From: dark@microsoft.com (Dar Korra'ti)
Subject: Re: Subscriptions (was Re: Hepcats news (ish)
Date: 17 Dec 92 01:31:24 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <9212150144.AA25747@lynx.corp.frame.com> jrd@frame.com (James Drew) writes:
>R'ykandar Korra'ti (dark@microsoft.com (Dar Korra'ti)) writes:
>>that running a subscription services is a _monumental pain_.
>If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
     Oh, testy testy... relax, will you?

>For me, if I cannot get at least as good a deal by subscription, then the
>reward isn't worth the effort, especially if I get a *worse* deal.
     Fine; if you don't think the extra convenience is worth the difference
in cover, _don't subscribe_. I didn't say you had some sort of moral
obligation to subscribe to anything. What I _was_ saying is that he's
not price-gouging, trying to take advantage of some mass of poor,
unsuspecting readers out there who are too silly to notice the difference
between cover and payment. :-)

>Hire a temp at $5/hour, uses labels off your printer, you can turn out
>30 an hour.  Thus, a profit can still be made on subscriptions.
     Eep. If he's not currently set up as a business-with-employees, then
his taxes will jump tremendously, and he'll have to start filing taxes
quarterly. He'd probably need an accountant, or at least some
form of pro help filling out the forms, unless he wants to do it all
himself or take chances. (I've looked into it. Not with the idea of
hiring somebody myself, mind you - ha! :-) - but out of curiosity.)

>Yes, I have.  Let's assume the $3.00 is right.  Then the publisher is making
>the full $2.50 off of you, less envelope and wages to have it stuffed.
     Anybody want to weigh these things? Somebody got a scale? I don't
have one where I post from (usually)...
     Some people make more money off subscriptions than off the copies
which go to the distributor. They do this so they can afford to meet the
distributor's demanding discount rates, and so they don't have to raise the
cost of their books too much, thus making sales drop. Icky, but true.

>The point of a subscription from the "user's" point of view
     Ah, okay. This is valid, then.

>if the publisher has to charge more per copy for a subscription than
>cover price, then that publisher should not be offering subscriptions.
     <shrugs> Moral-oblication statements don't often mean much, particularly
in market economics. Don't like it? Don't pay it.

>Anyone who orders such a subscription is either (a) unable to receive
>the material through other channels, (b) desiring to help financially
>support the publisher beyond just buying the product, or (c) a fool.
     Or simply doesn't want to run down to the comic book store on a
regular basis. There is an added convenience to having show up at your
door, you know. Some people pay for that sort of thing. (A lot of people
do, actually. That pizza you buy from Little Ceasar's costs virtually
nothing in raw materials - you're mostly paying for convenience.)
     (Option "c" above is kind of snide, don't you think?)
                                                  - R'ykandar.
--
R'ykandar Korra'ti | LOW ORBIT PUBLICATIONS
dark@microsoft.com | You'll note that REFRACTIONS is cheaper by subscription.