[magicofpi]

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.

[isleyaardvark]

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?

[magicofpi]

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.

[chris_vannoy]

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.