3 ms·

I think one way to estimate that is to see how much media you can possibly consume per month. Obviously you can only watch one movie at a time, and though it is

I think one way to estimate that is to see how much media you can possibly consume per month. Obviously you can only watch one movie at a time, and though it is possible to do more, you generally listen to only one song at a time. You probably don't listen to songs while watching a movie. So judging by the number of waking hours minus the hours sleeping and at work (maybe not for music), you should be able to guesstimate the number of "media hours" per month and use that to guess at a flat fee.

javajosh 14y ago
Alright. Let's say a song is $1, a movie is $10 and a book is $10, and a song takes 3 minutes, a movie 200 minutes, and a book is 700 minutes (350 pages at 2 minutes a page). So the per minute cost is $.30, $.50, $.15. The average is (30+50+15/3) $.31. Not really sure how to factor games in there. $60 for 20 hours - that's $.05 a minute, which pulls the average way down. I think a person will max out at 40 hours per week. That's 2400 minutes, which at $.30 is $80. The average is probably going to be closer to 10-20 hours - $20-40 per week. So we're talking $80-240 a month by this calculation.
- electrichead 14y ago
  Yeah I agree that 40 hours seems to be a good number for a week's consumption. On weekdays, the max I can think it taking is 2 hours for commuting, and 3-5 hours of TV. I am nowhere near this number myself, but I can see it being the norm for a lot of people. That's about 7 hours a day for 5 days. Weekends are completely random for me. On most summer weekends I didn't think I consume anything at all, but I can see how it could be quite high for some people. Overall, I think a hard cap of 40 hours is probably sufficient for most people. I am sure that the MPAA would try and argue that internet access should be included in this, which is probably where the whole problem starts.
mapster 14y ago
I think the price would be based on perceived consumption. Just like a gym membership of $50/month seems reasonable because you would go 3x a week, but in reality it is 1x a week or less.

javajosh 14y ago

Alright. Let's say a song is $1, a movie is $10 and a book is $10, and a song takes 3 minutes, a movie 200 minutes, and a book is 700 minutes (350 pages at 2 minutes a page). So the per minute cost is $.30, $.50, $.15. The average is (30+50+15/3) $.31. Not really sure how to factor games in there. $60 for 20 hours - that's $.05 a minute, which pulls the average way down. I think a person will max out at 40 hours per week. That's 2400 minutes, which at $.30 is $80. The average is probably going to be closer to 10-20 hours - $20-40 per week. So we're talking $80-240 a month by this calculation.

electrichead 14y ago
Yeah I agree that 40 hours seems to be a good number for a week's consumption. On weekdays, the max I can think it taking is 2 hours for commuting, and 3-5 hours of TV. I am nowhere near this number myself, but I can see it being the norm for a lot of people. That's about 7 hours a day for 5 days. Weekends are completely random for me. On most summer weekends I didn't think I consume anything at all, but I can see how it could be quite high for some people. Overall, I think a hard cap of 40 hours is probably sufficient for most people. I am sure that the MPAA would try and argue that internet access should be included in this, which is probably where the whole problem starts.

mapster 14y ago

I think the price would be based on perceived consumption. Just like a gym membership of $50/month seems reasonable because you would go 3x a week, but in reality it is 1x a week or less.