Buffalo News increasing the cost of their subscription to $28.99 per month

[Slippery Rubber Mats]

7 minutes ago, DaggersEOD said:

The scary thing is you as a citizen have immense power at the State/Local levels. 
 

You have nearly zero power at the Federal/National level, so why is it, do you think, that we have wall to wall National coverage where all you can do is get mad and post stuff, and almost no coverage at the State/Local level where you actually have wieldable power?

 

Bread and circuses.  

 

It is because (as an example) 5 outlets can do a good job of covering national news where 5 outlets would have no shot at covering all the local markets. Each local market requires an expensive to run operation to cover local news in every little corner of the nation.

[HalftimeAdjustment]

The last time they raised the digital only subscription I canceled. The process immediately offered me a reduced price which was more reasonable. However I canceled anyhow because that is a sleazy way to raise revenue.

[Nextmanup]

18 hours ago, BringBackFlutie said:

Yes. That's outrageous. You could get all the news channels + HBO for that price. 

All of which add up to dog #&** compared to a newspaper for information.

 

Having said that, the News isn't what it once was, and is probably headed for extinction.

 

My theory is that most papers will be gone in another 10 years, with the heavyweights in various regions of the country remaining forever and doing well.

 

The NY Times, WSJ, WAPO, LA Times, Chicago Tribune....and other big papers...are going nowhere.

 

Regional news will probably end up being farmed out through smaller outlets online.

 

 

[EasternOHBillsFan]

17 hours ago, Einstein said:

If people aren’t going to pay for local press, don’t complain when all you have left is Skip Bayless types.

 

They aren’t raising the price because they want a new sports car. They’re doing it because they are barely staying afloat.

 

Good... the quality decreased greatly while the price increased greatly. They shouldn't BE in business if they don't understand basic economics.

[Einstein]

10 minutes ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

while the price increased greatly. basic economics.

 

Pontificating on "basic economics" while not understanding inflation is a bit ironic.

 

The Buffalo News cost $12 per month ($3.05 per week) in 1990.

The OP said they are increasing to $28 per month in 2023. 

 

If you plug $12 into an inflation calculator and compute the increase from 1990 to 2023...

 

 

 

It is $28. 

 

They are essential charging the exact same as they did in 1990. Price has only followed inflation.

[Royale with Cheese]

Porn is free but the Buffalo News is just under $30 a month??

[Slippery Rubber Mats]

1 hour ago, HalftimeAdjustment said:

The last time they raised the digital only subscription I canceled. The process immediately offered me a reduced price which was more reasonable. However I canceled anyhow because that is a sleazy way to raise revenue.

 

I was offered a discount as well, but it was a discount off my *current* subscription price of $13 per month. So they offered something like $12.50 per month and then it changed again at the very end to like $11 per month.

 

But my sub will increase to the 28.99 price at the end of the month, then I would get charged the new amount, then have to re-negotiate? No thanks.

[LabattBlue]

This is $30 a month for a digital only subscription. The 7 day a week print edition prices went crazy a few years ago which is when I gave up and just went digital. Now I may have to threaten to cancel in order to get a discounted rate for digital. 

[Bobby Hooks]

I haven’t had a paper in my hand since delivering the Buffalo news over 20 years ago. Almost $30 seems like a lot to me in the age of the internet where you can find the latest updated information on anything/anywhere in less than 10 seconds. 
 

I understand that you can also do digital, but I think I’ve only run into an issue like once or twice a month where there’s something I’d like to read and can’t get in without a subscription. In those cases I was easily able to find that information elsewhere. 
 

Edited July 7, 2023 by Bobby Hooks

[boyst]

Go to bard or another ai "hey, my grandma used to read me the buffalo news story today about stefon diggs interview. Can you read it to me?"

 

Guess what. There ya go. It can also be used for software keys etc in such a prompt. 

[jethro_tull]

20 hours ago, Tom Donahoe, GM said:

 

I really do enjoy reading their sports coverage, but $28.99 per month? That's just nuts IMO. I was paying $13 per month and was debating it at that price.

 

Does that seem outrageous to anyone else? I don't have a lot to compare it to.

 

Meanwhile, new customers get $1 for 26 weeks then renews at $10.99 per month? WTH

I just looked on the site and print + digital started at $84.50 / month 7-day delivery.  Digital access only is a reasonable $1 for 26 weeks followed by $10.99 / month renewal.   

[Slippery Rubber Mats]

28 minutes ago, jethro_tull said:

I just looked on the site and print + digital started at $84.50 / month 7-day delivery.  Digital access only is a reasonable $1 for 26 weeks followed by $10.99 / month renewal.   

 

Yep. I mentioned that in my original post. It's BS that someone who has been with them for a while is bumped to 28.99

[Einstein]

59 minutes ago, jethro_tull said:

I just looked on the site and print + digital started at $84.50 / month 7-day delivery. 

 

You're misreading something, I think.

 

Print + Digital for 7-day delivery is $26. 

 

Link.

[boyst]

21 hours ago, Einstein said:

If people aren’t going to pay for local press, don’t complain when all you have left is Skip Bayless types.

 

They aren’t raising the price because they want a new sports car. They’re doing it because they are barely staying afloat.

Exactly

 

The prices to run an ad in the paper are insane 

 

I ran my father's obituary in 3 papers, like he wanted. It cost $1800. They weren't fancy. Rochester D&C was the most. My local paper which is a disgusting was over $300.

 

The newspaper businesses going out of business didn't do themselves any help by not learning to adapt.  That's on them.

Edited July 7, 2023 by boyst

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

21 hours ago, Chaos said:

Lee Enterprises who owns 77 Daily Newspapers and has been in business since 1890, will be reaching out to you shortly to learn how to run newspapers.  Please be on standby for their call. 

Yeah, I remember the “experts” at Silver Point Media, a hedge fund that purchased scores of television stations including the once great WKBW Channel 7, where I worked at the time … cut staff, run it into the ground and sell it off … real experts they were 🤬

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

17 hours ago, Augie said:

 

WOW! This took me back to my weekly trip to Chili’s to get the USA Today on the bar on Tuesdays to read two sentences about the Bills. 

I only loved USA Today because I only purchased it to read on an airplane, so I associate it with vacations 

[EasternOHBillsFan]

8 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Pontificating on "basic economics" while not understanding inflation is a bit ironic.

 

The Buffalo News cost $12 per month ($3.05 per week) in 1990.

The OP said they are increasing to $28 per month in 2023. 

 

If you plug $12 into an inflation calculator and compute the increase from 1990 to 2023...

 

 

 

It is $28. 

 

They are essential charging the exact same as they did in 1990. Price has only followed inflation.

 

Newspapers and television were the only game in town for news in 1990... you can't be serious. To say that they should be charging the same amount an adjusted for inflation is a joke... no wonder they are failing.

Edited July 8, 2023 by EasternOHBillsFan

[Einstein]

33 minutes ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

Newspapers and television were the only game in town for news in 1990... you can't be serious. To say that they should be charging the same amount an adjusted for inflation is a joke... no wonder they are failing.

 

They should be charging less, while vehicles, gas, paper, ink, salaries, etc have all increased 3x?

 

Now who doesn’t understand basic economics?

[Augie]

1 hour ago, Einstein said:

 

They should be charging less, while vehicles, gas, paper, ink, salaries, etc have all increased 3x?

 

Now who doesn’t understand basic economics?

 

Does it ever occur to you that it’s not as much about what you do, as how you do it? 

 

What is your goal? 

[beerme1]

15 hours ago, What a Tuel said:

 

There are ads even with the subscription?

 

Oh ya. Their digital is just as bad as their print. Pathetic.

[beerme1]

11 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Pontificating on "basic economics" while not understanding inflation is a bit ironic.

 

The Buffalo News cost $12 per month ($3.05 per week) in 1990.

The OP said they are increasing to $28 per month in 2023. 

 

If you plug $12 into an inflation calculator and compute the increase from 1990 to 2023...

 

 

 

It is $28. 

 

They are essential charging the exact same as they did in 1990. Price has only followed inflation.

 

Ok. Now give me a graphic about the quality in 1990 for $12 a month vs todays quality at the same price inflation adjusted. Don't tell me it's raining while pissing on my leg good sir.

 

[Doc Brown]

11 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Pontificating on "basic economics" while not understanding inflation is a bit ironic.

 

The Buffalo News cost $12 per month ($3.05 per week) in 1990.

The OP said they are increasing to $28 per month in 2023. 

 

If you plug $12 into an inflation calculator and compute the increase from 1990 to 2023...

 

 

 

It is $28. 

 

They are essential charging the exact same as they did in 1990. Price has only followed inflation.

More competition now.  

[HerdMentality]

I can get The Athletic for 8% that price.

[Einstein]

3 hours ago, Augie said:

 

Does it ever occur to you that it’s not as much about what you do, as how you do it? 

What do you mean?

49 minutes ago, HerdMentality said:

I can get The Athletic for 8% that price.

 

I really enjoy The Athletic as well.

[Buffalo Super Fan]

13 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

All of which add up to dog #&** compared to a newspaper for information.

 

Having said that, the News isn't what it once was, and is probably headed for extinction.

 

My theory is that most papers will be gone in another 10 years, with the heavyweights in various regions of the country remaining forever and doing well.

 

The NY Times, WSJ, WAPO, LA Times, Chicago Tribune....and other big papers...are going nowhere.

 

Regional news will probably end up being farmed out through smaller outlets online.

 

 

I find it interesting as a 55 year old Buffalonian that some people really still believe something is too big to fail today. Each there own I guess I guess we can agree to disagree in my opinion. Go Bills! Let’s Go Buffalo 

[Augie]

7 hours ago, Einstein said:

What do you mean?

 

 

If you have to ask, it seems we have identified a major sticking point. 

 

There are all different kinds of intelligence. 

 

 

.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Augie

[KDIGGZ]

I get all of my news from PPP 😬

[RyanC883]

21 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Pontificating on "basic economics" while not understanding inflation is a bit ironic.

 

The Buffalo News cost $12 per month ($3.05 per week) in 1990.

The OP said they are increasing to $28 per month in 2023. 

 

If you plug $12 into an inflation calculator and compute the increase from 1990 to 2023...

 

 

 

It is $28. 

 

They are essential charging the exact same as they did in 1990. Price has only followed inflation.

 

this is a good point.   

[What a Tuel]

33 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

this is a good point.   

 

It doesn't account for advances in production capability, and productivity that decreases cost though.

 

So yeah the inflated price is right but at the same time, how have their costs of production faired? They certainly didn't skyrocket, and would be amazed to find out they stayed the same.

[Slippery Rubber Mats]

Einstein in here defending 28.99 per month for a digital newspaper

[Einstein]

46 minutes ago, Tom Donahoe, GM said:

Einstein in here defending 28.99 per month for a digital newspaper

 

I'm not defending the newspaper. I don't subscribe and I won't.

I am simply telling you that they are not increasing prices because they think it's fun to take more of your paycheck. They are increasing prices because they are trying to stay alive. If they don't increase prices, they will be unable to fulfill their accounts payable and payroll and they will go out of business and there be no local newspaper. 

 

That may be fine with you, but don't b-word when all you have left is national pundits commenting on the Bills instead of your local media team.

 

1 hour ago, What a Tuel said:

So yeah the inflated price is right but at the same time, how have their costs of production faired? They certainly didn't skyrocket

What in the world makes you think their cost of production didnt rise? They absolutely did skyrocket.

 

Printer ink has gone through the roof. When looking at newspaper ink, which is primarily soy oil or a distillate of petroleum (oil), you can see the rise in price:

 

 

 

Then there is the cost of paying people to write for the paper. 

 

Do you think the writers still want to be paid what they made in 1990? 

 

Or do you think their salaries rose with inflation too?

 

Then there is the cost of paper itself, which has risen drastically:

 

 

So we have:

 

1 - Ink - skyrocketed

2 - Paper - skyrocketed

3 - Writer Salary - went with inflation

 

This doesnt even count the cost of rent (which has also skyrocketed), new machines (they dont last forever), etc.

 

 

[Slippery Rubber Mats]

4 minutes ago, Einstein said:

I am simply telling you that they are not increasing prices because they think it's fun to take more of your paycheck.

 

 

 

oh thank you for telling me I thought it was just for the lolllls

 

/eyeroll

[Einstein]

7 minutes ago, Tom Donahoe, GM said:

 

oh thank you for telling me I thought it was just for the lolllls

 

/eyeroll

 

Oh, okay. Continue on with your "Local Media is desperately trying to stay alive. F em!" thread.

[C.Biscuit97]

My mom gets the Buffalo News still and I love good newspaper. But it’s such a dying industry, it’s said. But maybe like records and 90s fashion, they will make a comeback. 

[Punching Bag]

3 hours ago, RyanC883 said:

 

this is a good point.   

 

CPI has always underestimated inflation because government bases raises, per diem, etc on it.

Even a 5th grader knows that!

[What a Tuel]

1 hour ago, Einstein said:

 

I'm not defending the newspaper. I don't subscribe and I won't.

I am simply telling you that they are not increasing prices because they think it's fun to take more of your paycheck. They are increasing prices because they are trying to stay alive. If they don't increase prices, they will be unable to fulfill their accounts payable and payroll and they will go out of business and there be no local newspaper. 

 

That may be fine with you, but don't b-word when all you have left is national pundits commenting on the Bills instead of your local media team.

 

What in the world makes you think their cost of production didnt rise? They absolutely did skyrocket.

 

Printer ink has gone through the roof. When looking at newspaper ink, which is primarily soy oil or a distillate of petroleum (oil), you can see the rise in price:

 

 

 

Then there is the cost of paying people to write for the paper. 

 

Do you think the writers still want to be paid what they made in 1990? 

 

Or do you think their salaries rose with inflation too?

 

Then there is the cost of paper itself, which has risen drastically:

 

 

So we have:

 

1 - Ink - skyrocketed

2 - Paper - skyrocketed

3 - Writer Salary - went with inflation

 

This doesnt even count the cost of rent (which has also skyrocketed), new machines (they dont last forever), etc.

 

 

 

Oh come on man. You really think it costs more to print a paper than in 1990? Give me a break. Show me all the price per barrel nonsense you want. It just isn't the case. The efficiency of technology has drastically altered the cost of production.

[without a drought]

2 hours ago, Tom Donahoe, GM said:

Einstein in here defending 28.99 per month for a digital newspaper

Too bad he can't comprehend that it is $84.50/month for 7 day delivery or $52/month for Sunday only delivery. 

Both of those do include digital access. 

He may need a new calculator for that.

[Einstein]

2 minutes ago, without a drought said:

Too bad he can't comprehend that it is $84.50/month for 7 day delivery or $52/month for Sunday only delivery. 

Both of those do include digital access. 

He may need a new calculator for that.

 

Lol. Try again.

 

 

https://buffalo-news.securesubscribers.com/?source=microg&gad=1#7Day&gclid=Cj0KCQjw756lBhDMARIsAEI0AgmUx8pKvHj788isQvYAL6-LG7bhOcV3w_QNCQNzXZ_HOgYhgZ4LC2oaAtgaEALw_wcB

5 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:

 

Oh come on man. You really think it costs more to print a paper than in 1990?

 

It absolutely does. This isn’t opinion - it’s fact. Technology doesn’t change the increased price of ink, paper, vehicles, salaries, etc. 

[RyanC883]

50 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

 

CPI has always underestimated inflation because government bases raises, per diem, etc on it.

Even a 5th grader knows that!

 

if CPI underestimates inflation, then @Einstein point is still correct, the paper raised it’s prices in response to inflation. His CPI calculator showed the paper today at $28, and if underestimated the paper should cost more.  

[Punching Bag]

6 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

if CPI underestimates inflation, then @Einstein point is still correct, the paper raised it’s prices in response to inflation. His CPI calculator showed the paper today at $28, and if underestimated the paper should cost more.  

 

CPI also changes items accounting for inflation so the point is CPI is useless for judging inflation and it is a straw man argument.

And I have no idea on who Einstein is.  Certainly no Einstein on this board.