wall street journal subscription price comparison

Last March, I took the New York Times to task over its paywall. Why not offer me a reasonable price in the first place? Why train me to think it makes more sense for me to just cancel? I’ll get back to some answers on this, but let’s talk about the New York Times now. Of course, I’d have been happier if I hadn’t gone through this in the first place. Really, You Want Me To Unsubscribe To Save? My “new” one is good through April of next year. I called today, and my January subscription was cancelled. The WSJ can keep the extra $10 or so it made during my double-dip period. I’ve been double-dipped! And I’ve only gotten a single paper delivered each day! For the past two weeks, the WSJ has maintained two different subscriptions for me, under the same exact name, at the same exact address. Another was for a “renewal” of the new account the telemarketer had created for me. Going online today, one renewal was for the account I renewed in January.

A few days ago, I received a paper “renewal acknowledgement” of it.

That was enough for her, in the end, to declare she could let my subscription go through. I said that as far as I could tell, my subscription had expired two months ago. See under “Status?” My account was shown as “Active” but with an expiration date of, which at the time the telemarketer had called me had passed two months prior. Here’s exactly what it said, except for me removing my account number: While we were talking, I looked up my account online. Funny how quickly she went from being the Wall Street Journal to having nothing to do with them. She told me I couldn’t have the deal, and that I’d need to call the Wall Street Journal directly to follow-up. She’s stumbled into an area that was clearly off the playbook, with a subscription that probably wouldn’t count to her quota, so simply wanted me off the phone. Surely the Wall Street Journal should know that I already had a subscription, right? I was told that I couldn’t have the offer, if I had a subscription already. At the very end, I asked what about that subscription I’d just renewed. Did I want this? The rep was very eager for me to take it. It was the WSJ (well, a telemarketer working for them) offering me a $100 per year deal. Restricting the content got me to renew, even at a higher price. Success for the WSJ, as I even noted in a later article explaining why that Google News trick had been deliberately blocked as part of a changing policy with the Wall Street Journal (see WSJ Pulls Back On What Google Searchers Can Read For Free).

Actually, the regular rate is even higher than that, as I’ll get into further below. I ended up renewing at the $260 (or so) per year regular rate. It also wasn’t one that I could unlock using the usual trick of going through Google News. In January, there was an article that I really wanted to read. The call didn’t come soon enough for me, however. If I didn’t, inevitably I’d get a call urging me to renew at a lower rate. By this point, I’d learned that if I just let the paper expire, I’d probably continue to get it for free. In late 2011, the notices came again that my subscription was expiring. It was the WSJ, wanting me to renew and offering me that same $100 rate. It was even inconvenient that I couldn’t put them on a vacation hold, since I no longer had an official account.Ībout a week after they stopped coming, I got a phone call. Nope, for three months, they continue to be delivered. Unfortunately for the WSJ, I didn’t need the paper that bad to stay hooked for the higher price. Of course, the answer - in part - was that I’d been given an introductory rate. If it was worth $100 for an entire year, what made it suddenly worth 2.5 times that amount the next? I got a few notices, but I balked at paying the $250 (if I recall right) that the WSJ wanted me to pay to renew. Getting a high-quality paper six days per week for cheaper than I could get my own local paper, the Los Angeles Times? Bring it on, especially since I’d also get easy access past the long-existing WSJ paywall.Īfter a year, my subscription expired. Way back in 2009, I received some junk mail from the Wall Street Journal offering me the paper for $100 per year.

If the New York Times, or the Wall Street Journal for that matter, want to be paid what they’re worth, how about giving subscribers a set price they can depend on? A price that doesn’t overcharge the digital subscriber? Below, a case study on the deliberate pricing confusion both publications pursue. The New York Times is launching new video ads to convince people they should pay for its content.

Wall street journal subscription price comparison