[wffurr]

You mean I can also choose $120/year?

No comment on whether either is reasonable but responding to “it costs too much” with a more expensive option is an interesting choice.

[kup0]

Only viewing total cost misses the point. For some people, it may be more reasonable for them to want to pay a fraction of the cost monthly vs. one big sum every 12 months. $10/month is more expensive, in total, over a year. However, $100 is more expensive in the short-term.

Also, paying monthly is only more expensive if the person paying decides to stay that long. Monthly payments allow flexibility to cancel rather than committing to a year.

[carlosjobim]

Let's imagine you need to read a certain story, but don't care to become a long-term subscriber. The $10 for a month option fits that use.

[eviks]

It doesn't fit, direct payment for an article fits that use, not an expensive subscription you'd have to remember to cancel

[carlosjobim]

If $10 is too expensive, then that article was not important anyway.

[eviks]

This also makes no sense, $10 is not some magic importance threshold

[carlosjobim]

For it to make sense to you, imagine somebody buying a pizza:

- How much is the pizza?

- It's 10 dollars.

- I don't think it's worth 10 dollars!

- Uhm, okay then don't buy it.

- But I really need that pizza, it's really important that I get it!

- Then pay 10 dollars?

- That's too expensive, it's worth nowhere near that!

- If it's not worth 10 dollars why is it important to you?

- It's extremely important that I get that pizza and I really want it, but also you have to understand that it's not worth 10 dollars, so give it to me for free now!

...ad infinitum.

If it still doesn't make sense, then it will never make sense.

[eviks]

It will never make sense because it's nonsense: you can eat dozens of pizzas for $10, so it makes no sense to say that if you don't want to pay $10 for just a single pizza means you don't value pizza (and no one was talking about "give it to me for free now")