In response to several discussions over the years about some kind of revenue-generating options for ETS, one idea that has recently been activated is the idea of a paid classifieds section.

I've done some research into this, in terms of what UBB threads can do, it seems that it's possible. The forum software CAN manage paid subscriptions, but the ONLY payment options are Paypal and a clunky manual data entry model, which would avoid Paypal entirely, but require more administration of the site (which is really no big deal).

In terms of benefits of premium membership, there are a few things that could be offered:

1. Ability to list "for sale" items. I'd probably make this unlimited, I don't want to go through the hassle of managing each offer post.

2. A "Shout Box" - a live chat area that would be displayed alongside the forum topics and would only be accessible to premium members.

3. Earlier access to Doug's reviews (e.g. Shot Show report)

4. Invitation to "members-only" ETS meetups in various locations around the USA.

(Any more ideas?)

I think that premium membership should only be open to those with more than 200 posts (really) AND more than 3 months membership. I don't mean to be elitist, but I'd suggest that in the almost 7 years I've been working this forum, I've learned the patterns that show a level of quality in content, thought and community.

Another thing that I think would have to go along with Premium Membership is - sit down now - no "handles". As you can all see, my name is Martin Focazio, and Doug Ritter is really THE Doug Ritter, and I think that this would be a requirement of premium members - they would have to shed the anonymous moniker that provides a small degree of privacy and they would have to post "openly". I think this is a requirement that would have to be enforced to have a successful marketplace, and I take my lead from Facebook when I ask myself if this would dissuade people from participating as a premium member (350 Million people on Facebook using their real name, not a "handle" says that we're all mature enough to abandon pseudo-anonymous interaction)

Lastly, pricing.
It seems that there are hundreds of companies trying to pull $10 to $20 a month out of you. While ETS would love to see 1,000 subscribers as $15 a month, I think it's utterly unrealistic. Digital media, unlike magazines and books, seems to have a dramatically lower price floor, even when the content is better than physical media. I'd suggest that $1.00 a month is a more realistic price target, paid only once a year.
If we could get 300 premium members at $12 a year, that $3,600 would support a few ETS activities and help relive a little of the financial pressure involved in making ETS work.

So, again, this is NOT a statement that premium membership is happening, it's a request for a discussion. In the year 2010, many of the web sites you know and love are going to be moving to at least a partially paid subscription model, this is inevitable, so if ETS is exploring this path, I'd like to have the input of the people most affected - the thousands of members of this forum.

For this forum and ETS as a whole I reckon the majority of users would pay a good bit more than a dollar a month.

I think it will work. And as Johno said, folks would probably pay at least $12 annually and probably more. I especially like the meetup idea and the early access to reviews. The only thing I might add would be earlier chance to buy DR gear, or maybe a discount to members, if the membership income could offset the profit loss from the gear. Maybe limit discounts to the first 20 buyers or something along those lines.

It is a well known fact that this forum is regularly viewed in classrooms across the nation, if not around the world. From all appearances, it is arguably the most popular survival type website on the internet. This carries with it some responsibility by the participants. Obviously, we are responsible for providing meaningful content. What may not be as obvious is the need to preserve the vast amount of intel we have provided over the years. We have a tremendous history of knowledge contained in this forum. It is searchable and I think most would agree rather thorough on the subject matter.

I'm not sure exactly how premium membership will affect the overall function of the forum. Obviously, it would be prudent to retain the historical archive of our effort and keep it available to the masses. Regarding the membership costs, the $12 per year fee for premium status seems more than fair.

$12 seems quite reasonable. I'd say double would be fine, too.

I guess I need to start posting more, however, so I can make the 200 post cutoff. . .

One other point - there are more issues for the moderators to address when banning someone who is unruly from a site they've paid to join than one that is free. Just something to think about.

Martin,

Several thoughts. I would continue to support ETS if you offered a paid premium membership but I do not like one of your conditions. 200 Posts? Really?

I work, a lot, and often on the road (snow days this week are the exception). I have a wife, two kids and a lot of things to do. I only have 59 posts but I feel most are substantive. By the time I get to catch up on the weekends most of the threads don't need any additional responses. Should I make 140 more comments to this thread to get me past the 200 marker?

As for the anonymity question, I don't personally have an issue but I can think of some people who may have reasons due to their profession who might not want to list their full name. Also, how would you be able to enforce this? Even on Facebook there is nothing preventing a person from supplying a false name -- just a valid email that can be set up via many domain registrars for just a few bucks is needed for registration.

As for the amount, $1 or $2 monthly (yearly pay option I would hope) seems more than reasonable to me, even in these tough economic times (though I don't like PayPal). However, I have sent in donations in the past to ETS. Would need to double check with the DW, but I believe these have been well in excess of several years worth of the amount you are proposing. Not sure I would continue these if I was paying for a premium subscription -- Harder to sell the idea to the DW of paying and making a donation.
Boy, wish we had that real-time chat feature right now, we could have a back and forth on this topic.


Regards,

Michael

I like the idea. $12/year is reasonable. Username changed to actual name could be risky, for the points above. I like the limiting who can post for sale ads to premium members only. It still comes down to buyer beware; a shooting forum I post on has a requirement that you post a legal disclaimer in the OP, absolving all members, and the forum itself, from any illegal or shady activities, placing the onus entirely upon the seller & sellee only. I think we have high quality members here, and I dont forsee any huge issues, but I think its a good idea to have the disclaimer in there.
Another premium membership caveat on another forum I have seen are group buys & group discounts. For a measly $12/yr for membership, participating in a groupbuy or a group discount could potentially save you that on your firs purchase.
As I have stated before, we have some pretty sharp tools in this shed. If this is something that ETS decides to do, and Martin is looking for input, I suggest we all give them the most accurate information we can, and it will help them decide where to go.
I just have 2 final points: I think the $1/month (payable once a year) is a good membership fee. It will encourage more people to join than a higher fee would. I think that the 200 post limit may be too much-some folks here mainly surf & dont post much. Maybe 100 posts/ 6 months would be a better idea. Again, I belong to a few other forums, and I cannot post FS items on them because I dont have enough posts-and, I wont, because I am there mainly for fact gathering. Its a loss, to be sure, but there are ways around it for me. One, my brother, is a well respected member-so I post FS items through him.

"I think that premium membership should only be open to those with more than 200 posts (really) AND more than 3 months membership."

Martin, with regard to buckeye's observation, why make the AND stipulation. I note that buckeye has been registered for quite a while as well, since June 2005. Would it be possible to ammend the stipulation to include an OR such as "or to those who have been registered over x time period"? The time period could be along the lines of at least a year. Or make exceptions on a case by case basis. For example buckeye has been a long-time registered user with under 200 posts but recent posts in the last 3 months. He is in. Whereas user X has been registered since 2003 with 5 posts and hasn't made a post since 2003 and only recently made a post to get in on the action. He is out. I don't know what the answer is here. Just tossing out some ideas. There will be no easy or fair way to do it without making somebody mad.

Perhaps this could be the new proposed guideline:

"Premium membership should only be open to those with more than 200 posts AND more than 3 months membership; or to those who have been registered for at least one year. Those who have been registered for over a year with less than 200 posts will be evaluated on a case by case basis."

Or am I missing something else here Martin? Obviously the intent is to keep someone from registering and making 200 bogus posts in a week's time just so they can access premium membership benefits. Also to make it easier as opposed to a case by case basis. On the other hand I think at least a year wait is enough to be prohibitive to someone like this. Am I missing anything else?

As far as interest, I think I could talk DW into it no problem at $12 per year. FWIW. Hope this pans out.

I agree with the no handles rule for the marketplace. However, some of us might like to be Premium members for the other benefits. I have no intent to sell anything, but I might like "Earlier access to Doug's reviews" and perhaps an Invite to "members-only" ETS meetups. I don't see why a real world name is required if I'm not doing business through ETS. What am I missing?

My 0.02$...

Here in this thread the "premium membership" is joined with the idea of a marketplace where there is some minimum quality assurance of the standing in the community of those posting gear for sale there. I think joining those two only serves to muddle the water.

The idea of a "premium" or a "benefactor" status is a good one. I am sure ETS foundation will make good use of that money.

I am a bit puzzled of how to solve the challenges that arises with the marketplace - no matter how you put it there are evil pitfalls and traps. I think the most clear cut and easy way is to put the marketplace in a totally separate forum, the way it is done at candlepowerforums (nerdy flashlight discussions). Registering at the candlepowerforums marketplace is totally separate from the candlepowerforum. Exclusion from one has no impact on the other. What happens in the marketplace stays there. Period. Go to http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/index.php? and read their rules, contact the administrators if you want feedback of how they regulate private transactions and professional vendors and how those rules works and are enforced in practice.

Having a separate marketplace forum also solves a lot of the issues disussed here of how to QA those who are permitted to a "premium" status - simply by exporting the problem to another forum. I don't want to go into details, but I see several cans of worms with some of the above proposals to that problem.

Let me rephrase that for clarity: Since you no longer are worried about QA the morale of those that wants to sell excess gear, the rules of admission to "premium" status can be much easier and transparent. My favorite: If you pay, you get "benefactor" status. Simple as that.

An added benefit is that you won't develop a paria caste (those worthy of "premium" status) high above the rest. With some grains of salt, common sense and perhaps a little search you find out pretty quick who knows what they're talking about and who doesn't. I like to see all members on equal footing. I wouldn't mind seeing that member X has contributed to ETS and now has a well earned "benefactor" status. Having a board comitty evaluating member Y to "superior" status means we no longer are on an equal footing. I dislike that.



None at all. You pay cover charge to a fancy bar and misbehave - do you get your covercharge back? No you don't.

Technically you CAN refund the appropriate proportion of the subscription (minus paypal fees, minus the time elapsed since payment and so on). But I don't really see the problem if ETS states that it won't.

I'm also guessing that the trolls don't want to PAY for having their fun. Of course, you could have a situation where honorable members starts flaming each other (perhaps due to some marketplace dispute...). Possible, but unlikely.