UKC

I rarely use UKC but I think it's a fantastic resource for climbers. I'm really disappointed so few of us seem to have joined as supporters. Is there a reason why so many people use the forum but don't want to support it financially? £20 a year works out at 38p a week. Are those of us a not in genuine hardship really such a mean bunch of skinflints?  It certainly looks that way....

UKC/Rockfax is a for profit company, not a charity. If it were a charity or other non-profit I might morally side with your argument. As a company, UKC has decisions to make about how to make an income for their shareholders/owners, they have chosen to make being a supporter a voluntary thing, that is their business decision. Unless there are signs of impending financial woe that have passed me by, I'm not sure UKC needs you to try and guilt people into becoming supporters (Or maybe you can see further than me from that high horse).

I'd also invite you to consider this - how much would it cost you, personally, every year if you had to pay a £20 membership for every site you use? Even if I only had to pay for the ones I regularly use I would estimate it at around £1000.

Is it so few, or have many turned the badge off?

I'd rather give 20 quid to a local charity.  If UKC want to move to a subscription service then there's nothing stopping them.  

Many people have supported different bits of the community using their own resourses, whether it's volunteering for the NHS or giving handouts to local needs. There does have to be a cap on how much time and money you can throw into the ring when many of us are on reduced wages. UKC is a great site and we considered supporting it but decided there were other ways we would focus our resourses.

It's all too easy to view things through your own eyes and not through those of others. Good for you for supporting the site here.

That's the first I knew about it, that £20 annual fee, been on here about 10 years and never seen a dicky bird about any ongoing fee or support.....I think it is a really good forum....the only certainty is that the owner managers of UKC need to get their marketing department into shape, if they have one, or get some business coaching, get the message out there, couldn't be easier for them....they have everybodys contact details....

Regularly use 50 sites ?  You need to get out more !!!...

https://www.ukclimbing.com/user/supporter/index.php?utm_campaign=ukclimbing...

Advertising on here is relatively unobtrusive and the site works well for most people. At the current rates I approve.

People can fund their websites in any way they choose.

People can also donate their money in any way they choose. 

"then there's nothing stopping them."

- Except they don't "own" much of the content they serve here and a community based open alternative would open up within 20 minutes of it going behind a paywall.

So are you arguing we should all be obliged to cough up the voluntary fee?

Those 'niche' sites don't come cheap!

I think she's suggesting that if UKC/Rockfax started making the charge compulsory, then a free-to-access site would soon be started by volunteers.

(As was the case in the days before the UKC/Rockfax forums started https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/features/ukrecclimbing-6746)

Exactly so

I've really gone off the forums ever since the introduction of the Dislike button (as I've said quite a few times). It has a stultifying effect on many discussions. And worse, it encourages a strange kind of negative person, who's got nothing better to do but lurk here for hours, pouncing on almost everything. Even straightforward, completely reasonable questions about climbing, technicalities, whatever. It's just kind of depressing. Like a slap in the face. Someone in effect saying 'f*ck off'. Well, they've succeeded in my case. Why on earth should I support something that's a turn off? If Alan takes away this juvenile, lazy, sneering button, I might consider coming back more regularly and supporting the site in the future.

a) as has been said many times before, why on earth take it so seriously? If someone clicks on either like or dislike, at least you know someone has taken the time to read what you wrote! I'm still be amazed by how important people find these buttons. 

b) Also, can't you just turn them off?

I started quite a long thread about dislike button removal a little while ago, not sure if you were in it or not. Learned have way through the thread that there is an option in user settings to turn the like/dislike buttons off. I still don't like the fact that they are there but at least when I can't see them it is a marked improvement.

Yes I know - I might be thick but like to think I'm not quite that thick .  I was trying to get at what the underlying meaning of the response was.  Unless I was overthinking it.

Yup - used to use uk.rec.walking and uk.rec.climbing back in the 90s.

Dwarf group lesbian hentai isn't niche, it's a very mainstream site, stop judging! :P

As already mentioned, why don't you simply turn them off?  Clearly more people like them that don't (judging by the like/dislike ratio whenever the topic arises).   Presumably it's more democratic to keep them?

Pretty sure the "nothing better to do" argument can be made more effectively against  those who post regularly, especially the top 10 posters.

Personally I use UKC to avoid doing the better things I should be doing (of which there's many).

I do have a problem with using too much internet but thankfully have lots of free time, so I can still get out too, thanks

I think you might be surprised as to the number of sites you use, try recalling your internet history for the last week and counting up the sites.

I just looked and yesterday I used multiple pages on 18 different sites (and single pages from several more) and that was a typical day where I worked in the morning, wasted some time in the afternoon and then went out for some exercise in the evening.

If they pulled a Strava and removed the logbooks other than for paid members then loads of people would pay.  I probably would if I ever get to climb outside again.

There’s no incentive to pay for the forums or photos.  99% of the forum subject matter has nothing to do with climbing.  The content is basically netmums although with a lot more smugness.  If people want to share photos they’ll do it on Flickr or something.

There are some good articles which arguably justify a subscription.  But given that that would just make it an online magazine, several of which have collapsed because people don’t want to pay for content that they can get for free elsewhere, it’s difficult to see that hiding the articles behind a paywall would bring in much revenue.

Personally as I use UKC a lot I decided to support it for a year or until the crisis is over. I wouldn't want any users to stop posting because they didn't want to pay. For all I know many people are giving far more selfless support to other things than I am.

Turning them off won't save it for me. The sneering reactionaries are still there, ever sneering. It's not like it's a huge issue for me, but simply unappealing. By far the simplest thing for me to do is just walk away from it and converse in friendlier, healthy contexts with people I respect. Life's too short etc. It's very nerdish this place, when life outside it is so much more interesting. I just want to get on with that now.

You seem to be drawn to discussing things here though Gordon. I would say you part of the furniture as something of a veteran of decades standing. But I think trying to take it less seriously wouldn't be a bad idea when you see "sneering reactionaries"! I don't think that sounds very good.

Wouldn't they still be there even if the buttons were removed altogether? It would be sad to see you go,

Chris

This is exactly what I did when they brought in the supporter scheme. Not for me thanks, pledged £5 a month to Macmillan (not local I know, they helped my mum a lot when she had chemo) instead.

Almost first time on here since the start of lockdown and was wondering what that fist thing was. Still would have to consider whether I want to give them my money. I donate to charities already. I will not be emotionally blackmailed into giving money (by fellow users, UKC hasn’t tried that on me)

Why are UKC in extra need of support during corobavirus? I'd have thought they're getting plenty of traffic with people being bored at home? 

Possibly I'm being naive but they claim they have comparatively little advertising coming in at present, presumably they don't make money directly from the traffic of those of us bored at home. Possibly less guidebook money too though, I don't think they mentioned that., Personally I do not intend to continue contributing once things start to improve.

Hi Ged,

It's explained here: https://www.ukclimbing.com/news/2020/05/become_a_supporter_of_ukclimbing_an...

We don't use Google ads. More traffic just means higher server bills I'm afraid. I think most people appreciate they're not getting flooded with crappy ads on UKC.

Am I being naive or are you forgetting to mention that traffic numbers justify higher ad costs to the advertisers?

So possibly in the months to come, this periods of higher traffic especially with lots of contentious threads in the pub forum will pay dividends & everybody will be happy?

Interesting that you have called your post 'Disappointing'. I'll tell you what is 'disappointing'...the fact that you are disappointed in me and numerous others who you know nothing about. You seem to have assumed the high moral ground and are implying that I am not doing my moral bit. Perhaps I'm someone who donates monthly to various charities? Perhaps I'm a volunteer in my local community? Perhaps I'm a front line worker giving selflessly of my time? Perhaps I'm a regular fundraiser? Perhaps I'm all or none of the above. That's my point. You don't know me!  So don't moralise and don't guilt trip me. 

Gi's £20. Go on, that's nowt.

...and this is why it should not, anywhere, be displayed prominently with every forum post.

Why not serve Google ads for people who don't cough up the £20 quid.   Standard thing to do: charge a small fee for the ad-free service (or in this case the climbing-ads only service).

Personally I don't care about getting Google ads as long as they stay in their little box in the sidebar and aren't super intrusive scripted ones that pop out over other content.  

Hi All,

This is more of a holding message than anything, as I’m currently looking after my daughter and will be off our climbing later, so if possible bear with until Monday.

This is an interesting thread with lots of points that have - in my eyes - relatively interesting answers; however, I’d prefer to address each properly (and would prefer not to do so on my day off - blurry a line though days on/off sometimes are for us here at UKC!).

Cheers,

Rob

It isn't just traffic numbers that justifies charging advertisers more though is it?  Not so much as actually, y'know, selling stuff.  The advertisers are gear manufacturers, shops, climbing walls etc..  so yes, perhaps you are being a bit naive there in the sense that you could probably think that through a bit more.

I think it’s personal choice. I personally, having known similar business struggle, I prefer to pay than seeing it go. Everyone that doesn’t want to pay then I assume are not that bothered if UKC seized to exist or became a subscription model. A lot of people seems to think that a few advertisers might bring enough money for all the developers, editors and contributors, but the reality is similar to Climb Magazine, just not enough. I wasn’t that bother that Climb went, but I certainly dont want UKC to go so I donate. 

I thought the opposite was suggested

For the umpteenth time that someone has mentioned it. You can remove them on options.

1, Go to user profile. 2, Go to user options 3, Select 'Forums' tab. 4, Check the 'Hide 'Like' and 'Dislike' voting system in all Forum threads' option box. 5, See if that helps your mood.

If you can't see them how does it matter. There would be people disliking or liking what you say whether there is a button to press or not.

You're clearly right. I suppose the reason that you're being disliked is that regardless of traffic advertising revenue will have taken a hit over the last few months. But long term traffic = money for anyone advertising. 

I may be wrong but I seem to remember from when my brother ran a website that its daily unique visitors that advertisers will pay for. UKC has a lot of members but the posters tend to be the usual suspects and at the moment whilst people are at home the usual people are posting more than ever and burning up that bandwidth.

I have said before (being one of the usual suspects) that even though my climbing days are probably over I still come here for the diverse level of subjects discussed and the wealth of information shared on here. I can't remember seeing a subject where at least one forum member isn't an expert in the field. 

I can certainly appreciate why some people don't want to pay and some won't be able to afford it but personally I think £5 a month is very good value. 

Just looking at the ads I'm being shown on UKC:

Ice Axes - not interested in ice climbing.  Never going to get clicked.

Rockfax Guide books - not interested.  I hill walk, run and climb indoors. 

Anything to do with trad gear - not going to happen.

If people were advertising ropes or climbing shoes and the walls were open they might have a chance of selling me something  Also approach shoes, or jackets.

But: if you were running Google ads I'd be getting reminders about the office chair I was looking at on Amazon or the discounted trousers on AlpineTrek.  Chances of me clicking on that and buying something are about 100x higher because I'm already halfway to a purchase decision.  Especially during lockdown there's going to be far more clicks in a wider range of adverts.

Thanks for explaining, I did mean it as a genuine question, not a sarcastic comment!

I'm not going to re-hash the argument here, I've said my piece before and like/dislike buttons are not the topic of this thread. If you are really bored and want to understand my position, here is the original thread: https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/likes_and_dislikes_a_detrimenta...

I've done that, too.

That said, "like" is useful, it signifies agreement without wasting space on classic "AOL" style posts (but it should say who liked it, not just a number).  "Dislike" not, because if you dislike something you should reply to it explaining why you dislike it, and if you can't be bothered then, in a discussion forum, your view simply doesn't count.

Because of my approach to purchasing I tend to find that all these do is show me lots of ads for things I already purchased.

I spent years complaining about the dislike button, limiting myself to only ever pressing "like" then took up the suggestion of switching it off. 

I lasted about a week. It was like being blindfolded but having the knowledge that someone was in the room with you armed with a hammer or a stiletto.....

Hi All,

I thought I'd address this to everyone, as the following provides a bit of background/context. I'll do my best to answer some of the more specific questions separately.

For those that aren't aware, my role at UKC/UKH - aside from writing the occasional article and witty post - is as its Advertising Manager. I've been in the role since 2014 and working in the outdoor industry since 2006.

As of the first day of the lockdown, maybe even a bit before, we started to receive an increasing number of phone calls from clients who were - perhaps unsurprisingly - looking to either put their advertising on hold, postpone it to a later date, or cancel it altogether. Given that advertising is our main source of revenue we had to come up with a strategy to compensate for this, because without something in place it was unlikely that UKC/UKH would have seen the year out. Ordinarily the Rockfax side of the business could be relied on, as its sales figures are remarkably consistent year-on-year, but due to the nature of the crisis at hand they'd taken an even bigger hit to sales. As a result, the Supporter Scheme was born...

When it comes to becoming a supporter our philosophy from a UKC/UKH perspective is simple: if you can (and want to) then we massively appreciate it; if you don't, or can't, then we totally accept that too - there are no hard feelings either way, just an overriding sense of gratitude to those that have contributed. One thing is for sure, this isn't a case of them and us, as we're all in it together.

I think you may have a rather rose-tinted view of how Google Ads operate and what they actually deliver.

From my experience they promise a lot, but actually provide poor results/return unless you're willing to open the floodgates to absolutely anything/everything, which would ultimately have a detrimental impact on the site as a whole. Irrespective of whether or not someone pays us £20 a month I'd still like them to come and visit the site without being bombarded with what can only be described as a load of irrelevant shite...

In addition to this, maybe I'm getting overly sentimental having come from a background working in an independent outdoor shop, but I'd prefer to be working with/supporting the likes of Joe Browns, The Climbers' Shop, Outside and Needle Sports than I would Jeff Bezos and Amazon.

If you buy your kit from anywhere, please buy it from somewhere that actually pays their taxes properly...and is preferably staffed by climbers who get out and climb + clean the routes within their local area...

Rob has outlined the advertising/financial situation. I always like to clarify the point about business status when it crops up since it can lead to a misunderstanding.

The actual status of 'non-profit' or 'not-for-profit' doesn't really exist in the UK. It tends to be used by small companies on their way to charity status, or by companies that align themselves with generally good work that has no obvious revenue stream. This latter case covers a lot of small businesses where the owners are also the employees (as with UKC). The company makes stuff, sells stuff and pays its expenses and employees. Anything left over is used to make more good stuff some of which it can sell, some of which it can't but which people appreciate. Using this definition there isn't really much difference between UKC (which has no third party shareholders) and a 'non-profit'.

I am not making this point to try and generate sympathy (and hence donations) it is because I get twitchy when the 'for-profit'/'not-for'-profit' thing crops up since I feel it adds a level of demarcation that doesn't really exist, and the for-profit tag doesn't really sit well when I look around my dedicated workforce who could probably all earn more bucks working for someone else.

Overall though I agree with your assertion that this is an entirely voluntary thing and we make no judgement on people who don't feel they want to, or can, contribute. It should also be added that a fair few people have hidden their Supporter status so the apparent figures are probably not quite what they seem.

Alan

Oh ferchrissakes Alan!

Every time I start to like you again you saddle up your horse and ride in to town talking about how ukc is "run much like a small charity" (your words, not mine), or you're like a not for profit and I point out that charities and businesses are run in a totally different way to each other and are subject to rules and I get a load of dislikes because I've not managed to keep my f*cking mouth shut again...

There's a difference between a small company that after paying staff, expenses (and donations) makes a small profit, or even none at all, and charities and NGO's.  I suspect if you were a charity you would have been shut down by the charities commission by now because to small a percentage of the revenue generated  would have been spent on the raison d'etre of the organisation.  

Also charities aren't owned an individual (or group of individuals) whereas businesses are.  UKC is a business, an asset, it has a value and can be bought and sold.  This a key difference that you don't take into consideration in your definition.

You've got a good, sustainable small business that provides employment for a number of people in an area that is their passion, provides entertainment and information, supports the passions of many and even manages to make some benevolent donations to bolt funds.  There's nothing wrong with any of that, you should be proud of that, but please stop getting confused between your small business and charities as there are some really key differences which you don't seem to take into consideration.

It's actually because of this very reason that I declined to join the supporter scheme, I'd rather support a real charity than a business that thinks it is "very much like" one.

Thanks for putting the instructions in; I have become increasingly convinced that Gordon actually doesn't understand what people mean when they say you can turn them off. As if he thinks people are suggesting that he turn them off "in his head". 

I’m with Gordon. No point in turning them off if you know they’re still there. 
 
You wouldn’t walk round with a sign saying knobhead on your back saying it’s fine because I can’t see it would you?

At the same time a realise I’m in the minority re. Not liking them so have vowed to stfu about it for now...

I agree with much of what you have written there however I didn't liken us to a charity. I may have erroneously done this in the past (although I have consciously avoided doing that for a while now) but not in the post you are replying to.

Alan

Yes it was a reply to me in the past that I was referring to, was little while back now, think the thread was about bolt fund contributions...  

I applaud you for consciously not referring to UKC in those terms any more, but bear in mind that I wasn't aware that you had changed your view on this so you can understand my frustration when you started using similar, but not the same, comparisons in your previous post. 

Apologies for my anger but I, and more so my partner, do and have done quite a bit of work for charities and NGO's so I reach for my guns quickly when I hear them being undermined (even if unintentionally). 

I only tend to use the Dislike button to flag someone I feel is acting like a 'knobhead'.

I even often hear myself mutter 'dick' as I press the button, lol.

Maybe UKC could add a sound to enhance my button press experience! 

... seriously though, some people need to get over themselves over this Like/Dislike thing, it's really not important.

Yeah I've moved on from the dislike/like thing - Alan showed the results of the survey and most people don't have a problem with it so fair enough!

I've started using it a bit and all! 

No probs. I appreciate you actually challenging what I was saying. I think I have the same gun-toting reaction when people start going on about us as if we were Amazon!

Alan

If you were Amazon, by recent experiences you'd accidentally charge £3000 every month, be unable to refund it or deliver on what your user has ordered, and not understand why your customer is fuming down the phone to you when they find that their bank account has been drained by an incompetent fraud-detection algorithm cancelling their order and disappearing all trace of it from the system. Three times.

Or you'd stick up the supporter badge on their profile and not give them any benefits - in much the same way that my new laptop charger was 'delivered to the resident' last Friday - who was nine miles away at the time. Original package never found, replacement package never even arrived, and I dread to look to see whether the refund has been processed...

No, you're definitely not Amazon!

Maybe.  I buy advertising from Google for my own business and find it works OK and is far more convenient than dealing with individual websites.

I agree that the UKC pages look better because all the advertising is consistent with climbing.  Aesthetically it is a good choice.   In terms of getting clicks, I'm less convinced.  I've clicked far more frequently on e.g. ads on the The Independent website related to c;limbing equipment than UKC for the very simple reason they are running Google ads and I'm getting reminded about products I'm interested in and tracking the price on.

It's not just Amazon.  Bergzeit.de use Google ads and they are the ones I click on most frequently as do some of the other discounters.  I'm looking at trousers and tents at the moment and those guys are following me around putting Google ads on the websites I visit where UKC is showing me pretty ads for stuff I am never going to buy.

I don't mind but I suspect you'd be getting more clicks and money with some Google ads.

I'm not rich enough for that.  I get interested in a product based on the specification and then I wait a long time until somebody puts it in a sale for half price.  Usually it is one of the climbing/outdoor specific online outlets that finally get my money and their adverts based on what I have browsed make it more likely I will notice when the price is right.

I'm not fully up on all the different structures you can have for business type things in the UK but I was using "non-profit" to try and cover things like charities and social enterprises. I wasn't meaning to suggest that UKC was some sort of money printing machine, that would have surprised me!

From your description of how UKC runs, on the surface of it, it does seem like becoming a charity would offer lots of advantages and few drawbacks but obviously I am making a judgement based on very little evidence.

I think your point about the people who work for UKC is misrepresenting the situation with employment though, because what you have said can arguably be applied to a _lot_ of jobs, particularly jobs in the leisure industry that often have a low rate of pay because the enjoyment people get out of doing these jobs that are entwined with their passion is more important than getting more money for a job they would enjoy less (within reason ofc). Everyone balances how much money they want for a job with how pleasant the job is to do (obviously there are lots of other factors like qualifications, location, etc. too).

There are also community interest companies, mutuals, community benefit societies, and co-operatives all without shareholders and could be loosely described as not for profit. I could almost see a version of UKC / Rockfax as the latter, with the 'dividends' either reinvested into the business, returned to the customers in the form of pricing, or donated to local charities (insert bolt funds) a bit like the Co-operative Group. 

The key difference between a small business and some of these other corporate forms is the ownership structure. Once the benevolent owner at a small business has had enough they either sell or allow the business to be inherited. 

You seem to be presuming that your posts would be attracting dislikes. So assuming that is so. How does it make any difference knowing that they are there rather than not knowing.

Not really misrepresenting it since that is essentially the point I was making. I wasn't suggesting we are special or different, in fact, I reckon the majority of small-to-medium employee-owned businesses are run in this way - that is the point. The 'maximizing profit for shareholders' maxim that is often trotted out really only applies to a certain type of business and most small climber-run shops and businesses are miles from that.

It is also worth saying that we are perfectly happy with our business model and have no plans to change anything, however, I have probably banged this drum enough now so time to shut up!

Alan

Well some attract more than others!

Gordon has been known to get a few!

My only comment is that ultimately it is a business and it is your business. It is really upto you as to whether you should be charging for its use and how that works back into your business model.

I do not consider voluntary subscriptions the correct method for a business, it is not after all a charity ( ignore the earlier poster references) so I am not sure this is really a viable way forward.I will happily contribute voluntarily to a charity if it is one I want to support. For a business it is really the market and the owner which controls things.I think unfortunatley the market is that if the site was closed, another competitor would pop up.That is regretably the way your business environment  works on free content.That is difficult and not easy to reconcile.

Poster BnB has a really good view on these things, I am sure his comments would be valuable.Hope he comments.