*** Subs ***

If charges weren't voluntary, then could you have some way of allowing people who were on low incomes to still use it free of charge? I think that would be good.

Also I'm not sure it would be a good idea to let people post too much, or stay at the top of the recently added page - it's kind of nice the way things appear now.

If you're going to charge, could you think about maybe having a free trial period? So people could try it first, before committing.

I really like that anyone can post too - I think that's important.

I'm sorry I can't actually think of anything useful to suggest, other than saying what I wouldn't like. I'd be happy to pay, and I'm going to sidle off (feeling guilty) and donate something now, since I never have.

Subscriptions might work but we'll lose a lot of people. What's the minimum sum needed to keep going? Divide by the number of regular posters.

I can see problems with 4).....who decides what's best?

I'm in favour of a small subscription fee, bearing in mind the exchange rate. (I pay about $100 for my website every two years, that works out to roughly R500 per year.)

Membership will give one a sense of pride and ownership. You can't get the service free anywhere else in any case. There will be better regulation and control.

However one should not procrastinate, he who hesitates is lost.

www.jacquesbrown.writernetwork.com

jacques, I think your web site is a little different from ABC. It takes a lot of horsepower to run ABC. ABC doesn't just hire a directory on a computer shared with a dozen other people, it has a hefty piece of kit all to itself. And it needs it.

I think the low income bit can be overplayed. Could a Big Issue seller afford £1 a month? She might have to sell a couple of extra copies a month (that's not a couple of copies a day, nor yet a week, but a month). Would that be a show stopper?

As for losing people, my estimation is that it's the casual posters of nothing worth speaking of (or reading) who would go. It could be a positive benefit to the site!

Another consideration may be revenue gained from further advertisments or links on site, though this could be seen as a bit intrusive if overdone.

Selfishly, I prefer the current non-elitist acceptance of subs, I enjoy the variety of interesting voices, ideas and styles, both past and present.

If people clicked the Google ads there'd be no need for fees! They don't. That is to say, a very few click their five-a-day, but most don't click anything ever!

It is unfortunate that the google ads are a bit 'samey', not all are live and some look downright dubious! (this isn't helping, sorry)

Perhaps developing links with commercial sites, eg...running ads for Amazon/Waterstones/Borders/Smiths and some of the smaller specialist stockists and presses etc. Is the deal with Google exclusive?

There was once an Amazon shop, there's still a link to it on the right sidebar, but it died. I'm not sure why, it was before my time, but it's a pretty good bet that nobody used it. I'd quite happily channel all my book purchases through ABC, but Amazon won't let you do that! You have to advertise a selection of their stuff and see if anybody clicks on it. And they demand the right to crawl, hack if necessary, your site to make sure you're sticking to their rules.

The deal with Google, I'm pretty sure, isn't exclusive, but it all makes piddling amounts of money, a few pennies per click, and not much more on an Amazon shop. A few people willing to go along with it just isn't enough. Sites that do pay their way by ads have loads of them, and they are highly intrusive.

There was once an idea for a classified ads page where ABC-ers could advertise self-published books and anything else they fancied, but you can imagine the difficulties and the slim pickings to be had from it. It would be as complicated as eBay to let people put up their own ads, and it certainly wouldn't generate eBay-style profits!

It's a shame, but relying on people's good will and enthusiasm just doesn't seem to work.

I am still in favour of paying for membership, but I would like to pay per member, as I have two user accounts.

If its a question of 'sink or swim' I think we should pay.

I have commented in the forum post. I reiterate my own feeling here that it's better to pay than perish.

The Google thing is a problem... I notice an exponential increase in spam on the (rare, sorry!) occasions I do click on five a day. The four on offer as I draft this post look suspiciously like money-mule sites. At least they're topical!

Certainly dodgy. Take a look at this: (I'm not going to give you a link, click the Google ads!) Click 'Get paid to' then on 'make money writing'. I don't know exactly what the scam is, but they're encouraging you to copy other people's work!

hmmm... scam,scam,scam,scam, luvverly scam!

I'd rather be a lumberjack.

* This contribution is also posted in Forum *

Option 1 isn't really an option of course, it's an acceptance of pending demise.
I don't like 3 at all. It creates a two-tier membership and an 'elite'; never a good thing in my view.
4 would avoid the problem that 3 creates but only by putting 'the elite' into a different chamber, as it were. But, as others have asked, who gets to decide who is worthy? Basing it on ‘cherries’ won is a problem because the criteria are so opaque and they are often given, I’m sorry to say, somewhat arbitrarily. In addition, one single work, in chapters, could win dozens of cherries, thus skewing the supposed measure. ‘Cherry’ giving is also, I suspect, potentially prey to ‘pressure group’ action and would be even more so if a system of voting was introduced.
Would we have promotion and relegation? Sorry to be facetious but that's the thought that it provoked.
This leaves 2.
Before I come on to that, I would still say this but more in the way of hope than expectation. Perhaps there is still an alternative way of generating income but someone will have to come up with a novel idea (not the sort of novel idea that grace these pages unfortunately) that will work … and soon! Like FTSE, I don't like the idea of being bombarded with adverts nor ABC becoming a kind of gatekeeper to some vast, profit making enterprise. That really leaves only sponsorship. Perhaps one or more Publishing Houses, or enterprises of that kind, would want to get involved if they could see something in it for them. A pitch might be made along the lines of using ABC as a kind of ‘grooming stall’ to identify future authors with commercial potential. Just an idea but no others come readily to mind.
Finally, let’s look again at option 2. Personally, I would pay a subscription if I felt I was continuing to derive some benefit. I think so at the moment but I could not guarantee for how long I would continue to think that; neither I suspect, could anyone else.
Clearly there would be ramifications if a fee was expected but it’s impossible to predict for certain what those ramifications would be. A drop in numbers – probably. A rise in quality – possibly.
What worries me most would be a drop in numbers to the point where the site becomes unattractive to its members and ultimately not viable in any case. Basing the level of fee on pure guesswork is likely therefore to prove counter-productive.
I hesitate to suggest this but I do think that some kind of ‘business case’ has to be devised. It has to deal with at least two main points… 1) How much income is necessary to ensure continued operation for a reasonable period of time (say 5 years) and 2) how many members are expected to contribute and at what rate. The two sides of that equation then have to balance in financial terms.
I can see no alternative but that ABC conducts an internal survey of members in order to gauge how many will contribute and how much they are willing to pay. It doesn’t need to be very complicated but it has to be sufficiently rigorous to provide a firm foundation for the ‘5 Year Plan’. Yes, OK, I know. But if you’ll forgive the mischievous and misquoted allusion, I’ve seen the future and it may just work.

Helvigo Jenkins

Just to let you all know that this is the beginning of a major re-think and, as always, we want to take in as many views as possible. We will be running focus groups and we will be sending out a series of questions to you all in a newsletter.

Many of you ask how much it takes to run the site - the answer should be around £60,000 a year and then I could get paid, the hosting would be covered, FTSE and the editors could get a bit and I would even be able to organise a number of ABCtales evenings around the country. But it could survive on £20,000 - but I would still have to do some outside work, we'd rely on the goodwill of FTSE and the Eds and it would continue to be the bit of a bodge that it is at present! I look forward to more debate from you all.

Regarding the elitist thing, perhaps subscription could entitle comments and forum-posting? The downside is that people would comment even less. I do see these privileges as being (marginally) more likely to be paid for than the risk of remaining rooted in the Vauxhall Conference rather than in the Champions' League of writers.

How much is a fair price? Good question. An affordable price for me would be quite different for others, I'm sure. I couldn't afford more than a token sum, more than 50 euros per annum would be impossible to justify for me.

Hi all, I thought this was was a story with an interesting title at first.
Nevermind, I reckon a smallish sub for all members would be good, but definitely have a free trial...I probably wouldn't have joined if I'd had to pay up front without knowing I what I was getting (I would quite happily pay now cos its it good ere it is).

Giving benefits or privileges to some would be divisive and could be damaging to a writer's already delicate, neurotic ego :)

Everybody needs the opportunity to comment even they don't do it that often, otherwise you'd just get the same people all the time.

I would be willing to pay a yearly subscription. But...that said, there will be a lot of people who couldn't or wouldn't for whatever reason.
I also dont like the idea:
1)keeping stuff on longer if paying more
2)Submitting more than 3 per day if paying more
It's true that it does stink of elitism as previously stated. This site is great because there are no rules governing age and content.
I don't know what the solution is but it would be a sad day if it had to close.
I know quite a few people from different walks of life and different ages who use this site and it has bought a lot of joy to them.
People are beginning to open up their minds and be creative and that has to be good thing!!!

I cannot but agree with that - but we must balance that view with some kind of economic reality.

I've been racking my brains for ideas. I would certainly pay a subscription fee - either monthly or once a year. This site is so important and I'm ashamed to admit I'd never really thought through the finance side of things.

Will dust off my brain.

The people here who would pay a subs fee are the kind of people who would probably respond to a donation request anyway and I am unsure that a subs model for additional functionality would bring in any more revenue than it would cost to set up.

Years ago ad revenue (running banners on the site) might pay hosting costs and perhaps a small amount of techie work but as well as being intrusive, this pays out a fraction of what it used to because web users are so inured against it.

I think two things need to happen i) a serious look at how to further reduce costs and ii) stepping up requests for donations.

Wiki made a very fruitful request for cash (I gave them a fiver) but they have a huge user base. As Bukh pointed out - the active membership of this site is now past the meridian. The decline in forum activity is a symptom of changing user behaviour on the web. Nine years ago when I joined this site, there were people of all ages and from all walks of life coming together here in droves, plus we had some great piss-ups. It seems to be an older demographic that remains and people have moved on with their lives(the piss-ups were legendary but I don't drink these days!)

Despite the dotcom crash (which was a stockmarket phenomenon), there was still a strong feeling of optimism, novelty and opportunity about online communication at the turn of the millenium. This site was a product that was ideally suited to the times in which it was launched but web portals are now a mature product. That's why Zuckerberg knows he has to keep developing tools to keep pace with user behavious otherwise Facebook will soon become a casualty a la Friends Reunited.

jude

I only just joined this website, after seeing it in the Big Issue. I assumed that I was going to have to pay a subscription fee to be honest, most of the sites offering the same kind of thing do charge.

DeviantArt has a very good system where being part of the community and posting work is free, but subscribers get a lot more. Seems like that might work for this website, but like I said, I'm new.

Any idea how many active accounts there are on ABCtales?

Let's say active means that the user has logged onto the site in the past 3 months.

Or that the user has posted to the site in the past three months.

Whatever's possible to know.

Ben

Number of distinct users logging in during past six months: 1,187; during past year: 1,785.

That's 20 quid each then, to allow a little fat on the turkey, no?

At the moment Tony will be grateful for anything anybody is willing to give. It will all be formalised later, but those who pay their widow's mite now won't be forgotten!

It's bound to be the case that a few good folk are going to subsidise everybody else, at least for as long as the contributions are voluntary.

If anybody would like to send Tony a Christmas card with a few bob in it, the address is:
Tony Cook, ABC Tales, 8 Clifton Road, Brighton, BN1 3HP.
If sending a cheque, please make it payable to: Burgeon Creative Ideas Ltd.

Please just give whatever you think is fair and reasonable in recognition of the hard work (and money) Tony has put into the site over the years.

i'm afraid the idea of voluntary donations puts me on decision-making overload. how much to give? how regularly? is anyone else giving? if no one else is giving is there much point in me giving? etc. so i'd rather we had a subs system, so i knew what to give, when, and that everyone else was giving the same amount. or, if there's a drive for voluntary donations, i'd like to know how much we're aiming to raise, what the financial period is, some idea what the money will be used for, to be given updates on how much we've raised so far, how far we are from the target figure etc. in short, a sense of direction and purpose to it.

I agree that voluntary donations are problematic. Partly because it's a request that hasn't worked, consistently for several years.

I'm personally extremely grateful to Tony for the effort and cash he's put into to ABCtales.com but that's a separate question to the question of what can usefully be done now to turn ABCtales.com into a sustainable operation.

Ultimately, some sort of product with a set cost (hopefully a series of products and services) is the best way forward but - as Chant suggests - a donations target with some indication of what the result of the donations will be is the minimum that will be necessary to generate a meaningful response.