is where the money was, payment for subscriptions was nice but a big part of its importance was as an indicator "this person cares enough to pay for this news source" for selling advertising. That hasn't really changed that much.
- rootusrootus 6y agoNot sure why your comment got downvoted, really. I agree, from their perspective it makes sense to give away a half year of service if it keeps the subscriber account active. It increases the odds above zero that the customer will stay even after they have to pay again, it looks good for the advertising stats, etc. I don't think they're really factoring in the "angry customer" aspect, however, or they'd stop. They turned me from an ambivalent customer who decided the ROI wasn't there, into an opinionated former customer who is willing to tell friends and family the horror show that will happen if they subscribe and then decide later it isn't for them. It's the opposite of good word-of-mouth advertising, and NYT is going to suffer for it. Even if they change their policy today.