Become a CA Subscriber Today!

Ah, but there is advertising and will continue to be so, but subscribers will not see it! As for Consumer's Reports, this would be a long road before the models could begin to merge. For starters, CR tests many/all items in given brackets and compares them directly and have no affiliation with manufacturers. Straight out of the gate, we have industry discounts offered as member. I did not see that at CR last I looked.

Hi 4est - Is your next stop the local elementary school where you can tell children Santa Clause doesn't exist? Only kidding 4est. Just like to give you some flak for only pointing out the negatives :~)

Hi 4est - Is your next stop the local elementary school where you can tell children Santa Clause doesn't exist? Only kidding 4est. Just like to give you some flak for only pointing out the negatives :~)

Well, it is that I do not see any positives in this sadly. Nothing personal Chris, but you are a long ways from Santa, he gives gifts, not asks for donations. If you truly are attempting to make this site like CRs. IMO, your first step ought to have been to back away from advertisers, not bringing them further into the fold by affiliating membership discounts from them.

One side of this new subscribers section I haven't seen mentioned yet is the potential effect on advertisers.

I have no idea on how the previous non-subscriber business model for CA worked, as far as income from advertisers. I would assume there had to be worthwhile revenue from advertising. I know if I was an advertiser on this site and now see a subscriber section with one of the big features being "no ads", I would immediately be reassessing my decision to advertise here at all. I would at a minimum be looking for a substantial reduction in advertising fees, since I would be thinking that a potentially large part of my target audience, and possibly even the most desirable part of the target audience, will no longer be seeing my ads as often.

I'm sure Chris has considered this, but it would seem to me (with no first hand experience working with advertisers) that the potential financial gain from having subscribers may end up being more than offset by the reduction in advertising revenue.

My personal opinion on the whole idea of having subscribers is negative, mainly because now the site will be composed of subscribers and non-subscribers, which is a division, no matter how negative or positive the concept itself may be. I personally feel, it should either be all subsciption, or no subscription. Either way, there will be no perceived division.

lastly, as for the buy/sell feature, I'm not sure how many are familiar with Canuck Audio Mart. This is an entirely free buy/sell audio site with forums. They've recently expanded by offering a U.S. based buy/sell site. It's been going for years, so they must be doing somethin right.

Bill

Well, it is that I do not see any positives in this sadly. Nothing personal Chris, but you are a long ways from Santa, he gives gifts, not asks for donations. If you truly are attempting to make this site like CRs. IMO, your first step ought to have been to back away from advertisers, not bringing them further into the fold by affiliating membership discounts from them.

Wow 4est. Things must move one step at a time. Moving away from advertisers befor generating replacement income is a death sentence for any business.

Paul can you explain what the amazing difference is? ...This is a sincere question.

I think Richard had a similar experience, and he is much more eloquent than I at describing it. Perhaps he would not mind stepping in and giving his point of view.

 

But, as best as I can put it into words, it is far more enjoyable not only because it is much faster, but because I no longer have to devote time or attention to filtering out the ads, even when they are just in my peripheral vision. I can concentrate on and enjoy the content. The site is not only much faster, but "calmer." If any of that makes any sense, which I rather doubt.

 

The point is, I can read a page long posting almost as easily now as if it were in hardcopy print. Something I could not do with ads. And this effect was totally unexpected to me.

 

Yours,

-Paul

Well, it is that I do not see any positives in this sadly. Nothing personal Chris, but you are a long ways from Santa, he gives gifts, not asks for donations. If you truly are attempting to make this site like CRs. IMO, your first step ought to have been to back away from advertisers, not bringing them further into the fold by affiliating membership discounts from them.

You made some good points 4est. Given the model is a work in progress and bills need to be paid and a presence needs to be maintained to shape the model for the future, perhaps in time your salient objections will be handled as they should be. I am not speaking for Chris, merely as a subscriber who feels he has a choice (and will stop writing in the third person before someone calls for a net). You know, I am chuckling: Out of sight out of mind (not that way!). Now that the advertisements are invisible to me, they don't exist.

But you are correct, 4est, they are still there. I am patient when I believe in the sincerity of our host. BTW: I hope you stick around, as I would miss your presence. I'll steal a few lines from Titanic when Jack says to Rose, if you were going to jump you would have done it by now (paraphrasing) ;>]. Just kibitzing.

Common' in. The CA20's fine.

Best,

Richard

Sorry all, just realized one has to uncheck the multiple quotation icon. My apologies,

Richard

Wow 4est. Things must move one step at a time. Moving away from advertisers befor generating replacement income is a death sentence for any business.

So this is a business for you then. Good!

Some may pat you on the back under the guise that you are philanthropic and a good guy and doing (us all) a favor. I will pat you on the back for having a good business idea and running with it. With that said I stand by my conviction, and will add that it is not up to us to feather your start up costs. Businesses weigh that in on the front end. In looking at your music room and coupled with the knowledge that I think you have a newborn, you appear to be doing alright. Have faith in your idea and bring it on.

I guess I don’t get it. The amount of frustration and almost fear expressed in the changes makes no sense to me at all. It seems like one might wait to see what actually occurs before making declarations of any nature.

I guess I don’t get it. The amount of frustration and almost fear expressed in the changes makes no sense to me at all. It seems like one might wait to see what actually occurs before making declarations of any nature.

Wise, fair, reasonable. Perhaps in a reasonable time, those responses are being formed even as we post.

Best,

Richard

So this is a business for you then. Good!

 

Some may pat you on the back under the guise that you are philanthropic and a good guy and doing (us all) a favor. I will pat you on the back for having a good business idea and running with it. With that said I stand by my conviction, and will add that it is not up to us to feather your start up costs. Businesses weigh that in on the front end. In looking at your music room and coupled with the knowledge that I think you have a newborn, you appear to be doing alright. Have faith in your idea and bring it on.

4est - I'm almost speechless. Your comments make it seem like you had no idea CA was a business. I find that hard to believe. I seems more likely that you have an issue with me making money from CA and you really want to point out to people what you think. I think your "pat on the back" is a bit empty based on all your comments. Maybe I'm misreading your words but that's what I'm getting from your comments.

I don't know where you get the idea about feathering my startup costs. I came up with the idea for CA almost five years ago and took a chance by starting the site. Working 40 hours per week at a Fortune 300 company during the day followed by more than 40 per week on CA when I wasn't at work was not easy. I operated the site at a loss for awhile. When CA business started taking off in 2008/2009 I took a huge risk by quitting my day job to make my dream of running my own Internet business come true. It's impossible to grow a business without working at it full time. CA has been my sole source of income ever since. Suggesting members are feathering my startup cost is ridiculous. I worked with many companies to get the best discounts possible for CA members who would like to subscribe and receive the extra benefits. I'm simply at a loss as to why you're so negative about everything that has or may change in the future even if it would benefit you. Running CA without advertisers on income generated solely by members is a good thing for everyone. Or so I thought. It seems if the site isn't there immediately you have to raise the possible issues and wave your hands in the air right now. I just don't get it.

Your comments about my listening room and my financial status are way out of line. I don't take much personally but these comments I take very personally. Your speculation based on absolutely no information is preposterous. I will not engage in a conversation with you about my personal life.

I will however say that my main audio system is owned 100% by me. I don't like long term loans from manufacturers. Owning my components has many benefits for me and for you. I now have a stable reference system that doesn't change because components do not have to be sent back to a manufacturer. Also, a stable system allow me to review and compare equipment in the same environment further isolating the single component that's the subject of a review. Owning the components should lessen thoughts about impropriety because I don't have to keep anyone happy for fear I may have to send something back among other things.

It really seems like you have it in for me and CA now 4est. I hope this isn't the case as I've enjoyed your comments for the most part and didn't mind disagreeing with you on a few occasions.

I guess I don’t get it. The amount of frustration and almost fear expressed in the changes makes no sense to me at all. It seems like one might wait to see what actually occurs before making declarations of any nature.

Ahhh... But equally why shout how brilliant this move is on Chris' part until you have seen what effect it has...

Eloise

Chris,

I am sorry that my post was taken as such a strong negative, when in reality it was meant straight forward as a compliment, even though I am not partial to this change. As Eloise noted, I see this forum differently now. Maybe more akin to Stereophile's, 6 Moons or the like, but with no direct comparison intended. As before, I put you more in the Author Salvatore category, but once again no direct comparison intended. In all of this it is meant to compliment the past, and wish it to continue. This is the only forum I have ever spent much time in for good reason-you and your management of this site. My objection is not the fees, but the slippery slope of affiliations.

Ahhh... But equally why shout how brilliant this move is on Chris' part until you have seen what effect it has...

 

Eloise

Perhaps, because some of us know how we feel, say what we mean, do what we say.

Not being cute. I mean this sincerely,

Richard

I'm now a paid subscriber.

Like several others who posted here, I'm not a fan of the subscription model for CA. But I finally decided to view it as a request for donations, and I'm happy to oblige.

Now ... if we can get that subscriber tag to disappear ....

Richard... You post my comment without of context!

Everyone should have their say about the positives and negatives of Chris' subscription decision; or no one should. THAT was the point...

I'm now a paid subscriber.

 

Like several others who posted here, I'm not a fan of the subscription model for CA. But I finally decided to view it as a request for donations, and I'm happy to oblige.

 

Now ... if we can get that subscriber tag to disappear ....

'Velcome to de Dark Side... ve haf vays, ve do....

(grin)

Hi all,

Where is this subscriber tag folks keep mentioning?

Is it something you only see when you are a subscriber? Or has it been in front of me and I just missed it?

Personally, I don't think it so outrageous that Chris make some money from CA; it is, after all, his job and I would hope he can make a nice income from his creation, in addition to the community he has created for the participants here. (In fact, I hope he makes a lot of money. Go Chris!)

And it has grown to become (for many of us) one of the more interesting of the audio fora on the Web. There is a good diversity of perspectives and visiting here can be fun. Based on my conversations with many friends, clients and acquaintances, some audiophiles, some just music lovers who don't know much about audio, computer audio is still a relatively young pursuit. CA started at the right time. I hope the site prospers, for Chris and for all of us.

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

Barry Diament Audio

Hi all,

 

Where is this subscriber tag folks keep mentioning?

Where the red arrow points. I initally missed it too.

-Paul

It doesn't appear in front page article comments unless viewed in the forum.

(Duplicate post, deleted.)

Ah! Got it.

Thanks Paul and Chris.

Here's a laugh: My first thought was "What red arrow?" Then it occurred to me to open the attachment.

(Hey, I'm a record producer! Takes me a minute to "get" things. ;-})

Just my take but I don't see why the tag would upset anyone. When I see it, it just tells me the person has subscribed. For example, Paul is still Paul - i.e, a nice person, into music and audio, a "friend" I've met here on CA. Someone I'd enjoy meeting in person. I don't feel "separated" in any way when I see the tag. I'm more interested in reading the post.

Best regards,

Barry

Soundkeeper Recordings

Barry Diament Audio

Although I'm not in favor of the segregated topics and therefore the subscriber deal, I do favor the subscriber tag. I think hiding the tag is pretending there is no caste system here. And if I were a subscriber I would want to know where to post to reach certain non-subscriber folks. IOW, if I want to include certain so and so's, can I go subscriber's forum, or need I go General.

-Chris

...And if I were a subscriber I would want to know where to post to reach certain non-subscriber folks. IOW, if I want to include certain so and so's, can I go subscriber's forum, or need I go General.

 

-Chris

Have you seen what's in the subscriber-only fora? They're fluff. Not in a way that I think they shouldn't be there but I don't see anything being posted in them that will be a valuable resource for CA newbies or even seasoned, grizzled regulars. And, without trying to put words in his mouth, I think that's how Chris C. meant them.

Anything but CA is a no brainer; there's nothing about CA in there. Buy/Sell has already been addressed in detail by Chris C. in this thread. Where do you buy equipment is a parallel topic at best and the final forum for questions, comments and concerns etc. should only be available to subscribers. Why should you have editorial input into an institution you are not willing to invest in?

RS

PS. Bad form, 4est

Seriously, I can't imagine anyone coming to this site and not realizing it's a business .. there are ads! IMO I'd rather see a paywall/subscription option instead of Chris having to ask for handouts. I'm with Barry D. on this, I hope Chris has great fortune in continuing this endeavor.

Seriously, I can't imagine anyone coming to this site and not realizing it's a business .. there are ads! IMO I'd rather see a paywall/subscription option instead of Chris having to ask for handouts. I'm with Barry D. on this, I hope Chris has great fortune in continuing this endeavor.

Gee, of course it is a business, but what is the business was my point. This site used to read more like a review/news blog with adverts and a forum. I do wish Chris the best of luck with this new model, but it is different in my eyes. Frankly, I would rather pay double and keep industry affiliations out of it.

And yes, it is bad form on my part. I guess I am a bit dismayed by it all. I have lurked around here from this sites onset and have watched it evolve. As it is, most of the strong early posters remain silent or have left, and this seems like another nail in the coffin. I'll get off of my soapbox now...