News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by jellicle on Monday March 21, 2011 @07:47PM (#2352208)
So, first he talks about how simplicity of pricing is key. Then he describes how an Apple Ipad, with about a dozen different prices depending on what you want, is simply priced. Then he describes how the New York Times, which has only one price that most people will ever care about ($15 for unlimited web access), is unsimply priced.

True brilliance.

Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by magicofpi on Monday March 21, 2011 @08:15PM (#2352305)
Well, the iPad's pricing is relatively simple to figure out: $499, plus $100 for every storage increase after that. If you want 3G, that's $130 extra.

The New York Times, on the other hand, seems less logical. The website+smartphone app is $15/4 weeks, the website+tablet app is $20, all three is $35, so the website is worth... nothing? Or, you could go with the home delivery option, which would cost you $455 (all digital access) -$304.20 (daily delivery in NY) = $150.80 less per year, even though they have to print all that paper.

Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by isleyaardvark on Monday March 21, 2011 @08:51PM (#2352426)
More importantly the iPad's pricing is normal. The Nook, the Kindle, and the Xoom all come in different versions. People expect to pay different amounts for different hardware.

Nobody's doing what the NYT is doing. Netflix and Hulu are given as examples of content producers that have a simple pricing scheme over multiple devices. Lots of people use those services. The NYT pricing not only violates expectations for online content, it doesn't even seem typical for newspapers. Paying per 4 weeks instead of per month? Who has ever done that?

Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by magicofpi on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @12:24AM (#2353107)
Yes, exactly. Perhaps the 4 weeks approach is to link it with the existing home delivery system (which is also calculated by week), but it sounds strange in practice.

I guess we'll see how it turns out, though. Maybe most customers won't actually mind these irregularities.

Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by chris_vannoy on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @06:38AM (#2353770)
Actually, my guess is the every-four-weeks bit is to goose revenue.

With monthly, you're getting paid 12 times a year. With every four weeks, you get paid 13 times.

It's a nifty little sales trick. Most people (including me) automatically round four weeks up to a month before thinking about it.

Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by dsuriano on Monday March 21, 2011 @08:01PM (#2352252)
There are 6 prices for iPads. 16/32/64 Wifi. 16/32/64 3g.

I would say people would care about the other NY Times plans. I would personally much rather use a NY times App on my iPad (Which would mean the $20.00 plan) versus using it on my iPhone. But if I wanted to use both apps, it would cost $35.00. It's cheaper just to get the physical paper delivered to your house.

Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by kenjackson on Monday March 21, 2011 @09:12PM (#2352505)
But for 3g you also have to price in Verizon vs ATT as they have different pricing structures.
Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by baran on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @12:13AM (#2353072)
Your confusing # of prices with the simplicity of the pricing scheme. With Apple, I can justify to myself why I'm paying more for a product (eg. size increase, 3G). With the NYTimes, its hard to justify why I should pay more for (1) a digital copy and (2) the same content on different platforms.
Re:A Rule of Thumb: Pricing Should Be Simple by mhb on Monday March 21, 2011 @11:19PM (#2352941)
And what's with the gratuitous snark about a car being something people "think they need"? Presumably these are the unenlightened few who don't realize that if they aren't banging out apps from their homes they can damn well walk the three blocks to the WiFi cafe.