This weekend, I found myself in a bathroom that time forgot, and there was a copy of New York magazine's 1991 fall fashion issue. The third best part: the fashion edit was spectacular. It was like the first round of new wave flashbacks, and it was like a neon sign shop threw up on Taylor Dayne, with Samantha Foxx singing backup. Girls on the wet streets with smoke machines, with a hand sassily on the hip! The second best part was that David Blum was listed as a contributing editor. But the absolute first best part was the blow-in subscription card.
$39.98 a year for 50 issues! That is $62.44 in 2008 dollars, adjusted for inflation.
And today?
Yes. 54 issues, for $24.97. (That is $15.99 in 1991 dollars, by the way.) So in the past 18 years, New York magazine's subscription price has dropped something like 60%.
"Love will lead you back... to a two-year subscription."
Which, of course, leads us back to this. The Awl is not unlike a dormant world-circling snake god that way.
Well, but they can charge less for subscriptions because print ad sales are going like gangbusters these days. Right?
Actually I think the price of ads went up significantly from the early 90s. Like, hugely. I don't have the data to back this up! And I could be completely wrong. But it's definitely a component of subscription being less.
And of course, the theory is, cheaper subscripti
Samantha Foxx was worth 80 cents an issue in 1991 dollars, only if you were lucky, you'd get just her once or twice a year.
I am embarrassed that I went through puberty with Samantha Foxx.
I like the economics lesson! But more Taylor Dayne, please.