1  2  3  |   Order by index

Jan 11, 2002, 9:49pm

Check out the latest AWC press release (Jan 11).

http://www.activeworlds.com/next/showart.asp?DB=NewsTable&ID=362

NoMad 1

Jan 12, 2002, 4:31am

(Quote)
"We believe that NetBroadcaster's proven marketing strategies and
state-of-the-art broadcast network will lead to immediate revenue-generating
opportunities for Activeworlds, by increasing our subscription base and
introducing the Activeworlds' technologies to the entertainment industry,"
said Rick Noll, chief executive officer of Activeworlds.
(End quote)

Sure, and skyrocketing the price of a citizenship will also lead to
immediate revenue-generating opportunities, won't it Rick? Jeez...When I
thought that AW was jacking up prices to keep their heads above water, I was
unhappy but semi-OK with the idea.
Now that I know that they're just making us pay for their new toys, I'm not
as OK with it anymore.

/me heads over to Adobe's website...

Jan 12, 2002, 4:43am

"dabartender" <admin at hooverae.com> a écrit dans le message news: 3c3fd856 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> /me heads over to Adobe's website...
That won't do any good to you :P

Fox Mc Cloud

Jan 12, 2002, 4:44am

> (Quote)
> "We believe that NetBroadcaster's proven marketing strategies and
> state-of-the-art broadcast network will lead to immediate
revenue-generating
> opportunities for Activeworlds, by increasing our subscription base and
> introducing the Activeworlds' technologies to the entertainment industry,"
> said Rick Noll, chief executive officer of Activeworlds.
> (End quote)
>
> Sure, and skyrocketing the price of a citizenship will also lead to
> immediate revenue-generating opportunities, won't it Rick? Jeez...When I
> thought that AW was jacking up prices to keep their heads above water, I
was
> unhappy but semi-OK with the idea.
> Now that I know that they're just making us pay for their new toys, I'm
not
> as OK with it anymore.

Agreed. If they can afford to "buy" another company, they're not too far in
debt, now are they. Besides, the point of this rise in price for us was for
their market department to get the word out about AW. Looks like they have
everything they need. Why are they still doing this to us? Capitalism at
work.. gotta love it.

--Bowen--

Jan 12, 2002, 6:18am

Think about it. If you're going to buy a company, it takes a lot more than
several months (from here to April when they actually buy the company) to
gain enough money with the price increases alone to buy Netbroadcaster.com.
What do you think they took out a lone from 1st National?

Now I've been hearing scattered reports of AWC having a tidy sum of cash in
their coffers since January 3. It's clear that they've been saving up for
this for awhile now. The revenue generated by the price increases is for
something else.

SW Chris

SW Chris


[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 6:26am

Arg.. every time AWC makes a move, people hate it. I think it's a fad
nowadays.

If this is the community's big failing, I'm glad to be with you guys. Some
communities have it worse. If you'll allow me to go off on a tangent, read
on. If not...

SW Chris


Ok.. where was I? Right. The last community I was in had a rather large
failing, and that was that they (collectively) were so self-righteous with
themselves that they couldn't stand to take any bit of criticism. Throw in
that there were some in the community who just didn't "get it" that
political and religious discussions were inflammitory, an Eep-like dude who
had an uncanny ability to get most people to support what he said and you've
got a powder keg.

So if you think we've got it bad here, think again.

SW Chris


[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 7:43am

I think it's a bit too coincidental that a huge price hike comes just a week
before the acquisition announcement.

Think about this...if you're planning on buying a company, would it really
make sense to raise your prices in such a fashion as to alienate a large
portion of both your existing and potential customers just before you made
the purchase? Sure, it'd make sense if you wanted to completely change the
direction of your business, alienate your existing clientele, and totally
move away from being a popular and affordable consumer product.

Looks like they're working on covering all those bases with the sharpened
business acumen of a 9-year-old.

[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 11:56am

Hiya SW.

Sounds just like AW to me :)

Screaming over a price rise, screaming over replaced textures,
screaming over what aw are doing to other universes, screaming that
new objects just might possibly not be for free elsewhere, and
screaming that all of their negativity is not listened to.

Staging protests and signing petitions and trying to raise the masses
with incomplete or incorrect facts.

Even the new objects were roundly condemned, and then people wonder
why they arent listened to :)

Forgetting to find out all the facts before screaming.

Forgetting the golden rule that every person has one mouth and two
ears and they should use them in that proportion:)

Forgetting the second rule that to assume makes an ass out of u and
me.

Has there been one topic raised that thanked AW for restoring the
textures removed by accident.

Has there been one post explaining whats happening in the other
universe and how it WASNT aw coms fault that there were problems?

Has there been one post explaining why some worlds went down in the
other universe and whos fault it was as opposed to assuming it was
AW's fault?

I guess now we'll have 100 threads from wanna be marketeers explaining
how AW are using their new subscriptions to buy a new company without
realising there are many ways to acquire a company without using
cash:)

never mind, one day they will be running companies too (maybe) and
can implement their own ideas and strategies.

Till then, is it any surprise that AWcom posts little in this
newsgroup. Perhaps the real voice of the majority is not contained
here?

Moria




On 12 Jan 2002 03:26:28 -0500, "sw chris" <chris at skywalkeronline.net>
[View Quote] >Arg.. every time AWC makes a move, people hate it. I think it's a fad
>nowadays.
>
>If this is the community's big failing, I'm glad to be with you guys. Some
>communities have it worse. If you'll allow me to go off on a tangent, read
>on. If not...
>
>SW Chris
>
>
>Ok.. where was I? Right. The last community I was in had a rather large
>failing, and that was that they (collectively) were so self-righteous with
>themselves that they couldn't stand to take any bit of criticism. Throw in
>that there were some in the community who just didn't "get it" that
>political and religious discussions were inflammitory, an Eep-like dude who
>had an uncanny ability to get most people to support what he said and you've
>got a powder keg.
>
>So if you think we've got it bad here, think again.
>
>SW Chris
>

Jan 12, 2002, 1:34pm

Gosh, we better get some media besides JPGs and GIFs inside AW then. At
least AWC's nowhere near to debt, so ergo, I don't think it's going anywhere
(thank god). Whether this community goes or not, is beyond me, but with the
advent of mixed media in a 3d virtual environment, this could be quite good
for AW, for the newbies coming in, and the oldies staying in. God, I can
actually have like decent art museums, movie theaters, and state of the art
architecture. :)

Nornny

[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 5:38pm

You guys are over-reacting. AWCom is just like any other business, they have
to raise prices in order to make the company larger. They will soon be
getting millions of more looking at activeworlds.com, meaning that many more
will buy! That means that raising the prices will give them lots of profit.
TONS! With millions of others looking at it, many more will go with AW, even
with the extremely high price increase.

This is how business works, you don't like it, that's your problem.
[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 6:09pm

Let me put this to you.... does the majority even have a collective voice?
If it's not here, it's certainly not at any GZ's I've been to.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 6:14pm

But is that really what they're doing? The timing is all wrong. They're
not raising their prices because they want to buy the company. That deal
was already made _before_ they raised the prices.

I'm not saying that these two events aren't related. They are. But they're
not as closely related as everyone is saying. The timing is wrong. The
revenue generated by the price increases is for something else.

SW Chris



[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 6:23pm

Well Moria, your posts are USUALLY sensible.....

What other products that you have used have had a 600% price increase?
Public statements by JP less than a year ago said we have plenty of cash
on hand for operations in the foreseeable future.

Some of us are concerned not just about the increased price we will have
to pay, but also on the total cashflow that this will produce further
out. Without a significant change in the number of new users coming on
board, that total cashflow is likely to be less. What will bring new
users in now that the casual tourist is a thing of the past?
Netbroadcaster.com maybe?

Facts? Go to netbroadcater.com and read their own web page...then read
the press accounts (that they had to copy to their own site because they
were too old to still exist on the original sources). 10 employees...
may be giving up their office space soon... 7th fastest of the NEW
entertainment portals TWO YEARS AGO... No original content other than
one short film they made... lots of hits but average stickiness 1.5
minutes per user. Their domain name expires next month.

Facts are good. Let's have more. As a former insider maybe you can
fill us in. Absent any facts but what I can find on the net I'll draw
my own (pretty dang historically correct) conclusions.

"is it any surprise that AWcom posts little in this
newsgroup?"

Yes it is. They OWN this newsgroup and this is one of the best places
to communicate with CORE users... people who know how to use the
internet, are likely to have been around a while and are likely to stay
a while. If there is a more representative collection of AW users let
us know where they congregate.

The people who offended AWcom originally and were supposedly responsible
for AWcom's lack of participation have been BANNED!!!

I'm tired of hearing that because someone got their feelings hurt over
something three years ago AWcom will not communicate with its users.
That attitude is not only pathetic, its also pathological.

AWCom has to grow up sometime... The sooner the better.

If AWcom would post more to this group I would post less. That would be
fine by me, and I suspect would be fine by them too.

Make my day !



[View Quote] > Hiya SW.
>
> Sounds just like AW to me :)
>
> Screaming over a price rise, screaming over replaced textures,
> screaming over what aw are doing to other universes, screaming that
> new objects just might possibly not be for free elsewhere, and
> screaming that all of their negativity is not listened to.
>
> Staging protests and signing petitions and trying to raise the masses
> with incomplete or incorrect facts.
>
> Even the new objects were roundly condemned, and then people wonder
> why they arent listened to :)
>
> Forgetting to find out all the facts before screaming.
>
> Forgetting the golden rule that every person has one mouth and two
> ears and they should use them in that proportion:)
>
> Forgetting the second rule that to assume makes an ass out of u and
> me.
>
> Has there been one topic raised that thanked AW for restoring the
> textures removed by accident.
>
> Has there been one post explaining whats happening in the other
> universe and how it WASNT aw coms fault that there were problems?
>
> Has there been one post explaining why some worlds went down in the
> other universe and whos fault it was as opposed to assuming it was
> AW's fault?
>
> I guess now we'll have 100 threads from wanna be marketeers explaining
> how AW are using their new subscriptions to buy a new company without
> realising there are many ways to acquire a company without using
> cash:)
>
> never mind, one day they will be running companies too (maybe) and
> can implement their own ideas and strategies.
>
> Till then, is it any surprise that AWcom posts little in this
> newsgroup. Perhaps the real voice of the majority is not contained
> here?
>
> Moria
>
>
>
>
> On 12 Jan 2002 03:26:28 -0500, "sw chris" <chris at skywalkeronline.net>
[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 7:29pm

Thanks, macb, you took the words right out of my mouth :-)

Jan 12, 2002, 8:56pm

So you're willing to pay six times as much for the same citizenship just so
AW can buy some unheard-of company?

-Agent1

[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 9:00pm

Didn't say I was willing to pay the price. I may or I may not, depending on
if 3.3 is as good as AWC brags of. ;-)

I do, however, understand why and what they are doing. It's business
*shrug*, that's how the business world works. The more money, the better.
[View Quote]

Jan 12, 2002, 10:23pm

Hiya macb:)

[View Quote] >Well Moria, your posts are USUALLY sensible.....

thank you:) I see no reason to change the habit of a lifetime:)

>What other products that you have used have had a 600% price increase?

600% price increase, cant think of many, couple of programs I use
have done more than that over 5 years even on upgrade price but I
agree its rare.

>Public statements by JP less than a year ago said we have plenty of cash
>on hand for operations in the foreseeable future.

and so they may well have, that could and should be incidental to
changing the pricing structure. Operations includes much more than
just running the AW universe:) Good example is company acquisition,
no-one can seriously think this pricing increase has anything to do
with that based on how long these discussions last and how long ago
this must have been started:)

>
>Some of us are concerned not just about the increased price we will have
>to pay, but also on the total cashflow that this will produce further
>out. Without a significant change in the number of new users coming on
>board, that total cashflow is likely to be less. What will bring new
>users in now that the casual tourist is a thing of the past?
>Netbroadcaster.com maybe?

cashflow consits of many things, it is not just revenue in, its not
even just cash, although these play a part, they are not the total
formulae for cashflow.

As to new users, who knows, lets see what happens. Theres certainly
a good chunk of net users who would be happier joining something that
didnt allow free users and where everyone is accountable for what they
do, but will it be a big enough group.. dunno, we will see. If not,
then I am sure things will change, but I dont have accurate figures,
and I would guess very few have.

Some of those that probably do have accurate figures are those making
the decisions.

>
>Facts? Go to netbroadcater.com and read their own web page...then read
>the press accounts (that they had to copy to their own site because they
>were too old to still exist on the original sources). 10 employees...
>may be giving up their office space soon... 7th fastest of the NEW
>entertainment portals TWO YEARS AGO... No original content other than
>one short film they made... lots of hits but average stickiness 1.5
>minutes per user. Their domain name expires next month.
>

I think your facts are wrong here, good example...
The netbradcaster site states they were number 5 in March this year
and in November last year, therefore if your facts are correct, they
have grown in those 2 years when so many have fallen by the wayside.

Reference http://www.netbroadcaster.com/streaming_media2.html

In addition they are a portal, not just a streaming company, so some
comparisons with people such as real.com and napster.com are somewhat
tenuous, and explains the stickiness of 1.5 minutes, even though I
agree thats a tad low even for a portal:)

You provide an excellent example of facts being misused negatively.


>Facts are good. Let's have more. As a former insider maybe you can
>fill us in. Absent any facts but what I can find on the net I'll draw
>my own (pretty dang historically correct) conclusions.

Have you tried talking to people that know rather than relying on
urban ledgends on the net?

>
>"is it any surprise that AWcom posts little in this
>newsgroup?"
>
>Yes it is. They OWN this newsgroup and this is one of the best places
>to communicate with CORE users... people who know how to use the
>internet, are likely to have been around a while and are likely to stay
>a while. If there is a more representative collection of AW users let
>us know where they congregate.

I disagree, the only thing this newsgroup has displayed in recent
memory is total negitivity towards AWCOM. Its a place for people to
vent. Presence or lack of it hasnt changed that in the 5 years its
been running, and it wouldnt change now:)

>
>The people who offended AWcom originally and were supposedly responsible
>for AWcom's lack of participation have been BANNED!!!
>
>I'm tired of hearing that because someone got their feelings hurt over
>something three years ago AWcom will not communicate with its users.
>That attitude is not only pathetic, its also pathological.

I'm not talking three years ago, I'm talking today, look at the lists
of posts from the few that have made them and determine yourself if
the 20 or so that post here regularly are core supporters, or whether
anything AW would do is a crime:)

>
>AWCom has to grow up sometime... The sooner the better.

Perhaps they have, and maybe just maybe some of the users dont like
the adult AWCom, so they wont see it.

>
>If AWcom would post more to this group I would post less. That would be
>fine by me, and I suspect would be fine by them too.

>Make my day !
>

You'd hate that:)


Moria

Jan 12, 2002, 11:54pm

[View Quote] > Hiya macb:)
>
[View Quote] Well it wasn't intentional. A healthy use of newsgroups is to sort
things like this out. I've never been to a web page yet where a company
reports negative things about itself. This may be the kick in the
pants that AW needs, but my impression was otherwise.

>
>
>
> Have you tried talking to people that know rather than relying on
> urban ledgends on the net?
>


There ARE nothing but urban legends regarding AWCom. I monitor 4
newsgroups, a few web based zines, tech-talk, and frequently talk to
people in-world. Pretty rare to find anyone (including employees) who
claim to actually know anything about the company's plans.

It is the company's prerogative to be secretive, I just don't happen to
think that it is good for them in the long run.

>
>
> I disagree, the only thing this newsgroup has displayed in recent
> memory is total negitivity towards AWCOM. Its a place for people to
> vent. Presence or lack of it hasnt changed that in the 5 years its
> been running, and it wouldnt change now:)
>
>
>
> I'm not talking three years ago, I'm talking today, look at the lists
> of posts from the few that have made them and determine yourself if
> the 20 or so that post here regularly are core supporters, or whether
> anything AW would do is a crime:)
>


Well, maybe they should shut the newsgroups down again then. I was
very much in favor of them being brought back, but my assumption (there
is that word again) was that AWCom would participate in them. If their
attitude matches yours (and it appears to) then the best thing from the
companies point of view is for all public opinion to be suppressed.


>
>
> Perhaps they have, and maybe just maybe some of the users dont like
> the adult AWCom, so they wont see it.
>
>
>
> You'd hate that:)
>
>
> Moria
>
>

Don't confuse my lack of optimism for lack of HOPE. I wouldn't still
be here if I didn't have HOPE that things might eventually change. I
in fact spend an ever increasing amount of money to support that hope.

I'm always on the lookout for evidence that it is not money down the drain.

ACTIVEWORLDS IS THE BEST IMMERSIVE 3D PROGRAM IN THE WORLD RIGHT NOW FOR
ANY PRICE.

If we all put that line at the top of all our posts you think Rick and
JP would get their butts back in here?

Well... their lead is narrowing. There really are some interesting
things on the horizon. I would like to see AW positioned to fend off
some competition. I think there is room under the tent for "yes-men"
as well as people who gripe a bit. I'm afraid I'll always be the
latter. But I still consider myself a supporter, and I think most of
the people who post here are too.


So many have given up.

I won't post on this topic again... take the last word if you want
Moria. I hope when the company makes its further announcements next
month that they have truly weighed public opinion on all of this. The
petitions, boycotts, world owner meetings may seem silly to the owners
of AW, but there is a resentment in them that is both broad and deep.
AWCom needs to deal with that. It's not a lost cause unless they treat
it as such.

Jan 13, 2002, 8:48am

[View Quote] I had never heard of NetBroadcaster before, so I went to their site,
read some fascinating celebrity gossips and registered (for free!)
to see a nice old sci-fi movie online. Other than that it was more like
a glorified link list, but then that's what portals are.
They get revenue from advertisers and referring people to join
their newsletters/advertisement e-mails when they register.
They claim to have pay-per-view content too but I didn't find it.

I did find the original stories that their press releases refer to:
http://www.streamingmedia.com/newsletter/062601.html
- I like the idea of "viral marketing" there - and
http://www.digitalcoastweekly.com/issues/dcw02072001.html#Headline3604

Apparently their balance sheet "has been in the black for nine months".
Admirable, but so was AWC's before. Either they have started losing advertisers now,
or then I really wonder why AWC is buying them and not the other way round.
I guess they are still smaller than AWC or without such capital.
Unless it is because of AWC's status in Nasdaq?

This was an interesting page too:
http://www.lukeford.com/subjects/content/babenet.htm
However, even though its writer claims that he can link
NetBroadcaster to Internet porn business - or even worse, spam! -
I couldn't find that kind of evidence there; just that their hosting service
may have such connections, but maybe NetBroadcaster
only chose them because of their streaming media services.

Now, will NetBroadcaster start promoting AW on its website
(pay-per-view or credit card needed??) or will there be
streaming media in AW - with popups...?

--
Mauz
http://mauz.info

Jan 13, 2002, 9:49am

[View Quote] Somebody had been on vacation for the first days of the year and
wondered why she hadn't been informed about the price raise by e-mail.
Yes, why not, like they managed to send this month's newsletter.
Is there anything about the new prices in the newsletter?
Is there anything on their front page? Did they post about it in the newsgroups?
All we got was a link in the universe welcome message and sign at AW GZ,
to a letter that was posted one day before the new price plan
(that also included disabling version 2.2, of interest to some citizens);
a letter that to my disappointment did not even contain words like "sorry".

A big part of the community uses these newsgroups, but AWC never posts here.
Some say it is because of possible attacks. However, the Community newsgroup
is now moderated isn't it, and the rowdiest ones have been banned completely.
Even if they did get some sour notes then, well, if you can't take the heat
then stay out of the customer service business ;) Now all the anger
was directed to Gatekeepers, Peacekeepers and other innocent citizens.

Maybe they do not want to post comments that might cause them
legal or financial trouble? But if they had posted even that one letter,
or cut wings from some false rumours that were flying around here -
without having to reveal corporate secrets of course - then maybe
most of us would _understand_ and unite. Now they just have once again
managed to alienate lots of former loyal, happy citizens.
Don't they even want to keep their current users, but are targetting
some other group in the future?

--
Mauz
http://mauz.info

Jan 13, 2002, 4:55pm

I would see correcting the rediculously low pricing of the product as
"growing up". $20 a year is totally unrepresentative of the (unique)
services and environment AW provides. $10 a month is a bit steep, but then
don't tell me that people wouldn't have bitching about $5 a month (still a
300% rise).

Grims

[View Quote] "AWCom has to grow up sometime... The sooner the better"

Jan 13, 2002, 5:08pm

Totally agree.

There is obviously a link between the pricing structure and the acquisition,
but there is no way that the price rise can possibly be considered as a way
of funding the buy-out. The chances are its an exchange of stock anyway.

However, if there was to be a price rise, the the right time to do it was
BEFORE the annoucement. That sets out the stall for new immigrations through
this route. It makes perfect sense really as it would have looked really bad
if they raised the prices soon after buying NetBroadcaster.com.

As I said somewhere else, I see the change in pricing more as corrective
action. When people can get something for peanuts (and I think $20 a year
easily counts as peanuts these days), they expect to get peanuts. $10 is too
high IMO, but the action of raising the prices itself is, to me, the correct
thing to do.

Also, remember that all that has happened is the signing of a letter of
intent ... basically they want to get the news out there as well as show
commitment to going forward with the deal - which is fair enough and a
common practice. There is still al long way to go before its a "deal".

Grims.

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2002, 5:48pm

i wouldnt mind $5 a month but $10 a month is what a highly entertaining
online game costs which AW is not

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2002, 5:50pm

> i wouldnt mind $5 a month but $10 a month is what a highly entertaining
> online game costs which AW is not

Very true. Some working people cannot afford $120 a year, but they can
afford $60 a year. Since AW hasn't bridged the gab between application and
game yet, they can't charge that much for something so little as this. I
doubt even 3.3 bridges that gap.

--Bowen--

Jan 13, 2002, 5:54pm

"Since AW hasn't bridged the gab between application and game yet ..."

Ummm no thankyou!!!

Grims.

Jan 13, 2002, 6:06pm

we dont WANT aw to be a game though. not in the way we think of games now. a
way they could do that is to make tools for worldowners to make more
intresting and complex games. i have no idea how this could be done but only
then could they charge that much. bots right now cant hold that good of
games, they can only control objects, talk, and moniter what the person is
doing and move objects or talk in response to that. a way they could do this
is to make more bot options. just dont ask me exactly what that would be

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2002, 6:17pm

Gap, if that's what you were trying to point out. Thank you is two words.

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2002, 6:38pm

Actually no. I was meaning no to the game reference. Not what I want from
AW.

Don't be childish! Heesh!

Grims

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2002, 6:41pm

LoL well if you were correcting me then I would've had to correct you ;). I
don't think most of us want AW to be a game. That would just take away from
the ambience of it all. $5 a month is fine for most of us on a chat
program, because let's face it, that's mostly what AW is. Like a vamped up
AOL chatroom. That's all they're paying for $5 for the connection and $15
for the chatrooms.

--Bowen--

[View Quote]

Jan 13, 2002, 7:36pm

We haven't really seen AW defined yet in any marketting AWC has done. What
confuses a lot of people upon downloading and entering AW is that they don't
quite know what it is.

From my perspective, Active Worlds is neither a chat program, nor a game.
You can build things with it, but that takes practice. The graphics don't
look like a game's, say Quake 3 Arena, but there are games to play. Bingo,
Paintball, Checkers, and scores of others.

So what is AW? From my experience, it's a place where your creative side
can go wild. Build strange new worlds, where no man has gone before.
Interact with others and participate in a virtual-society, with it's own
independant news service, digital entertainment networks (ABN, VTV, etc),
cities and organizations with their own distinct governments, and best of
all, people who, like you, want to escape from the pressures of reality and
relax, have fun, and be merry.

Should AWC define the program any way they want, not necesarily how I've
defined it, I'll be happy to pay.

SW Chris



[View Quote]

1  2  3  |   Order by index