Is there another..

[St_Tel49]

Personally, it'd take something fairly special and spectacular to make me want to pay to use a web forum; Especially when it is not the norm and virtually all other forums do not need to charge. At the moment, and for as far into the future as I can see, this forum is not it. Soon after this ruling commenced for non-payers, I was quite happy to be restricted to three posts in 24hrs, because the quality of the board had diminished so much. There are a lot of stubborn and non-paying users from 'back in the day' who helped make the various incarnations of the S4E / TSW forums what they are (were?) These Registered Users are now not able to start threads, so a whole swathe of interesting subjects are lost; What we're left with amongst some decent paying Members are some that, to be blunt, are plain boring, repetitive and recyclers of rubbish topics. This, in turn, turns more people off of the forum.

 

I don't see any reason why restrictions cannot be lifted so that everyone can start threads, paying members or not, but leaving the three post rule in if the owners still think it is needed. This would bring more decent Registered Users out of the woodwork and if they start threads, they may even get caught up in the debate and decide to bite the bullet and join up. I just see the inability for Registered Users to start topics as suicide from a TSW business point of view.

If it is not too difficult to set up perhaps the site owners could have an option where you don't pay but have to put up with adverts instead. The fee payers carry on as they are. I should think the fivers would start rolling in after a couple of weeks. I honestly cannot see what people's problem is paying less than 10p a week for what in my opinion is the best Saints Site around. I've never understood why people think someone else should provide them with a service for nothing just because its on the internet.

[Essruu]

Maybe people object because there are other revenue streams that can offset the costs involved, just like virtually every other website/forum seems to manage?

[Essruu]

 

We're well aware of how and why. We'll be patching the "hole" pretty soon.

I don't think patching a hole that, maybe 2 or 3 users have figured out, is your main problem tbh.

[St_Tel49]

Maybe people object because there are other revenue streams that can offset the costs involved, just like virtually every other website/forum seems to manage?

Apart from advertising? Because if advertising is what you are talking about I would rather pay the fiver.

[OldNick]

we have had other times when the site has been quiet. The times when the site was at its liveliest was during the takeovers /Burley etc. Then it was bedlam.

It may be the lull before the storm. The start to the season has disappointed us and we feel very flat due to that.

Having adverts would be a backward step IMO

[Lord Duckhunter]

I think that by and large it's pretty good. Enjoy some of the topics in the Lounge as much as the football and the Election forum was great. I get the feeling it's populated in the main by "normal" people, therefore discussions on things like bands, Politics,films, TV ect ect are quite interesting as the discussions are not bogged down by bores completely anal about the particular subject. £5 is nothing really, but can see why some object to the priniciple of charging.

[Bucks Saint]

Apart from advertising? Because if advertising is what you are talking about I would rather pay the fiver.

 

+1

 

I understand the point that Essruu is very exercised about, but for football fans, £5 for a year is 1.5 beers at St Marys (assuming you got in for free)

[saint_stevo]

I am guessing it is time related

[Saint George]

If it is not too difficult to set up perhaps the site owners could have an option where you don't pay but have to put up with adverts instead. The fee payers carry on as they are. I should think the fivers would start rolling in after a couple of weeks. I honestly cannot see what people's problem is paying less than 10p a week for what in my opinion is the best Saints Site around. I've never understood why people think someone else should provide them with a service for nothing just because its on the internet.

 

It's a principal issue for me....Just imagine if every website you ever visited started to charge for visiting.....and believe me, if peeps like you start paying to visit one or two sites then it won't take long before 'everyone' starts charging....It's not like there's no other revenue streams out there......Some of the very best websites i visit regularly are based on voluntary donations and/or advertising and they are waaay better than this place since it became a pay site.

[St_Tel49]

It's a principal issue for me....Just imagine if every website you ever visited started to charge for visiting.....and believe me, if peeps like you start paying to visit one or two sites then it won't take long before 'everyone' starts charging....It's not like there's no other revenue streams out there......Some of the very best websites i visit regularly are based on voluntary donations and/or advertising and they are waaay better than this place since it became a pay site.

 

I am no expert on Website economics so, apart from advertising, what are these other revenue streams? I also think that you and Esruu had better start bracing yourselves because within a couple of years you are going to have to pay to access newspaper websites. The economics of the free website just isn't working for them. The Times is already heading that way and where one goes the others will soon follow. 606 isn't free by the way - you are paying for it in your licence fee.

[Dark Munster]

I don't think patching a hole that, maybe 2 or 3 users have figured out, is your main problem tbh.

No, but it is yours!

 

(Nice try, btw )

[Dark Munster]

I must admit unless the clubs looking for a new manager or being taken over I get very bored with the forum.I miss 3 million page takeover threads.

The Cheats FC takeover saga one in the lounge is always good for a daily laugh.

[NickG]

It's because if you make a spelling mistake they all assume it's half term! People on this forum Like to put people down! It's become a bully forum! People more intrested on picking up peoples mistakes.

 

should be small "l"

[scotty]

Just get your fiver out you tight c*nt.

 

I bet you got moist when you typed that

[scotty]

I am no expert on Website economics so, apart from advertising, what are these other revenue streams? I also think that you and Esruu had better start bracing yourselves because within a couple of years you are going to have to pay to access newspaper websites. The economics of the free website just isn't working for them. The Times is already heading that way and where one goes the others will soon follow. 606 isn't free by the way - you are paying for it in your licence fee.

 

now there is a point worth noting. The same people on here that moaned blue murder about godfather cortese charging for pics at the ground and said the murdoch press were right to whinge about it seem to have let this one slip under their radar. The Times and FT have put up a paywall around their content, but apparently thats ok.......

[saint lard]

Things will liven up soon,just after xmas when we will have a new 'new manager rumours' and 'new manager poll' threads.

[Victor]

Bring back The Windmill Diaries.

[Victor]

And the ex-player with his tales from the dressing room and training sessions etc. Forgotten his name.

[stevegrant]

now there is a point worth noting. The same people on here that moaned blue murder about godfather cortese charging for pics at the ground and said the murdoch press were right to whinge about it seem to have let this one slip under their radar. The Times and FT have put up a paywall around their content, but apparently thats ok.......

The FT has been a paid-for subscription service for years. The model works with that publication because it is specialist information and analysis that may not be readily available elsewhere. The Times' website hits have fallen through the floor as a result of the paywall - I've got vague recollection of reading a report which suggested a 90+% drop - which would suggest that it's not working for them. Unless all other newspapers go down the same route (which I'm pretty certain they won't), they'll have a problem because, for me, there isn't enough exclusive content in The Times to warrant paying for online access when similar content is available for free elsewhere. The BBC are incredibly unlikely to ever make their content paid-for, so there will always be that source, which renders Murdoch's idea fairly irrelevant, IMO.

 

Some people will draw comparisons with the model in place here, but there are clearly massive differences. Firstly, you don't have to pay to access the site at all. In fact, the majority of users don't pay. For most people, three posts per day is enough, so they have that option of using the site in the same way they always have done for free. Obviously as a consequence, they'll have adverts on the site (unless they've got an ad blocker installed), so they are still generating revenue for the site without actually having to pay themselves.

 

Then we come onto the subscribers - there are generally two "types" of subscribers from what I can tell: there are those who subscribe because they want to be able to use all the features that are only available to paid subscribers, and then there are those who subscribe just because they want to contribute towards the continued running of the site. There appear to be a surprising number of people falling into the latter category, based on the number of subscribers who have low post counts.

 

As we explained at the time, the whole reason for switching to the subscription model was to ensure the site remained self-sufficient. Under the previous donations-based structure, it became a law of diminishing returns - after the first wave of donations, there was plenty of money to run the site for about a year, but when we then asked for further donations, we received a much lower sum, which would obviously only keep the site running for a shorter period of time. With donations, I think people are happy to donate initially but feel a bit put out if they're then asked to contribute again a few months later. I seem to remember there was a bit of an issue with someone who donated a fairly significant sum then trying to claim immunity from being banned because they had contributed that much more to the forum than most other people. With the subscriptions model we now have in place, there are two options, it's either free but slightly limited, or a fiver with everything included, which keeps things much easier and settled.

 

To pick up on a couple of other points that have been made on this thread, it does feel as though it's been quieter lately, but then a look at the figures (3746 have logged in in the last month) would suggest otherwise. I guess it's all in comparison to the massive floods of traffic we had with Markus Liebherr's death and then the Pardew sacked/Adkins appointed saga, and clearly it's going to seem quieter compared to those occasions when everyone wants to have their say. Not everyone has something to say on a given topic, obviously.

 

With reference to the lack of news articles on that part of the site, I can only apologise for that. My excuse being that I'm in the process of moving house, and simply haven't had the time to write articles recently - I've not posted much on the forum recently for the same reason. I'll try to plug the gaps in the next week or two, but I'll also be on the lookout for a couple of people who are interested in writing news articles, match reports, etc for the site.

[chrisobee]

I just think on the whole it's that everyone is pretty subdued at present, I know I am. I'm sure I post far more on the Cricket and Horse Racing threads than on the main board. I don't believe it has anything to do with registered users being allowed only 3 posts a day though I do think they should be able to start new threads.

The only other reason which I believe has had an impact is that a number of people no longer post on here because of the amount of abuse that is hurled around. This applies to the main board, The Lounge and TMS but not the other boards including General Sports where I'm struggling to think of any problems on there at all EVER !! People can make of that what they will, the number of posters who venture there is generally low, I hope it continues;)

[Denzil]

Agreed. Registered Users not being able to start threads is THE biggest single problem. Fine, if the Admin Nazis want to hold Registered Users to a £5 ransom if they want to post more than three times per day (although there are ways around this ) but only having threads started by paying members has proved disastrous.

 

+1.

[Deppo]

This place is quite good: http://chucklezone.proboards.com/index.cgi

 

It's full of proper fans who support the boys through and through.