Subscription for Edugeek : Would you pay?

[Athlona]

I am new here & YES I would Pay...

[contink]

I will be posting a more in depth post in the other thread regarding the ad banner after the first post, including my thoughts about adblocking software so keep a eye out for that later tonight.

 

Re: actual costs... It's interesting that advertising seems to be bringing in 5k+ (by inference) so if you're getting that much perhaps the rest is somewhat moot. That said, you seem to be taking a sort of all or nothing approach. At a guess you'd probably only ever get about 25% of people paying for advert free forums which still leaves you with a hefty (and growing) advert fed population...

 

And frankly, the whole ad-blocking thing is endemic so ignoring it is perhaps a little disingenious. I have ad-blocking on but it was installed for other sites I use that are just replete with cr*p flash ads that make reading impossible. You just can't turn it on/off for specific sites if the adverts are being hosted from outside of edugeek.

 

Either way, the question's been asked and it's interesting reading

[witch]

I am happy with the ads at their current level and would pay as well to keep them at this level.

BUT I am concerned about new people coming across the site and being able to see it all if it is paid for

As for Jake's offer -sounds OK to me - I am perfectly capable of looking after myself and the thought of the jewel coloured cushions, plasma TV, exotic food and drink and exciting company....after the day I've had it sounds like heaven.

But you won't get me in the jacuzzi!

[elsiegee40]

* Wonders if Jake's luxury cage is paid for by the advertisers *

 

Is it spacious WITCH?

[webman]

As for Jake's offer -sounds OK to me - I am perfectly capable of looking after myself and the thought of the jewel coloured cushions, plasma TV, exotic food and drink and exciting company....

 

When did the cage acquire all of these luxuries?

[beeswax]

The site currently has 5567 members of which 925 are active. I feel it would be safe to say that some people have drifted away as they've gone into different jobs, the private sector etc. What these 925 active members can't guarantee, is a regular income stream to Edugeek. If some of these active members object to paying a subscription, then the amount needed to cover costs and asked of the others increases. As the fee goes up, more people drop out. The fee goes up again, and as people drop out again you get murmurings of discontent along the lines of, "This isn't the organization I joined X years ago, I'm off!" not only is Edugeek losing members, but it's also being bad mouthed and gaining an unsavoury reputation as a rip off site.

Then we come to our members abroad who may well have differing costs of living, should we have a graduated scale of fees? Then employ an accountant/secretary to do the paperwork? (By the way, who does the paperwork now? Who pays the phone bills?)

It may be unpalatable to some of us on planet Edugeek, but at the moment it's the best and fairest means of supporting all that Edugeek stands for and wishes to accomplish in the future.

Now if you'll just let me get down from my soapbox, I'll be on my way.

[russdev]

@contink

 

Well we don't get 5k in advetsing (we wish) but db was using bett as example as we want edugeek to be self sustaining and not beg, borrow and steel . So it was just example of how much BETT alone costs.

 

@Beewax

 

Who 'cooks'... I mean does the books at moment that would be DB

 

Russ

[john]

I would pay a small nominal fee myself, I don't mind adverts too much, but not impressed by animated ones after the first post, as it distracts the eyes from the posts around it to the advert. I dont often buy things from banner ads.

[cookie_monster]

I don't find the ads to be intrusive i'd only consider paying if the site was in danger of closing.

[markcuk]

if i had to pay would go back to uk.education.schools-it on google groups

 

mark

 

those were the days :-)

[crc-ict]

I'm not really bothered by the ads as they are, so no, I wouldn't pay to be rid of them.

 

However, if the ads morph in to those bl**dy awful pop-up in the middle of the screen over the top of the page content and make stupid noises, or worse still start playing video, I'd be out of here quicker than you can say ad-blocker.

 

I would pay to be able to access EduGeek in school, though!

[Andrew_C]

Wot adverts? Oh yes, I remember, I use a proper browser with an ad-blocker. Yes, I'd pay £5, and maybe £10 with or without the ads; and I'd support a dual-layer solution.

[GrumbleDook]

if i had to pay would go back to uk.education.schools-it on google groups

 

mark

 

those were the days :-)

 

You are JC and I claim my five pounds.

[Jake]

When did the cage acquire all of these luxuries?

 

I got Microsoft sponsorship...say what you will about Mr Gates, but he certainly knows how to splash the cash on comforts.

 

Actually you know..now that I think about it, the microsoft sponsorship may explain the dodgy security on the cage

[Sylv3r]

To be honest i'd be happy to keep the ads and pay also.

[john]

I got Microsoft sponsorship...say what you will about Mr Gates, but he certainly knows how to splash the cash on comforts.

 

Actually you know..now that I think about it, the microsoft sponsorship may explain the dodgy security on the cage

Oooooh I want one of those cages if its MS Sponsored, at least it will work and be ace like the MS House, now if it was Apple Sponsored..........

[localzuk]

A subscription model would drive people away - experts-exchange for example drives me away every time I stumble upon it.

 

The current model with adverts and donations is the best model, as it is inclusive.

 

And as I said elsewhere, I don't block any adverts - it is selfish and will cause the downfall of many a small site.

[webman]

I'd agree with that statement. It's similar to the way everyone moans about advery breaks during TV programmes, but they also resent paying over £100 per year to the BBC who don't have commercials!

 

The problem with the BBC license is that you legally need to pay it if you have a TV regardless of whether or not you watch any of the BBC channels.

[enjay]

I can't say the ads annoy me generally; if there is a really garish one, then I just scroll past it so it is off the screen. I have an ad-blocker at home, but that was installed because of a) the hideously bright animated side-bar banner in Facebook and b) the talking/singing ads on popcap! As long as EduGeek doesn't start hosting those ones, I', happy.

 

That said, while I don't block the ads, I don't click on them either - if I wanted to know about a good brand of switches, I would post a question, ignore the banner ad which appeared and read people's responses; I would not go "ooh, dlink sponsor this forum, I must buy their stuff".

[ZeroHour]

FYI (copied from another post):

If you do run Adblocker Plus etc you can right click on the icon in the bottom right corner of FF and click "disable on www.edugeek.net", this will mean any ad's (from any provider) that are displayed on edugeek are shown in your browser. This helps support edugeek and means you the members get better events etc for it. Its like donating but without the need to donate and you never know you might spot a deal

[webman]

Does it help EduGeek when we click on the ads?

[Kyle]

I hope we are never in a position to have to pay for Edugeek...................

 

but imust admit the help I've had on here is blooming fantastic.

[Joedetic]

TV Licensing is a sketchy area. It is only necessary if you are recieving broadcast materials. Doesn't matter whether it's bbc or not.

 

If you've got a TV but aren't using it to receieve broadcast materials you don't need a license. The people came and confirmed that for me whilst cycling through the channels on my tv last year.

[Wubbalubbadub]

I would happily pay, but I would probably want to see some other benefits. Even if it just meant we got a cool badge.

[elsiegee40]

Necro on a thread from 2008!