That's not always the best metric, particularly when your product is being sold to an entity which is dissimilar to you (see: rich people, medium to large companies). In those cases, they are often willing to pay much, much more than you would.
Many people make the mistake of underpricing because of this.
Relatedly, you not selling to HN posters, people on Slashdot, starving college students, or people who are morally opposed to spending money for software.
I don't mean to step on any toes, but I've heard "$20 is sort of pricey for a business -- why not make it $10?" enough to be skeptical of the advice on pricing from other people, unless they are saying Charge More.
Good point. Your business is a good example of one in which you are able to charge reasonably aggressive prices even to a demographic that is not normally considered monied.
That people are often willing to pay far more than you'd think is certainly not limited to enterprises and the wealthy.
The graphic has done the rounds in many, many places, but it did generate 46 points and 35 comments here a few months back without an ad redditum comment.
People are downvoting you because you are doing nothing to add to the conversation. Why not try to formulate your comments into a more meaningful discussion?
I think it will be important for journalists (and their companies) to really think about who their audiences are.
I think it will be important to simplify. And once that's done, I think the majority of people will eventually (I don't know when) pay for content because it will be of higher quality and relevance. (Some do this moderately well now.)
Frankly, I think all parties (i.e. Journalism as a whole) will probably benefit in the long-run. You may see smaller organizations, but that should enable them to adapt more efficiently as things evolve.
The key here, in my opinion, is to not get caught up in fast and excessive growth. You may even extend that to "pull-back/slow down" if you're growing too fast.
Wow.