Title: price. price. price
Review: I subscribe to the print version. I would prefer to save trees. Why I would have to pay MORE to save trees is totally beyond me. Who is driving this train wreck? I am a professor at a top U.S. business school. I am teaching an MBA course that requires students to read the WSJ. Our MBA students have Kindle and/or iPad access. We are trying to teach them about environmental responsibility and sustainability. Does WSJ really want us to teach our MBA students that it costs EXTRA to be environmentally and socially responsible? If our students were not on limited budgets, it would be a no brainer to have them access WSJ electronically but paying a BIG premium for the ability to do so? I don't think so.
Is this product review negative?