11–20 of 25 posts
Headline's kind of sensationalist .... it's 1 pound per day or 2 pounds per week which is much more reasonable. It seems kind of high although the real question is if people are willing to pay anything, the right price can be established after they find that out.
That's hardly sensationalist. The key point is that they are charging. Would you pay the £2 per week?
Start charging £1 without any changes to the quality of the site?
And I suppose Windows 7 is "a crucial step towards making the business of desktop computers an economically exciting proposition". Marketing blurb never fails to impress me with its sheer lack of logic...
Headline's kind of sensationalist .... it's 1 pound per day or 2 pounds per week which is much more reasonable. It seems kind of high although the real question is if people are willing to pay anything, the right price can be established after they find that out.
>£0 is unreasonable. I doubt they'll get many subscribers at all.
Charging for access to the Times website may cause a loss of page views, but it may also encourage more of the papers to charge (it isn't the first) - which I think on balance is a good thing.
Andrew, please not edit headlines unless necessary. This one should be "Times and Sunday Times websites to charge from June". Yours is inaccurate as benologist already mentioned. See http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
This is ridiculous. I get the International Herald Tribune delivered to my door in London for £0.53 a day. Same goes for the guardian, with subscriptions under a pound a day. Yes, people will pay for convenience, but this is not a competitive offer at all!
I think Murdoch is mistaken to believe that newspaper buyers are paying for content - I believe that they are paying for access. If I'm waiting for a train, I am happy to pay £1 to have something to read. The problem for the newspapers is that now I carry a smartphone with a huge backlog of RSS feeds - content far more specific and relevant to me than any daily paper.
Personally, I think the only chance they have is to establish a news cartel, which I believe is explanation enough for Murdoch's mission to kill off the BBC.