[Leica] PHOTOG BAD NEWS!!!! :-)

[Clive Moss]

I get the Economist online and audio - and I give the paper edition to my
son-in-law. To get my local rag (Chicago Tribunes) and New York Times
online, I subscribe to the weekend paper auditions only and trash them. I
think that it is because the advertisers value paper subscribers highly. An
expensive fiction.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:44 PM Jayanand Govindaraj <jayanand at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Of course I do, and a lot more than I used to. The costs for an online
> subscription for most magazine is that a years' online subscription costs
> roughly 10-15% of what it used to cost for a print subscription for a year
> - The Economist is an exception, but not so the FT from the same stable! I
> would guess that the net margins for the publishers would be roughly the
> same for both types - if you take into consideration the cost of
> machinery/paper/consumables/extra staff that it took to put out a print
> edition.
> Cheers
> Jayanand
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu>
> wrote:
>
> > But you still consume the journalism, just online, right? I read more
> > newspapers than before, but I too have just one paper subscription, also
> > The Economist. In fact, I called them a couple of years ago asking how
> much
> > cheaper it was just to get the iPad edition. The answer was that it would
> > be virtually the same price since I was really paying for the content,
> not
> > the paper. Fair enough, so I continue to get it both electronically and
> on
> > paper. The paper edition spends most of its time in the toilet ;-)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Nathan
> >
> > Nathan Wajsman
> >
> > Alicante, Spain
> > http://www.frozenlight.eu
> > http://www.greatpix.eu
> > PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> > Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/
> >
> > Cycling: http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/belgiangator
> >
> > YNWA
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 24 Jan 2015, at 03:09, Jayanand Govindaraj <jayanand at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I just think this is part of the accelerating trend of the end of print
> > journalism. For example, I have long subscribed to around 25 magazines,
> and
> > I get a hard copy of just one still - The Economist, due to the fact that
> > it was a long term subscription. Sign of the times, and the good news
> > emanating out of this trend is it will save a few trees, here and
> there.....
> > > Cheers
> > > Jayanand
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > >> On 24-Jan-2015, at 06:54, RicCarter <ric at cartersxrd.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Damn, I wish you were right, but this is the country in which a large
> > percentage of the public buys into fox news...
> > >>
> > >> ric
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> On Jan 23, 2015, at 8:21 PM, Tmanley <tmanley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> They are "hoping" that the photographers will continue to contribute!
> > Hah!!! I hope the photographers boycott forever. Let SI depend on crowd
> > sourcing for "good enough" photos. No one will know the difference!!
> Hah!!!
> > >>>
> > >>> Tina
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Leica Users Group.
> > >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Leica Users Group.
> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>