What is a subscriber based forum?

[Jim Becker]

Is there any published info on actual costs, what they entail? Viewing the costs could actually help people pay a small yearly fee.

It's a private business. That kind of granular information isn't going to be posted publicly...but the (many) previous discussions were clear that the costs to run a forum of this size and level of activity are substantial. Do folks really need to see that to justify the current $6 US contribution ask?

[Jim Becker]

Oh my, did my original post open a can of worms???

The can has been open now for a very long time...

You seem to see a lot of value based on the remainder of your most recent post in your own thread. Perhaps you'll become a Contributor, too.

[Barry McFadden]

Hard to tell Chris, what you really want or expect. Let's make it a free forum, pay contributors for their content and then share it with everyone?

A lot (most/many of us) contribute because we know there is value here. A great deal of of good/expert advice/tips are shared here because we want to share within this community. Some of us just take and contribute nothing. BUT somebody has to pay - yet it seems like that is just a terrible thing to do here.

But without the contributors that have helped Keith & Jackie try and keep the ship afloat, we wouldn't be here having this conversation, because the creek would not exist. And THAT is a fact of life.

So if what's here is not for you, then move on. If you weren't stirring the pot, your departure probably wouldn't be even noticed.

A lot of us like what the Creek is - if you don't just head on out and let us enjoy/support/participate or do whatever we want to do here. And we'll do it quite easily without you. Sorry, but that is a fact of life as well.

Agree 100%..... for the members that won't cough up $6 for a year, you won't be missed...I will continue to contribute because of the value of this site....

[Chris Parks]

Agree 100%..... for the members that won't cough up $6 for a year, you won't be missed...I will continue to contribute because of the value of this site....

And that is a good point because the value of this site is about to go down due to less variety which is a shame. I guess no one likes my point of view but we are all entitled to one and the debate should be open and available for everyone to read but I doubt that the management sees it that way which I can totally understand.

[Stewie Simpson]

The can has been open now for a very long time...

You seem to see a lot of value based on the remainder of your most recent post in your own thread. Perhaps you'll become a Contributor, too.

Jim; whilst I don't have an issue with the changes Keith is proposing, a little more transparency would be appreciated. As an example; I am able to do a search within SMC and find out there are 116,924 Registered Members, but disclosure on how many of those Registered Members are financial Contributors is not been made available.

regards Stewie;

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Keith has no obligation to provide the personal financial information being called out here or the number of financial contributors. Would you be willing to provide your personal financial information so Keith can determine whether or not you can afford to contribute or are you just being a cheapskate?

Keith has no obligation to provide this website. He's done it voluntarily and bravely (IMO) for 16 years.

I'd suggest everybody just take Keith at his word, decide whether or not you think SMC is worth spending $1-$2 per month to be a member. Make your own decision but don't be public jerks about it.

[Chris Parks]

Keith has no obligation to provide the personal financial information being called out here or the number of financial contributors. Would you be willing to provide your personal financial information so Keith can determine whether or not you can afford to contribute or are you just being a cheapskate?

Keith has no obligation to provide this website. He's done it voluntarily and bravely (IMO) for 16 years.

I'd suggest everybody just take Keith at his word, decide whether or not you think SMC is worth spending $1-$2 per month to be a member. Make your own decision but don't be public jerks about it.

When did the fact that the forum is a business come to light, that it has not been a known fact from day one says a lot to me. OR did it start out as a forum and not a business and change somewhere down the line. Nothing is open or transparent about this at all and I would have no issues at all if all it had been known. Ken, I don't think anything I have said would class me as a jerk but if that is what you think then fair enough I must be.

[Bill Carey]

It's a private business. That kind of granular information isn't going to be posted publicly...but the (many) previous discussions were clear that the costs to run a forum of this size and level of activity are substantial. Do folks really need to see that to justify the current $6 US contribution ask?

I normally avoid threads like this like the plague (except for smart ass Like Button posts) because I can not fathom how anyone can go out and pay 5 or 6 bucks a bf for QSWO and then post here, share their projects, get and give advice, solve problems, offer solutions, bitch about robo calls, trash talk AARP, recommend good (and bad) woodworking videos, recommend sources for materials, ask questions about finishing, own up to mistakes and dumb ass shop stunts (yesterday I made a sled for cutting keys into the corners of a mitered humidor top with the blade in backwards, and was so worried about the sled making all that smoke that I didn't stop to think the blade may be the culprit - and so it goes), sell stuff, buy stuff, show off their workshop, get the skinny on dust collection, vent about Tom Brady - won't he EVER go away?? - respect that politics gets left at the door, etc etc etc and they can't pony up 6 bucks. ITS.6.BUCKS.PEOPLE. And just because you do contribute the 6 BUCKS, why would you ever think Keith owes us any transparency at all. You an Amazon Prime member? Do you get a newspaper delivered? Belong to any clubs? Buy a fishing license? Ever see any of their books? Of course not. It's a VOLUNTARY contribution of 6 BUCKS to keep the Creek going like it is. And if Keith makes a few bucks out of the deal, God bless him. IT'S.ONLY.SIX.BUCKS. And now, the smoking humidor.............
smoking humidor.jpg

[Mark Beall]

Jim; whilst I don't have an issue with the changes Keith is proposing, a little more transparency would be appreciated. As an example; I am able to do a search within SMC and find out there are 116,924 Registered Members, but disclosure on how many of those Registered Members are financial Contributors is not been made available.

regards Stewie;

If the member search functionality of the forum actually gives correct results, then I would say there are about 1000 Contributors. I could write a script to get that number exactly, but don't really feel like it. I actually hope that number is wrong. If this whole debate is over $6000/year, I'm sure there are better ways to resolve that.

I have been a contributor in the past. Don't really do much woodworking these days. Would probably still be a contributor if the thing had just auto-renewed (I wouldn't have cared about the $6 per year) - bad business choice there.

I agree with others that have pointed out that running SMC on a server in the attic (or basement or wherever) is a waste of money when you can just buy those services (rather cheaply) without having to own the physical hardware these days. I don't see the point in contributing money to support bad business choices.

[Stewie Simpson]

If the member search functionality of the forum actually gives correct results, then I would say there are about 1000 Contributors. I could write a script to get that number exactly, but don't really feel like it. I actually hope that number is wrong. If this whole debate is over $6000/year, I'm sure there are better ways to resolve that.

I have been a contributor in the past. Don't really do much woodworking these days. Would probably still be a contributor if the thing had just auto-renewed (I wouldn't have cared about the $6 per year) - bad business choice there.

I agree with others that have pointed out that running SMC on a server in the attic (or basement or wherever) is a waste of money when you can just buy those services (rather cheaply) without having to own the physical hardware these days. I don't see the point in contributing money to support bad business choices.

Thanks Mark; appreciate the feedback.

regards Stewie;

[Bert Kemp]

Hmmm. I recognize Derek Cohen's name and associate it with many valuable posts. I note that he IS a contributor. I don't recognize your name, Chris. Not saying you haven't posted valuable things, but they haven't made an impression on me. Maybe you post in areas that I don't follow closely. Anyway, the irony of your example did make an impression.

[Keith Westfall]

Is there any published info on actual costs, what they entail? Viewing the costs could actually help people pay a small yearly fee.

When you go into your local coffee shop, beer joint, restaurant, etc., do you ask for their income and profit statement to see if they are charging too much??? Of course not. Does it matter if any of the before mentioned places are making money or loosing money? Of course not. plus it's none of your business.

Just because you think Keith could do better at a server farm, should he HAVE to do that? If he's been loosing money since inception, yet chooses to continue on, is that any of your business? Of Course not.

What seems to upset people is that he HAS provided the Creek for many years, and yet somehow they think that knowledge of how he does it or what he pays for it (or what he looses) is somehow important.

If it was shown that he HAS actually been loosing money all these years, (not that it matters) would everyone rush to double, triple (or more) the contribution they make to save it. Of course not. But that's the nature of people.

When I fill up my truck, it over $110 cdn, but do I ask Costco for their income statement to make sure I'm not paying too much or getting value that is worth it for me? And filling my tank is just over double what I pay as a Friend of the Creek, and I do them both, because they both have value to me.

So tiring listen to people complain about $6 bucks. Just leave and go get a life.

[Mike Kreinhop]

When you go into your local coffee shop, beer joint, restaurant, etc., do you ask for their income and profit statement to see if they are charging too much??? Of course not. Does it matter if any of the before mentioned places are making money or loosing money? Of course not. plus it's none of your business.

Just because you think Keith could do better at a server farm, should he HAVE to do that? If he's been loosing money since inception, yet chooses to continue on, is that any of your business? Of Course not.

What seems to upset people is that he HAS provided the Creek for many years, and yet somehow they think that knowledge of how he does it or what he pays for it (or what he looses) is somehow important.

If it was shown that he HAS actually been loosing money all these years, (not that it matters) would everyone rush to double, triple (or more) the contribution they make to save it. Of course not. But that's the nature of people.

When I fill up my truck, it over $110 cdn, but do I ask Costco for their income statement to make sure I'm not paying too much or getting value that is worth it for me? And filling my tank is just over double what I pay as a Friend of the Creek, and I do them both, because they both have value to me.

So tiring listen to people complain about $6 bucks. Just leave and go get a life.

When I go into my local coffee shop, I know what to expect as a paying customer. If the price is reasonable, I buy. If not, I walk. However, if one day the owner of the coffee shop told me he needed more money to keep the shop open and asked me pay more for a cup as he handed it to me or told me I couldn't browse the menu until I paid first, I would likely wish him the best and go to another shop, as there are lots of coffee shops from which to chose. If the coffee was really good, and I didn't want the shop to close, I would certainly ask the owner why business was bad and ask if I could help, but it would have to be really, really good coffee. I really wouldn't care to see his financial statements, but if there was a glaring flaw in the business model that I could help with, I would certainly offer my recommendations or assistance. That is what others have done in these related discussions, yet they are consistently dismissed by the old guard and invited to leave.

As with most things, technology outpaces tactics, and can impact cost...sometimes for the better. Those who don't anticipate or at least keep up with the changes will likely fall far behind those who do. The server farms are a good example that offer a great value at a reasonable cost. The only ways I know of to increase profit (or decrease loss) are to increase revenue or decrease expenses. Keeping pace with the available technology and service is a good way to decrease expenses.

[Timothy Shouldice]

I have seen these information sharing forums on the Internet evolve from old alt.woodworking newsgroup to forums like this to new the new forms of social media that have become the new de facto discussion forums via posts and comments.

In my opinion, closing the forum to paying members only might give it a lifeline, but it will guarantee its death within a year or two. Current, non-contributing members who've been here a while have a different perspective of the value of the content and enough might be willing to contribute. However, for those new to the hobby and used to wide scale, free discussions and sharing on social media, I believe they are unlikely to perceive a value to paying and won't. I don't believe any 'preview' system of seeing x number of free posts before requiring a subscription will not be enough to convey the value of the board. I also believe that many contributing members will feel an inequality of them paying and contributing while other pay and consume. While many individuals won't mind, overall there will be enough contributors that this will rub the wrong way that they will leave and the value of the content here will drop. Thus continuing a downward spiral.

To survive (which will be a challenge), some potential solutions might be:

1. Starting a SMC Patreon support campaign. This is a common fundraising solution for content providers.
2. Move to manually placed ads from dedicated sponsors that ad blocking software cannot defeat. Ad blockers block ads fetched from external sites via various ad platforms. Manual ads require html editing but at least are always visible. Some sites have moved to this advertising model.
3. Keep the advertising via whatever ad platform is being used but move to a an 'ad removal pass' subscription service.

The movement away from these styles of forums to social media is a trend that isn't stopping. There is no question this forum (and hundreds of others on different topics) are at risk of closing. Change is constant on the Internet.

[Wayne Watling]

If you ask members to contribute what could turn out to be a large sum of money (albeit individually this might be insignificant) we are going to want to know the details. If this is Keith's business and I am the potential customer then I'm entitled to ask questions without being called a 'jerk'. Do these cost include a salary component for Keith and others involved with the business, if so what's the yearly salary?