
Look, I get it. You want to protect your ... wow, it's a buck fifty now? I have been away from NYC for a long time. Ok, I don't get it. Here's the deal:
1) Readership down.
2) Ad revenue down.
3) Raise newsstand price.
4) Readership down.
5) Ad revenue down.
6) Charge $300 dollars for mobile access.
For the benefit of those who don't remember / don't live in New York City, there was a time that the New York Post was struggling heavily. I recall when Rupert Murdoch reacquired the paper in the early 90's he increased circulation and saved the paper by lowering the price to a quarter.
So, I get it - they don't want to give it away for free anymore online. The Wall Street Journal proved you can charge for access. But let's think about what might ever, possibly work for a moment. Eyes closed? Ok, raise your hands if your mind latched onto... say a buck a day or so to read a newspaper-formatted web app.
The New York Times digital division thinks $10 a month is more reasonable - and they are certainly right - it's more reasonable. Maybe not perfectly reasonable, but it's ballpark. They also (correctly) think the pricing of Kindle, nook and Sony editions is overpriced. I used to work for that division as a consultant; I always liked those guys.
Have they looked into the Journal? It's $2 a week or $104 a year for a subscription. That compares to $119.08 for the print edition. Want both? $139.88, or about $35 more than a regular online subscription.
Don't just toss a number out there folks, make me consider subscribing!

No comments:
Post a Comment