3 ms·

So, I subscribed for a couple years, but cancelled six months ago when I left the country for a sojourn in Europe. I am returning to the States next week and I

So, I subscribed for a couple years, but cancelled six months ago when I left the country for a sojourn in Europe. I am returning to the States next week and I fully intend to re-subscribe to the Times. I'm curious what price you would be willing to pay for access to all of the Times content. Personally, I find that 15 USD a month is a fair price for an abundance of news that seems high quality (perhaps I've been duped?). There's all the multimedia, the arts section, the magazine, and, of course the news (both world and US). Do you not enjoy as many sections as I do? Or do you share my interests but find 15 USD too steep a price for the content? I also wonder, does means affect your choice? I recognize that the value of money is sometimes inversely related to how much you have.

DanBC 14y ago
I'm not interested in reading all of that the Times. $15 per month is too much for a bunch of content that I'm mostly not interested in. In theory I'm paying £200 per year for Wall Street Journal; £270 for Financial Times (standard, not premium); £117 for the Economist - well, these three are nearly $1,000 per year. Add in a UK daily paper (because that's where I live); and Private Eye, and something like Monocle and the costs are easily over $1,000 per year. So, I gently write to newspapers and ask them to include tipjars on articles (so they know how much people actually value good writing); and I leave ads turned on but ask for single-article payment systems to allow me to view ad-free articles; and I hope that something gets done to implement micro-payments because it'd be awesome. PS: Why are newspaper websites so awful? (http://www.independent.co.uk/ http://www.independent.co.uk/) (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/) EDIT: Here's my complaints screenshoted. (http://imgur.com/a/V00kO http://imgur.com/a/V00kO)
- danking00 14y ago
  My orginal parent post claims that a month of NYTimes content isn't as valuable as/worth 15 USD. Are you saying the NYTimes is not a good value or that, it's simply not a product you seek because you're already amply satisfied by WSJ, FT, the Economist, etc.? It just seems weird to me to call something too expensive when the real reason is that you've already purchased it, just from someone else. Unless you think the cost to journalistic quality ratio of the aforementioned papers and magazines is superior to the NYT?
  - DanBC 14y ago
    If I want all of it it's worth $15 per month. I don't want all of it. I want a couple of articles a week. Those articles are worth $0.50 at most to me; but probably much less. (I have no idea how much they'd get for ads for my view for any articles I want to read). I mention those other journals because there is so much good journalism that buying all of it for a whole year is not practical for most people. People will pick and chose. At the moment they chose to include one paper for a year and exclude other papers for that year. But it'd be better if they could just pick and chose and pay for any individual article they wanted to read.
venomsnake 14y ago
My price point is somewhat close to 4-5 USD per month. Since the only things that are really irreplaceable there for me are the Krugman, Collins and Dowd columns. For other stuff there are more tightly focused news outlets that serve my needs better. Also I have never been fan of the subscription model when it is about consuming content and not providing service.

DanBC 14y ago

I'm not interested in reading all of that the Times. $15 per month is too much for a bunch of content that I'm mostly not interested in. In theory I'm paying £200 per year for Wall Street Journal; £270 for Financial Times (standard, not premium); £117 for the Economist - well, these three are nearly $1,000 per year. Add in a UK daily paper (because that's where I live); and Private Eye, and something like Monocle and the costs are easily over $1,000 per year. So, I gently write to newspapers and ask them to include tipjars on articles (so they know how much people actually value good writing); and I leave ads turned on but ask for single-article payment systems to allow me to view ad-free articles; and I hope that something gets done to implement micro-payments because it'd be awesome. PS: Why are newspaper websites so awful? (http://www.independent.co.uk/ http://www.independent.co.uk/) (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/) EDIT: Here's my complaints screenshoted. (http://imgur.com/a/V00kO http://imgur.com/a/V00kO)

danking00 14y ago
My orginal parent post claims that a month of NYTimes content isn't as valuable as/worth 15 USD. Are you saying the NYTimes is not a good value or that, it's simply not a product you seek because you're already amply satisfied by WSJ, FT, the Economist, etc.? It just seems weird to me to call something too expensive when the real reason is that you've already purchased it, just from someone else. Unless you think the cost to journalistic quality ratio of the aforementioned papers and magazines is superior to the NYT?
- DanBC 14y ago
  If I want all of it it's worth $15 per month. I don't want all of it. I want a couple of articles a week. Those articles are worth $0.50 at most to me; but probably much less. (I have no idea how much they'd get for ads for my view for any articles I want to read). I mention those other journals because there is so much good journalism that buying all of it for a whole year is not practical for most people. People will pick and chose. At the moment they chose to include one paper for a year and exclude other papers for that year. But it'd be better if they could just pick and chose and pay for any individual article they wanted to read.

venomsnake 14y ago

My price point is somewhat close to 4-5 USD per month. Since the only things that are really irreplaceable there for me are the Krugman, Collins and Dowd columns. For other stuff there are more tightly focused news outlets that serve my needs better. Also I have never been fan of the subscription model when it is about consuming content and not providing service.