"$50 annually or $25 monthly”

That’s the worst deal ever, I’m glad I’m already a subscriber ;-)

Wow, 50 dollars annually for membership to a Boardgame news site? You have got to be kidding. Jesus Christ.

Good luck with that!

$25 a month for a boardgame site?  Did you pick up an addiction to crack while you were in Essen?

You do realize that virtually every other hobby community has multiple free blogs and news sites that push out more weekly content than BGN does, even including the Essen preview, right?

I was hoping the $25/month were a typo.

Could we have link on our account page to show when our membership expires? Please?

Numerous people sign up for one month in October to check out the Spiel preview, then quit. With the new pricing, I want to encourage people to sign up for the year, but if they do want to sign up for only one month for the preview, it’s still a reasonable price.

Terry, I currently send out reminder notices 1-2 weeks prior to a member’s account expiring because the software behind BGN doesn’t have a field for an expiration date. Hiring a coder to add this info and make other adjustments is definitely part of my plans to make things easier for both me and you.

Eric

Being a BGN member since three years ago, I guess this is a very good deal indeed.
Of course if you just want to read the news you will still find them for free, but the money you save by already knowing most of the Essen games thanks to Eric’s previews is certainly more than 50 dollars.

Of course not everyone is going to Essen each year, so I also hope that Eric comes up with more interesting ideas and articles for members only, because this site really deserves your money.

@ Rutger & Everett

Most people who produce free content aren’t doing much legwork.  They are largely commenting on information made available somewhere else.  Initially finding and publicizing that information takes a lot of time and effort.  Much of the discussion about boardgames that goes on elsewhere begins after the news is broken by BGN.  When Eric starts attending Essen in his private BGN jet, I’ll start complaining.  However, I think its completely fair to compensate someone for all the work they put into their journalism rather than depend upon the magic information fairy.

The two sites I visit every day are the NY Times and BGN. If 14 cents a day will give Eric the flexibility to keep producing the content I love, that seems like pennies well spent to me.

Keep up the good work, Eric!

One little advice to Eric: maybe you should reveal the 2009 Essen Preview (or at least its first page) to non-members, so they can judge the quality of your great work by themselves.

My previous comment was only meant to put the new membership cost in perspective, but, looking at it again, it may seem a little self righteous which is not how it was intended. So, to flesh it out a little more:

To me, the business model of BGN is basically the same as public radio. The content is out there, and it’s free. Anyone who wants to listen can do so without spending a dime. No radio police are going to come to your door; no one is going to bust your chops for not paying. There was a long stretch coming out of college when I didn’t have two dimes to rub together and it was a great thing that I could still listen to my favorite news shows for free. Now times have changed, and I can afford to support my local station, so I do, not because that makes me better than anyone, but because I believe in the service and I can afford to help out.

I figure BGN is basically the same. The content is free, and no one is going to hound you if you want to get your regular news fix and can’t or don’t want to contribute. (BGN doesn’t even have annoying pledge weeks!) On the other hand, there is no getting around the fact that there is a cost to the time and resources that it takes to keep the site going. So I believe in what Eric is doing and I’m happy to kick in my pocket change to keep it going. I blow more than 14 cents a day on a lot of things that I care about a lot less, so it doesn’t seem like that big a deal to me.

I’m in!  (And I’m not a subscriber yet)

Eric, that makes sense. I’m thinking the Essen preview is easily worth the $25, possibly even the $50.

I don’t see this as any different from the way lots of other websites are trending. Two from very different realms - Starcitygames (a MtG website) and ESPN - have been following this model for at least a few years now.

They have basic content, which is free for all, but then also have ‘premium’ content that is only available to paid subscribers.

Keeping the info flowing (not to mention keeping the lights on) is a big job, IMHO Eric has every right to look for payment for his hard work.

pk

I never really bother with the Essen Preview, since I don’t attend.  However, $50 to support such a great site is fine with me.  Eric does a huge ammount of work to keep this going, and the content is excellent.

Cheers,

Giles.

Have to say I was gobsmacked at the negative responses people posted at the beginning of this thread! I wonder how much time and energy any of those people are giving away for free every week...for years! If I signed up for the games magazine ‘Counter’ (which I did for years) I’d be paying $30 annually for a publication that comes out quarterly. Yet Eric manages to update BGN on a daily basis and I should expect to get that for free! Go figure!
Anyway...this is a wonderful site and a great resouce and I think the fees for everyone should go up if it stops it going the way of so many other gamers websites in the past...which shut down because they began to absorb too much time for those who were trying to run them.
Maybe fees should go up with inflation every year to enable Eric to keep up the sterling job he’s doing at present! I think it’s worth every penny.

I am grateful Eric is executing the change the way he is.  He gave me a kick in the pants to finally subscribe and allowed me to do it at the current rates.  After many years of lurking, I’m finally a member.

(Just to be totally clear: My initial comment was a joke, because I blithely assumed the monthly rate was simply mistyped - hence the smiley)

Even tho’ the $50 is a bit on the steep side I can see why it has to be this way. I check out this site almost every day and I read almost all the articles, so I guess I’m getting more content than a magazine. so from that point of view alone it’s worth it.

If you go to Essen the the guide is well worth it. For several months before the show I’m checking out what’s going to be released, loads of pictures and previews/reviews. It really makes sifting through all 500 or more games much easier than trying to do it in 3 days at the show.

I really couldn’t imagine going to Essen without having this guide. It may cost the same as a game does at the show but when I think of all the good games it’s pointed me to and also away from bad ones it’s well worth it.

Another option would be to create another lower cost class of membership that gives everything but the Essen preview (and perhaps not the Nuremberg preview).  This would make membership more attractive to those who aren’t as interested in Essen.  These people could still support BGN without having to pay double or quintuple.

For example, a yearly membership without the Essen preview (and possibly without the Nuremberg preview as well) could cost $25. A monthly membership minus Essen and Nuremberg would be $5.

Perhaps, this class of membership could have the option to purchase the Essen preview for an additional fee.  The lesser yearly membership could upgrade to a full membership for the year for another $25.  The monthly membership could pay an extra $20 for the Essen preview month to get the Essen preview.

For those who only want the Essen report, charge $25 for that month.

One way to make the lesser membership more attractive would be to give these members access to the older Essen previews - say from 3 years ago or older.  Alternatively, you could make the older reports available for purchase individually at $5 or $10.  I imagine some people would be interested.

I think grandfathering rates for existing members is something you will come to regret Eric—eventually it will place you in a no-win situation. You’ll be choosing between breaking your word by raising rates for long-time members or foregoing new members at all. (The latter situation coming about when new readers balk at paying $50 for a membership when “everyone else” is only paying $25.)

Value is perception and by giving most of your members a perpetual rate of $25/year, you peg the value of BGN at that rate. People who would otherwise be fine with paying $50/year are likely to be upset that they’re paying twice as much as most other members.

The only privilege of membership that I know of, John, is the Essen Preview (other than possibly winning a free game when you register?).  I’m sure Eric is open to people donating any sum of money to the site, if they are not interested in the Essen preview.

And I believe that Eric does make previous Essen previews available for non-members to look at, so that they know what they are getting.

As for the complaints, I think anyone interested in this site probably pays quite a bit more than $50 per year on games.  Eric has tried to avoid being the “annoying salesman,” hoping people would join because it was such a value at $25.  He even opened up the comments section to non-members, something previously only granted to paying members.  But in the end, I think Eric’s learned the harsh reality that most people are basically cheap.  If you want to see the site continue (and improve), contribute your fair share.  Period.

Disclaimer:  I don’t receive a penny of the membership fee for any articles I contribute.

Great site, great resource.  I’m happy to support it, because i would be very disappointed to see it go away.

I think he’d be better off by reducing the amount to $15 and getting a lot more people to sign up at that amount, than raising his price to the price of a board game.

Higher price, lower demand, lower price, higher demand. When Valve (a computer game company) released Left4Dead, they priced it at $49.99. Three months later, they had a weekend sale and priced it at $24.99. In one weekend, they nearly tripled the sales in the previous three months combined. They were surprised at those numbers, but they’ve held a lot of sales since then, so I’m sure it’s still working for them.

In this economy I really can’t see paying $50 for that preview. I can get 80% of what’s in the preview for free, and the rest is not worth $50.

He also should put a Donate to BoardGame News button on the top of the front page if he thinks he should be paid more money than what he’s getting.

I love this site.  It provides a very different service to me than BGG.  So, from my point of view its worth the money, period.  But this thread does remind me of a conversation I had with a former game store owner.  Ultimately, his store failed.  He was a little embittered about the way his gaming friends would come in and use the store’s space as a meeting place for gaming, without buying any games. 

His conclusion: gamer’s have an unfortunate tendancy to look at life through the same lense they use for gaming.  These include the “free rider” strategy, and various maximizing strategies.  Why should I pay a penny more, when someone else will do it for me?

Well, in real life, such self-centered, maximizing strategies tend to have very unfortunate consequences.  The game store meeting place closes.  BGN stops being a resource for gaming news. 

Boardgaming is a hobby, and a pretty insubstantial business (at least our niche of it).  I think we should all understand that a little self-sacrifice, and a little collective action is necessary to keep the infrastructure of our hobby going and growing.

Jason

I have had a membership for a while now...not exactly sure how long. The perception of doubling the price of a membership in these economic times just looks bad.

I agree with Mr. Aleknevicus above, any kind of grandfathering will create problems down the road. If I was a betting man (and I am), I would bet the number of memberships for BGN will plummet if you do not grandfather.

The Essen and Nuremberg previews hold no interest for me because I have never attended. I don’t think I have ever read any of them. Previews are not something I generally get excited about anyways.

$50 for a yearly subscription? I am fine with it, but to be honest that would likely be very close to my limit. I can understand wanting to get paid for all your hard work but I would be suprised if many folks will actually pay you $50/Yr. Hopefully you prove me wrong. :)

If it is the number of hours you spend doing this that is an issue for you...have you concidered simply recruiting more folks to help take some of the load?

By reading the initial announcement you mention that those previews chew up the most of your time “...all the hours devoted to news posts, game previews, tweets, Gone Cardboard updates, and (most of all) the Spiel and Nuremberg previews.”

It would seem by your time allotment that the focus of this website is primarily on those previews. Is this the focus you want for this website? Is that the focus the subscribers want? How big is the audience for those previews?

Of course, I do not know the answer to those questions and I do not expect an answer. I only pose them because it seems to me that when you are doubling the membership rates for new members, now would be a good time to think about them.

I will continue to be a member, grandfathered or not. This is a good site for Boardgame news and I am both supportive and appreciative for its contribution to the hobby.

Peace

As I think about this more, I want to make some suggestions as to how Eric can get more money from the site because doubling the membership fees with no commensurate increase in value for his viewers is not very likely to work.

As I mentioned, he needs to put a “donate to Boardgamenews” button up as soon as possible. When people press the button, they could be sent to a page that had some amounts, like $5/$10/$15/$25/$30 etc.

Many sites now give someone who donates a title. It could be as simple as “Supporter” or “Donator” You could do this for someone who donates over a certain amount, like $10.

You could change the software to allow for graphic signatures and let anyone who donates at least $15 get one. Yes they can be garish, and you should certainly approve them before they are used, but they do a great job at giving value to your viewers without costing much.  For $25, you could allow for an avatar much like BGG and many other sites. And if you explain on the front page exactly why you are doing this, you’re less likely to get complaints about the graphic changes.

All of these things could give value to customers without costing a lot on your end. They would also allow for people like me to get value from being a user of the site. I’ve never bought a membership because I really am not interested in the Essen previews and while I understand that the membership previews are a euphemism for a site donation, I’d rather either just give a donation outright or get something that would have more value for me.

In these tight times (2 more people I know got laid off this week), everyone is juggling monetary priorities. It should be a an important goal for the site to make it easy to donate some amount and providing more ways for viewers to get a little value from the donation.

Jennifer Schlickbernd, MBA
“Ms Meeples”

My donation of $25 will be coming next month.

Scott Adams once wrote that customers want better products--for free!

I hope you will continue to have a prominent donation button for those of us who can’t justify 50 bucks but still want to thank you for your efforts.  I also hope that donors will receive the equivalent of a virtual coffee mug or other cyber-tchotke.

I think Brent brings up a good point—does the focus of your time match the focus of your subscribers?  I support the site because I think it’s a great resource for new games, previews and commentary.  But I don’t really care much about the Essen and Nuremburg previews, directly, and wouldn’t be too sad if it were to go away (I imagine it drives a lot of the previews and Gone Cardboard news that I do like, though, so that may be a little tricky).

Are other subscribers interested in the Essen preview?  Is it the primary draw for you, simply A draw for you, merely another piece of the site used occasionally or something you have no interest in?

A separate thought, hence the separate post.  I like the content here and I think it’s very valuable and distinct, but I like the interface of BGG about a thousand times more than this site’s interface.  I wonder, now that their software is sufficiently modular (witness rpg.geekdo.com), whether or not there is an opportunity for more of a symbiosis with BGG these days?

You need to do what you think necessary but I am disturbed that you have apparently made this decision after talking to “several people” at Essen who put a high value on the Spiel preview. I am a member but it is because I appreciate the daily posts on the site. I take only a mild interest in the Spiel preview. If you think that the preview is going to draw in $50 memberships I wish you would reconsider and make it easy to support the everyday workings of the site. Otherwise, I am afraid it will be lost.

I visit the BGN site probably once or twice a week and have just registered and sent in my $25 for a yearly membership.

Here is my 2 cents on membership prices: I am willing to pay $25 for a yearly membership but I doubt that I would be willing to pay $50 for a yearly membership.

Mr. Martin expressing his desire to be better paid for his work here reminds me of an interesting article on this very topic:

http://fortressat.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1349:games-journalism&catid=59&Itemid=100066

Follow the link at the bottom of the introduction for the full article. Some of the discussion following the introduction is also very interesting.

Peace

I love the news here, but go in spurts.  I joined sometime last year (I think), after the Essen stuff, but the price rise got me wondering what I get from here.  I am not sure I really get enough to justify $25, let alone $50.  Anything that wants my money has to justify why that is.

The game store owner mentioned above needed to find other profitable ways to provide game space, not just gripe that people didn’t “support his store.” Too many “free” alternatives are provided in too many areas for most sites to survive on a pure subscription basis.  I stopped even looking at ESPN (for the most part), since they didn’t provide what I wanted (to find out how much Illinois lost by, <grin>).  They may make it because most sports fans are a bit more passionate, but they will likely flop at converting people from free to paying.

Sure, the money always has to come from somewhere, but you also need to convince people to part with their money.  Creative additional products for some value, past the Essen preview are needed, not just pushing the price up.

Reading some current marketing stuff might help, but lots of people are trying to figure out how to make money at this stuff and I think that raising prices is more likely to be harmful than helpful.

I may rejoin, I may not.  It would be more to support the site than for the value I personally receive if I do.  That should be a warning sign that things could be rough.

Brad