My orginal parent post claims that a month of NYTimes content isn't as valuable as/worth 15 USD.
Are you saying the NYTimes is not a good value or that, it's simply not a product you seek because you're already amply satisfied by WSJ, FT, the Economist, etc.?
It just seems weird to me to call something too expensive when the real reason is that you've already purchased it, just from someone else.
Unless you think the cost to journalistic quality ratio of the aforementioned papers and magazines is superior to the NYT?
I don't want all of it. I want a couple of articles a week. Those articles are worth $0.50 at most to me; but probably much less. (I have no idea how much they'd get for ads for my view for any articles I want to read).
I mention those other journals because there is so much good journalism that buying all of it for a whole year is not practical for most people. People will pick and chose. At the moment they chose to include one paper for a year and exclude other papers for that year. But it'd be better if they could just pick and chose and pay for any individual article they wanted to read.
Are you saying the NYTimes is not a good value or that, it's simply not a product you seek because you're already amply satisfied by WSJ, FT, the Economist, etc.?
It just seems weird to me to call something too expensive when the real reason is that you've already purchased it, just from someone else.
Unless you think the cost to journalistic quality ratio of the aforementioned papers and magazines is superior to the NYT?