Matt, what do you think about charging for Metafilter now (June 2001)

June 29, 2001 1:29 AM

I know the "Matt make another post" thread is a joke, and it's funny. But lately, my guilt mechanism for getting Metafilter for free has been kicking in.
Then I read this post: http://www.metafilter.com/comments.mefi/8677#101532
And there's the thing about Yahoo possibly going subscription (sorry, I'm a technomoron and I don't know how to link from over here).
I know we've asked before, and you've refused. But Matt, what do you think about charging for Metafilter now on some sort of basis? Is it time? And what do others think?

posted by hazyjane to MetaFilter-related at 1:29 AM (23 comments total)

I've thought about it for some time, and if I ever choose to create some sort of revenue model here, it will be reader-supported (like public television and radio in the US) and never, ever advertising supported.

When you go with outside advertisers, you don't just "sell out" in the pointless hipster sense, but it opens a whole new can of worms. There are possible conflicts of interest (would threads discussing smart tags be the same if there was a microsoft banner ad running?). You also have to give up some portion of the interface to unknown outside sources, and the design suffers when annoying, animated ads are occupying some part of the site.

Philosophically, I don't care for the plethora of advertising that's creeping into our lives every day. It's not just commercials, billboards, and typical, well-established methods, it's the annoying ones in every movie I see now, in every single direction I might look in a cab or subway, and digitally inserted into sporting events I may be watching on TV. It's an accepted nuisance for everyone, but it doesn't have to be. I know it's a very small thing, but MetaFilter is a haven from that world of advertising ubiquity.

When you stick with a reader- or user-supported revenue model, as an owner you maintain control of the site, including the look, the uses, and the sources of any revenue. The users that stand to gain the most by increasing the sites revenue and hopefully longevity are the ones that will participate. Also, there's no chance of an advertiser pulling ads based on content nor is there a chance of users suspecting others of promoting a site's advertiser. A user supported model ensures editorial integrity and the integrity of the site's look and feel, which is something I think is worth more than 3 cents a click-thru.

A side tangent is a question of ethics of generating revenue from a community effort. Everyone else makes the site what it is. Sure, blah servers, blah programming, blah administration & maintenance, blah building it on my own for over two years, blah blah blah poor, poor me, but really I feel slightly guilty taking cash on behalf (in no small part) of the work of thousands.

But that's another argument entirely.

If anyone really wants to help me out, help get me a friggin' job, or donate to your heart's content.
posted by mathowie at 1:51 AM on June 29, 2001

I just donated a bit, although only $20 because I'm a broke cheapskate. I would love to help you find a job, but there's a hiring freeze where I work, and I don't have other connections.
I completely agree with your sentiments against advertising.
But what about the idea of a voluntary subscription type thing whereby maybe just $10 a month would disappear relatively painlessly from our bank accounts or appear automatically on credit-card statements? I'd sign up for that. If just 99 other folks did too, you'd have $1000 a month. Maybe enough to pay the rent at least?
posted by hazyjane at 2:52 AM on June 29, 2001

Philosophically, I don't care for the plethora of advertising that's creeping into our lives every day....It's an accepted nuisance for everyone, but it doesn't have to be. I know it's a very small thing, but MetaFilter is a haven from that world of advertising ubiquity.

<ROAR>

D'ya hear that? The crowd here at MeFi Stadium is going wild! Simply wild!

Well spoken, Matt. I knew I liked you for some reason. I just couldn't find the piece of paper I wrote it down on...

When you stick with a reader- or user-supported revenue model...there's no chance of an advertiser pulling ads based on content nor is there a chance of users suspecting others of promoting a site's advertiser.

No, but you might find some self-righteous assholes who think that because they paid their dollars, they are entitled to abuse the site without banning.

Of course, the way to stop that is to make it very very clear, up front, that those who pay can be banned as well. And when you ban someone, send them their two dollars back and post their pictures on the front page...

Heh...
posted by fooljay at 2:54 AM on June 29, 2001

But what about the idea of a voluntary subscription type thing whereby maybe just $10 a month would disappear relatively painlessly from our bank accounts or appear automatically on credit-card statements?

Metafilter: This won't hurt a bit
posted by fooljay at 2:56 AM on June 29, 2001

In case it wasn't clear, that's a tagline... :-)
posted by fooljay at 2:56 AM on June 29, 2001

I like MetaFilter: Help me get a friggin' job better.
posted by holgate at 5:02 AM on June 29, 2001

Metafilter: that's another argument entirely.
posted by daveadams at 9:18 AM on June 29, 2001

MetaFilter: Enough jibba-jabba, I need work!
posted by mathowie at 10:23 AM on June 29, 2001

jibba-jabba. hehe

And lest you think no one cares, some of us are worknig very hard on the GMAJ project... Just no results yet...
posted by fooljay at 10:36 AM on June 29, 2001

I'll bet this is the only site on the web where the users periodically beg the owner to start charging them.

I guess it just occurred to me today that we could start our own subscription model if some of us just regularly donated a certain amount of money every month. of course, getting matt to spend it on himself would be near impossible.... rcb
posted by rebeccablood at 11:39 AM on June 29, 2001

Enough jibba-jabba, I need work!

Montana needs geeks, Dude. You wouldn't make as much as Frisco, but think of the bennies ...
As for the funding, if half the members here paid a dollar a month, that would be a shit load more than I make. If you decide that's the way, Matt, I'm in.
As for voluntary subscription, please remember that Montanans already pay energy rates set in California. WE know how to pinch pennies. Unless you bring it down to the question of "Can I Live A Day Without Metafilter?" I doubt people like myself will cough up a living wage for you. Sorry, but that's the truth.
posted by Wulfgar! at 12:26 PM on June 29, 2001

Actually, I guess I can sort of spill the beans about something.

I've been thinking about and planning a subscription system for the past few weeks. It's going to be a set of power user tools (personal stash of threads you want to save for later and review, show/hide thread functionality on the index page, good/bad user lists to hide or highlight other posters, enhanced security, etc.) for a small montly fee. It's basically a suite of database- and processor-intensive tools that power users would love and have wished for in the past.

I wish I could make the billing automatic monthly, but it's looking like paypal with some monthly nag emails or multi-monthly payment upfront will be the method of payment. It will be no more than $5 a month, and I doubt if it appeals to more than 50-100 people at the start, but I suppose if I could get 1,000 people subscribed, I wouldn't need to even have a job.
posted by mathowie at 12:28 PM on June 29, 2001

Metafilter: "Can I Live A Day Without Metafilter?"
posted by Avogadro at 1:00 PM on June 29, 2001

Sorry, back on topic. I think I'd pay for that service, Matt, esp. at $5 a month ("That's less than a phone call a day!").
posted by Avogadro at 1:03 PM on June 29, 2001

Look at the bux Pud Kaplan scams in every month with just a newsletter and such; power tools AND a bozo filter? Heck, I'd pay just fot the bozo filter. But $5 is about as much as I'd ever pay per month for any subscription thing ever.
posted by briank at 1:07 PM on June 29, 2001

YES! YES! YES! MeFi PRO!

The way to cut down the monthly nagging is a pre-pay system. 10% off if you pay 6 months in advance.

posted by jpoulos at 1:07 PM on June 29, 2001

When you first roll this thing out (if you do it at all), say that everyone who signs up in the first month or so gets to contribute one tagline to the Random MetaFilter Tagline Database. I bet you'd double your enrollment.

MetaFiler: The Reason "Reload" was Invented.
posted by Shadowkeeper at 1:29 PM on June 29, 2001

Hell, I'd pay based on what I'm hearing.

MetaFilter: Pony up, you bastards!
posted by Skot at 3:12 PM on June 29, 2001

Just remember, Matt, if I'm paying your salary, I'm calling the shots! ;-)

Me and your 10,000 other bosses.

(what a bitch that performance review is going to be)
posted by briank at 6:31 PM on June 29, 2001

I might pay $5/month if every feature I've ever asked for is implemented. If not, then maybe $2/month for some cool new stuff is more reasonable for me (I'm poor!). ;)
posted by daveadams at 10:52 PM on June 29, 2001

I just wanted to add my agreement for a no-ads-ever model. A public radio station is the model to shoot for. Perhaps experimenting with a subscription/contribution model here, the Web can be made safe for...intelligence.
posted by ParisParamus at 10:48 AM on July 3, 2001

A monthly nag is good enough for me. I'm always forgetting these things, but more than willing to fork out the $$.

I can't wait!
posted by frykitty at 11:58 AM on July 3, 2001

I'd pay the $5 for the stated functionality and more if it includes a pony.
posted by vanderwal at 5:35 AM on July 16, 2001