the something for nothing philosophy is entrenched on the net frogboy. It's not going to go away overnite.

Well, a few variables come into play here. First, you have to look at their visitors. Most of them are strong members of the open source community, all of which who are use to getting everything for free. So kuro5hin isn't exactly the most ideal site to try out a membership system on. However, none the less, I think the way they are working their membership system leaves a lot to be desired. It is clear to me that the Internet is going to move towards this revenue model, the problem is that no one has done it right. Regardless though, I would imagine that although you see a good number of people "threatening" to leave (note the people who claimed they'd never come back to skinz.org, and did), most will continue to visit the site and many will in fact pay. I don't think their idea was thought out very well, but I do commend them for trying the idea.

-gorman

To clarify a bit, I don't think their idea was very well thought out due to their lack of offering to paid users. They want to charge 5 dollars a month to not see ads; well, who in their right mind is going to pay that? It's all about planning, and it seems to me that this was a spur of the moment thing. Anyway, this can be done right; they just aren't doing it that way.

-gorman

I agree with both jark and gorman...

Keeping users has to be a priority for many sites. After all, hits matter when it comes to getting advertising.

However, since many of these users may be a little reluctant to actually put the effort in on using some intelligence, approaching this in a more pacifying way may have avoided such rebellion.

For some people the line between making them understand and insulting them is way too fine.

people think that the $10 they pay their isp is all they should pay to get everything. but if you want a quality website it's going to eventually cost somehow unless ad revenue comes back.

It's when we are out of beer that I get really pissed... [or is that 'because'?]....

Problem with paying to provide things for free is when you start having to pay so much that it begins to affect your life and the one of those that depend on you.

On the web, as previously stated before, sites are victims of their own success - this because there are literally millions of people surfing the web at every instant. A site becomes too successful and the bandwidth bill goes through the roof. No can do (unless you're some kind of altruistic Bill Gates, of course).

Successful free sites where thus supported by advertising until recently (as are magazines, newspapers and tv). When you buy a newspaper, its actually the advertisers that are covering most of the costs - you just pay some minimum amount. When you pay your cable TV, you are not supporting the networks (actual content), just the cable service... again, its advertising that supports the networks.

Unfortunately the advertising business model does not work on the net. Magazines, for instance, have two advantages: first advertising is targeted, second you will see that full page article wether you want it or not when you flip the page in the middle of an interesting article.

With TV it's something similar: There you are, completely hipnotized by that great show, when BAM, they switch to comercials. Of course we can break the spell and walk away or turn the sound off, but most of us will just do nothing and wait for the show to resume - in the mean time some or all of those adverts came through to you.

On the net we don't exactly flip pages like we do with magazines... so the adverts were mostly peripheral and we learned to ignore them, or used ad blocks. When the pop ups came, we would close those irritating little windows faster than they could show their content... Add to that the fact that advertising was not targeted and you can see why the advertising-pays-all business model failed on the net.

Some other solution must be found... just don't ask me which one(s). However, one good thing came out of the dot com collapse: people started to realize that they can't have their cake and eat it too. As in real life, generally speaking, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Good things come at a price, which you or someone else will have to pay.

Jorge Coelho
NextSTART 2.70 - The Desktop Revolution Begins Here!
http://www.winstep.net - Winstep Software Technologies
IRC Chat: #winstep on AustNet

Excellent points!

"However, one good thing came out of the dot com collapse: people started to realize that they can't have their cake and eat it too."

This is so very true, and I've often found myself saying the exact same thing. People have finally realized that they can't run a website or web-based company off of just ads, or out of pocket; they have now realized that in order to stay afloat they must employee some sort of a true business plan.

The Internet will move to a membership model. It’s just a matter of people getting use to it, which they will. Two or three years down the road people will think back upon the days when things were free and wonder what in the world webmasters and ‘net company CEOs were thinking. You pay 7 bucks to see a movie, 30 a year for a magazine subscription, so how does it make sense not to pay for things on the Internet? Yes, the Internet was free for some time, but I disagree with the fact that things on the 'net are suppose to be free. The only reason people say that is because they were for so long, mainly because people couldn't figure out how to create a proper revenue model. Additionally, everyone and their brother use to be able to get funding; now only companies with a real plan do. It makes sense, things are finally coming to the make it or break it point. Either the Internet starts to become profitable as a whole or it’s all going to fall apart.

In all, I would very joyfully pay money for sites which I visit daily. I know how it is, I've run sites for years, and I know that membership systems are the way of the future.

-gorman

quote >>
Gorman, the subscription model will only succeed if there are no free alternatives and I believe that will not happen for a very long time yet.
>
I wouldn't pay a dime for the sites I visit daily. Not because I'm a miser, but because most of the stuff I get from them, I could get for free elsewhere or because I can find "real-world" alternatives. I'd rather pay for a newspaper subscription, than to pay some news site.
<<

Last time I checked, you couldn't find a skin site in the real world. Nor could you find all of the content on a site like news.com in the real world. If you can get all the content you get on the Internet in the real world, why even bother being on the Internet? Also, I don't understand why you'd pay for a subscription to a tech magazine (example) and not something like news.com, geeknews, or any other site like it. If you are trying to say that the quality isn't up to that in print sources, I definitely disagree.

I agree that people aren't willing to pay for 50 different websites; that would be insane. I won't go into too much detail, but imagine a situation like this ... you pay an extra 10 dollars a year for the Object Desktop Network and you get unlimited access to WinCustomize, and maybe some exclusive material (like they had on their CD). That's just an example, yet a viable one. Regardless though, with thinking like that, the Internet will be nearly empty in a two years or so. No one wants that, do they?

-gorman

Well, I'm with plastic on this. I'm greedy.

I'm not sure I see your point. Yes, you are paying tax dollars for further development/research of Internet II, and I'm sure to some extent, the Internet itself. However, I'm unsure as to how your tax dollars help webmasters get paid even enough to pay their server bills.

-gorman

Hmm not sure what to say or how to put this :

I feel that in order for any business to survive in the world, it has to have some kind of contributions to the business in order to survive. Ok, there is over heads to pay for in a business which revenue has to come from some kind of source. An Option in a web Community whereby you could have a Free area whereby you get pop up banners, and such compared to an 'additional' feature in the Web site where you pay membership not to recieve the banners, doesn't seem like a bad idea. Many sites use this idea particualry Web Space Providers.

A system where you can be a member and choose to recieve or not recieve banners and such seems fine. I cannot see a problem in this philosphy. People just expecting a free ride arn't being realistic to the pains of running the Web site/Etc. Users then become to the point of taking it for granted that it all should be free. Web Site Masters, Anyone who is in the serious business of providing a Good service and reliable FAST bandwith's, al realise to do that you need money. But I wonder how many of the general users who log on to their site's realise that ? [Just my thoughts]