NYT Cooking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a full digital subscription which gets me access to everything online. Do you read the rest of the paper OP? I don’t think about it as food section vs everything else. I also used to get full digital access with just a subscription for Sunday only delivery on dead tree. I just had been reading online anyway, so I canceled hard copy delivery and switched to online.

I also know that in this day and age, it is important for independent responsible media to stay afloat. I buy the NYT subscription because I feel the need to have the NYT exist.

+1

+2 and I have a subscription to the Washington Post as well for the same reason. But in truth I read both papers religiously and for the NYT I love their recipes (or at least certain recipe authors) and use it extensively, so it's worth it to me. I use their recipes multiple times a week and I don't print out or copy the ones I make repeatedly; I just save them in a folder and access them online whenever I need them.

I think some of you are grandfathered in perhaps? I pay $8/month and don’t get Cooking with it. It sounds like some folks have it included.

I'm not grandfathered in but it's not that much extra. I think it's $15 per month for the paper and $5 per month for the cooking section. Not that much when you consider what I save on takeout by using the recipes to cook! And I really love cooking so it's an indulgence/hobby as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I hear ya! My subscription used to include access to food section when I first got it, but now it doesn’t. Mine is $11.99/mo, I believe.

This is us, too. We used to qualify for it and now we don’t. It’s annoying.

I think it was a trial subscription bundle.

For us NYT cooking is so much better than free stuff, it’s no comparison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have to say, it is so irritating that the NYT food section has a separate subscription than the regular newspaper. Add a couple dollars to everyone's to cover the cost. If I remember correctly, it's like $60/year. That's a lot. I would pay half of that, but not $60. Am I being unreasonable? I will admit that what I have made from there is good.

$1.25 week ($5 for every 4 weeks)
Or $50/annual if you pay the year upfront.

[Anonymous]

I don't care about the newspapers, but I pay thrn$5/mo for cooking. Not only do i find the respites spectacular, I actually live reading and browsing through the recipes doe pleasure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about the newspapers, but I pay the $5/mo for cooking. Not only do i find the recipes spectacular, I actually love reading and browsing through the recipes for pleasure.

Yikes corrected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have to say, it is so irritating that the NYT food section has a separate subscription than the regular newspaper. Add a couple dollars to everyone's to cover the cost. If I remember correctly, it's like $60/year. That's a lot. I would pay half of that, but not $60. Am I being unreasonable? I will admit that what I have made from there is good.

$1.25 week ($5 for every 4 weeks)
Or $50/annual if you pay the year upfront.

Still too much for me. DP. I would pay $25 annually but that's the max. Love the quote from another poster who feels it is a donation. Not. NYT is a for-profit company and I am not making that kind of "donation." If there were more value then I would pay the $50. Since there is lesser value, the max I will pay is $25.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have to say, it is so irritating that the NYT food section has a separate subscription than the regular newspaper. Add a couple dollars to everyone's to cover the cost. If I remember correctly, it's like $60/year. That's a lot. I would pay half of that, but not $60. Am I being unreasonable? I will admit that what I have made from there is good.

$1.25 week ($5 for every 4 weeks)
Or $50/annual if you pay the year upfront.

Still too much for me. DP. I would pay $25 annually but that's the max. Love the quote from another poster who feels it is a donation. Not. NYT is a for-profit company and I am not making that kind of "donation." If there were more value then I would pay the $50. Since there is lesser value, the max I will pay is $25.

They are for profit based on advertising revenue that counts subscribers, and in some cases subscribers of the print edition. The NYT is one of the few papers that can still afford to have bureaus around the world and not rely of press agencies and stringers. You know nothing about the economics of print journalism if you think the Times and the Post are living large.

[Anonymous]

^^Wow... yes, there are definitely some people here who don’t understand the serious economic challenges facing NYT and all of traditional journalism. If you want your news and recipes for free, you’ll get the quality one would expect from those things being free.

I have the NYT Cooking app and for $5 a month, it delivers consistent high quality recipes that keep me out of the dinner rut.

[Anonymous]

I won't pay for any of it because there is no value to it. I can find what I need for free on a whole host of other sites. I have no need to subsidize the NYT or WaPo for an inferior quality product.

[Anonymous]

I thinking you are an advanced cook who enjoys being in the kitchen the NYT cooking is well worth it. Tested recipes. High quality ingredients. Only free website I've seen that comes close is food 52.

[Anonymous]

I agree. NYT's recipes turn out well since they are from serious chefs and cooks. The comments for the recipes also have many useful tweaks and suggestions. There are a few trusted blogs I follow that have good recipes but there's a lot of chaff out there.

[Anonymous]

I'm willing to pay for both WaPo and NYT, since I read both online religiously. I also really love the daily Cooking email, and I rely on the search and save functions in the food section. So yeah, totally worth it. I'd rather save on other expenses. I think the "free" digital content we're so used to getting now has devalued real in-depth journalism. And the NY Times recipe columns are great reads in and of themselves, even before you get to the recipes. I've been particularly enjoying Samin Nosrat's columns and I'm a bit bummed she is taking off for a while!

[Anonymous]

I get it included as part of my subscription, but I get the actual paper delivered, 7 days a week, which apparently includes all digital access.
For the PPs who don’t want to pay, then don’t. There are other free options. NYT isn’t operating a free website; the content costs money to generate.

[Anonymous]

I cancelled my subscription to the NYT years ago. The paper drives me crazy. Some good things about it and the food section was one of the better sections but I can't stand the rest. Whenever I come across a food headline or recipe that is intriguing, I have a friend send it to me. So $0.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I won't pay for any of it because there is no value to it. I can find what I need for free on a whole host of other sites. I have no need to subsidize the NYT or WaPo for an inferior quality product.

+1 I'm professionally trained although I've never worked professionally as a chef. I don't see value in either site and I won't pay for either of them. They seem to be for the one-off cook who wants to claim she made a recipe from NYT rather than Food Network because she thinks people care. I can find what I need by doing a general search on Google and then looking at what pops up. The vetting by evaluating recipes means I have a better end product.