|
|
Question (Community)
Question // Community
Jan 2, 2002, 7:51pm
No I am not askign this in any way meant to slight ROland or anyone at
AW.com however I need to get this one out in the open air.
Point to consider #1: If they do not get the price change they want, 3.3
will be the final version.
Point to consider #2: If they do get the price change they want the
universe will lie empty more often than not.
Point to consider #3: If 3.3 is the final version then Active Worlds
itself as a viable entity on the internet will basicly cease to be by
falling slowly into the pit of being obsolete.
Now my question for AW is this. If you cannot afford the expenses you
currently have, why did the community at learge not hear a thing about
it until the day before the proposed plan goes into action?
Jan 2, 2002, 8:04pm
If Mauz's site is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it is. 50,000
citizens are currently resitered with aw.
With a pricing increase on citizenship of 50% ($30 a year) that would
generate $1,500,000 over the new year for AW.
With an increase of only 80% putting the yearly at $100 people are
projectign they will lose 75% or more citizens. We will assume 75% for
simplicity.
That will put citizen count at approx 12.500 registered citizens (I know
these numbers are not the end all but bear with me on this).
Now 12,500 citizens paying $100 a year will generate $1,250,00.
You tell me which way is more cost effective.
[View Quote]
> No I am not askign this in any way meant to slight ROland or anyone at
> AW.com however I need to get this one out in the open air.
>
> Point to consider #1: If they do not get the price change they want, 3.3
> will be the final version.
>
> Point to consider #2: If they do get the price change they want the
> universe will lie empty more often than not.
>
> Point to consider #3: If 3.3 is the final version then Active Worlds
> itself as a viable entity on the internet will basicly cease to be by
> falling slowly into the pit of being obsolete.
>
> Now my question for AW is this. If you cannot afford the expenses you
> currently have, why did the community at learge not hear a thing about
> it until the day before the proposed plan goes into action?
Jan 2, 2002, 8:06pm
AW has this interesting habit of hiding anything dealing with finances from
the community. According to shareholder info, they turned a $71k profit last
year. Looks like they're getting by, but maybe they know somthing we don't.
Maybe equipment needs to be replaced. Maybe 3.3 is costing them obsurd sums
to develop. Maybe Roland wants a raise. Maybe they're dropping Renderware.
Tell us WHY, maybe someone might pay.
[View Quote]"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:3C337F1F.4F115036 at my.activeworlds.com...
> No I am not askign this in any way meant to slight ROland or anyone at
> AW.com however I need to get this one out in the open air.
>
> Point to consider #1: If they do not get the price change they want, 3.3
> will be the final version.
>
> Point to consider #2: If they do get the price change they want the
> universe will lie empty more often than not.
>
> Point to consider #3: If 3.3 is the final version then Active Worlds
> itself as a viable entity on the internet will basicly cease to be by
> falling slowly into the pit of being obsolete.
>
> Now my question for AW is this. If you cannot afford the expenses you
> currently have, why did the community at learge not hear a thing about
> it until the day before the proposed plan goes into action?
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 8:06pm
:) That's exactly my point! They're losing more money then this will
generate in the long run. I just don't want to see AW go down the hole
without it but with the new price plan they're putting themselves further
down it and faster.
--Bowen--
[View Quote]"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com...
> If Mauz's site is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it is. 50,000
> citizens are currently resitered with aw.
> With a pricing increase on citizenship of 50% ($30 a year) that would
> generate $1,500,000 over the new year for AW.
> With an increase of only 80% putting the yearly at $100 people are
> projectign they will lose 75% or more citizens. We will assume 75% for
> simplicity.
>
> That will put citizen count at approx 12.500 registered citizens (I know
> these numbers are not the end all but bear with me on this).
> Now 12,500 citizens paying $100 a year will generate $1,250,00.
>
> You tell me which way is more cost effective.
>
> dotar sojat wrote:
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 8:07pm
As long as it's the absolute truth.. I don't want one of those "this is what
I want you to hear" deals.
--Bowen--
Jan 2, 2002, 8:10pm
AMEN! Give us the straight story and we will listen. But next time instead of
just picking a number you want to make for a profit, let those of us who pay
YOUR bills have a say in it too AW. I would pay $30 a year for AW and consider
it worth while. And doing that you would keep your high user counts, and make
more money.
[View Quote]
> As long as it's the absolute truth.. I don't want one of those "this is what
> I want you to hear" deals.
>
> --Bowen--
Jan 2, 2002, 8:20pm
You're all forgetting on thing - and that's that if AW raised the price to
$30 a year, 50,000 citizens wouldn't all pay for an increase. There's
always going to be someone who says the next dollar is too much. I'd be
willing to bet at least 10,000 citizens wouldn't renew even if the price was
raised to even $30. Therefore, AW wouldn't make 1.5 million dollars but
substantially less.
Second, $71K is hardly a lot of money for a huge corporation for AW to make
in one year. They're attempting to increase their bottom line - it's that
simple. Chances are, they can make more money by charging that much,
because even if they make the same amount in citizenship renewals, so many
people will leave the universe that they'll be charged less for bandwidth,
hosting, salaries, and so forth. There's the reasoning behind the increase.
But sheesh - why is everyone complaining about the price increase when they
don't even know what the increase is going to be after all? For all you
know, you could be paying $30/year after all next year. Everyone should
read the letter a little more carefully.
[View Quote]"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com...
> If Mauz's site is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it is. 50,000
> citizens are currently resitered with aw.
> With a pricing increase on citizenship of 50% ($30 a year) that would
> generate $1,500,000 over the new year for AW.
> With an increase of only 80% putting the yearly at $100 people are
> projectign they will lose 75% or more citizens. We will assume 75% for
> simplicity.
>
> That will put citizen count at approx 12.500 registered citizens (I know
> these numbers are not the end all but bear with me on this).
> Now 12,500 citizens paying $100 a year will generate $1,250,00.
>
> You tell me which way is more cost effective.
>
> dotar sojat wrote:
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 8:27pm
Well said that man.
[View Quote]"brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org> wrote in message
news:3c3387c9$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> You're all forgetting on thing - and that's that if AW raised the price to
> $30 a year, 50,000 citizens wouldn't all pay for an increase. There's
> always going to be someone who says the next dollar is too much. I'd be
> willing to bet at least 10,000 citizens wouldn't renew even if the price
was
> raised to even $30. Therefore, AW wouldn't make 1.5 million dollars but
> substantially less.
>
> Second, $71K is hardly a lot of money for a huge corporation for AW to
make
> in one year. They're attempting to increase their bottom line - it's that
> simple. Chances are, they can make more money by charging that much,
> because even if they make the same amount in citizenship renewals, so many
> people will leave the universe that they'll be charged less for bandwidth,
> hosting, salaries, and so forth. There's the reasoning behind the
increase.
>
> But sheesh - why is everyone complaining about the price increase when
they
> don't even know what the increase is going to be after all? For all you
> know, you could be paying $30/year after all next year. Everyone should
> read the letter a little more carefully.
>
> "dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com...
3.3
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 8:30pm
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
I did read it carefully Brant, however have you EVER known a company to
set a price for the old timers that was substantially lower than the price
for the newbies. Also YOU should read the FAQ on it...
<p>{quoted from the faq at <A HREF="http://www.activeworlds.com/tech/faq.asp">http://www.activeworlds.com/tech/faq.asp</A>}
<p>I have just renewed at $19.95 per year and my registration will not
expire until January of next year. Will I still have to pay the $9.50 per
month?
<br>No. Your registration is valid until January of next year. At that
point when it comes time to renew, you will need to pay the new rate of
$9.50 per month.
<p>{end of quote}
<p>Seems they already have the pricing model figured out but are not wanting
to let us all know yet. And I quote "<b><i><u><font color="#FF0000">No.
Your registration is valid until January of next year. At that point when
it comes time to renew, you will need to pay the new rate of $9.50 per
month.</font></u></i></b><font color="#000000">"</font><font color="#000000"></font>
<p><font color="#000000">So you see, they have already decided to shaft
us who already were here for our loyalty. We worked hard for what we have
here, and have done our part to be supportive, yet this is our thanks?
If this plan does fully go into action my cit expires on April 27, and
I will not renew since I cannot afford that kinda outlay jus to chat.</font><font color="#000000"></font>
[View Quote]<p>brant wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>You're all forgetting on thing - and that's that
if AW raised the price to
<br>$30 a year, 50,000 citizens wouldn't all pay for an increase.
There's
<br>always going to be someone who says the next dollar is too much.
I'd be
<br>willing to bet at least 10,000 citizens wouldn't renew even if the
price was
<br>raised to even $30. Therefore, AW wouldn't make 1.5 million dollars
but
<br>substantially less.
<p>Second, $71K is hardly a lot of money for a huge corporation for AW
to make
<br>in one year. They're attempting to increase their bottom line
- it's that
<br>simple. Chances are, they can make more money by charging that
much,
<br>because even if they make the same amount in citizenship renewals,
so many
<br>people will leave the universe that they'll be charged less for bandwidth,
<br>hosting, salaries, and so forth. There's the reasoning behind
the increase.
<p>But sheesh - why is everyone complaining about the price increase when
they
<br>don't even know what the increase is going to be after all? For
all you
<br>know, you could be paying $30/year after all next year. Everyone
should
<br>read the letter a little more carefully.
<p>"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
<br><a href="news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com">news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com</a>...
<br>> If Mauz's site is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it is. 50,000
<br>> citizens are currently resitered with aw.
<br>> With a pricing increase on citizenship of 50% ($30 a year) that would
<br>> generate $1,500,000 over the new year for AW.
<br>> With an increase of only 80% putting the yearly at $100 people are
<br>> projectign they will lose 75% or more citizens. We will assume 75%
for
<br>> simplicity.
<br>>
<br>> That will put citizen count at approx 12.500 registered citizens
(I know
<br>> these numbers are not the end all but bear with me on this).
<br>> Now 12,500 citizens paying $100 a year will generate $1,250,00.
<br>>
<br>> You tell me which way is more cost effective.
<br>>
<br>> dotar sojat wrote:
<br>>
<br>> > No I am not askign this in any way meant to slight ROland or anyone
at
<br>> > AW.com however I need to get this one out in the open air.
<br>> >
<br>> > Point to consider #1: If they do not get the price change they
want, 3.3
<br>> > will be the final version.
<br>> >
<br>> > Point to consider #2: If they do get the price change they want
the
<br>> > universe will lie empty more often than not.
<br>> >
<br>> > Point to consider #3: If 3.3 is the final version then Active Worlds
<br>> > itself as a viable entity on the internet will basicly cease to
be by
<br>> > falling slowly into the pit of being obsolete.
<br>> >
<br>> > Now my question for AW is this. If you cannot afford the expenses
you
<br>> > currently have, why did the community at learge not hear a thing
about
<br>> > it until the day before the proposed plan goes into action?
<br>></blockquote>
</html>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 8:35pm
Yes, it does say that arrangements will be determined for existing citizens
at a later date, but in order to keep the new from complaining, it can't be
THAT huge of a difference. Also, what about renewals of expired
citizenships? How much will they cost? How do they expect to impress n00bs
enough in two weeks to get them to let them be charged $10 a month? What
about people without credit cards? What about outside the US?
[View Quote]"brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org> wrote in message
news:3c3387c9$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> You're all forgetting on thing - and that's that if AW raised the price to
> $30 a year, 50,000 citizens wouldn't all pay for an increase. There's
> always going to be someone who says the next dollar is too much. I'd be
> willing to bet at least 10,000 citizens wouldn't renew even if the price
was
> raised to even $30. Therefore, AW wouldn't make 1.5 million dollars but
> substantially less.
>
> Second, $71K is hardly a lot of money for a huge corporation for AW to
make
> in one year. They're attempting to increase their bottom line - it's that
> simple. Chances are, they can make more money by charging that much,
> because even if they make the same amount in citizenship renewals, so many
> people will leave the universe that they'll be charged less for bandwidth,
> hosting, salaries, and so forth. There's the reasoning behind the
increase.
>
> But sheesh - why is everyone complaining about the price increase when
they
> don't even know what the increase is going to be after all? For all you
> know, you could be paying $30/year after all next year. Everyone should
> read the letter a little more carefully.
>
> "dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
> news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com...
3.3
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 8:41pm
[View Quote]"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com...
> If Mauz's site is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it is. 50,000
> citizens are currently resitered with aw.
|
Hehe I will have to rephrase that: there are over 50,000 accounts
in the citizen database, but many of them are expired,
or then expiring soon like the 3D Homepage ones.
And there is no way for a bot run by ordinary user to find out
which is which; that is, how many active, paying citizens there really are.
--
Mauz
http://mauz.info
- An unofficial user site not affiliated with Activeworlds Corp. ;) -
Jan 2, 2002, 8:43pm
TY for the clarification.
[View Quote]
[View Quote]> "dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com...
>
> Hehe I will have to rephrase that: there are over 50,000 accounts
> in the citizen database, but many of them are expired,
> or then expiring soon like the 3D Homepage ones.
> And there is no way for a bot run by ordinary user to find out
> which is which; that is, how many active, paying citizens there really are.
>
> --
> Mauz
> http://mauz.info
> - An unofficial user site not affiliated with Activeworlds Corp. ;) -
|
Jan 2, 2002, 8:56pm
90% of the people I know that use aw feel just "ok" with the price now, and
I'm constantly hearing them mention leaving aw due to money (at 19.95).
Even if I managed to get the $240+ a year (not including worlds, which I
assume will also be skyrocketing) I'd have almost non of my friends left....
what they should have done is ADVERTISED aw, THEN done the 3d homepage. I
saw hardly any increase in aw's pop from the homepages. Why? Because only
people who alrdy were in aw knew about it. 3d homepages are a great idea IF
there is a large advertising blitz along with them. But with little or no
advertising it's just a money pit to get where we are now.
When aw went from free to 20 a month it lost about 80% of it's citizens. AW
is just now finaly starting to shape up into a healthy community.. and now
they are raising the price by about a hundred dollars... imagine what % it
will lose this time.
No offence to aw's staff.. since I know most of them and like them. But it
seems you guys really have a bloated staff. How about the community and you
meet half way. You guys take pay cuts and even lay offs, and we only go up
to 30-40 a year? I've heard some pretty rediculus figures on how much rick
and jp make a year. heh, how about we get rid of them, they seem to be
the biggest costs around here. Heck the only people that seem to matter are
Roland and Tom, and perhaps gand and stacy. Maybe you guys shouldn't have
hired so many more staff and such if you couldn't afford them.
Jan 2, 2002, 9:05pm
actually...worlds will stay they same they said...and you also know
what...if they split it up like 10 every 6 months it would be easier to pay
since you dont have to pay it all every month...most people dont save they
wait until the time to pay gets close and then complain they wotn have
enough...makign smaller payments will make it easier to pay...i say like $4
every 3 months...that would be about $20 a year right? and its a hell of a
lot easier to pay
[View Quote]moff piett <baronjutter at shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3c339034$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> 90% of the people I know that use aw feel just "ok" with the price now,
and
> I'm constantly hearing them mention leaving aw due to money (at 19.95).
> Even if I managed to get the $240+ a year (not including worlds, which I
> assume will also be skyrocketing) I'd have almost non of my friends
left....
>
> what they should have done is ADVERTISED aw, THEN done the 3d homepage.
I
> saw hardly any increase in aw's pop from the homepages. Why? Because
only
> people who alrdy were in aw knew about it. 3d homepages are a great idea
IF
> there is a large advertising blitz along with them. But with little or no
> advertising it's just a money pit to get where we are now.
>
> When aw went from free to 20 a month it lost about 80% of it's citizens.
AW
> is just now finaly starting to shape up into a healthy community.. and now
> they are raising the price by about a hundred dollars... imagine what %
it
> will lose this time.
>
> No offence to aw's staff.. since I know most of them and like them. But
it
> seems you guys really have a bloated staff. How about the community and
you
> meet half way. You guys take pay cuts and even lay offs, and we only go
up
> to 30-40 a year? I've heard some pretty rediculus figures on how much
rick
> and jp make a year. heh, how about we get rid of them, they seem to be
> the biggest costs around here. Heck the only people that seem to matter
are
> Roland and Tom, and perhaps gand and stacy. Maybe you guys shouldn't have
> hired so many more staff and such if you couldn't afford them.
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 9:14pm
I'd like to propose the idea that charging more for citizenships will be the
solution to all the problems with community involvement AW's been having
recently.
If people are paying $9.50 per month, they're much more likely to put more
into AW than they would be if they're paying only $20 per year. In
addition, chances are that people like Radon who continue to buy new
citizenships to cause trouble will decide that the price is now too high to
be worth the effort. Furthermore, the elimination of anonymous tourists
will most likely mean the end of a lot of GZ spamming and a reduction in
vandalism - people won't vandalize as much when they know it can be nailed
to their account.
Furthermore, if you read the FAQ that's posted at
http://www.activeworlds.com/tech/faq.asp, you'll find out that all current
citizenships will be good until they expire. Not only that, but the price
for renewing existing citizenships will probably be lower than obtaining a
new citizenship.
In short, AW's not going to disappear one day tomorrow or a day in February.
The fact that AW is phasing in a pricing plan instead of simply filing for
bankruptcy shows how stable their financial situation really is.
I'm not going to go signing any ridiculous petitions that say "F AWCOM" or
something like that because doing so is simply a waste of time and probably
would only hurt the community. I'd bet some money that, in a week or so,
public opinion will have drastically changed once everyone learns all the
facts and calms down a bit to think more reasonably.
[View Quote]"moff piett" <baronjutter at shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3c339034$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> 90% of the people I know that use aw feel just "ok" with the price now,
and
> I'm constantly hearing them mention leaving aw due to money (at 19.95).
> Even if I managed to get the $240+ a year (not including worlds, which I
> assume will also be skyrocketing) I'd have almost non of my friends
left....
>
> what they should have done is ADVERTISED aw, THEN done the 3d homepage.
I
> saw hardly any increase in aw's pop from the homepages. Why? Because
only
> people who alrdy were in aw knew about it. 3d homepages are a great idea
IF
> there is a large advertising blitz along with them. But with little or no
> advertising it's just a money pit to get where we are now.
>
> When aw went from free to 20 a month it lost about 80% of it's citizens.
AW
> is just now finaly starting to shape up into a healthy community.. and now
> they are raising the price by about a hundred dollars... imagine what %
it
> will lose this time.
>
> No offence to aw's staff.. since I know most of them and like them. But
it
> seems you guys really have a bloated staff. How about the community and
you
> meet half way. You guys take pay cuts and even lay offs, and we only go
up
> to 30-40 a year? I've heard some pretty rediculus figures on how much
rick
> and jp make a year. heh, how about we get rid of them, they seem to be
> the biggest costs around here. Heck the only people that seem to matter
are
> Roland and Tom, and perhaps gand and stacy. Maybe you guys shouldn't have
> hired so many more staff and such if you couldn't afford them.
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 9:17pm
One more issue I should bring up - for all those complaining about AW not
adding improvements the community wants, AW simply HAS to listen to the
community's requests for improvements from now on, because consumers now
hold a much bigger share as compared to the big businesses that run AW.
Expect to see more user-requested features in the future; heck, AW probably
decided on this plan months ago when they suddenly changed their public
policy with the feature vote page. The timing is interesting, as is
Roland's cancellation of Tech Talks recently..... just something to think
about :)
[View Quote]"brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org> wrote in message
news:3c339461$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I'd like to propose the idea that charging more for citizenships will be
the
> solution to all the problems with community involvement AW's been having
> recently.
>
> If people are paying $9.50 per month, they're much more likely to put more
> into AW than they would be if they're paying only $20 per year. In
> addition, chances are that people like Radon who continue to buy new
> citizenships to cause trouble will decide that the price is now too high
to
> be worth the effort. Furthermore, the elimination of anonymous tourists
> will most likely mean the end of a lot of GZ spamming and a reduction in
> vandalism - people won't vandalize as much when they know it can be nailed
> to their account.
>
> Furthermore, if you read the FAQ that's posted at
> http://www.activeworlds.com/tech/faq.asp, you'll find out that all current
> citizenships will be good until they expire. Not only that, but the price
> for renewing existing citizenships will probably be lower than obtaining a
> new citizenship.
>
> In short, AW's not going to disappear one day tomorrow or a day in
February.
> The fact that AW is phasing in a pricing plan instead of simply filing for
> bankruptcy shows how stable their financial situation really is.
>
> I'm not going to go signing any ridiculous petitions that say "F AWCOM" or
> something like that because doing so is simply a waste of time and
probably
> would only hurt the community. I'd bet some money that, in a week or so,
> public opinion will have drastically changed once everyone learns all the
> facts and calms down a bit to think more reasonably.
>
> "moff piett" <baronjutter at shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:3c339034$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> and
> left....
> I
> only
idea
> IF
no
> AW
now
> it
> it
> you
go
> up
> rick
be
> are
have
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 9:24pm
Geesh ... you win the award for the most self-centred and warped outlook I
have ever come across. You would rather people lose their jobs in this
economic climate than you have to leave a chat community?
That is just sick!
[View Quote]"moff piett" <baronjutter at shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3c339034$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
|
"You guys take pay cuts and even lay offs, and we only go up to 30-40 a
year"
Jan 2, 2002, 10:56pm
Tell us, how much do you pay for your cit? I could bet you get the free
renewals for working with the community.
Of course, you have no complaints...
--
_________________________________________
Anduin Lothario
ICQ#:17962714
SMS: (Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +278314217962714
More ways to contact me:
http://wwp.icq.com/17962714
http://www.anduin-lothario.com
_________________________________________
[View Quote]"brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org> wrote in message
news:3c339461$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I'd like to propose the idea that charging more for citizenships will be
the
> solution to all the problems with community involvement AW's been having
> recently.
>
> If people are paying $9.50 per month, they're much more likely to put more
> into AW than they would be if they're paying only $20 per year. In
> addition, chances are that people like Radon who continue to buy new
> citizenships to cause trouble will decide that the price is now too high
to
> be worth the effort. Furthermore, the elimination of anonymous tourists
> will most likely mean the end of a lot of GZ spamming and a reduction in
> vandalism - people won't vandalize as much when they know it can be nailed
> to their account.
>
> Furthermore, if you read the FAQ that's posted at
> http://www.activeworlds.com/tech/faq.asp, you'll find out that all current
> citizenships will be good until they expire. Not only that, but the price
> for renewing existing citizenships will probably be lower than obtaining a
> new citizenship.
>
> In short, AW's not going to disappear one day tomorrow or a day in
February.
> The fact that AW is phasing in a pricing plan instead of simply filing for
> bankruptcy shows how stable their financial situation really is.
>
> I'm not going to go signing any ridiculous petitions that say "F AWCOM" or
> something like that because doing so is simply a waste of time and
probably
> would only hurt the community. I'd bet some money that, in a week or so,
> public opinion will have drastically changed once everyone learns all the
> facts and calms down a bit to think more reasonably.
>
> "moff piett" <baronjutter at shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:3c339034$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> and
> left....
> I
> only
idea
> IF
no
> AW
now
> it
> it
> you
go
> up
> rick
be
> are
have
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 10:56pm
Sounds right to me :)
--
_________________________________________
Anduin Lothario
ICQ#:17962714
SMS: (Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +278314217962714
More ways to contact me:
http://wwp.icq.com/17962714
http://www.anduin-lothario.com
_________________________________________
[View Quote]"grimble" <grimble2000 at btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:3c3396c1$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Geesh ... you win the award for the most self-centred and warped outlook I
> have ever come across. You would rather people lose their jobs in this
> economic climate than you have to leave a chat community?
>
> That is just sick!
>
>
> "moff piett" <baronjutter at shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:3c339034$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
> "You guys take pay cuts and even lay offs, and we only go up to 30-40 a
> year"
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 11:38pm
I'd pay US$30 a year. I wouldn't pay more.
Then a year later, if they made another increase to US$40 per year, I would
still think it reasonable and probably renew.
~ Justin
[View Quote]"dotar sojat" <barsoom at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in message
news:3C33821D.90CC8E10 at my.activeworlds.com...
> If Mauz's site is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it is. 50,000
> citizens are currently resitered with aw.
> With a pricing increase on citizenship of 50% ($30 a year) that would
> generate $1,500,000 over the new year for AW.
> With an increase of only 80% putting the yearly at $100 people are
> projectign they will lose 75% or more citizens. We will assume 75% for
> simplicity.
>
> That will put citizen count at approx 12.500 registered citizens (I know
> these numbers are not the end all but bear with me on this).
> Now 12,500 citizens paying $100 a year will generate $1,250,00.
>
> You tell me which way is more cost effective.
>
> dotar sojat wrote:
>
>
|
Jan 2, 2002, 11:53pm
white page with nothing on it :-/
[View Quote]dotar sojat wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> {quoted from the faq at http://www.activeworlds.com/tech/faq.asp}
>
> [...]
|
--
"_
|
/\
\ /
__/ /_
Jan 3, 2002, 12:15am
Paying on a monthly base is even worse for people
outside of the US, and the banks will be happy
[View Quote]cozmo wrote:
>
> actually...worlds will stay they same they said...and you also know
> what...if they split it up like 10 every 6 months it would be easier to pay
> since you dont have to pay it all every month...most people dont save they
> wait until the time to pay gets close and then complain they wotn have
> enough...makign smaller payments will make it easier to pay...i say like $4
> every 3 months...that would be about $20 a year right? and its a hell of a
> lot easier to pay
|
--
"_
|
/\
\ /
__/ /_
Jan 3, 2002, 4:38am
lol Wing, why are you posting with Jess's account?
--
- Syntax -
http://swcity.net
[View Quote]butterfly jess <wing at systemrecall.com> wrote in message
news:3c338b14 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Yes, it does say that arrangements will be determined for existing
citizens
> at a later date, but in order to keep the new from complaining, it can't
be
> THAT huge of a difference. Also, what about renewals of expired
> citizenships? How much will they cost? How do they expect to impress
n00bs
> enough in two weeks to get them to let them be charged $10 a month? What
> about people without credit cards? What about outside the US?
>
> "brant" <awteen at shoemakervillage.org> wrote in message
> news:3c3387c9$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
to
be
price
> was
but
> make
that
many
bandwidth,
> increase.
> they
you
should
50,000
for
know
at
want,
> 3.3
Worlds
by
you
about
>
>
|
Jan 5, 2002, 6:29am
"Maybe 3.3 is costing them absurd sums to develop."
BINGO, give the lady a stuffed bear!
Does anyone know what a programmer makes? Then factor in the added
taxes, space to house the bodies, utilities, computers, furniture,
additional software license fees for professional development tools,
etc, etc, etc. You can pretty much count on around $100,000 per year --
unless your developers are senior, then the price goes up. AW Corp is
getting things done because they have FIVE programmers -- that is half a
million dollars a year. Want to know how to save $400,000 a year? Lay
off four of them and go back to the old model of a minor upgrade every 8
months or so...
I agree with everything that AW Corp is forced to do. But I do not agree
with the size of the increase (should be $4.95 instead of $9.50) nor the
length of the trial period (should be 4 weeks instead of 2 weeks). I
also feel it is stupid of AW Corp management to NOT SAY ANYTHING until
24 hours before this was implemented. A heads up in the newsgroup and
via their e-letter would have given us some idea, and time to get used
to this. And for them to get something rolling before the situation gets
desperate.
ScottyDM
[View Quote]butterfly jess wrote:
>
> AW has this interesting habit of hiding anything dealing with finances
> from the community. According to shareholder info, they turned a $71k
> profit last year. Looks like they're getting by, but maybe they know
> somthing we don't. Maybe equipment needs to be replaced. Maybe 3.3 is
> costing them obsurd sums to develop. Maybe Roland wants a raise. Maybe
> they're dropping Renderware. Tell us WHY, maybe someone might pay.
>
--snip--
|
--
Send all SPAMS, FLAMES, and CONSPIRACY THEORIES to smiller6 at uswest.net
Send all other IMPORTANT CORRESPONDENCE to scottydm at uswest.net
___
/////\\ Digitally Enhanced Portrait of:
{|-0-0-|} Scott D. Miller,
| % | Silicon Mercenary
\===/ Freelance Chip Designer
always #5 FOO = ~FOO; // the sound of a beating heart
|
