iSign
New Member
I haven't been posting as much in the last few weeks, due to an increase in my business responsibilities, but I've seen a lot of discussion related to the Premium Forums lately & have wanted to comment on at least 4 threads since yesterday. I'm up early, so I had some time... look out, this is a long post!
My views are just that... my views. They exist because I think about my surroundings & I try to understand what I see, & what I hear others say. I may misunderstand as often as not...
But to me the Premium forums originally grew out of a desire to contribute on the part of many happy campers using this free site, benefiting from this free site & watching Fred give of himself to make this free site such a valuable place for us to enjoy.
I recall a thread where people mentioned a willingness to contribute, and in many cases this was not the first time some of us had posted that willingness. The conversation took off, as many do, & there was a significant enough of us basically telling Fred... "take the money dammit" ...how many times do we have to have to say this!
So, the "Contributing Member" tag was born, & Fred allowed us to do what was at that time, basically like leaving a tip to voluntarily show appreciation for service already being provided.
Again, in my perception of events, this original concept evolved. Everyone knows that almost all good things come at a cost to someone, and the cost to provide this site has been growing with the site. Most of us in business know that labor costs are often among the highest of all costs. In an effort to cover the increasing costs of this site, two of the revenue streams were looked at for ways to ensure that funding increased in pace with cost increases.
Those two streams were advertising & subscriptions.
Remember when cable TV didn't have advertising? OK, I don't even remember that, but I think at one time it was a little bit like Public Broadcasting in that the need for donations (or subscriptions) replaced some of the need for advertising dollars. Anyway, both revenue streams can work together, but they can also work against each other, so that is a challenge alongside the basic challenge of raising enough cash to meet costs.
Part of my perceptions have been gained from my participation in the Organizing Committee conversations & the short lived Board of Directors, but much of what I have heard said has been said several times in the open forums. I just want to start discussing it again, to help clear things up in my own mind, and possibly add clarity for others as well.
To increase the funding from subscriptions, Signs101 is & has been trying to create "value" that can be offered in exchange for payment. This doesn't change the fact that there is a vast amount of value available for free. Once this "value" can be identified, advertising of the opportunity to purchase a subscription will theoretically result in more subscriptions, & more revenues.
Simultaneously, the other revenue stream of advertising is also being considered & developed. We are not like public television with a guarantee of NO COMMERCIALS... and we are also not like those free magazines shoved in everyone's mailbox, just so inflated claims can be made to advertisers about the bazillions of readers who will see their ads...
...We are walking the line between those two extremes, & attempting to receive some subscription dollars from satisfied customers, without suffering the decline in attendance we would encounter in a pay-to-play environment... as well as receiving some advertising dollars, without compromising the value of the site by catering to sponsors needs before our own.
As we have walked this line between these 2 diverse sources of income, several things have been happening. We are growing larger & costlier, Fred is growing closer to a day he might wish to work less than 18 hours a day, & clues are being gathered to assess the feasibility of increasing revenues from the 2 streams mentioned above.
In my opinion, based on my best effort to understand & remember what I've read...
Subscription dollars seem to hold far less promise for supporting the site as we know it today.
Advertising dollars seem to hold far more promise for supporting the site as we know it today.
Will the site remain as we know it today? Will anything remain as we know it today?
Even if we wanted things not to change, things change! however, I imagine we would all agree that nobody wants Signs101 to become so full of ads, & so dependent on advertiser dollars, that policy & content were set, or controlled by advertisers. That will never happen as long as Fred is involved, or any of the participants who have volunteered time helping to guide the future of this site.
But, even though we won't expect to see advertising dollars come at a cost of losing the value that brings us here (because if we aren't here, advertisers will leave too)... I think we can all expect to see the role that advertising plays increase, because I believe that is where the primary funding needs to come from, to keep this site growing, even if Fred's herculean level of labor contributions may decline some day.
Conversely, I believe the emphasis on Premium subscriptions as a revenue stream may be toned down. Just me guessing again, or grasping at perceptions, so I'm sure i'll be corrected if I'm wrong.
The reason I wanted to write this is because privacy is important to some people, some of the time. We have a place for that. Secrecy is also important to some people, some of the time, although it is not exactly the same as privacy. I think some people want privacy to help us as an industry to keep pricing structures & profit margins, & wholesale sources away from the eyes of our clients, which makes sense.
I think other people have started suggesting secrecy of pricing topics, manufacturing tips, material sources, or even font id's as a way to create value for the premium subscriptions, by taking value away from the free forums. This does NOT make sense in my mind.
I think the notion of promoting Premium subscriptions, from within our threads, by the contributing members, is NOT good for the site. I believe too many people have too vague of an understanding of the various interwoven considerations related to this topic.
If I am correct, that the powers that be today (Fred, Stacy, and the Advisory Committee) have recognized a greater opportunity in funding this site with advertising, compared to subscription dollars, then we will want to promote value in the freely available information to the masses, so that the masses flock to the site & the advertisers will recognize a mutually beneficial opportunity in supporting the site.
So, in my opinion, Premium membership & Premium forums will still have value, and will still offer privacy, will still generate some revenue, & will still be developed into an increasingly more valuable opportunity...
But I think my main observation would be that the increased value of Premium forums, should never be created by taking away value from the general forums.
I could have just posted this last paragraph, but I am trying to wrap my head around all the other paragraphs, because those are the things I have read & considered for the last few years, and I wanted to write it all down & see if it made sense to anyone else, of if I am off base, to have my perceptions corrected.
My views are just that... my views. They exist because I think about my surroundings & I try to understand what I see, & what I hear others say. I may misunderstand as often as not...
But to me the Premium forums originally grew out of a desire to contribute on the part of many happy campers using this free site, benefiting from this free site & watching Fred give of himself to make this free site such a valuable place for us to enjoy.
I recall a thread where people mentioned a willingness to contribute, and in many cases this was not the first time some of us had posted that willingness. The conversation took off, as many do, & there was a significant enough of us basically telling Fred... "take the money dammit" ...how many times do we have to have to say this!
So, the "Contributing Member" tag was born, & Fred allowed us to do what was at that time, basically like leaving a tip to voluntarily show appreciation for service already being provided.
Again, in my perception of events, this original concept evolved. Everyone knows that almost all good things come at a cost to someone, and the cost to provide this site has been growing with the site. Most of us in business know that labor costs are often among the highest of all costs. In an effort to cover the increasing costs of this site, two of the revenue streams were looked at for ways to ensure that funding increased in pace with cost increases.
Those two streams were advertising & subscriptions.
Remember when cable TV didn't have advertising? OK, I don't even remember that, but I think at one time it was a little bit like Public Broadcasting in that the need for donations (or subscriptions) replaced some of the need for advertising dollars. Anyway, both revenue streams can work together, but they can also work against each other, so that is a challenge alongside the basic challenge of raising enough cash to meet costs.
Part of my perceptions have been gained from my participation in the Organizing Committee conversations & the short lived Board of Directors, but much of what I have heard said has been said several times in the open forums. I just want to start discussing it again, to help clear things up in my own mind, and possibly add clarity for others as well.
To increase the funding from subscriptions, Signs101 is & has been trying to create "value" that can be offered in exchange for payment. This doesn't change the fact that there is a vast amount of value available for free. Once this "value" can be identified, advertising of the opportunity to purchase a subscription will theoretically result in more subscriptions, & more revenues.
Simultaneously, the other revenue stream of advertising is also being considered & developed. We are not like public television with a guarantee of NO COMMERCIALS... and we are also not like those free magazines shoved in everyone's mailbox, just so inflated claims can be made to advertisers about the bazillions of readers who will see their ads...
...We are walking the line between those two extremes, & attempting to receive some subscription dollars from satisfied customers, without suffering the decline in attendance we would encounter in a pay-to-play environment... as well as receiving some advertising dollars, without compromising the value of the site by catering to sponsors needs before our own.
As we have walked this line between these 2 diverse sources of income, several things have been happening. We are growing larger & costlier, Fred is growing closer to a day he might wish to work less than 18 hours a day, & clues are being gathered to assess the feasibility of increasing revenues from the 2 streams mentioned above.
In my opinion, based on my best effort to understand & remember what I've read...
Subscription dollars seem to hold far less promise for supporting the site as we know it today.
Advertising dollars seem to hold far more promise for supporting the site as we know it today.
Will the site remain as we know it today? Will anything remain as we know it today?
Even if we wanted things not to change, things change! however, I imagine we would all agree that nobody wants Signs101 to become so full of ads, & so dependent on advertiser dollars, that policy & content were set, or controlled by advertisers. That will never happen as long as Fred is involved, or any of the participants who have volunteered time helping to guide the future of this site.
But, even though we won't expect to see advertising dollars come at a cost of losing the value that brings us here (because if we aren't here, advertisers will leave too)... I think we can all expect to see the role that advertising plays increase, because I believe that is where the primary funding needs to come from, to keep this site growing, even if Fred's herculean level of labor contributions may decline some day.
Conversely, I believe the emphasis on Premium subscriptions as a revenue stream may be toned down. Just me guessing again, or grasping at perceptions, so I'm sure i'll be corrected if I'm wrong.
The reason I wanted to write this is because privacy is important to some people, some of the time. We have a place for that. Secrecy is also important to some people, some of the time, although it is not exactly the same as privacy. I think some people want privacy to help us as an industry to keep pricing structures & profit margins, & wholesale sources away from the eyes of our clients, which makes sense.
I think other people have started suggesting secrecy of pricing topics, manufacturing tips, material sources, or even font id's as a way to create value for the premium subscriptions, by taking value away from the free forums. This does NOT make sense in my mind.
I think the notion of promoting Premium subscriptions, from within our threads, by the contributing members, is NOT good for the site. I believe too many people have too vague of an understanding of the various interwoven considerations related to this topic.
If I am correct, that the powers that be today (Fred, Stacy, and the Advisory Committee) have recognized a greater opportunity in funding this site with advertising, compared to subscription dollars, then we will want to promote value in the freely available information to the masses, so that the masses flock to the site & the advertisers will recognize a mutually beneficial opportunity in supporting the site.
So, in my opinion, Premium membership & Premium forums will still have value, and will still offer privacy, will still generate some revenue, & will still be developed into an increasingly more valuable opportunity...
But I think my main observation would be that the increased value of Premium forums, should never be created by taking away value from the general forums.
I could have just posted this last paragraph, but I am trying to wrap my head around all the other paragraphs, because those are the things I have read & considered for the last few years, and I wanted to write it all down & see if it made sense to anyone else, of if I am off base, to have my perceptions corrected.
Your entitled to your opinion Marc, no matter how counter productive it may be.
