What would you pay??

JohnnyG

Honorary Lifetime CEO
Staff member
MODERATOR NOTE: This thread was moved to DrummerWorld Site News because of Bernhard's contribution to the thread.

*****************************************************************​

I was reading a few days ago that several free websites were thinking of starting to charge fees for registered users. There are a bunch that have been doing it for a while now. Some of these are for server space for such things as photos, document backup etc. With that in mind and absolutely no prodding from Bernhard, Jason, or Thomas I was wondering what YOU, the members, would be willing to pay to be a member of this site. I realize that many of you are young, students, etc., and you may answer if you wish or choose to opt of of this question as you see fit. I'm just looking for an idea. I know it isn't much but I would pay 25.00 or 30.00 USD a year to help along the way. So participate if you wish. I'm just curious. Thanks.
 
This is a great site for sure, but I wouldn't pay. Too many other bills already and the economy being the way it is.

However, I think a better way to go would be to have some banner advertising. As long is it's not too intrusive I don't think most would mind. At least I wouldn't. I'm pretty sure every hit brings revenue from the advertiser, but don't quote me on that. Maybe someone who has more experience with that kind of advertising could say for sure.

And I'm talking unobtrusive banner ads, not those annoying popup ones like on some major corporate sites.
 
I was reading a few days ago that several free websites were thinking of starting to charge fees for registered users. There are a bunch that have been doing it for a while now. Some of these are for server space for such things as photos, document backup etc. With that in mind and absolutely no prodding from Bernhard, Jason, or Thomas I was wondering what YOU, the members, would be willing to pay to be a member of this site. I realize that many of you are young, students, etc., and you may answer if you wish or choose to opt of of this question as you see fit. I'm just looking for an idea. I know it isn't much but I would pay 25.00 or 30.00 USD a year to help along the way. So participate if you wish. I'm just curious. Thanks.

I already have, there is the donation button on the "DrummerWorld main page",
which I thought everyone here would have already done?

Best,
Chazz
 
Yeah. I'm all for anything that's going to broaden my drumming horizons.
 
I already have, there is the donation button on the "DrummerWorld main page",
which I thought everyone here would have already done?

Best,
Chazz

Sorry, some of us are out of work and are struggling to survive to support ourselves, families and our homes. The last thing I'm about to do is donate money to anyone.
 
Sure, I'd definitely give 20 or 30 once a year to help the site along, if it was really needed.
 
I'm not sure where you read that sites are thinking about switching to a business model like that, but I'm pretty sure it was just propaganda to get you to read it (hence the site you were reading it making even more money off advertising).
 
Well for one the Kodak site is going to charge now for storing photos where previously it was free. I think if you do your research you will find many sites that are changing their policy. The economy is effecting everyone. And I don't think that MSNBC would put a propaganda piece in their website to promote Kodak.

But I think everyone is missing the main premise of the question. It's not how much can you afford to donate but if you could how much would you? "...how much would you be willing to pay to be a member of this site..." was the question.

A recent e-mail from Eastman Kodak Co. didn't lead to a Kodak moment for Vanessa Daniele. It got her angry.

On May 16, the company's Kodak Gallery online photo service will delete her picture albums unless she spends at least $4.99 by then and every year thereafter on prints and other products.

That's the new rule for people whose photos take up less than 2 gigabytes of space on Kodak's servers — enough for around 2,000 1-megabyte photos. People over that limit must spend at least $19.99 a year. And customers who signed up under the old rules won't be given a pass.

805 you can start reading the propaganda here.
 
Well for one the Kodak site is going to charge now for storing photos where previously it was free. I think if you do your research you will find many sites that are changing their policy. The economy is effecting everyone. And I don't think that MSNBC would put a propaganda piece in their website to promote Kodak.

But I think everyone is missing the main premise of the question. It's not how much can you afford to donate but if you could how much would you? "...how much would you be willing to pay to be a member of this site..." was the question.

A recent e-mail from Eastman Kodak Co. didn't lead to a Kodak moment for Vanessa Daniele. It got her angry.

On May 16, the company's Kodak Gallery online photo service will delete her picture albums unless she spends at least $4.99 by then and every year thereafter on prints and other products.

That's the new rule for people whose photos take up less than 2 gigabytes of space on Kodak's servers — enough for around 2,000 1-megabyte photos. People over that limit must spend at least $19.99 a year. And customers who signed up under the old rules won't be given a pass.

805 you can start reading the propaganda here.

I'd spend $20 a year, maybe $25. but not on more then 1 or 2 sites.
 
If you put "drum discussion forum" into google, you get 493,000 hits.

I'd suspect more people would just move on to one of the 492,999 free sites.
 
I doubt that there are 493,000 other sites, just hits on sites mentioned, but again thats not the question. Oh Well. I tried.
 
I'd gladly pay a small, annual fee to remain a member here. However, the unintended consequence of something like this would be a dramatic reduction of new "subscribers". While the established members of the forums know and love this place - newcomers would no doubt be turned off by the idea of paying to use a discussion forum. Another problem might be that a free alternative would arise and siphon off members from this forum.
 
Well for one the Kodak site is going to charge now for storing photos where previously it was free. I think if you do your research you will find many sites that are changing their policy. The economy is effecting everyone. And I don't think that MSNBC would put a propaganda piece in their website to promote Kodak.

But I think everyone is missing the main premise of the question. It's not how much can you afford to donate but if you could how much would you? "...how much would you be willing to pay to be a member of this site..." was the question.

A recent e-mail from Eastman Kodak Co. didn't lead to a Kodak moment for Vanessa Daniele. It got her angry.

On May 16, the company's Kodak Gallery online photo service will delete her picture albums unless she spends at least $4.99 by then and every year thereafter on prints and other products.

That's the new rule for people whose photos take up less than 2 gigabytes of space on Kodak's servers — enough for around 2,000 1-megabyte photos. People over that limit must spend at least $19.99 a year. And customers who signed up under the old rules won't be given a pass.

805 you can start reading the propaganda here.

Oh, okay, it didn't say MSNBC. But while we're on the subject of that, if you saw Jon Stewart's piece on Mad Money's Cramer...

To answer the question though, if Drummerworld did, hypothetically, become a subscription-service website, I simply wouldn't pay. I value this website very much, but not in the sense that I would pay for it. In fact, not only would I not pay for it, but honestly, and this goes for ANY website: Much less people would use it, and there would be many replacement sites open up, to which former users would flock.
 
I love drummerworld's forum, much more mature and member friendly than other sites. I don't contribute monetarilly to the custodianship of the site, but if Bernhard or Dogbreath or NuthaJason pm'ed me personally and said they needed a contribution, i'd be happy to oblige them. I dunno, maybe $50 for a year? I've definitely gotten that much worth of knowledge and experience from the brief time i've been here so far but i'd like to have a title of silver "FELLOW" instead of "member".
 
I love drummerworld's forum, much more mature and member friendly than other sites. I don't contribute monetarilly to the custodianship of the site, but if Bernhard or Dogbreath or NuthaJason pm'ed me personally and said they needed a contribution, i'd be happy to oblige them. I dunno, maybe $50 for a year? I've definitely gotten that much worth of knowledge and experience from the brief time i've been here so far but i'd like to have a title of silver "FELLOW" instead of "member".

My title is Gold member. I don't know how they found out. :p I'm the man with the Midas touch, if you konw what I mean. How about Silver Dude?

Anyway, I would certanly give something, don't know what. $50.00 a year doesn't seem unreasonable.
 
I dont think the story on MSN was false, but I think many websites will find it hard to get people to pay for subscriptions. There's too much free stuff on the web already. Advertising is the way to go. Is this site worth a fee? Yes. Will people actually pay that fee? My guess is no. Or maybe not enough to support a full online forum.
 
I doubt that there are 493,000 other sites, just hits on sites mentioned, but again thats not the question. Oh Well. I tried.

Well, of course not, 493,00 sites, but none the less, there are 100's if not 1000's of drummer related discussion forums out there. Just look, they are out there.

Buying webs space is easy, and then you just have to buy and plug in the vBulletin software, and instant discussion forum.

But it does go to the question: It is very difficult, if not near impossible, to charge for something that can be easily had for free.
 
I knew that this day would come. The economy and less advertising have forced many forum sight managers to think about usage fees. I know that Bernhard has to shell out a fair amount of his own cash to keep DW up and going. Bless him for that! If Bernhard made a post tomorrow that stated that he would have to start charging to use his site. I would probably be willing to chip in for DW. It is to valuable a part of my life for me to let it go. I have so many friends here that I consider members of my extended family. I'm also sure that the usage fee would drive many folks out. I'm confident that Bernhard would make the fee as reasonable as possible. I would have to see what the fee would be before I made my final decision.
 
Well once again this is just me wondering. I'm not fishing or working undercover for Bernhard. It was after reading the Kodak website that I began what this large community would be willing to pay for a membership. But so far most of what I have gotten are all of the reasons that they wouldn't or can't afford to pay rather than post an actual amount that they felt would be worth it to them. I guess I didn't word it correctly but everyone seems to have misconstrued my original thought. I'll work on my English composition skills.
 
Back
Top