How much would "Monthly Unlimited Everything" cost? | Hacker News Reader

How much would "Monthly Unlimited Everything" cost?

10 pointsjavajosh10 comments

This is a neat little thought-experiment for all you media focused people out there. I just bought a monthly unlimited membership to a nice gym - it's about $120/month. Which got me thinking - if you could have "all you can eat" music, movies, TV, games, and books how much would you pay? Related questions: how do you think such a system would affect media consumption by absolute amount or category?

Just to get the ball rolling: I'd pay $500 for that.

View on HN

All you can eat, so in the case of music/movies etc, am I owning or leasing the content for that period. That would determine the price for me.

Taking that I pay $79/yr for Amazon, with free movies, tv + shipping, then I spend about $40/mo on movies, music and books at Amazon, then I'd spend $50/mo.

Of course there are people who will spend more, and people who will spend less. I like to think of my spending as conservative. And since I get my TV over the air, I can't fathom for a second why anyone pays for TV.

> since I get my TV over the air, I can't fathom for a second why anyone pays for TV.

Here are some reasons people might buy cable:

1. Cable has many more channels, many of which don't exist on over-the-air TV.

2. If you grew up in a cabled household, you may think of it as a "standard" utility and buy it without thinking about whether you really need it.

3. Depending on where you live, the over-the-air channels you receive may be limited. I've discussed this problem before on HN [1].

4. Many homes and buildings no longer have antennas for receiving over-the-air signals. Many new TV's have no or poor built-in antennas. So you may have to buy a bulky antenna with no idea how well it will work.

5. If your TV is more than five years old, you may have to get a converter box to receive TV over the air, since TV transmissions changed format in 2009 [1]. New TV's have hardware to read the new digital TV signals, but old TV's don't.

Here are some reasons people might decide against getting, or discontinue a cable subscription:

1. You can save a substantial amount of money.

2. You may spend less time watching TV if you have less content available (whether this is good or bad is subjective, but for many people, reducing TV time is a plus).

3. Losing access to cable-TV content is less painful if you have a broadband connection, because much content is available freely and legally online -- Youtube, Hulu, Crunchyroll, etc. You can usually* send your computer's video output to your TV.

I'm writing from a USA point of view; if you're in another country, your mileage may vary.

*You need the computer and TV to have the same port, and the proper cable. An astonishing number of video ports have come into existence, many in the last 10-15 years, including traditional antenna, component, composite, VGA, S-Video, DVI, HDMI, and DisplayPort. A computer and TV built around the same time are likelier to have the same port, but your best bet is to check the specs before you buy.

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4307147

I think one way to estimate that is to see how much media you can possibly consume per month. Obviously you can only watch one movie at a time, and though it is possible to do more, you generally listen to only one song at a time. You probably don't listen to songs while watching a movie. So judging by the number of waking hours minus the hours sleeping and at work (maybe not for music), you should be able to guesstimate the number of "media hours" per month and use that to guess at a flat fee.

Alright. Let's say a song is $1, a movie is $10 and a book is $10, and a song takes 3 minutes, a movie 200 minutes, and a book is 700 minutes (350 pages at 2 minutes a page). So the per minute cost is $.30, $.50, $.15. The average is (30+50+15/3) $.31. Not really sure how to factor games in there. $60 for 20 hours - that's $.05 a minute, which pulls the average way down.

I think a person will max out at 40 hours per week. That's 2400 minutes, which at $.30 is $80. The average is probably going to be closer to 10-20 hours - $20-40 per week.

So we're talking $80-240 a month by this calculation.

Yeah I agree that 40 hours seems to be a good number for a week's consumption. On weekdays, the max I can think it taking is 2 hours for commuting, and 3-5 hours of TV. I am nowhere near this number myself, but I can see it being the norm for a lot of people. That's about 7 hours a day for 5 days. Weekends are completely random for me. On most summer weekends I didn't think I consume anything at all, but I can see how it could be quite high for some people. Overall, I think a hard cap of 40 hours is probably sufficient for most people.

I am sure that the MPAA would try and argue that internet access should be included in this, which is probably where the whole problem starts.

I think the price would be based on perceived consumption. Just like a gym membership of $50/month seems reasonable because you would go 3x a week, but in reality it is 1x a week or less.

Is this strictly for content consumption. When I first read the title, I was thinking of phone plans, etc... In which case we're talking about around $130/month for unlimited everything (minus international plans), unlimited internet, hotspot plans, cable tv, etc... those probably would come close to $500 already. If you're talking about just everything packaged as a whole, including the above, $500 is a steal deal.

Well if I look at the cost of Netflix, let's say Spotify or Rdio, Gamefly and the Library, I wouldn't pay more than 150$ a month.

I currently pay zero. If I want it and it isn't free I usually steal it (if it is digital!). If I really applicate a Work, I will support the Artist with some sort of purchase.

Although I do not own my home so that mitigates most of the risk for me.

After a couple of years with several media subscription services, I'm about done with them.

If I have a slow month, I feel like I'm losing money. I feel pressure to "consume now", because if I subsequently drop the service, I'll no longer have access.

Items come and go. I e.g. add them to my queue, to find a month or three later that they are no longer available.

I can't loan them to family or a friends (I'm not counting "authorized" "lending" features that are at the whim of the subscription service).

I'm switching back to ownership. And to public libraries -- assuming the U.S. manages to maintain any sort of public infrastructure.

Fuck "subscriptions". From someone who actually tried to make them work.

P.S. Not to mention my concerns about "centrally redacted history" and the like.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com