locked Re: Pricing Changes #update
groups.io, as was Yahoo, revolves around a very large number of totally
informal groups whose members have only one thing in common - an interest in the subject of the group. I am in 21 of those (which puts paid to Samuel's suggestion of an average of 5. A few of those are very active. Many are less active but I remain subscribed for historical reasons and some of those I have set to 'special notices' as they are for past interests but want to keep a passive interest. A few were joined for a specific interest which came up, like information on a particular type of software, which I joined at the time that interest appeared but could probably leave. Around half of my groups have over 100 members, some well into the thousands. A very few of those groups are tied in with a national club/organisation which has an annual membership fee. To some extent a Premium or tiered Free subscription could be absorbed in that. There again one of these national organisations is indirectly responsible for many groups to cover all its interests, 50 or so as a finger in the air. No way could a reasonable annual fee for all these diverse groups be done that way, the membership fee would increase above that which most members could justify - result, a reduced membership of the national organisation as people decide it is too much. Remember also that membership of GIO groups is a dynamic variable, with people coming and going all the time. Is it fair to charge for those 50 or so who happened to have joined on the eve of a billing date who leave a week later? I appreciate that Mark has to cover his costs but the model of free sponsored by the relatively few Premium and even less Enterprise groups is not going to work. This is very clear in that the proposed rates are totally out of the question for most non-commercial enthusiast groups that must make up most of their market. Dave http://davesergeant.com
|
|