Probably that's not the case, it looks like they introduced localised pricing similar to the one in the App Store(or Netflix, Amazon Prime etc.).
If you think about it, their costs are fixed and they should optimize for revenue and the sweet spot for the num subscribers and price is different at every market.
Not necessarily. It's entirely plausble that they set the price lower in order to boost the number of subscribers and thus their political constituency.
I think it is either an accounting thing or they decided they wanted people to pay for the 4.28GB download and decided to charge their "standard low price".
Exactly same feeling. I’d like to know what is the argument against this pricing model because I’m pretty sure they have considered or reviewed different pricing models.
Their justification on Twitter seems to be that they needed to get rid of their free tier. That makes some sense, but that doesn't really explain why they double the price for their lowest tier and increased the pricing on their other tiers as well. It's unfortunate that they're increasing their price without adding any extra value to the product.
They are lowering prices because demand is falling off. And it's not just one price reduction. They have done multiple at this point. It's one of the worst positions for a company to be in.
Seems like it. I don't see how the price increase could be sustainable for anyone. It's almost as if Microsoft is deliberately trying to sabotage them.
A la carte makes no sense.
reply