Just wondering, and I apologize if this is somehow in bad form to ask. Ed Zotti mentions 3800 subscriptions… at almost 8 bucks a pop, that’s around $30,000. At almost 15 bucks a pop, that’s $57,000. So, I figure the actual total is somewhere in between. Over the span of 2 years, I’m guessing somewhere between 80 and 100 grand. So I’m wondering if a) the mods/admins are getting a stipend/salary, b) what hardware/servicing was purchased, and c) what the profit was, and d) if over the next couple of years membership stays somewhat constant and board performance (not counting crashes) remains good, will there continue to be a subscription charge at the same price?
If this has been broken down somewhere else, could someone please point it out? If not, would Ed and company be averse to giving us the numbers? I also ask this in light of the recent failures. In the event this continues to happen, I’m going to really start wondering what the profit has been, and what amounts have and have not been spent on hardware.
It’s not your money; it is the *Chicago Reader’s * money. If your boss asked for an accounting of how you spent your paycheck, would you feel compelled to provide it?
It’s always important to remember that the board isn’t an independant entity, it’s wholly owned by the Chicago Reader, who as a private business shouldn’t tell anyone squat about it’s finances.
If you really want to know, get a job at the paper.
I think the points raised in the previous two posts would be fair if membership had always been chargeable. As everyone knows, once upon a time it was free.
I don’t know whether the OP has ever been answered in the past, however circumspectly, but consider this:
I used to take delivery of a free newspaper. If someone had knocked on my door and told me that if I wished to continue receiving it I would have to pay, I would probably ask why this was so.
That said, I would perhaps hope for an answer rather than expect one. So the question is reasonable but if a reply is not forthcoming that is also fair enough.
Not exactly. We have been paying for subscriptions for over two years now. If the answer from the Chicago Reader was, “We needed more hookers and blow”, would you cancel your subscription to a message board which you previously found worthy of paying for?
Yeah, I figured this might start a small brush fire, which is why I tried to politely ask “would Ed and company be averse to giving us the numbers?”
I’m not demanding or expecting anything, but I am hoping that if they decide not to give us anything, to at least have fair explanation as to why they won’t. Simply saying “none of your business” will be a bit hard to swallow for me.
They’re generating a lot of money. If the board continues to crash, it won’t be long before this question gets asked again by many many people, I’d think. If they’re taking all of this money as profit and not spending enough on hardware and maintenance, isn’t that something we should know? I’m NOT saying that’s the case, but I do think it gives some credence to my request.
It may be two years but that does not alter the fact that membership was once free.
Furthermore, a request for information does not assume disapproval of the reply.
In all seriousness, if the Reader answered in the manner you describe I would be secretly pleased. As for cancelling my subscription (to a free newspaper or to this message board) I would make a value judgement.
In the case of the SD I have no problem paying them my cash whatsoever. The facilities provided are more than good value for money.
According to TubaDiva, this board cost the Reader $120,000 in the five years before the board went to paid subscriptions. Even with the income provided by the subscriptions, the board is still not profitable yet. So, you subscription today is still paying off the debt of five years ago.
I think I have made it crystal that I have no problem paying a subscription to the SD. Would you like me to voluntarily increase my fees in order to pay off this debt?
No, but simply understanding that charging a subscription does not automatically result in a shiny new server that will handle any and all loads this board can generate. Some of that money goes towards repaying debts already incurred.
Thanks for the link, Mellivora capensis. That thread actually answered many of my questions, but still leaves me with one more, and probably a stupid one at that. I’m still not sure if anyone in the Reader is looking out for the subscriber’s interests or simply trying to recoup as much of the $120,000 debt as they can. Ed, I trust your judgment, although I’m not sure how much visibility you have on exactly how our money is being used. Are you happy with what you know? As part of your big picture, do you or does someone at the Reader have the interests of the subscribers?
I really do not know what to make of this so I will revisit what I have said here, and what I did not say.
I pointed out that membership was once free of charge. I said that the question raised in the OP was reasonable. I opined that the OP should not expect an answer. I mentioned that I have no problem paying my cash to the SD for the services they provide and that the facilities offered were more than good value for money.
I did not ask the question raised in the OP. I am not interested in the answer even if one is forthcoming. The Chicago Reader can do what it wants with my subscription fees. The staff can go to the casino and put it all on the Red if they wish to do so. Or spend it on hookers and blow. I hope they do. I have no problem with the current server setup. I like it. If the Chicago Reader wants to spend money on a new server that is up to them. I simply do not care. If they need the funds to repay debts already incurred that is fine by me. If they email me for an extra contribution in order to help them do this I will assist them.
During the period that subscriptions have been in force I did not post for 18 months. I still paid my fees during that time. I cannot think of any other points I would like to make at right now.
I apologise if this post seems somewhat snippy but I want to make my position absolutely clear and unequivocal.
Perhaps if he showed up for work in stained, smelly t-shirts and shoes with holes in them.
I think the point is that some people (not me and possibly not the OP) feel the servers are still being run by hamster wheels, and that as a result of going to paid subscriptions we should have at minimum gone up to a steam engine or water-driven paddle wheel.
Well, Patty, I certainly see a difference in performance nowadays, so I feel confident that some of our money has been spent on system upgrade. I’m just trying to point out that since we don’t know how the money is being allocated, and we don’t know if anyone at the Reader has in mind our interests (I don’t count Ed as being ‘with’ the Reader since he’s contracted out), then I’m not sure how comfortable we can feel with the future performance of the board. And in my mind, that’s the sole reason why we are paying. In my mind, the spirit of the agreement (I know it doesn’t address any of this) did not address paying off past debt. It was to upgrade the system and ensure decent performance.
I’m not trying to poke a stick at Ed and company. I’ve always been grateful of their work and commitment to the Boards. And I’m definitely not trying to start a thread full of bickering. I’m just curious about this stuff and wondering if Ed can chime in.
The WHY behind the subscription fee has been answered, on several occasions, and was described in considerable detail when Ed first announced the change.
The details of exactly what dollars go where for what, the READER has chosen not to disclose. As discussed elsewhere, several times, this is within their rights as a privately-held company; and, in fact, would be the response of most such companies if asked for an accounting by customers.
I also know that Ed has been pretty heavily wrapped up in Real Life the last couple weeks, so the odds are against him seeing this thread, let along responding.
You have taken one comment from my post #5 and you have not given it context. The following line follows that comment:
I would ask such a question out of curiosity, that is all. If a response was not forthcoming I would let it drop. Additionally, I sincerely hope that my post #15 clarifies my stance regarding the SD.
Futhermore the details of exactly what dollars go where for what is more the concern of the OP than myself. To sum up, I have no axe to grind concerning how the Reader uses SD subscription fees.
