What would you pay per-month for an Ad-Free ATS?

originally posted by: unicornholiday
So we're now throttling the speed of members based
on their ability to give you money or not?

That was never implied. Certain core scripts necessary for advertising audience aggregation (comscore) and a few others would be negated.

I rather deal with the ads than give this site
my credit card information.
I'll survive.

We (ATS) would never have your credit card (or any personal) information. That would all be worked through a reputable third party.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Klassified

I think the point is that if other sites under financial pressure can run without subs then why can't ATS

But are they? What other sites do you know of that have the polish and staff this one does, and have no issues with funding?

As to content, we all understood when we joined this site that ATS is a business. Part of that business model is content generated by its users, and paid for by advertisers. I do understand cynicism to a degree, but I think some of the posts in this thread are unduly critical of the ownership.

Someone mentioned a store, that would be good - ATS merchandise and maybe conspiracy books, Audio, documentaries and ATS can make money that way.
Also most sites have advertizing and I don't think the ads per se are the issue, it's just the super intrusive ads that people bitch about and rightly so.

Also ATS would get more ad revenue if they had more members so maybe figure out a way to get back to being as popular as in the ATS heyday. What major changes lead to people leaving and number of monthly visitors dropping?
Maybe it's those with an agenda using ATS as a platform to spew hatred, maybe it's over moderation, maybe it's a shift away from the alternative subjects towards politics and Mainstream news topics and celebrity crap.
Maybe it's all or none of these things but there must be a reason.

a reply to: Klassified

Not for sure if I'm being honest. It's also been awhile since I've been on the forums I used to frequent so I may be completely off. I just don't remember it ever being this big of a deal, but that's anecdotal and those places were nowhere near as polished. I'm basically only on Reddit (which is a bad example) and ATS these days.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: EvillerBob

Mods would now have a financial incentive to drive off those people you (incorrectly, let's be honest, I bet none of them were actually bigots/racists/whatever) label as "bad", because the site wants to keep your subscription.

That's insulting as well as being inaccurate. I've often admired your posts for their insight, it's disappointing to see you make the suggestion. The mods are volunteers - no pay. What incentive would cause a volunteer to ban or 'drive off' someone who is within the T&Cs?

A whole dollar? A word from the boss? You seem to be characterising us as mindless drones. You're wrong.

While I appreciate the compliment, it's a matter of taking the rough with the smooth - the reason I annoy people is often the same reason I come up with the occasional good point.

And that's the issue here. I'm not "good", I don't consider myself "bad". Where do I - and the people like me - stand in this subscriber's utopia?

You as moderators are asked to moderate in the way that suits the style the board owners wish to pursue. Am I assuming that? Sure, but I bet it's fairly accurate.

This is all well and good when the style is consistent with your own vision of what the board represents... but if the owners say to you that you need to be a bit firmer with people pushing [agenda x] because it's "causing a lot of distress and upset amongst members"... what do you do? When the owners come back because the situation "isn't settling down, it's hurting the board, we need to be a bit firmer and maybe hand out a few bans"...

I'm not saying it would happen because you're mindless drones. I'm saying it would happen because you care about the good of the community and serving it to the best of your ability. Sounds great, until someone starts changing the definition of what is "good" for the community. When the community is based around encouraging people to pay up, then the "good of the community" is keeping the paying people feeling happy in their protected little bubble.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I can understand why you would want to do this and although it might not seem much to a lot of people it is to some. I would prefer to keep the adds..

a reply to: ReadLeader


Ummm...I think the block feature would be childish...This is supposed to be a mature site...block posts and poster accounts...what an insanely stupid idea...if you can't honestly defend your opinion and grow beyond the things people sometimes say then I don't know what to add...

a reply to: Klassified

If ATS are asking us the members for our cash then basically in my view I think we should have a full explanation of why ATS is having to charge. That's all.

Transparency

How much revenue does the site make

How much does it cost to run.

a reply to: stargatetravels

Maybe let people have a little fun.. would be nice!

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

If this site starts charging then I stop visiting.

I know one person walking away from a site they come to almost three or four times a night wont be a big deal but for me it will take the same stand I did against other "alternative" sites who started to charge and eventually fell away with the sites of yesteryear.

I'm already strapped for cash and while even a dollar (pound) might seem like change to some people I live with very little as it is and even that quid is important to bills and food. You've already gotten your adverts and that should be enough. Yes people use Adblock (I do) and it might take away some of the revenue but having a donate option over a subscription service would make more sense and even me with very small numbers in my bank account would consider donating once or twice a year but not every single month.

So yh, if you start charging I start walking away. Which is a shame because coming to this site is almost like a religion to me, it is one of the sites I visit every day as soon as I get in.

a reply to: Klassified

As to content, we all understood when we joined this site that ATS is a business. Part of that business model is content generated by its users, and paid for by advertisers. I do understand cynicism to a degree, but I think some of the posts in this thread are unduly critical of the ownership.

I completely agree with you. I think I saw one person say they would be upset if ATS turned a profit. Pffffttttt. I want ATS to turn a profit, and the membership here is pretty spoiled with the slickness of the sight/ownership/mod team.

I think a lot of people are forgetting that they could still access the site, but it would have ads. That's basically every other site in existence.

The only thing that's really bothered me at all is having a separate forum for paid members and the potential abuse of being able to buy other people's subscriptions. That is after I realized the fee would only be for browsing ad free.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

A couple of questions have come up. First....would our subscription status remain unknown at all times? Somewhat of a class issue comes up concerning that. I would not like being part of a forum where it was perceived that all were not created equal.

Second....I noticed the timing of this proposal coincided with the new ad block notice. Are the marketing folks a bigger pain than you had expected?

And last....Given that most long lived members don't see ads anyway, isn't this just another way of asking for donations?

Regardless....I would pay for a subscription to keep things moving smoothly here.

I have a gaming site that I pay 8 or 9 bucks for 6 months of ad free. I happily pay it, and never have to worry about my games being slowed down, or my machine crashing.

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Klassified

Not for sure if I'm being honest. It's also been awhile since I've been on the forums I used to frequent so I may be completely off. I just don't remember it ever being this big of a deal, but that's anecdotal and those places were nowhere near as polished. I'm basically only on Reddit (which is a bad example) and ATS these days.

I hear ya. As I said above, I understand some questioning and cynicism, but I know of no sites as well maintained and staffed as ATS. Our mods aren't even paid, and do an exponentially better job than other sites I've been on that aren't even conspiracy related. I'm not saying there aren't issues we would all like to see worked out, but if this site is not paying its bills, and creating a modicum of profit for the proprietors, sooner or later, it isn't going to be worth their time any longer. Trust me, if I thought there was something under-handed here, you know i would speak out. I have no tact or fear when it comes to such. lol.

The only thing that's really bothered me at all is having a separate forum for paid members and the potential abuse of being able to buy other people's subscriptions. That is after I realized the fee would only be for browsing ad free.

As long as it stays strictly ads/no ads being the only difference, I don't see a problem with any of it. It's not really even a two-tiered system as such. One group just pays for access differently than the other group does. I pay 4.99 a month, and you pay the same by tolerating ads.

That $5 I said I would pay is purely to get rid the advertisements (that I don't see btw). I clearly not need a dedicated forum or even a badge like "paying member" (I would turn it off if I could). I see it purely as contributing to the costs and cut out the middle man that I obviously don't need.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: James1982

That is very harsh but also sadly true.

ATS owners are already making money out of the free content we the members provide now they want to charge us for this, feels like being milked at both ends

Ok, this might sound slightly contrary to previous posts, but bear with me.

I don't actually have a problem with the idea that I might come up with some little bit of genius that attracts more readers to the site and allows the owner to make more money from advertising as a result. I don't personally want to see ads, but I'm not against the idea overall.

It's not cheap to run a website. The more popular you are, the more bandwith and diskspace you use, the larger servers you might need to handle the load... this all adds up to sometimes quite substantial amounts.

Is ATS generating much content itself? No, not really. If anything, it's curating the user-submitted content. But, and this shouldn't be forgotten, it's also shouldering the financial burden for creating that space within which the content can exist.

I would agree, however, that adding in a subscription model is essentially milking us from both ends. Which... is a rather disturbing mental picture... ewww...

Where's the $0.00 option? Run all the adds you want, keep it free!

a reply to: gosseyn
What if they provide false data? We're conspiracy theorists, we're paranoid.

a reply to: EvillerBob

Which... is a rather disturbing mental picture...

Speak for yourself ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Hello Skeptic...I don't see any adds even with my blocker turned off...However...I would be willing to support you in such a fashion...provided there were some changes in the T&C's specifically #17 and author generated content...

Why don't you do the math and tell us what the bottom line is...Then we might be able to make a more informed decision...

However if there are any changes like adding a member ability to block other member content or posts...then it would be a deal breaker...and frankly I wouldn't be able to support this site and It would just drive me away...This isn't BookFace..or Tweeter...




YouSir