To: Doren who wrote (554 ) 5/21/2012 6:30:44 PM From: Sr K Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 3790 There are sites I'm registered for where I never log in, or almost never log in. I won't pay the nytimes because they're unfair. And they paid about $25,000,000 to the departed ex-CEO who they pushed out. I want to see my page visits count and know when my free month ends. If I paid $15/4 weeks, I'd set myself up to pay 10 or 20 times $195 and annual "adjustments". They have to break the price or tier it so that "olds" after 12 or 24 hours is much less than "news". And Associated Press stories cannot count the same as New York Times -staff or -owned content. Other sites break the price and almost all businesses do, so they are just trying to see what the market will bear. Fair to me would be about $39 per year excluding the first 6 hours after publication or posting. A url you save to read later should be readable for years if you want to go back to it; and if the base pricing is fair, I would pay an archive fee for stuff older than xx months for which I've saved the url. If they got 50,000,000 subscribers to pay $39 per year and 500,000 to pay the $195 per year, they'd never raise the low-price tier (and they might lower it or set a more-delayed and lower rate). The NYT market cap is $926 million. Edit They probably pay Apple and Amazon 30% for subscribers they bring in, but that doesn't mean I accept a higher price structure. I want it less when there's a sales agent getting in the way when I already want it. It should be enough that they can sell targeted advertising to try to sell me stuff I don't want or don't know I want. They should pay me to delay loading the page I click to read. Load the advertisements in idle time, after the news loads.