[Closed] Would STW bear any responsibility for promoting ad scams *Kate Winslet

Bring back the days of unaffordable Maserati giblets.

Actually, the Ghibli is in the same price range as a mid-range Audi, about £45-50k, and a damn nice drive.
Dunno about the ads, not seen them, but I do now get loads of ads no matter what site I go to, whereas I never used to, that’s using Firefox and DuckDuckGo as search, so I don’t know what’s changed

"anything to stop adverts of this nature"

If you raise your Ad prices then most of the malware gets priced out. What would enable STW to raise prices would be more information on the users (if you really are all Audi driving middle aged IT managers).

Actually, the Ghibli is in the same price range as a mid-range Audi, about £45-50k, and a damn nice drive.

So unaffordable for the majority of the UK population.

So unaffordable for the majority of the UK population.

Depends how much it is PCM. RRP is largely irrelevant at those prices.

So unaffordable for the majority of the UK population.

Depends how much it is PCM. RRP is largely irrelevant at those prices.

TBH you won't get great data talking about "UK Population" as 25% or so of them are too young to drive.

Anyway, lets assume average Man or Woman on the street who works full-time.

First google, £650 - £950 a month.

Average UK full-time salary outside London is £26k (which rules out anyone retired or under 18 - so £1715 take home if they haven't opted out of WPP.

Average rent in the UK (excluding London) is £800
Average mortgage payment is £700

Assuming no kids most underwriters will want £600 a month set-aside for living expenses so:

£1715 - £750 - £600 = £365

So average, non-Londoner with a full-time job, no kids, living alone couldn't buy one. Someone cohabiting would have enough disposable income to get into a low-end to mid-range one, but they'd be very stretched and any other borrowing would probably rule them out.

They seem nice, but I can't ever see me paying double, to three times what I pay for my Superb for one.

I just wondered if STW had any say or could do anything to stop adverts of this nature.

Ads are served by a third party provider, usually Google but it varies from time to time. I believe you can report rogue adverts to ads(at)singletrackworld.com and they'll investigate, a screen shot would probably be helpful.

By virtue of them being displayed on here, could they be interpreted as being endorsed or legitimate and anyone who lost money have any recourse to stw?

It's a good question and I have absolutely no idea what the answer is.

Daniel Craig is now promoting this on “This Morning” with Philip Schofield. Seemingly, the boss of Barclays called in to get the interview pulled....

He’s now disappeared, I was going to screen grab it.

Daniel Craig The actor or the finance/tech journo?

The James Bond one.

Ads are served by a third party provider, usually Google

Working in cyber security, this attitude really grates.

Some of the most famous hacks/breaches have been performed by third party code running on sites - e.g. BA

ST run the site, ST need to take responsibility for the ads the site is displaying.

When I used to run a kiting based site (ok, back in the early 2000s) I ran ads, but I went direct to the industry and sold subscriptions that way, avoiding having to use Google etc. This meant I had full control of the ads and where the links pointed, but also the adverts were relevant to the site!

my current faves are the ones that dodge when you go to close them

So average, non-Londoner with a full-time job, no kids, living alone couldn’t buy one.

The average salary is not the average salary for full time workers. No kids would increase the likelihood of full time working, and thus higher salary.

I'm not saying a Maserati is "affordable", but I reckon a good number of people could afford it.

Also, when we say average, I'd suggest median is more appropriate here, rather than mean. though this might well put the numbers down.

Working in cyber security, this attitude really grates.

Also working in cyber security, it wasn't an attitude, it was a statement of fact.

STW's choice of ad delivery methods is a business decision and I know that it's something Mark spends a lot of time analysing and reviewing. I can tell you with a cast iron certainty that if there were a better way of doing it then they'd be doing it, and I rather suspect that if they changed to the model you describe then they'd go bust by the end of the month. Was your kiting site the primary source of income for over a dozen people? It's not really a comparable scenario otherwise.

And yes, you're absolutely right of course that poorly maintained third-party code is a major security risk. But it ain't 2000 any more, the IDE of choice isn't Notepad, and I reckon you'd be hard-pressed to find many major websites which are 100% in-house code. And even it were, are your programmers producing code that's more secure than mature open-source plug-ins?

You're right, it wasn't a primary source of income, and it was just a suggestion of a potential different way of doing things.

I'm not suggesting that all code should be developed in-house, but when there are regular threads about dodgy ads which all seem to come with the reply of "blame the ad provider" it doesn't stack up - someone needs to take responsibility for it, and that responsibility only lies in-house at STW.

someone needs to take responsibility for it, and that responsibility only lies in-house at STW.

Does it though - I don’t get any of those dodgy ads, at least, not on STW. I use Flipboard a lot, and pop-up ads and ads that wander all over the page are almost a feature.
Bloody irritating too.

If you work in cyber security and think wordpress plugins are mature and secure ... I hope it’s not for my bank

As is so often the case, it's a little more complicated than that.

 that responsibility only lies in-house at STW

Does it though

Yes

I only have a contract with STW and Gofar. I don't have a contract with Quantcast, Google Ads, or any of the (presumably several) other ad agencies or any other sub-contractor that ST/Gofar may wish to use. Unless of course someone is able to prove that I do, and remind me of each sub-contractor that I do have a direct contract with (and an obligation to execute their software on my hardware) but just plain forgot about.

It's the 3rd party cross site tracking that I intentionally block.

And yet for a teeny subscription you can make all this shit literally go away.

Your choice

I only have a contract with STW and Gofar.

Is this a contractual issue?

Do I , as a non-P, non paying,   forum member have a contract with STW and Gofar?

What version of the law applies given that I am in Scotland and they are in England?

If it's English law, then where is the element of consideration in the contract given that I don't pay them anything?

Should I be  presenting STW towers with an annual peppercorn?

I await the wisdom of the assembled legal minds of STW.

someone needs to take responsibility for it, and that responsibility only lies in-house at STW

Site users can take responsibility for it if they choose. I think the ad-funded model of web use is unsustainable so if sites offer no ads in return for a small sub that's compatible with the value they offer, I'll choose to pay it. If more sites were paid, advertising was a tenth of what it is and product prices reduced (ultimately the purchaser pays for the ads) I doubt the users would be out of pocket.

It's a long time since I signed up and I can't find the T&Cs on the site now (should I be able to?) but I'd be surprised if there isn't something that says STW are not liable for the content of ads.

If it’s English law, then where is the element of consideration in the contract given that I don’t pay them anything?

Maybe, you agreed to be served with ads in return for a licence to post on the forum? I don't know, can anyone find the T&Cs?

If it’s English law, then where is the element of consideration in the contract given that I don’t pay them anything?

*reads forum rules*

https://www.singletrackworld.com/terms-and-conditions/

Oh , there it is.....

However, by posting on our forum you agree to allow us to reproduce your comments in any form at any time. After all you may write some words of genius that we want to share with all our readers.

I'm paying with my genius

You can read the Privacy conditions here which give more information.

https://singletrackworld.com/privacy-policy/

if sites offer no ads in return for a small sub that’s compatible with the value they offer, I’ll choose to pay it. If more sites were paid, advertising was a tenth of what it is and product prices reduced (ultimately the purchaser pays for the ads) I doubt the users would be out of pocket.

Mark told me a fair while back how many extra subscribers it'd take for STW to be able to afford to do away with third party advertising networks completely. I can't remember the exact figure now, but I thought at the time that it was an astonishingly small number. And nothing would give him greater pleasure to do so, because as various threads over the years ably demonstrate they're a pain in the arse.

It ultimately boils down to the whole 'internet is free' attitude that seems to prevail across so much of society. In my mind, if someone isn't prepared to pay the relative pittance that annual subscription is for this site - approx 75p per week, or 11p per day - then they 'probably' deserve to get scammed by Daniel Craig, Gordon Ramsay or Philip Schofield (disclaimer - I work in publishing) or whosoever is the latest sleb to magically discover the secret to eternal wealth, health and happiness, in which we too can join once we've handed over our bank details, passwords and Mother's maiden name.

And before anyone uses the 'I contribute to the forum, therefore I add value' argument, in August last year the site had 1.6 million unique visitors, of whom a tiny percentage use or contribute to the forum. That traffic is what advertisers on the programmatic ad exchanges buy into.

So to repeat again, if you don't want crappy ads, and want to feel good about yourself too, cough up for membership. Simples innit

And yet for a teeny subscription you can make all this shit literally go away.

Your choice

No you can't, it still logs you out (although it's not valued my privacy for a while?).

in August last year the site had 1.6 million unique visitors, of whom a tiny percentage use or contribute to the forum.

That's not unique to STW either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule_(Internet_culture)

And out of that lot, the people who contribute regularly, the ones most likely to scream "you should be paying me!", the 'big hitters' if you will, you could probably count on the fingers of both hands. (Slight exaggeration perhaps, but it'll be a small percentage of a small percentage.)

This is so very much the case that if an unfamiliar username pops up in the middle of a conversation we'll go and check to see if it looks like a returning banned.

the ones most likely to scream “you should be paying me!”,

Not me. I give my genius away for free.

I'm nice like that

you could probably count on the fingers of both hands

That's what STW stands for innit.

Same Ten W****rs

The ads at the bottom of the page, are now offering a plug in, mains powered virus killer. If it only it was that easy to remove them, that “x” is very hard to press without opening the ad.

funkrodent ^^^ how right you are.
I have taken every possible opportunity to bang the drum about forum users converting from member to subscriber.
Spurious arguments and verbiage don't change the fact that long-standing 'members' have used the forum free of charge but given nothing - other than their *wit and wisdom*, which has no value.
Many of the most frequent posters have been 'members' for many years but have, in real terms, done nothing to support.
If the mag and forums closed, where would they take their *wit and wisdom*? Mumsnet or pistonheads are the likely homes.
Thanks to them for their 'support'.
Anyone in favour of turning the forum into subscription only?

Scam me like one of your French girls.....

STW’s choice of ad delivery methods is a business decision and I know that it’s something Mark spends a lot of time analysing and reviewing. I can tell you with a cast iron certainty that if there were a better way of doing it then they’d be doing it, and I rather suspect that if they changed to the model you describe then they’d go bust by the end of the month. Was your kiting site the primary source of income for over a dozen people? It’s not really a comparable scenario otherwise.

And people think "there's a magazine?" Is a joke

Spurious arguments and verbiage don’t change the fact that long-standing ‘members’ have used the forum free of charge but given nothing – other than their *wit and wisdom*, which has no value.

If people don't post then there is no reason to click to the site, you become bikemagic and fizzle and die.

The loss of the old classified format must have cost lots in clicks the main forums are slower. It must be the advertorials driving the income.....

And the crypto mining..... 😉

Anyone in favour of turning the forum into subscription only?

There were always the rumours of a "special" forum for the in crowd.....

long-standing ‘members’ have used the forum free of charge but given nothing – other than their *wit and wisdom*, which has no value.

I'm only subscribed in the hope that Jamie will return. Perchypanther is OK too I suppose.

big - why don't you subscribe?

The loss of the old classified format must have cost lots in clicks the main forums are slower. It must be the advertorials driving the income…..

Come on, time to move on. On my device the classifieds works well for me and the site is stable and fast. (perhaps I'm just lucky?)

I completely understand that folk don't want to pay in order to subsidise a loss-making magazine. I would rather my subscription went towards relieving the pressure on the website development team in order to remove all the bugs.

So average, non-Londoner with a full-time job, no kids, living alone couldn’t buy one.

Made me laugh...by your logic if you were to estimate our household income based purely on the cars on our drive then you'd grossly over estimate our household income - like by 3 or 4 times probably. Judging by the number of 50 - 60k cars on the road (and even more so the 30 - 50k cars of which there are many many more) then clearly there is no correlation between income and the car you drive. People don't actually buy cars anymore...especially cars over £30k or so and certainly not cars from about 45k and above. You'd be a fool to do so. There are so many ways people can drive around in cars that are way more expensive than 'what they can afford'. No matter how 'poor' you are you'd be surprised at the number of ways you could probably get yourself into a nice car.

long-standing ‘members’ have used the forum free of charge but given nothing – other than their *wit and wisdom*, which has no value.

Well that is of value to a forum. A forum with restricted membership is useless...you want many responses to a question you put on there. I often use this forum as a source of information and peoples experience and I try to put up useful stuff for others who ask questions of it - so peoples 'wisdom' is a valuable asset...their wit is just an added bonus. It is this that makes the forum a useful resource. A 'special' forum with a significantly reduced population would lose most of its actual usefulness.

I'm a recent 'free member' turned 'subscriber' and I decided to subscribe following Singletracks appeal to help out Singletrack. I buy the magazine occasionally as I'm not a big magazine buyer and only buy them every now and again and enjoy them when I do, but decided to subscribe to do what I can to help the magazine as it's a good read when I do buy it. I'll no doubt maintain the subscription when all this is over too.

big – why don’t you subscribe?

The real question is why don't I subscribe anymore?????

As with anything it's a complex issue, short version is that "don't be a dick" applies as much to the readers and contributor's to the forum as is does to the staff and directors of Gofar Enterprises Ltd.

The good and bad ebb and flow on here, still a useful if shrinking community of contributors to the forum. I suspect that the long-term trend doesn't look good which would be sad

Website traffic up 25% YOY

The problem is the crash in advertising rates and the halt on marketing budgets, which has made the whole ongoing saga of how media companies sustain themselves much much worse.

1.7 million people to the site right now (Last 30 days) and climbing. It's not translated into the amount of revenue it did just a few months ago though - ergo the subs appeal. In terms of traffic (not revenue) we are so very close to Pinkbike as the world's largest online mtb community - last August and September we passed them. so this..

The good and bad ebb and flow on here, still a useful if shrinking community of contributors to the forum. I suspect that the long-term trend doesn’t look good which would be sad

...is far from a reflection of reality. If there is a trend it is currently showing that we will pass 1.8 million visitors/month by June.

We currently have around 6k paying members. As Cougar said earlier, there's a number that if we reached it with current costs we would be able to replace the programmatic (automatic) ads. I reckon 10k subscribers would do it.

Yep. Digital subscription. Cheaper than chips.

…is far from a reflection of reality. If there is a trend it is currently showing that we will pass 1.8 million visitors/month by June.

Not what I pointed out

The good and bad ebb and flow on here, still a useful if shrinking community of contributors to the forum. I suspect that the long-term trend doesn’t look good which would be sad

How big is the community of forum contributors year on year? Same question for the classifieds

Also where the clicks go to matters, is it to content, advertorials/reviews or the forum?

I don't have the data, it's just an impression, if you thought there was an issue you would do something about it, so I'm probably wrong