4 ms·

I guess I would expect the price to change. Netflix (as it is all streaming and not really "renting") isn't the greatest example. For some things that I can't

I guess I would expect the price to change. Netflix (as it is all streaming and not really "renting") isn't the greatest example. For some things that I can't stream on Netflix, I often rent from the iTunes store. The cost is much less than a purchase from the same store. The only difference is the understanding that the digital media I'm renting will no longer function after a well-understood period of time. I'm an adult, I can make informed consent to that arrangement. I wouldn't be happy with this being the only media option, but I like having that as one of the many options in the media ecosystem.

shmerl 13y ago
I see no valid reason why the expected price should be higher in the case of a purchase for digital data. As was discussed here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6496579 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6496579 the main reason why rent price is lower for physical goods, is because it's based on reusability of the object. The reason to limit the time of using it is pretty straightforward as well - to allow the next user gain an access to the object. All these reasons have completely no application to digital goods. So what's the point in renting them, or making the purchase price any higher? I see none, except someone's potential greed may be. You can say, that renting an object more often produces more profit, in case when one time fee is charged for each renting, so that's the reason for the time limit. But then again, this is only valid when the resource is limited (physical object), and each user prevents others from renting it. In case of the digitial data which costs nothing to duplicate, the resource is unlimited, so this reason doesn't apply. And if we are talking about the same user renting it again and again, then what's the point? Purchase makes more sense again. The bottom line, I think that renting of digital goods is a pointless idea. And since as we see it causes DRM in result - it's a bad idea too.
- MartinCron 13y ago
  Price of goods, especially digital goods, aren't based the cost of those goods. You don't expect to pay less for a low-budget indie film than a 300 million dollar blockbuster. The price of something is instead based exclusively on willingness to pay for it. The market has proven that people are willing to pay more for digital goods that they own and can consume over and over over digital goods that they have a short-term access to.
  - shmerl 13y ago
    Prices are based on cost at least in part. But with logic similar to yours, ISPs for example explain why they charge crazy prices for normal quality plans, and charge "normal" prices for junk ones. "Willingness to pay" when there aren't better alternatives is quite a slippery basis for any conclusions. Anyway, ask anyone if they prefer to buy and not to overpay, rather than rent. Just because someone devised an idea of renting digital goods for no reason except their own greed is not a reason to say that it's a good idea. It gives no benefits for the user and can be used as an excuse to drive prices up on purchases as you said yourself.
    - MartinCron 13y ago
      Prices are based on cost at least in part. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of basic economics. The market always sets the price. If the price that is set by the market is lower than the cost to produce that item, then you just don't have a viable product to sell. The basic real-world reason that renting of digital media exists is because some people are willing to pay more for the added value of being able to watch it over and over while some people aren't.
      - hackinthebochs 13y ago
        >The market always sets the price. This is rather devoid of meaning. What is the market if not a label we use to reference the extremely complex interactions of individuals with varying degrees of information and rationality in an adversarial system? Of course the actual price to produce a product influences what people are willing to pay for it! This is why companies fight so hard to keep that information secret. This is why I refuse to buy a typical cell phone plan that charges absurd amounts for data and text and stick to prepaid. I influence the market because of my knowledge of how much it actually costs to send a text. The market absolutely reacts to the actual costs of products.
        pointlessdebate 13y ago
        Absolutely. Thats why everyone complains about how an iPhone is priced at nearly 200% of its cost.

shmerl 13y ago

I see no valid reason why the expected price should be higher in the case of a purchase for digital data. As was discussed here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6496579 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6496579 the main reason why rent price is lower for physical goods, is because it's based on reusability of the object. The reason to limit the time of using it is pretty straightforward as well - to allow the next user gain an access to the object. All these reasons have completely no application to digital goods. So what's the point in renting them, or making the purchase price any higher? I see none, except someone's potential greed may be. You can say, that renting an object more often produces more profit, in case when one time fee is charged for each renting, so that's the reason for the time limit. But then again, this is only valid when the resource is limited (physical object), and each user prevents others from renting it. In case of the digitial data which costs nothing to duplicate, the resource is unlimited, so this reason doesn't apply. And if we are talking about the same user renting it again and again, then what's the point? Purchase makes more sense again. The bottom line, I think that renting of digital goods is a pointless idea. And since as we see it causes DRM in result - it's a bad idea too.

MartinCron 13y ago
Price of goods, especially digital goods, aren't based the cost of those goods. You don't expect to pay less for a low-budget indie film than a 300 million dollar blockbuster. The price of something is instead based exclusively on willingness to pay for it. The market has proven that people are willing to pay more for digital goods that they own and can consume over and over over digital goods that they have a short-term access to.
- shmerl 13y ago
  Prices are based on cost at least in part. But with logic similar to yours, ISPs for example explain why they charge crazy prices for normal quality plans, and charge "normal" prices for junk ones. "Willingness to pay" when there aren't better alternatives is quite a slippery basis for any conclusions. Anyway, ask anyone if they prefer to buy and not to overpay, rather than rent. Just because someone devised an idea of renting digital goods for no reason except their own greed is not a reason to say that it's a good idea. It gives no benefits for the user and can be used as an excuse to drive prices up on purchases as you said yourself.
  - MartinCron 13y ago
    Prices are based on cost at least in part. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of basic economics. The market always sets the price. If the price that is set by the market is lower than the cost to produce that item, then you just don't have a viable product to sell. The basic real-world reason that renting of digital media exists is because some people are willing to pay more for the added value of being able to watch it over and over while some people aren't.
    - hackinthebochs 13y ago
      >The market always sets the price. This is rather devoid of meaning. What is the market if not a label we use to reference the extremely complex interactions of individuals with varying degrees of information and rationality in an adversarial system? Of course the actual price to produce a product influences what people are willing to pay for it! This is why companies fight so hard to keep that information secret. This is why I refuse to buy a typical cell phone plan that charges absurd amounts for data and text and stick to prepaid. I influence the market because of my knowledge of how much it actually costs to send a text. The market absolutely reacts to the actual costs of products.
      - pointlessdebate 13y ago
        Absolutely. Thats why everyone complains about how an iPhone is priced at nearly 200% of its cost.