Full Version: Thoughts and Decisions
From: sprinter [#81]
1 Jun 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#79] 1 Jun 2006
David,
I hope you can understand the confusion, and I'm sure I was not alone.
From some of your earlier posts and Harvey's post the two of you don't seem to be on the same page. It's almost like the two of you have a plan, but don't have a clue of how it is going to be done. The joys of trying something different with more than one person involved :-)
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#82]
1 Jun 2006
To: sprinter [#81] 1 Jun 2006
Ken,
I agree and I do understand the confusion.
These were the types of discussions we originally carried on in private and I'm happy we've enlisted the opinions of others.
It's been a big help.
You're witnessing, not only the trials and tribulations of making decisions, with more than one person involved, but those in trying to launch something virtually untried in this industry.
There have been mistakes in this decision-making process, and there will surely be more, before we're through.
Everything is life is a calculated risk. I see this move as a mild risk.
EDITED: 1 Jun 2006 by DGL
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#83]
1 Jun 2006
To: sprinter [#81] 1 Jun 2006
The total plan is not yet set in stone, it will never be because that stifles growth.
We have spent many hours on the phone discussing issues and ways to do things. It went from a full only subscription site to what is imagined at the moment, two levels.
A lot of this was from opinions not only posted on the forum, but in emails and private messages. We are pretty much working on it in the way the forum runs. Doing what looks and feels as the best, and taking input from a ton of others to make it better. A thousand minds, while never to be able to agree on anything completely, can sure produce better results than a few minds.
Unfortunately, (to me), it is still a bit of a work in progress. I would love to have the full concept finalized, but each time we feel that we have it someone chimes in with another aspect that needs addressing. For example, having the software able to apply the credit paid for the basic subscription applied to a premium subscription. It is a nuts-and-bolts thing, but needs to be addressed so as not to have problems.
The other problems being addressed are publishing problems, like having articles from paid experts, (those knowledgeable in that function, not necessarily considered industry experts-yet), before having the funds to pay them. Hundreds of little things as well as the big ones.
From: Pete (AWARDMASTERS) [#84]
1 Jun 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#79] 1 Jun 2006
David,
I believe Rodney is correct. Those leaving will be much greater than you expect. Also, I believe that you grossly overestimate the number of new people who will sign up with a pay format.
Why kill the golden goose when, as Rodney points out, you can use the membership here as a resource for your planned new features. This forum works - if your expanded program is going to work, you are going to need a foundation from which to draw customers. In my opinion, there is no better foundation than this forum in its present format.
From: Dave Jones (DAVERJ) [#85]
1 Jun 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#74] 1 Jun 2006
I have to agree with Rodney. $36/year is not "in essence, free". That may be a small amount to pay as a pro for a feature rich site. It IS a lot to pay for a forum and a couple of minor extra features. The real features you are talking about are at additional expense beyond the $36.
If the forums require any fee, I would be surprised if you get any new members beyond ones that have already been coming here. Newcomers will not see a forum as being worth $36/year. They won't even pay $20/year for a forum when there are free ones that give them what they feel is enough info.
Also, be aware that free sites like sprinter's are going to add free premium content (he's already said so here) in order to draw away your paying customers. So this whole brew-ha-ha has cost you paying customers already. (you might want to institute a policy of not promoting competing forums here)
My suggestion is to keep the forum free and offer a 3-tier plan:
Tier 1 == No monthly/yearly fee. Just join the forum (with a real name). You get free access to the forums, plus a couple of minor extra features. Special content (tutorials (video or PDF), articles, tele-seminars, etc...) are available at a per-piece price (ie: $10 for large video tutorial, $5 for a small one) Maybe some cheap content for $1-$2. Also give everybody a couple of free sample tutorials to demonstrate what they are like, and as a teaser to pay for more.
Tier 2 == $29/year: Main forums plus a couple of special private forum folders not available to Tier-1. Some free special content not available to Tier-1, plus 30% discount on all paid special content ($7 instead of $10 for a large video tutorial). Maybe the $29 includes a credit for one free tutorial.
Tier 3 == $79/per year: all special content included, plus a couple of bonus features not available to Tier-1 or Tier-2 plans.
There is a reason that prices in retail stores end in .95 It's all about perception. $19.95 feels a lot cheaper than $20, even though everybody knows it's the same thing. Likewise $29/year seems a lot cheaper than $36/year. Same thing with $99 vs $79. The perceptual difference is larger than $20.
You can't really expect newbies to pay for your past xx years expenses. But you could put out a call to current members to make contributions to help keep this forum free. Then use that money as seed money for the premium content, which when it goes live will support the free forum and keep it free.
Using the 3-tier system I suggested above, you can also bootstrap the whole thing by opening Tier-1 now and start adding tutorials or other content that people can pay for piece by piece. Then nobody can complain that they had to pay a membership fee on the promise of content coming some day in the future. Once there is a fair amount of per-piece content on the site then open up Tier-2 and 3 so people can join as members to get discounts on the content they can already see available. And of course, opening those tiers gives you a boost of money to add even more content.
I would also suggest some type of content control so that once you pay for a tutorial you can replay it again for a certain amount of time without being charged again (maybe 1 week or 1 month). Sometimes you need to watch a tutorial a few times to "get it". Plus that solves the problem of lost connections or internet problems.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#86]
1 Jun 2006
To: Dave Jones (DAVERJ) [#85] 1 Jun 2006
Contrary to what Rodney has said, I don't think this has been a circular discussion. It's generated important food for thought, including yours, which I highly value.
Thank you,
From: Dave Jones (DAVERJ) [#87]
1 Jun 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#86] 1 Jun 2006
One other point to make for the 3-tier system I mentioned, by keeping the forums free (except for a couple of members-only private folders) you keep highly knowledgeable folks around who don't feel they should have to pay to participate. Plus you dilute the power of competing forums, since this will still be the place to hang out. ;-)
From: Dave Jones (DAVERJ) [#88]
1 Jun 2006
To: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#75] 1 Jun 2006
Another way to look at it, at least for a certain amount of the people that come here, is more like sponges. They soak up what they can and then after a while they get full enough that they start putting back for others to soak up. :-)
A leech to me implies doing some harm to the ones giving out the info. The only ones of those I can think of would be people sucking up info here so they can spread it on another forum as if it were their own knowledge. :-(
From: UCONN Dave & Lynn too (DANDL48) [#89]
1 Jun 2006
To: Dave Jones (DAVERJ) [#85] 1 Jun 2006
Guess that would eliminate Mr Sprint since he doesn't like to give out his name, even on his own forum.
From: Rodney Gold (RODNEY_GOLD) [#90]
1 Jun 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#78] 2 Jun 2006
From: UncleSteve [#91]
1 Jun 2006
To: Dave Jones (DAVERJ) [#88] 1 Jun 2006
AND right on the money! ;-)
From: Ken D. (KDEVORY) [#92]
1 Jun 2006
To: Dave Jones (DAVERJ) [#88] 1 Jun 2006
From: Franklin (FW_HAYNES) [#93]
1 Jun 2006
To: ALL
From: Mike (BIGPIXEL) [#94]
1 Jun 2006
To: ALL
Dave, Harvey and All,
I just caught up with this thread and all I'd really like to suggest is that your only mistake at this point in time is attempting to hash it all out in public before the change over. If you're going to a subscription basis, and I know that you are, I'd recommend that you design it as you want and then spring it on the masses when ready to launch with full bells and whistles in place, similar to the Rob Galbraith photo site transfer that Rodney has been speaking about. That does represent a financial risk, but one you must be willing to take.
This endless back and forth over $3/day isn't convincing anyone in advance that a pay site would benefit them more than the current free site. Why? They can't see the difference or added value yet.
You're on the right track, you just need to make a leap of faith. There are very few viable reference centers on the web for what is discussed here daily. Personally I think people will subscribe AFTER they are able to see what they're missing if they don't. Its the combination of personalities, extra value offerings and site uniqueness that should draw people in.
That's the deal maker folks! Added value over a chat list!
BTW, I am very happy and eager to be considered worthy of being a photographic contributor to the new site and look forward to the opportunity to add value to the site's purpose if I can.
EDITED: 1 Jun 2006 by BIGPIXEL
From: UncleSteve [#95]
1 Jun 2006
To: Mike (BIGPIXEL) [#94] 2 Jun 2006
The only disagreement we have is probably based on a typo....
It is $3 / MONTH, not per day for the basic membership.... :D
From: UCONN Dave & Lynn too (DANDL48) [#96]
2 Jun 2006
To: Franklin (FW_HAYNES) [#93] 2 Jun 2006
Franklin,
I couldn't have said it better!!
Can we get an Amen from the Congregation.
Going pay IS going to happen, for those of you still rehashing it, GET OVER IT. You have choices and you are allowed to exercise them.
Just my opinion,
Dave
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#97]
2 Jun 2006
To: Mike (BIGPIXEL) [#94] 2 Jun 2006
Our hashing this out in public, was done for one basic reason:
We have longstanding reationships with the forum members, whom we consider a family. In light of the displeasure with our decison to become a subscription-based site, we wanted to make the transition as democratic as possible.
In doing so, I think we've demonstrated how difficult and imperfect the decison-making process can be. Much moreso, than I would have originally thought.
Harvey and I spoke at length last night, and we've drawn our conclusions.
We'll tweak and fine tune those conclusions, before making any further announcements.
From: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#98]
2 Jun 2006
To: UCONN Dave & Lynn too (DANDL48) [#96] 2 Jun 2006
This topic has been discussed almost to a point of boredom. Let's move!!!
EDITED: 2 Jun 2006 by DATAKES
Show messages: 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-98