I find the thread tiresome

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

Ellen wrote:

There is no way I'm going to charge "my subscribers."  I do not own anything in groups.io; if I was forced to pay, I might see myself as

a renter, a tenant. That's the analogy. Google groups would not do because they have no archives, no files (we do share essays) and no photos

(which we share with one another) -- they are part of the 3 different groups' identities, their memory as it were.

This paragraph doesn’t make any sense whatsoever!

I find the thread tiresome because the sentiment that is coming across is that the owners of free groups want those who pay for premium or enterprise to subsidise the free/basic groups.

Sorry, that’s not fair trading.  As far as I can see, Mark has set out a pricing plan and isn’t going to change it.

John Wirtz

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

But, please kill or close this boring thread, there’s been enough opinion and it’s getting tiresome now.

I think we can be clear that the purpose of Groups.io is to make money,

My thesis [when I started Groups.io] was that I could create a good business around it.

...

The per-member pricing structure ... aligns revenue with costs.

• Bronze group: no credit card required, 100 members max, 1 GB storage, basic group.
• Silver group: credit card required, 100 members free, plus $0.05 per additional member per month, 10 GB storage, basic plus collaboration and donations.
• Gold group: $10 per month for up to 250 members, plus $0.05 per additional member per month, 20 GB storage per 250 members, all premium features.
• Platinum group (i.e. Enterprise, with an entirely different pricing structure)

• My reasoning for the silver group is to allow groups who might want to be come larger or use more features to be able to do so without a very sudden change in pricing.  Also, allowing donations for such groups would allow the owners to start gathering money for a potential switch to gold.
• For silver and gold plans, allow owners to set a preferred maximum annual payment (e.g. $10, $20, $50, etc.) and then receive warnings when that amount is approaching (or the calculated average of it is approaching), and/or when the chosen amount is reached, the group is switched to no-mail (i.e. posting by mail allowed, but reading via web only) and no further uploads to files and photos are allowed until the owner updates the limit.
• I suggest giving bronze groups a "limited" collaboration suite, i.e. 150 MB files, 150 MB photos, 150 rows database, 15 pages wiki, so that they can get used to using these tools and get to see the advantage of paying for it.  Silver and gold groups get the full collaboration suite (i.e. up to their respective maximums).
• Another way to reduce bronze groups' cost is to always convert attachments to links (silver and gold groups can choose to have attachments delivered).
• An alternative way of pricing gold groups would be $10 per month for every 250 members or part thereof (so that 300, 400 or 500 members would all be $20 per month).  The advantage of this for group owners is a more predictable cost at the end of the invoicing period.
• Let users be counted as members only if they are members for more than 10 days.  This allows people to join a group, look around a bit, and then leave again, without affecting the group numbers or costing the group owner any money.
• An alternative arrangement is to set the free number for silver groups at 50 instead of 100.  This means that you get money from silver groups quicker, but it is still advantageous for silver groups because they get more storage and they get collaboration and donations.  The fee structure should encourage groups that are willing to pay to start paying as soon as possible, without making it too expensive for them initially or when they're a small group.  Or make both the bronze and silver group's free limit 75 members (it's just simpler).
• 10% discount for annual instead of monthly payments on the gold plan (I don't see how that can work on the silver plan).

I don't believe that relying on donations is the way to go, and I
won't be pursuing that.

For whatever it's worth, I think M K really nails it.

Mark has built a wonderful platform here and without team. If anything, I'd like to see him grow it more rapidly...with outside capital or organically. More likely both.  But, from ethical or societal perspectives, this isn't the Salvation Army or local church. It is a business.  Businesses have to generate positive cash flow to survive.  Business with real growth potential, as GIO surely has, can also do a world of good for the many people who eventually may be hired to support that growth in different roles.  There is nothing wrong or less admirable about building an honest and successful business.  Non-profits are also wonderful and obviously do a ton of good in the world. Successful companies increasingly have CSR (corporate social responsibility) teams that support non-profits with whatever resources.  

MK really speaks the truth when (s)he writes "Whatever business model is chosen by [Mark], there are going to be users who will be unhappy for one reason or another."  You can take that to the bank and we've already seen that on this long thread.  That aside, the ethics and honesty behind this for-profit company are very evident to me and rather awesome.

Mark appreciates input/feedback but isn't asking for votes since businesses aren't democracies.  Still, my vote is "carry on!"  A great platform by a wonderful and accomplished entrepreneur with a big heart. That's what groups.io is to me.

Also, I don't see how changing the pricing structure for future groups could be considered a 'bait and switch'.

I don't believe that relying on donations is the way to go, and I won't be pursuing that. Also, I don't see how changing the pricing structure for future groups could be considered a 'bait and switch'.