"iTunes for magazines" gets a little more focus

More details about the US consortium of magazine publishers and their planned "itunes" for magazines, courtesy of the Guardian/Paid Content.

UPDATE ( few minutes later after actually following the Zemanta links!)
In the comments under the Gawker post, lukeoneil47 makes the very good point that in the USA magazines bought on subscription are almost free already. That discussion in full (all material taken from Gawker.com: http://gawker.com/5421522/the-new-itunes-for-magazines-or-an-irrelevant-venture-is-here


@sweetpickles: How much is this going to be? Magazines are already basically free. $10 or so for a year.
@lukeoneil47: Exactly; I don't pay enough for magazines to start looking for a cheaper way to get them, and an e-reader doesn't look nearly as intriguing on coffee table. (Or maybe it does, but I'm not letting my guests get their grubby hands on it.)
@DahlELama: Yeah but you might not have much of a choice in the future. Magazines are going to be newsstand or electronic. I don't think you will be able to get cheap print subscriptions any more.
@triplethreat: Interesting; that's definitely a perspective I haven't heard yet. What's the advantage to getting rid of the subscription model as long as the issues are still being created in print?
@DahlELama: Print subs are basically a loss and getting more so--they are super cheap in order to keep the rate base up, but are increasing in cost as printing prices, postal rates, and gas prices rise. Better to print just a few copies to sell at newsstand for those who really want the "object experience" (I made that term up) and put the rest of your energy into developing web audience and revenue models.

I think music will go same way. I mean, why make a CD? People would rather download. But a fancy vinyl box set? They will buy.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]