Full Version: Thoughts and Decisions
From: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#45]
28 May 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#37] 28 May 2006
Your placing words in my mouth Harvey. I am paying no matter what it comes down to at a minimum to see what all the hubub is about...I've said that in the past. David was asking us to express our feelings about ways to make this transition a good one. I am expressing mine.
What's wrong with EE now? Nothing as far as I can see.....Why must it be all or nothing when the majority of the forum is entirely satisfied with the status quo. My opinion is that change is being forced by a small group of people that want to expand thing....That's just fine, but what about those that arent interested? Tough luck? Why must it be this way?
Could you fathom the possibilty that utopia has already been achieved?
I can....
No one has expressed what will be different yet because of fear that this "idea" may be stolen. Someone has to know what the plans are or it won't go anywhere....
I'm using simple logic here.......
If the idea can't be sold as a good idea to investors, it's highly likely that it isn't a great idea for a business in general. Think about it for a minute before you start calling me cheap....
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#46]
28 May 2006
To: Debbie (DEBBIEG) [#42] 28 May 2006
On the topic of how my words come across in print, it's an unfortunate side of the printed-word format.
Confidence, in the printed-word, can come across as arrogance.
Those who know me personally, can attest to me being a soft-spoken, laid back, introspective person.
I lead a modest lifestyle and prefer to live within my means. To increase those means, through a subscription site, is a desire, but greed isn't a motivator.
I don't blame you, for being reticent to post.
I was reluctant to raise this issue again, since "that previous thread", was such an unpleasant experience, for anyone who followed the exchange.
I got to the point, where those messages were literally the last read. Very uncomfortable.
I intentionally laid low, for a while, in order to restore a sense of normalcy to the forum, weigh the opinions and collect my thoughts.
At the same time, I felt it was necessary to keep the momentum going, for a subscription site.
The concept of a content-based, subscription site, isn't a new one. It just happens to be untried in the A&E industry.
There are very successful pay sites, (some charging hundreds of dollars per month), which rely on collective participation, as we do here.
Some have only a handful of members and are very exclusive, while others, have literally thousands of members, with more joining regularly.
One example would be www.photoworkshop.com a site my wife belongs to, at $99 per year. I should point out that the site's heavily-sponsored, as well. Hasn't slowed down paid memberships.
The one aspect, pay sites hold in common, regardless of their area of endeavor, is information, crucial to the development of expertise and successful businesses, within those fields.
With that in mind, it could easily be said that everyone profits, through belonging to those pay sites.
Are the owners of those sites, profiting more than their members?
It's possible.
It's also possible, that by putting the accumulated knowledge to work, the forum members could outweigh the income of the site owner.
It's all up to the individual and their level of ambition.
I can't think of much more to add, that hasn't been amply covered, in this thread as well as others.
I do appreciate you bringing your thoughts to this topic.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#47]
28 May 2006
To: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#45] 28 May 2006
At this point, I can't see any cards that I haven't put on the table.
If the multiple added-value features I've mentioned, leave people cold, there will be no winning them over.
If the prospect of a "near-free" forum, leaves people cold, there will be no way of winning them over.
From: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#48]
29 May 2006
To: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#34] 29 May 2006
Sorry for the delay in responding to your post. I had the fortune of being able to spend a couple days out of town with my family to smell the roses, in more ways than one.
I'm the last person you want to ask to keep things status quo. That seems a bit boring and unproductive to me. I'm of the opinion that businesses are either moving forward or backward, but never on an even keel with the competition.
Many here would agree with you that there is nothing wrong with the usefulness of the forum, but that really isn't the issue here. The issue is, can it become more and simply a part of something better for our businesses ultimately? My personal answer to that is yes, yes, yes! :-)
EDITED: 29 May 2006 by DATAKES
From: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#49]
29 May 2006
To: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#48] 30 May 2006
Hi David,
No big deal on getting back....it's a holiday weekend ;)
......I had a great day. I played several pieces with a 20 piece brass group at a Revolutionary war vet's grave for an honorary service.....
Back to the issue at hand.......
I also believe in always moving forward, but not at the loss of something that's working well... That would be a terrible business decision don't you think?
I guess what I am trying to say is that I believe that the idea of moving forward should be self supportive, not forced on the back of a forum that works extreemely well "as is".
Why burden something successful with the risk of total if not substantial failure. If the idea is that great.....it should support itself.
From: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#50]
30 May 2006
To: RALLYGUY (RALLYGUY1) [#49] 30 May 2006
Brian,
I don't think you and David L. are too far off on your opinions of where to go from here. Knowing what he knows now, he also sees the importance of maintaining what we have here. I know it will not be free, but at a very modest subscription rate, I think the privacy and credibility it adds to the forum will far outweigh the nonburdensome fee.
I have conveyed to David in some private e-mails that I believe the website needs to stand on its own. I think he had come to that revelation himself and this is why you are seeing the two-tiered subscription being discussed here.
From: Carl (CSEWELL) [#51]
30 May 2006
To: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#50] 30 May 2006
One says, "This is old, and therefore good."
And one says, "This is new, and therefore better."
B-)
(Fire Away!)
I should have sent this to ALL rather than directed it David, but I didn't know how to change it after I posted it.
EDITED: 30 May 2006 by CSEWELL
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#52]
30 May 2006
To: Carl (CSEWELL) [#51] 30 May 2006
There is a third kind of fool.
One who sees merit in both of those sentiments. :-)
From: Carl (CSEWELL) [#53]
30 May 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#52] 30 May 2006
One who sees merit in both of those sentiments.
I'm guilty as charged!
And pessimists have been defined as optimists with experience.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#54]
30 May 2006
To: Carl (CSEWELL) [#53] 30 May 2006
From: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#55]
30 May 2006
To: ALL
You can't carry on having circular discussions about this , the window of opportunity is gone now.
Here's a plan
Why not just call for donations to help keep this site running as is - lots of us will oblige - I would
Then set up your Educational site as a stand alone and punt the hell out of here
I doubt there is one person who would object to you using this site mostly being the fruit of YOUR labours , to punt a site beneficial to all and that can make you a living and satisfy your need to go further than this site.
When you got something good , offer it and we will bite.
You then have the best of both worlds , an active free partially subsided site and a nice target audience and a hugely better chance of success, win win for all.
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#56]
30 May 2006
To: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#55] 30 May 2006
That is close to the plan at the moment, with one exception.
The virtually free site needs to cover its costs and over a few years pay back the outlay of the site from the past, (I think it is), seven years. The $3 per month will hopefully do that and leave a bit for improvements. (It may take a few years to pay back the financial investment, hopefully not that long.)
When I say payback and cover the costs I include a little more than just the financial investment. A far below minimum wage payment for the time to organize things and keep them that is not an unheard of possibility. Some people will not like this aspect, but very few will labor and allow that labor of love to badly impact their marginal income. Why should David, in my opinion?
This is far from an adversarial post to you, we are in very close agreement at this moment.
From: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#57]
30 May 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#56] 30 May 2006
Harvey,
I doubt very much that David is looking at it like you portray, although I would be the last person opposed to the concept of reimbursing him for his past out-of-pocket expenses.
David will likely not be pocketing much money any time soon, especially with the investment required for video equipment, programming, etc. I imagine he will be investing plenty of his free time in the effort as well.
EDITED: 30 May 2006 by DATAKES
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#58]
30 May 2006
To: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#57] 30 May 2006
From: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#59]
30 May 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#56] 31 May 2006
Harvey , the donations to the site will defray pressing expenses and the target audience feeding the value add ons or new site will more than compensate for any income lost/cost of maintaining this site.
Write off past costs as the cost of building this site up to feed the new one.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#60]
31 May 2006
To: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#59] 31 May 2006
Rodney,
As Harvey said, we're basically in agreement, with the approach you're suggesting.
The added features are ambitious and will take time (some, more than others) to develop.
Where we're not quite coming together, is on the issue of donations vs. a nominal fee.
EDITED: 31 May 2006 by DGL
From: sprinter [#61]
31 May 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#60] 31 May 2006
David,
For your video productions have you looked at Camtasia 3.1? It now has live video from a video camera input. I've been playing with the demo version and was so impressed I ordered the CD version. The full version is $300.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#62]
31 May 2006
To: sprinter [#61] 31 May 2006
I've only recently become aware of some of the technology we can bring to bear, which is incrediby exciting.
My head's exploding with ideas, based on the little bit I know.
I knew of Camtasia, for flash tutorials, but I'll definitely look into the video aspect.
Thanks for the heads up. :-)
From: Ken D. (KDEVORY) [#63]
31 May 2006
To: ALL
The investors are the forum members. Instead of a formal business plan where everything is on paper, the forum was set up out of pocket as a limited free sample. Now the sample time is coming to an end; membership fees will be the investment and expanded content the dividends.
Have I been reading the situation incorrectly since I first joined?
P.S. I like the new twist of basic and expanded content levels. Curious how "upgrades" will be handled.
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#64]
31 May 2006
To: Ken D. (KDEVORY) [#63] 31 May 2006
Could you be a little more definitive about what you mean by 'upgrades'? I am a bit unsure about what you specifically mean.
Show messages: 1-4 5-24 25-44 45-64 65-84 85-98