Topic: A New Change For Luminous-Landscape (Read 150543 times)

StephaneB · « **Reply #20 on:** November 23, 2015, 06:55:36 pm »

Excellent! I'm in!

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #21 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:04:06 pm »

Quote from: amolitor on November 23, 2015, 06:49:08 pm

I regret that shan't be signing up, but I wish you the best.

Oh, no, Andrew, who am I going to spar with!?

ddolde · « **Reply #22 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:05:21 pm »

A million readers a month means you are going to make a million dollars a month. Or so you think because I, (and I am sure a lot of other people) will not support your greed. You will be very lucky to get one percent of those million to sign up.

Even the expressions and tone of your video hide an obvious "pretend not to notice" from you that you are going to be even filthier rich than you already are. Come on boys at least be honest you want to make a god damn killing !

amolitor · « **Reply #23 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:05:42 pm »

Let me expand, a little, actually, since it arguably could be useful.

I don't get value from this site, I get something on a spectrum between entertainment and boredom-relief. Sometimes it's fun (entertaining). Sometimes it's irritating (also kind of entertaining). Sometimes it's just a place to go click around because I don't want to do something else (boredom-relief).

The price is perfectly reasonable, $12 is cheap. I can afford it.

But I'm not willing to pay a nickle for the privilege of wasting time I ought to be spending elsewhere, so $12 is infinitely too high -- for me. Your mileage, as they say, may vary. I see a lot of discussion in the technical forums that is probably very useful, it's just not my cup of tea. I'm probably not a very interesting member of the audience. The advertisers aren't at all interested in me, because I am literally never going to give them one cent.

Going subscription may well produce a more targeted audience to advertise against as well as, of course, funding a higher grade of content (which will in turn bring in those high-value eyeballs). I certainly don't know.

But, anyways. Good luck, and I'll be hanging about until the doors slam shut.

kevk · « **Reply #24 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:06:20 pm »

Quote from: Cem on November 23, 2015, 06:28:00 pm

I too welcome and support this change. So I'll become a paying member soon.
But I am wondering, does this mean that the forums will become members only? If so, how will you entice new members into enrolling in case they cannot see the contents of the forums in advance?

I agree with Cem here - $12 (USD I presume?) is a no-brainer for us long-time members, but how are new people going to know it is "good enough" to pay for?
Cheers!
Kevin

tnargs · « **Reply #25 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:06:40 pm »

Not for me thanks. Only the occasional article is of interest to me. I like the site very much, but it completely lacks the quality to put it on a pedestal above all the free-to-read sites. It is good, sure, but their equal, not their better.

We all know you are already making a living, so it looks like a greedy grab at our pockets. I hope it backfires TBH and I predict that it will.

As for posters saying 'the free internet is the way of the past', they are completely wrong and the opposite is the truth.

Just watch what happens to your advertising revenue once they see your viewing numbers crash.

Just watch all your discussion forums dry up and threads become incestuous with the same old 'buddies' boosting each other's egos and bullying anyone who dares to differ.

Of course, what few females and youth are presently interested in your message will evaporate, you know, less disposable income in general, but hey if you want to discourage diversity and focus on middle-to-old-age men, pros and superannuated retirees, that's your business and the loss of social diversity is your loss.

The decision appears to be locked in, too bad, but I hope you see sense after a short journey and return to open communications. Because I'll be sorry to lose you.

cheers

amolitor · « **Reply #26 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:08:19 pm »

And one question, broken out separately:

What will happen to existing accounts? Will they be deleted, or simply left fallow? If fallow, will PMss be disabled in a user-friendly way? In particular, I should hate to get email saying "You have a new PM from some guy who stumbled across your post from 7 years back" and to find myself unable to reply, and really, it would be best if "some guy" couldn't PM me at all (got a user-friendly "that user is not active" message, e.g.) but COULD read the content I've left here over the years.

marcgoldring · « **Reply #27 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:17:27 pm »

Interesting that several folks who feel that this shift is motivated by "greed" and that the content is not worth 12 bucks also seem to go on about how much they'll miss access. Seems like a mixed message...

Marco

amolitor · « **Reply #28 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:18:43 pm »

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on November 23, 2015, 07:04:06 pm

Oh, no, Andrew, who am I going to spar with!?

You can always read my dumb blog where, in the words of Robert Heinlein, "you can spit on the mat and call the cat a bastard" for no money whatsoever!

ivanljb · « **Reply #29 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:25:18 pm »

Hi, I'm a casual photographer who enjoys occasionally reading your posts. When I read this announcement, the first thing I thought of was Taylor Hicks during his American Idol run, funnily enough. He was very popular then, so popular in fact he never ended up in the bottom 3 and he eventually won the competition that year. And he was so proud of his fans that he dubbed them the Soul Patrol. I think you know how that story goes. When he launched his first album, the legions of fans did not translate into album sales and it tanked.

Besides the quality of your posts, the vibrancy of your forums is also great. However, I won't subscribe to find out whether it remains so. The "firewall" will inevitably lead to a sharp drop in viewers and members, so I think the vibrancy of the forums will also take a dramatic hit. Certainly while I love photography, paying monthly for a website is not what I will do unless absolutely necessary. I'll just go to other websites for my photography info, and I think many will do the same. I'm sure you are perfectly cognizant of your own Soul Patrol out there. Nonetheless, I fully empathise with this move and I wish you all the best. I'll just not be reading, or posting here after that. As they say, I'm keeping it real.

Ken Bennett · « **Reply #30 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:29:21 pm »

Web advertising has changed in the last year or so, and it's getting very difficult for small publishers ("content providers" -- hate that term) to make money any more. I've been seeing this sort of model elsewhere, and certainly this is not unexpected here. It's not a matter of greed so much as how much it costs to run a site like this. Once the ad revenue dries up, there would be no LuLa.

The "million dollars a month" comment reminds me of every time I would tell my day rate to a client -- there would be a pause while they did the mental math. "Day rate times 365 = dang that's a lot of money" and then they would assume I was rich and didn't need their job. Like anyone is billing a full day rate every single day.

Count me in. It's a bargain, even if most of what I do here is time-wasting.

I do get the occasional useful tidbit, which is well worth twelve bucks a year.

dseelig · « **Reply #31 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:31:43 pm »

To be very honest for the last year or so this site has been dragging mostly the articles, I enjoy the forums on occasion and even people I have fought with like Andrew Rodney have been helpful, but to be honest I need more Michael and he has been less here then he once was and less of Mr Raber. Money for me is always an issue and this price is more then fair for the old LL but I want to know it will be more Michael. The internet is aging and another site I once loved sports shooter.com is not what it once was either.

rvamos · « **Reply #32 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:48:52 pm »

Dear Kevin and Michael,

I have followed your site almost from the beginning, and have gotten A LOT out of it. Thank you. $12 is definitely worth it. However, I would like to suggest that, just like you commit to end advertising after the first $50,000 people sign up, that you also commit to devoting x% of all revenue above the minimum needed to maintain the website to your photography grants project. In many ways this can become an upward-spiraling crowdfunding idea for photography projects around the world. Wouldn't that be grand?

David Sutton · « **Reply #33 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:51:20 pm »

US$1 a month? Good oh.

rdonson · « **Reply #34 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:56:35 pm »

This change is way beyond fair enough. I will sign up the the $12/year without hesitation.

luxborealis · « **Reply #35 on:** November 23, 2015, 07:58:29 pm »

Quote from: ddolde on November 23, 2015, 07:05:21 pm

A million readers a month means you are going to make a million dollars a month. Or so you think because I, (and I am sure a lot of other people) will not support your greed. You will be very lucky to get one percent of those million to sign up.

Even the expressions and tone of your video hide an obvious "pretend not to notice" from you that you are going to be even filthier rich than you already are. Come on boys at least be honest you want to make a god damn killing !

Really?! As if!! A million readers a month is not a million subscribers!! It's a million times someone has accessed the page - either me a million times or you and I a half million times each or a million people once (highly unlikely, don't you think!)

BTW - if Michael, Kevin and Chris are becoming filthy rich, then all the more power to them as they are offering a decent service at a respectable price. That's what business is all about (and I support the left!) Let's face it - you get what you pay for, hence the poor quality of free sites.

BTW2 - 1% of 1 million is 10,000 or $120,000. That's a good start!

It's funny this should arrive in my inbox today as I just received a renewal notice for a photo magazine. I'm ditching it as it is primarily ads or ad-driven.

Lu-La, on the other hand is worth it at twice the price. I'll gladly save $22.99 by not buying the photo rag and spend $12 for access here. The Forum, alone, is worth it.

Thanks guys. A courageous decision, but a healthy one (especially if it rids us of the trolls!!)

hokuahi · « **Reply #36 on:** November 23, 2015, 08:14:27 pm »

Huh??.. $12/year for the video content both old and yet to be, and forum access to what in my opinion is one of if not the best photography resources there is... How can anyone not believe this isn't a bargain??

I'm in.

Thanks!

ramarren · « **Reply #37 on:** November 23, 2015, 08:15:05 pm »

The price is right, and if it keeps things going strong, I'm all for it.
I'll sign up as soon as it's available.

G

markrichardross · « **Reply #38 on:** November 23, 2015, 08:22:59 pm »

It is long overdue. Easily worth $1 a month. Easily Please keep up the passionate, good work. Thanks.

MRR

Rand47 · « **Reply #39 on:** November 23, 2015, 08:31:03 pm »

Michael, Kevin...

Bravo! I'm in. Great idea. What I've learned from this site is invaluable. You guys, Andrew Rodney, Jeff Schewe, Eric Chan and literally scores of others who are genuine experts have upped my knowledge and increased my pleasure in photography.

Oh, and as far as the "greed" comments from some others is concerned, my take is this - a good idea and value deserves to be rewarded. I hope you all get filthy rich while you continue to provide the best photo web site on the Internet!

My best to you all as you move forward.

Rand

Author Topic: A New Change For Luminous-Landscape (Read 150543 times)

ddolde

amolitor

amolitor

amolitor