![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 13 of 13. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by badhaircut on January 28, 2004, at 10:49:41
At http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20040112/msgs/303994.html, Dinah asked,
> Have there been studies done about how many posters you'd lose if you go to a fee based system?
I couldn't find much. I mostly saw reports of message boards switching from free to pay-to-READ, and I'm assuming PB would be kept free-to-read, even if it's pay-to-post. Haven't some Yahoo! Groups sites converted to paid-access? Anyone know?
(Sorry if this is too much info...)
http://www.babynames.com
In 2002, babynames switched from free message boards (with ads) to pay-to-post boards (minus ads). Fee: $10 / 3 mos, $24/yr renewal. They have 7,000 registered users, and get 500,000 visitors a year. Some of their boards are still free-to-read (with ads), but most of their boards are now pay-to-read. OUTCOME: They survived. No data on how many posters they lost, but I imagine they have a high turnover anyway.http://www.motleyfool.com
Also in 2002, The Motley Fool put its free discussion boards behind a pay-to-read fee. Initially it was $15 / 2 yrs, but it's now $30/yr. OUTCOME: Some very early results (from http://boards.fool.com/message.asp?mid=16593641 -- where there's a thread on switching-to-fee, losing users, what it's worth, etc):-snip-
Sign up rates have far exceeded expectations. ... I don't want to jump the gun on the early results. . . however, it is becoming clearer by the hour that there will be little reduction in the quantity of posts and a likely increase (perhaps dramatic) in the quality of the posts.
...I plan to work extremely hard to illustrate that a community strengthens when it has members invested in it -- with the aim being to win *back* everyone's business.
-Tom Gardner
-snip-Many diary sites have both paid and free versions and some have gone through a transition to paid. No stats, though. One that might be worth watching is the Tabulas journaling site, whose volunteer owner is trying to get some of his 10,000 (?!) current members to pay voluntarily and requiring new members to pay up front at $15 / 6 mos: http://www.tabulas.com/~tabulas/85672.html
One *very* cautionary tale is that of http://www.gettheloop.com/theloop.html, an amusement park business email newsletter. It was quite successful in its industry (7,000 free subscribers), but it switched to pay-subscriptions too late. It seems to have gotten about a 10% response rate in about 4 months when it switched to $22/ yr, but it wasn't enough by that time, and it had to close.
College course data site http://www.pick-a-prof.com tried to go to $5/yr paid-access in 2002. OUTCOME: They've now gone back to being free! Not clear what the story was.
News sites are very different from PB since they're read-only with expensive-to-produce content, but the trend was *away* from pay-to-read. Daily papers with online versions saw online readership drop 99% (!) when they switched to pay-access: http://www.digitaldeliverance.com/MT/archives/cat_paid_content.html
There's a site called http://www.theendoffree.com/ that follows pay-access issues.
-bhc
Posted by Dinah on January 28, 2004, at 12:35:28
In reply to free-to-fee question » Dinah, posted by badhaircut on January 28, 2004, at 10:49:41
Great information. Thanks! So it seems like it doesn't necessarily have to mean doom to a site, but in other cases it hasn't worked out well.
Something for Dr. Bob to think about.
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 28, 2004, at 19:28:14
In reply to free-to-fee question » Dinah, posted by badhaircut on January 28, 2004, at 10:49:41
Posted by 8 Miles on January 28, 2004, at 19:33:56
In reply to free-to-fee question » Dinah, posted by badhaircut on January 28, 2004, at 10:49:41
Oh, I'm sure that there are a few people who would pay an access fee to use these boards, but I also think that the diversity of thought and input would make this a very bland and vanilla place. I find it interseting that I have gotten no feedback to the post I made regarding alternative options for generating revenue. I would also think that a site that one has to PAY to access would be severly resticted in principle on who could be blocked from posting. Of course, most people DO read the rules, accidents happen. So, if I made a *minor* rules violation, and I was blocked from posting, would that not possibly be an infringement upon services paid for? It is a lot to consider, but before I agreed to pay for access to a site (especially to one I mostly offer support and ideas to others as opposed to seeking help) I would clearly want to see the costs that the board host has to pay. Doesn't the University of Chicago ultimately support this board? Does any money actually come from Dr. Bob's wallet? Obviously, Dr. Bob spends a lot of time on these boards, but is in ADDITION to the time he usually works at the University? Also, I know, as Dr. Bob states, that research from those who post on these boards is used for speaking engagements as well as published material from Dr. Bob. Where do the profits and honoraria from THESE usage of OUR words go? I have suggested that a portion of them be returned to help support the financial costs of maintaining these boards, yet I got no response to my suggestions. Again, as I pointed out in an earlier post, there are REALLY people who cannot afford even an exrta $10 per month to post here. Should THEY be denied possibly LIFE-SAVING help from others? I say "others" because Dr. Bob has stated that he is NOT here to offer professional opinions regarding our postings. So who DOES provide the info? OTHER POSTERS! Ultimately, I contend, that the only true involvement needed from a moderator is SOME feedback to general questions, controlling postings by re-directing them to the most appropriate forum, and SOME direct involvement when established rules are not followed ( I have also posted several alternatives to THAT involvement by Dr. Bob). There are those who also have commented that a fee-for-service system would really only serve as a "weeding out" process to keep out the rift-raft. I see no evidence to support those claims, but I understand how such thoughts could have evolved to that "perception". There are clearly rather divergent opinions regarding a fee-for-service access. Bottom line: is it REALLY that cost effective( when compared to quality of information )to charge for access when it means the elimination of potentially up to 25-33% of posters currently on board? How many lives would be lost or indelibly disaffected because this resource was not available to them freely during their most dire hour? Who wants to answer THAT question honestly? If ONE person dies or falls apart because that person was unable to ask for help because no fee was paid, is that not too high a price to pay? I wonder what SAR would have to say about that one.
any real responses?
8
Posted by Karen_kay on January 28, 2004, at 20:09:11
In reply to Free? Nothing is really free, is it?, posted by 8 Miles on January 28, 2004, at 19:33:56
Wow! I'll respond. In all honesty, if I were EXPECTED to pay for services here I wouldn't. As much as I enjoy the support and do love giving support (as best I can), I just wouldn't feel the principle as being serving to the community. I wouldn't mind donating money, but I would leave if I were expected to pay. And it isn't the thought that I were expected to pay, as much the thought that others were. Others who possibly couldn't afford to. I just don't like the idea. But, I don't think Dr. Bob would do that. That's not the impression I'm getting anyway. That would be a good way to lose a pretty good bunch of people (or research, however you tend to look at things, I prefer people) fast and I think he knows it :)
Posted by Dinah on January 28, 2004, at 20:38:22
In reply to Free? Nothing is really free, is it?, posted by 8 Miles on January 28, 2004, at 19:33:56
No, the University of Chicago doesn't pay for this site, Dr. Bob does. And Dr. Bob's time here is in addition to his job, not a part of it.
Yes, Dr. Bob might get some monetary benefit, and some other benefits from his involvement here, but I seriously doubt it is sufficient to cover his costs.
Posted by coral on January 29, 2004, at 6:47:40
In reply to Free? Nothing is really free, is it?, posted by 8 Miles on January 28, 2004, at 19:33:56
" . . .would that not possibly be an infringement upon services paid for?" I don't see any difference than when one pays to enter a club, causes a disturbance and is asked/removed from the premises.
"It is a lot to consider, but before I agreed to pay for access to a site (especially to one I mostly offer support and ideas to others as opposed to seeking help) I would clearly want to see the costs that the board host has to pay." Surely, there are other ways that people could receive your support and help, such as e-mail? Furthermore, even if someone is paid to offer support, help or ideas, I'm not aware that it's SOP upon the hiring organization to disclose their financial statements.
"Where do the profits and honoraria from THESE usage of OUR words go?" I'm not aware of any restriction on any poster from selling his/her own words, separate from this site.
"Should THEY be denied possibly LIFE-SAVING help from others?" It has been repeatedly stated that this board is not the place for someone in immediate, life-threatening crisis.
"How many lives would be lost or indelibly disaffected because this resource was not available to them freely during their most dire hour? Who wants to answer THAT question honestly? If ONE person dies or falls apart because that person was unable to ask for help because no fee was paid, is that not too high a price to pay?" This board is not 911 and to expect otherwise flies in the face of the stated purpose.
"I wonder what SAR would have to say about that one." Given that SAR's tragedy occurred under the present system, I'd have to say that I don't see the relevance. I don't understand how being reminded of her horrible loss is pertinent.
Coral
Posted by NikkiT2 on January 29, 2004, at 8:33:51
In reply to Free? Nothing is really free, is it?, posted by 8 Miles on January 28, 2004, at 19:33:56
I would have taken the time to find out your answers for you.. I know that Dr Bob pays for this, I believe it is over $200 a month.
But, I fell that you fell to emotional blackmail with your Sar statement. I feel hurt and offended by that, and as such, I will not be searching out all the info you require.
Nikki
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 29, 2004, at 18:20:18
In reply to Re: Free? Nothing is really free, is it? » 8 Miles, posted by NikkiT2 on January 29, 2004, at 8:33:51
> I fell that you fell to emotional blackmail with your Sar statement. I feel hurt and offended by that
Keeping in mind that the idea here is not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused, could you please rephrase that? Thanks,
Bob
Posted by 8 Miles on January 30, 2004, at 17:26:10
In reply to Free? Nothing is really free, is it?, posted by 8 Miles on January 28, 2004, at 19:33:56
I am sorry if my post was taken by some to be accusitory, provocative or a use of poor examples.
None of those "perceptions" were my intent. I apologize MOST to you, Dr. Bob, as I now see (after re-reading that post several times) that my comments may well have been out-of-line, and as such may have hurt your feelings. I respect your policies regarding not posting material that could be taken as offensive to others. I request that you delete my post made on 1/28/04 on this matter, and I will refrain from further commentary on that subject.Thank you,
8
Posted by jay on February 2, 2004, at 22:09:52
In reply to free-to-fee question » Dinah, posted by badhaircut on January 28, 2004, at 10:49:41
Well, Healthcare is free here in Canada..:-)...
So please send my bill (and all other Canuck's) to this address:Mr. Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada
Ottawa,
Canada..Don't worry..they will know where it goes.. ;-)
Jay Canuckian
Posted by NikkiT2 on February 16, 2004, at 14:55:46
In reply to Free? Nothing is really free, is it?, posted by 8 Miles on January 28, 2004, at 19:33:56
I could have just as easily have used that phrase in my side of the argument, as none of us can possible know what Sar would have wanted in this situation. I wish that you had just made your side of the argument instead of proclaiming the wishes of someone who's death upset us all. I do believe we should remember and honour Sar, but I felt as if I had to see it your way or else sully the name of Sar.
Apologies for the delay in me posting this
Nikki
Posted by Dr. Bob on February 17, 2004, at 10:05:30
In reply to Rephrasing my post to you. » 8 Miles, posted by NikkiT2 on February 16, 2004, at 14:55:46
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.