Forum menu
I subscribed, it means you get a blowie from chipps if your ever drunk in tod. For that alone its worth it.
Can't I have a t-shirt instead?
Because you won’t get the thing you do use if you don’t pay for the thing that you don’t. If that’s the way you want to look at it.
In which case I go somewhere else. No big deal. I'll not be the one out of a job if the thing folds.
One alternative would be to ring-fence the forum subscriptions to, you know, develop and test changes to the forum and then let the magazine subscribers pay for the costs of the magazine but I guess those want the magazine aren't, actually, wanting it badly enough to pay the full cost of it.
what funkrodent said.
People's who's attitude is: In which case I go somewhere else. No big deal. I’ll not be the one out of a job if the thing folds really need to think about what they're saying.
👍😳👍😳🧐💋
Just signed up after reading some of the posts on this thread, had forgotten what a forum looked like without adverts everywhere, £1.99 a month well spent considering I check the forum on most weekdays!
really need to think about what they’re saying.
I think they are saying all they need to.
Funkrodent
I guarantee that in the long run whether you’re here or not won’t make the slightest bit of difference as to whether Mark and the team can keep the ship afloat, and at least they can continue to crack at it without your negativity dragging them down (I’ll bet my bottom dollar that they do read these threads on the forum)
Insults aside - if they don't need us, why don't they charge for forum access? You could say I'm not paying at the moment because I don't have to, if the non payers presence is so valueless then why not charge everyone for access?
I asked for a convincing argument as to why I should pay a voluntary charge, your argument is that your insults apply if we don't pay. Its not very convincing. I think the best way to convince non payers to pay is to make the service pay only, then we will see who values it. I have not seen that happen and I think that is because our presence here is worth something.
TBH if I was forced to pay, I probably would, the fact I am not asked to makes me think I must be worth something (well not me, but other less sanctimonious moany types with some knowledge to offer), so I don't see why I should pay for the STW to have value of my presence.
I asked for a convincing argument as to why I should pay a voluntary charge, your argument is that your insults apply if we don’t pay.
No, he's pointing out that there is a handful who come on here who insult the business, the forum, the staff and owners adding very little to the forum. Some of them probably freeload too so add absolutely zero value to the fotum.
@funkrodent *applause*
One thing I'd like to add to this,
Online advertising pays buttons, unless you’re Google or facebook with unimaginable readership bases and economies of scale. Small publishers like Singletrack get sweet FA – I’ll speculate at maybe hundreds a month, probably not even enough to cover their office rent – from the online stuff that is on the site. They have it because a) they would be crazy not to (every penny counts) and b) because it helps drive people to a more consistent and profitable way of driving long-term revenue, which is subscriptions.
I don't know how applicable this is to STW as I don't have that degree of insider knowledge but I would be exceptionally surprised if you're not bang on the money.
Mark once told me how many new subscribers STW would need to be able to do away with third-party advertising networks completely. I don't remember the exact figure now but I remember at the time thinking that it was astonishingly small.
Bang on Funkrodent.
Occasionally I think about cancelling, as I don't bother too much with the mag any more, but tbh that's more my issue of my interests changing, and I always come back to 'it's 3 quid a month, and this place has on occasion been ace over the years'.
People’s who’s attitude is: In which case I go somewhere else. No big deal. I’ll not be the one out of a job if the thing folds really need to think about what they’re saying.
I did think about what I was saying. The forum is not that big a deal to me and there are other ones out there I could easily switch to. I was a subscriber when I first joined, read some of the back issues, didn't like them much so stopped reading and stopped subscribing. Stayed for the forum which they do not charge for. If I am a free loading tight scrounger contributing nothing then they are free to get rid of me. If they want to charge for using the forum then I'd consider that when/if it happened. I use many online resources. If they all started charging 10p a day then it soon adds up and priorities would need to be made. It's their business not mine, I have no vested interest in it, nor any sense of personal connection to the owners and staff really. If you do, good for you if you want to contribute finacially to it. As the forum is currently free then that's individual choice.
I think the best way to convince non payers to pay is to make the service pay only, then we will see who values it.
I think perhaps the flaw here is that you are massively underestimating the number of lurkers on the forum (or indeed, on any forum). Our big hitters may be visibly prolific posters but they are a very tiny minority of the site's users.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule_(Internet_culture)
It's purely speculation on my part, but I'd guess that the 90/9/1 rule (where 90% of users only read, 9% post occasionally and 1% post regularly) is probably optimistic in relation to the number of active posters.
No, he’s pointing out that there is a handful who come on here who insult the business, the forum, the staff and owners adding very little to the forum. Some of them probably freeload too so add absolutely zero value to the fotum.
Fair enough, its not my intention to insult them, I don't actually think the quality of some of the reviews I have commented on is that great, but I don't mean that as insult.
The general thrust for paying is that our presence here adds nothing, we are lucky to have it, so we should pay for what are seemingly moral reasons.
I stand by what I said - if we are truly worthless then why are we not compelled to pay? If we were compelled then I actually feel I might value paying, as it is I still feel like my presence here is part of the product and they need us, hence why we are not forced to pay.
Try going into a pub, to chat to you mates, other patrons, even the bar staff, but don’t buy any drinks. Better still, criticise the pub, it’s decor, it’s beer selection and staff. Then every now and then, openly have a sip from a hip flask in your pocket.
People act the same way, to similar degrees, on here and expect to be welcomed with open arms as they make the place look busy and provide conversation.
rene59 - you're entitled to your opinion. I suspect you wouldn;t be walking into a UK Airbus factory today saying: "Lose your jobs, see if I care!" so why share what you think about stw on stw.
I was questioning your manners, not your opinion.
So Cougar if what you say is true, then the non paying lurkers are worth something too? Otherwise why is it relevant? What am I missing here?
EDIT - I am not intending to be nasty to the owners, journos or mods, its navel gazing point only...
So Cougar if what you say is true, then the non paying lurkers are worth something too?
Collectively, they are worth something, but if one of them starts saying how shit they think the place is/not worth anything etc, that individuals worth drops from a few pence to, well, less than that.
wwaswas - I wouldn't go into an airbus factory saying that no. But if they tried to sell me something I didn't want whilst giving me for free something I did want (whilst at same time telling me they aren't interested in that same thing) and then try guilt tripping me into paying for the former anyway as their jobs are at stake, they'd get the same response.
I stand by what I said – if we are truly worthless then why are we not compelled to pay?
For the same reason that some people will happily spunk a grand on a smartphone and then piss and moan about having to pay 69p for an app. We've seen this in action on other threads, there's a very small but highly vocal subset of users who refuse to subscribe, openly boast about blocking adverts and then still feel justified in bleating on about how shit everything is. I can't speak for Mark or the rest of STW but personally I'd cheerfully see those self-entitled ****ers get in the sea. If it's so shit and yet they're still hanging out on here every day then just maybe if some of them considered investing a few pence STW could afford to hire another developer? Ether that or they could just GTF to those magical Other Places we keep hearing about and stop being such a pain in my arse.
Sorry. Rant aside: The point I was getting to is that mandatory payments would blatantly decimate the userbase. That's not an STW thing, that's the nature of the world.
but if one of them starts saying how shit they think the place is/not worth anything etc
I never said that. I have said I value the forum, however I try to impart info whenever I can so hopefully this balances what I get out.
I also keep being told the forum adds no value to the site.
So Cougar if what you say is true, then the non paying lurkers are worth something too? Otherwise why is it relevant? What am I missing here?
Dunno TBH. It's not my company, I just help out here.
I also keep being told the forum adds no value to the site.
I don't think anyone's said that have they?
if they tried to sell me something I didn’t want whilst giving me for free something I did want
I once took out a trial magazine subscription because I wanted the free gift. True story.
So in which case you made this statement without any reasonable back up as to what you expected it to mean? Dude, you are one of the smart people on here.
I think perhaps the flaw here is that you are massively underestimating the number of lurkers on the forum (or indeed, on any forum).
I stand by what I said – if we are truly worthless then why are we not compelled to pay? If we were compelled then I actually feel I might value paying, as it is I still feel like my presence here is part of the product and they need us, hence why we are not forced to pay.
Think if you were compelled to pay there'd be abar ten posters total on here tbh, given the state of this thread. That aside, have you seen this type of pay to post model operate successfully anywhere else on the internet? I know somethingawful do / did but I don't think it's v common (could be wrong).
Forums sprang up at the start of the internet as free to use and were a huge part of that early internet culture, so paying to post goes against people's expectations. Think it would take something well out of the ordinary to get people signing up for that sort of model.
So in which case you made this statement without any reasonable back up as to what you expected it to mean?
I was speculating, really. As I said, I have very little insider information, but a chunk of this is self-evident.
There is a very large number of people who use the forum, the main site or both and never type a word. Many don't even have a member login. This is almost certainly true of the vast majority of websites. These readers will still be valuable to the site (collectively as @tomhoward says) in any number of ways, as our rodenty friend explained just now far better than I could. And of course, any website that doesn't want to attract more visitors pretty much fails as a website, it's its raison d'etre.
Cougar -
I don’t think anyone’s said that have they?
you implied it
I don’t remember the exact figure now but I remember at the time thinking that it was astonishingly small.
So you and others have said
The point I was getting to is that mandatory payments would blatantly decimate the userbase. That’s not an STW thing, that’s the nature of the world.
Think if you were compelled to pay there’d be abar ten posters total on here tbh, given the state of this thread.
and
And of course, any website that doesn’t want to attract more visitors pretty much fails as a website, it’s its raison d’etre.
So why is it a problem if there are only ten users if the previous many users contribute little significant ad revenue.
I stand by my point - the fact we are not compelled to pay means that they need us in some way. Which does not feel conducive to making me want to pay when until the article quality improves, I am only interested in the forum.
If it’s so shit and yet they’re still hanging out on here every day then just maybe if some of them considered investing a few pence STW could afford to hire another developer?
But they have said they are not interested in the forum, they are not in the forum business, that's been made clear. I hang out here every day because of the user base, not because of the owners or their publication. If they don't want to capitalise on that then that's their business. What else do you pay for that you don't need nor want?
they have said they are not interested in the forum, they are not in the forum business, that’s been made clear
*Citation needed.
*Citation needed.
TBh I agree, I have been going on a few other posters saying this - whereas the actions of STW show that they are interested in the forum, even need/want the forum.
So Cougar if what you say is true, then the non paying lurkers are worth something too? Otherwise why is it relevant? What am I missing here?
Of course non-paying lurkers are worth something. The number of page impressions (clicks) is what STW sell to the advertisers. The advertising revenue from the forum/website keep the magazine going. Folk who post in the forums are worth a bit more as they are unpaid content creators and attract the lurkers.
The advertising revenue from the forum/website keep the magazine going.
On its own? That’s impressive...
Looks like this thread is going down the usual route, can someone pull the chain and spray some Fabreeze around afterwards.
Ta.
🤷♂️
Funckrodent hit it on the head.
If the freeloaders are that arsed about paying for the site (penny's FFS) any classified/ease of use/IT changes/problems with the forum they can shut up and go jump. Nobody's going to miss them.
I've enjoyed the mag and the site since day 1, and independent journalism in this day and age is surely worth supporting. If you use something and value it, surely its worth a few pence. If you don't support it, it wont be here for ever.
you implied it
I most certainly didn't. You may have inferred that. If the forum wasn't of value to the site then there is no doubt in my mind that it wouldn't be here, I expect it's a huge drain on resources.
they have said they are not interested in the forum, they are not in the forum business, that’s been made clear
To be fair I think Mark did actually say something to this effect, the latter half of that sentiment at least. It's not that they "aren't interested" in it, rather that the publishing side of the business is a higher priority than the forum.
STW is a small, independent publishing company with maybe a dozen employees (someone earlier said eight or nine, I'm not sure exactly but it doesn't really matter). Commercial decisions have to take priority over anything else or the site, the forum and the entire business will no longer be here. That's just good business sense. I totally get that a number of forum-only users really don't like to hear this but it's the nature of the beast I'm afraid.
You want justification for subscribing, let me give you mine. I currently get a free [P] due to me being a moderator, it's about the only perk I get aside from an invite to the staff Xmas do. If I didn't, I would 100% be paying for a digital sub. I don't read the magazine - I stopped reading it as I was off my bike for maybe four years or so until last summer for personal reasons and the last thing I wanted to do was read about other people having fun - but for the amount of time I spend just on the forum alone I'd feel morally obliged to contribute something back. (Hell, that's why I said yes to being a moderator in the first place.) It's a pittance for the amount of enjoyment I get out of it (moany arsed gits aside 😊 ) and to my mind well worth the price of admission. Plus it's investing in STW's future and supporting a small local business; how many folk here laud the notion of buying gear from their LBS over giants like Wiggle and CRC?
TL;DR: I'd subscribe simply because I'd think it was the Right Thing To Do.
The forum is brilliant, as almost everyone here has said, it's the main thing they value.
But we are the product.
The whole internet is free, in your pocket and one click away.
Therein lies the problem with forums on the internet. We want it for free, we also hate the intrusiveness of the adverts, we provide the content for the forum, we are annoyed when it does not work properly.
Given the forum model of 90/9/1, could you get say the 9's and 1's to pay enough to cover its costs. If you remove the ads, what would it cost to run it ?
I would pay money for that. Even if only the 9's and 1's paid up, how much would it cost ?
I get a full print sub every year from my in laws for My birthday, I have enjoyed the mag but rarely do more than graze through it unless I am away from home on a journey and need some time to kill. I always treat my sub as support for the website.
I will not be renewing this year I’m afraid, not in the websites current format and the current classifieds. I would much prefer that the website became pay content only if it was developed accordingly. But appreciate that it’s not STW prerogative and it’s quite clear where their intentions lie. So I make a decision put up or shut up. It’s a shame, from where I’m sat the general aparent degradation of the online element of the site. But there you go!
I think there are two seperate and distinct issues here.
One is the mag, how it is funded and how it survives. The other is the forum.
Point the first, print is not dead, this has been proven by the likes of Cranked and even Dirt which was profitable till Factory shut it down, Dig is still going under original ownership. It may need a new strategy like cutting the number of issues (increases quality) and raising the price but if you have something people want they will pay for it.
The second point, the forum, is what people are really discussing. I appreciate the folk in charge don't have all day to answer every query and that's fine but to show the complete level of disengagement with the userbase that they continue to do (still waiting on the results of Chipps' feedback) is just crap. If they want folk to use the forum/website they need to fix it. If they want to fix it they need money to do so. If they want money they need to actually seem like they value their customers. The site is an absolute mess, it needs rebuilt from the ground up by someone that knows what they are doing and tested properly before getting rolled out. People are pissed off because it's been pointed out, repeatedly what the problems are and after the nth time it's just too much of a pain to be constructive when nobody seems to give a toss. Start engaging, publish a roadmap and even just a once a month "here's what you said, here's what we did" update would be miles better than now. Let us pay for a forum sub, but if you do it has to actually mean something - no more utterly broken logging in and out, no more borked classifieds (just roll back till you know what is causing the isssues ffs) and a UX worth paying for. And no more ****ing GDPR popups or ads that utterly break the site, if you are going to serve ads fine but enogh of the crap that hangs up the browser. If you don't want folk using ad blockers then stop giving them such a compelling reason to, whitelisting doesn't work if you can't load the page!
Get them both right and the forum will more than support the mag. The classifieds should be doing this right now especially considering how bad and how expensive eBay is but it's constantly having issues! Fix it and charge for it. A pound a go, unlimited ads, bosh, job done.
Give us value for money and we will give us your money, give us a broken heap and we walk on by, it's really not difficult.
Squirrelking! Bravo, spot on!
It seems like the biggest moaners are the freeloaders
russyh and squirrel king sum it up for me
For the mag I read every issue when I was in the UK, when I was in Oz it was a nice connection to the UK by the time I left I found a couple of issues still in the wrapping when I chucked them out. I don't think I've read an complete issue in the last year.
Not sure why, maybe I'm drifting away or STW is off in a different direction to what I remember it being.
I don't think it's going to be renewed, as for the forum sub, time will tell as to how much stuff gets sorted out by the time my sub expires.
It seems like the biggest moaners are the freeloaders
The slagging off of the customers doesn't really help either.
Your not a customer if you don't pay for anything
Your not a customer if you don’t pay for anything
If you are getting fed the ads and reading the content you are.