This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
As UKC/Rockfax is making alot of money from their monopoly on climbing media basically just for being IT nerds and presenting news/information. Is it time for those who make the news and collate the information (the definitive guidebook writers) to get a cut? Perhaps 0.5p per unique hit for news stories could go to the star(s)? Many top climbers moan about not getting enough money (Haston and Simpson for example). Think what would be possible if they had more... Salathe ledge to ledge? or many other amzaing climbs in foreign countries. This would be far better than having a 40 biggest losers list posted every week surely? or another rockfax guidebook covering an already well-covered aread. Obviously such a system would be open to byass but if UKC sided with certain climbers theres enough other hit-starved others out there to report on them so there would be no overall loss in information. Any thoughts?
I realise that UKC/Rockfax members dont all have filipino maids and huge yahts put relative to the amount of money in climbing they must be raking alot in.
I realise that UKC/Rockfax members dont all have filipino maids and huge yahts put relative to the amount of money in climbing they must be raking alot in.
In reply to jl100:
Do you plan on an extended stay here Joe? Because you're sure making important friends quickly.
T.
> As UKC/Rockfax is making alot of money from their monopoly on climbing media basically just for being IT nerds and presenting news/information.
Do you plan on an extended stay here Joe? Because you're sure making important friends quickly.
T.
In reply to jl100:
Hmm, how much money do you think UKC (as oppose to Rockfax, which is a different issue) actually makes? I suspect it is not "a lot"; somehow I suspect they're sorta covering their costs, and not much more.
> As UKC/Rockfax is making alot of money from their monopoly on climbing media basically just
> for being IT nerds and presenting news/information.
> for being IT nerds and presenting news/information.
Hmm, how much money do you think UKC (as oppose to Rockfax, which is a different issue) actually makes? I suspect it is not "a lot"; somehow I suspect they're sorta covering their costs, and not much more.
In reply to Coel Hellier: Aren't UKC and rockfax pretty much owned by the same people. And i dont know money making formula or public service? I dunno.
In reply to jl100: jack bloody geldard nearly ran me over in his ferrari yesterday and im only starting to recover from mick sunbathing nude on his yacht near kalymnos last summer. sorry, what was your point?
In reply to jl100:
Nice!!!
Enty
> As UKC/Rockfax is making alot of money from their monopoly on climbing media basically just for being IT nerds and presenting news/information. Is it time for those who make the news and collate the information (the definitive guidebook writers) to get a cut? Perhaps 0.5p per unique hit for news stories could go to the star(s)? Many top climbers moan about not getting enough money (Haston and Simpson for example). Think what would be possible if they had more... Salathe ledge to ledge? or many other amzaing climbs in foreign countries. This would be far better than having a 40 biggest losers list posted every week surely? or another rockfax guidebook covering an already well-covered aread. Obviously such a system would be open to byass but if UKC sided with certain climbers theres enough other hit-starved others out there to report on them so there would be no overall loss in information. Any thoughts?
> I realise that UKC/Rockfax members dont all have filipino maids and huge yahts put relative to the amount of money in climbing they must be raking alot in.
> I realise that UKC/Rockfax members dont all have filipino maids and huge yahts put relative to the amount of money in climbing they must be raking alot in.
Nice!!!
Enty
In reply to jl100: <speechless> You must have cojones visible from space.
In reply to jl100:
Most of that doesn't even make sense. Lots is actually wrong.
> As UKC/Rockfax is making alot of money from their monopoly on climbing media basically just for being IT nerds and presenting news/information. Is it time for those who make the news and collate the information (the definitive guidebook writers) to get a cut? Perhaps 0.5p per unique hit for news stories could go to the star(s)? Many top climbers moan about not getting enough money (Haston and Simpson for example). Think what would be possible if they had more... Salathe ledge to ledge? or many other amzaing climbs in foreign countries. This would be far better than having a 40 biggest losers list posted every week surely? or another rockfax guidebook covering an already well-covered aread. Obviously such a system would be open to byass but if UKC sided with certain climbers theres enough other hit-starved others out there to report on them so there would be no overall loss in information. Any thoughts?
> I realise that UKC/Rockfax members dont all have filipino maids and huge yahts put relative to the amount of money in climbing they must be raking alot in.
> I realise that UKC/Rockfax members dont all have filipino maids and huge yahts put relative to the amount of money in climbing they must be raking alot in.
Most of that doesn't even make sense. Lots is actually wrong.
In reply to jl100:
Yes, I think so. However, I suspect that UKC is hardly the money-making machine you think it is. The only income is from the advertisers, who will be paying per user-click-through. I'm guessing that they're paying a reasonable wage to the people who maintain and improve the site, but I suspect with not much profit after that.
> Aren't UKC and rockfax pretty much owned by the same people.
Yes, I think so. However, I suspect that UKC is hardly the money-making machine you think it is. The only income is from the advertisers, who will be paying per user-click-through. I'm guessing that they're paying a reasonable wage to the people who maintain and improve the site, but I suspect with not much profit after that.
In reply to joe larner:
Are you sure ?
> British climbers could get up more routes due to being better funded
Are you sure ?
In reply to jl100: quit while you're ahead mate, you don't want to be here when Mick breaks out the statistics.
In reply to jl100:
We're a capitalist society. Even if UKC and Rockfax were rolling in it (which I seriously doubt) why should they share their profits with the climbing community? Why not ask Leo Houlding to give some of his sponsorship money to Stevie Haston while you're at it?
Would you give the money you could spend on climbing to let a well-known climber go abroad?
Also do you really think the money made from the 40 biggest posters list would send someone up a climb halfway round the world?
We're a capitalist society. Even if UKC and Rockfax were rolling in it (which I seriously doubt) why should they share their profits with the climbing community? Why not ask Leo Houlding to give some of his sponsorship money to Stevie Haston while you're at it?
Would you give the money you could spend on climbing to let a well-known climber go abroad?
Also do you really think the money made from the 40 biggest posters list would send someone up a climb halfway round the world?
In reply to toad:
I think space visible inside his cranium is a more likely explanation.
> (In reply to joe larner) <speechless> You must have cojones visible from space.
I think space visible inside his cranium is a more likely explanation.
In reply to jl100:
Random!
A few of my thoughts here...
1) UKC aren't a charity - I also very much doubt they're rolling in it.
2) To make a living as a climber you need to be a bit more enterprising than just do a few hard routes and expect the money to come rolling in. I suspect Leo Houlding does alright for himself. The owners of UKC and rockfax are also a good example of enterprising behaviour - they spotted a potential gap in the market and stepped in with a product to fill it. Well done them I say.
3) UKC/Rockfax certainly do not constitue a monopoly because I can think of numerous active competitors to both.
4) UKC shouldn't be volunteering money to climbers for clicking news stories - Stevie Haston proved recently that if you're prepared to haggle for it you can get some money for these reports. If demand for the news is high you can bet that UKC will want a piece of it!!
All IMO of course...
Random!
A few of my thoughts here...
1) UKC aren't a charity - I also very much doubt they're rolling in it.
2) To make a living as a climber you need to be a bit more enterprising than just do a few hard routes and expect the money to come rolling in. I suspect Leo Houlding does alright for himself. The owners of UKC and rockfax are also a good example of enterprising behaviour - they spotted a potential gap in the market and stepped in with a product to fill it. Well done them I say.
3) UKC/Rockfax certainly do not constitue a monopoly because I can think of numerous active competitors to both.
4) UKC shouldn't be volunteering money to climbers for clicking news stories - Stevie Haston proved recently that if you're prepared to haggle for it you can get some money for these reports. If demand for the news is high you can bet that UKC will want a piece of it!!
All IMO of course...
In reply to Ed FBeldman: I dont make money from Haston/Houlding's achievements. Not developing silly things like that would save costs.
In reply to jl100: Mate, it's not a monopoly. In fact its an almost perfect example of competition! Bizarre post.
In reply to jl100: Good timing, just after Alan's gone off for his weekend away
In reply to jl100:
So much misunderstanding and ignorance Joe, and you aren't the only one!
Be better if we sat down in a pub and explained how it all works to you...how the climbing community works, the economics, the connections, the desire and passion that makes us all tick etc
It is such a big topic I would have difficulty deciding where to start.
Very interesting topic by the way.
Mick
So much misunderstanding and ignorance Joe, and you aren't the only one!
Be better if we sat down in a pub and explained how it all works to you...how the climbing community works, the economics, the connections, the desire and passion that makes us all tick etc
It is such a big topic I would have difficulty deciding where to start.
Very interesting topic by the way.
Mick
In reply to Michael Hood:
Yes he has just left and Jack is in Morocco. Just me at UKC/Rockfax towers.
M
> (In reply to joe larner) Good timing, just after Alan's gone off for his weekend away
Yes he has just left and Jack is in Morocco. Just me at UKC/Rockfax towers.
M
In reply to jl100: You really think developing the top 40 list cost much money? AFAIK this forum is built on a fairly standard, commercially available PHP backend with a custom frontend to match the rest of the site. Forum software like this has a post ranking feature built in. It then takes all of 5-10 minutes to build a feature to post the top 40 to a certain thread every sunday. Overall cost; £5?
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
At some disgustingly luxurious 5 star resort hobnobbing with his movie star and minor royalty mates presumably...
> and Jack is in Morocco.
At some disgustingly luxurious 5 star resort hobnobbing with his movie star and minor royalty mates presumably...
In reply to Coel Hellier:
Wrong....the second bit.
> (In reply to joe larner)
>
> [...]
>
> The only income is from the advertisers, who will be paying per user-click-through.
>
> [...]
>
> The only income is from the advertisers, who will be paying per user-click-through.
Wrong....the second bit.
In reply to stewieatb:
Wrong. Nick Smith would be insulted. The UKC forums are unique.
> (In reply to joe larner) You really think developing the top 40 list cost much money? AFAIK this forum is built on a fairly standard, commercially available PHP backend with a custom frontend to match the rest of the site. F
Wrong. Nick Smith would be insulted. The UKC forums are unique.
In reply to stewieatb: the forum is custom built as far as im aware, although your general point abut the top40 list is still true (i.e. it costs naff all in the scheme of things.)
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: For the record, compared with practically any other forum I've used, the UKC ones are far and away easier to use, even if they don't have the (usually unnecessary) features of others.
PS If you ever introduce Avatars and signatures, I will hunt you down and eat you. Really.
PS If you ever introduce Avatars and signatures, I will hunt you down and eat you. Really.
In reply to toad: Agreed
>
> Wrong. Nick Smith would be insulted. The UKC forums are unique.
> Wrong. Nick Smith would be insulted. The UKC forums are unique.
......That they are.
In reply to jl100:
Me a nerd? Jack a nerd, Alan a nerd, Mark a nerd, Sarah a nerd. Nick a nerd. And all those who help! Please.
Presenting! Do you know how much original copy we generate on a daily basis. No, obviously not, and what is this 'just' bullshit... we have a joke here...Alan works 24 hrs a day, I work 18 hors a day, Jack works 12 hours a day... and really, I'm not joking!
A monopoly in the climbing media? The best without a doubt. But there are lots of websites, blogs, magazines, videos out there.
Fundamental to our quest and a question we ask ourselves each day and ask of others; What do climbers want? That is what we strive for....and we aren't there yet.
Over and out, dinner to cook.
Mick
> As UKC/Rockfax is making alot of money from their monopoly on climbing media basically just for being IT nerds and presenting news/information.
Me a nerd? Jack a nerd, Alan a nerd, Mark a nerd, Sarah a nerd. Nick a nerd. And all those who help! Please.
Presenting! Do you know how much original copy we generate on a daily basis. No, obviously not, and what is this 'just' bullshit... we have a joke here...Alan works 24 hrs a day, I work 18 hors a day, Jack works 12 hours a day... and really, I'm not joking!
A monopoly in the climbing media? The best without a doubt. But there are lots of websites, blogs, magazines, videos out there.
Fundamental to our quest and a question we ask ourselves each day and ask of others; What do climbers want? That is what we strive for....and we aren't there yet.
Over and out, dinner to cook.
Mick
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
I have no doubt about that. The almost shamanistic ability of any punter with a keyboard to raise a Katrina-esque shitstorm is completely unique.
I think the point still stands that it must have cost bugger all to develop.
> (In reply to stewieatb)
> [...]
>
> Wrong. Nick Smith would be insulted. The UKC forums are unique.
> [...]
>
> Wrong. Nick Smith would be insulted. The UKC forums are unique.
I have no doubt about that. The almost shamanistic ability of any punter with a keyboard to raise a Katrina-esque shitstorm is completely unique.
I think the point still stands that it must have cost bugger all to develop.
In reply to stewieatb:
Try several hundred thousands of pounds.
> (In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com)
> I think the point still stands that it must have cost bugger all to develop.
Try several hundred thousands of pounds.
In reply to stewieatb:
So you are assuming Nick wrote the code in his spare time, just for fun?
Chris
>
>
> I think the point still stands that it must have cost bugger all to develop.
>
> I think the point still stands that it must have cost bugger all to develop.
So you are assuming Nick wrote the code in his spare time, just for fun?
Chris
In reply to Chris Craggs: Woah, crap, missed some words out there - I just meant the top 40 feature that Joe was complaining about.
In reply to stewieatb:
Given that your original point was so far from the truth, I initially assumed you taking the piss.
Anyone who has worked in IT knows you are talking utter rubbish, but why not go off and develop your own site "for bugger all" and we'll compare it to this one.
> I think the point still stands that it must have cost bugger all to develop.
Given that your original point was so far from the truth, I initially assumed you taking the piss.
Anyone who has worked in IT knows you are talking utter rubbish, but why not go off and develop your own site "for bugger all" and we'll compare it to this one.
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Nick's efforts and creativity are colossal, but it is far more than code.
> (In reply to stewieatb)
> [...]
>
> So you are assuming Nick wrote the code in his spare time, just for fun?
> [...]
>
> So you are assuming Nick wrote the code in his spare time, just for fun?
Nick's efforts and creativity are colossal, but it is far more than code.
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: I hope that dinner's in the 6 hours of your own time
In reply to Michael Hood:
I really am off. Lamb, spuds, gravy and vege....
> (In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com) I hope that dinner's in the 6 hours of your own time
I really am off. Lamb, spuds, gravy and vege....
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Eating like a king, while the peasants pay for your conquests. The Rockfax empire grows still further, the moors have fallen and now too, the west country.
The rebels of Cookson and Larner are taken care of.
The rebels of Cookson and Larner are taken care of.
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
>
For sure, I think I have a teeny inking of what he has put into UKC.
Chris
PS Enjoy the lamb, another big day tomorrow!
>
> Nick's efforts and creativity are colossal, but it is far more than code.
For sure, I think I have a teeny inking of what he has put into UKC.
Chris
PS Enjoy the lamb, another big day tomorrow!
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Plus of course the massive efforts put in by Alan and your good-self, making UKC the success it is today.
Chris
Plus of course the massive efforts put in by Alan and your good-self, making UKC the success it is today.
Chris
In reply to Chris the Tall: Will say it again, as my last post was pretty small; I was NOT suggesting that the site cost nothing to develop, nor that I could develop something better. I have no doubt that Nick, Mick, Alan, etc. have spent a great deal of time and money on the site over the years, and am very grateful to them for doing so at low profit, leaving me with a brilliant free resource.
What I was pointing out was that the 'Top 40 Posters' feature that OP was complaining about must have cost very little to develop in comparison to the rest of the site.
What I was pointing out was that the 'Top 40 Posters' feature that OP was complaining about must have cost very little to develop in comparison to the rest of the site.
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
>> (In reply to joe larner) Good timing, just after Alan's gone off for his weekend away
Well if previous events are anything to go by, then the whole forum should go down in the next hour or two. Not to return until sometime on tuesday morning. In the meantime facebook traffic will increase by 30-40% as the back up takes effect.
>> (In reply to joe larner) Good timing, just after Alan's gone off for his weekend away
>
> Yes he has just left and Jack is in Morocco. Just me at UKC/Rockfax towers.
> Yes he has just left and Jack is in Morocco. Just me at UKC/Rockfax towers.
Well if previous events are anything to go by, then the whole forum should go down in the next hour or two. Not to return until sometime on tuesday morning. In the meantime facebook traffic will increase by 30-40% as the back up takes effect.
In reply to jl100:
In addition to the points above, why should UKC or Rockfax give any money to climbers? Both UKC and Rockfax do great jobs in their respective fields and incidentally UKC would still be a great source of useful information even if they didn't report on the latest hard ascents. If leading climbers want to make a living out of climbing (unlike the rest of us who have to do 'proper' jobs), they should do a bit of legwork and shouldn't just expect the cash to roll in. If there is a market for exclusive interviews and they can get a bit of money that way, good on them, but if UKC simply write up an ascent, why should the climber get paid just because UKC users read the article? After all, the climber will actually benefit from this publicity and might go on to secure sponsorship deals.
In addition to the points above, why should UKC or Rockfax give any money to climbers? Both UKC and Rockfax do great jobs in their respective fields and incidentally UKC would still be a great source of useful information even if they didn't report on the latest hard ascents. If leading climbers want to make a living out of climbing (unlike the rest of us who have to do 'proper' jobs), they should do a bit of legwork and shouldn't just expect the cash to roll in. If there is a market for exclusive interviews and they can get a bit of money that way, good on them, but if UKC simply write up an ascent, why should the climber get paid just because UKC users read the article? After all, the climber will actually benefit from this publicity and might go on to secure sponsorship deals.
TO Mick Ryan:
Would you be able to explain to all us UKC users (especially and including me as I'm interested) just how the UKC forums are funded?
How is how much you charge advertisers determined (I know it's demand and supply) but I would find the specifics interesting.
Who are your main financers?
Just general questions from someone who is generally interested.
James
Would you be able to explain to all us UKC users (especially and including me as I'm interested) just how the UKC forums are funded?
How is how much you charge advertisers determined (I know it's demand and supply) but I would find the specifics interesting.
Who are your main financers?
Just general questions from someone who is generally interested.
James
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
The climbing community works? No wonder standards are so low.
> (In reply to joe larner)
>
> So much misunderstanding and ignorance Joe, and you aren't the only one!
>
> Be better if we sat down in a pub and explained how it all works to you...how the climbing community works,
>
> So much misunderstanding and ignorance Joe, and you aren't the only one!
>
> Be better if we sat down in a pub and explained how it all works to you...how the climbing community works,
The climbing community works? No wonder standards are so low.
In reply to jl100:
Didn't bother to read the post, this answer is based solely on the Thread title:
No, definitely not, never, can't see a good reason period, what a ridiculous idea, etc etc...
Why does it always come down to money. We should stop equating things to a monetary value and start seeing things in a value to humanity again! Particularly us [relatively] affluent folk who can afford to do things like climb.
Didn't bother to read the post, this answer is based solely on the Thread title:
No, definitely not, never, can't see a good reason period, what a ridiculous idea, etc etc...
Why does it always come down to money. We should stop equating things to a monetary value and start seeing things in a value to humanity again! Particularly us [relatively] affluent folk who can afford to do things like climb.
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
I bet you did it for bugger all as well Mick. Such is your power of doing summit for nowt. What made me laugh is:
"Is it time for those who make the news and collate the information (the definitive guidebook writers) to get a cut? Perhaps 0.5p per unique hit for news stories could go to the star(s)?"
0.5p? is he extracting the urine? I want at least 0.7p FFS!
;0)
> (In reply to Michael Hood)
> [...]
>
> I really am off. Lamb, spuds, gravy and vege....
> [...]
>
> I really am off. Lamb, spuds, gravy and vege....
I bet you did it for bugger all as well Mick. Such is your power of doing summit for nowt. What made me laugh is:
"Is it time for those who make the news and collate the information (the definitive guidebook writers) to get a cut? Perhaps 0.5p per unique hit for news stories could go to the star(s)?"
0.5p? is he extracting the urine? I want at least 0.7p FFS!
;0)
In reply to jl100:
If you improve your grammar a career awaits at the Daily Express.
> Any thoughts?
If you improve your grammar a career awaits at the Daily Express.
In reply to jl100:
Some climbers who operate at the cutting edge do get sponsored. Some climb full time the majority don't, they have other jobs.
There's a lot of misunderstanding about what sponsorship is. Most 'sponsored' climbers do not get money to climb but have a gear allowance from a company.
They are given gear each year and in return they must fly the flag for that company by publicising their significant ascents. These ascents are sometimes reported in the climbing media both web (UKC) and print (Climb and Climber).
In these news reports, often the company who sponsors the climber is mentioned, we started this as standard about 4 years ago. Also if there are pictures of the ascent the companies gear and logo is often shown.
http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51265
Some climbing companies give the climber a photo incentive deal, a small amount of money if their gear/logo appears in the photos. The company will also expect feedback on the gear so that they can develop it.
The bottom line for the sponsored climber is for them to help the company market and sell gear.
Above the gear only sponsorship deal are various sponsor packages that may involve a financial retainer. As well as gear and perhaps a photo incentive the climber may get some money, in the UK this may range from around £500 to several thousands of pounds. For this the climber usually has to work several days a year for the company at trade shows, do shop visits, keep a climbing blog, go on photo shoots, maybe help with copy for websites and catalogues. If they are really lucky they may get an small allowance for climbing trips
I do not think there are any climbers in the UK who can earn a living by just climbing and sponsorship. If we you want to make a living as a professional climber you have to be talented, indispensable and have several ways of generating income by writing books, articles, making films, doing lecture tours, coaching and training, route setting a well as representing the climbing companies at trade shows, doing shop visits, attending gear seminars for retail staff etc
To the question: Does any media pay for news reports. No. They may pay for the photographs, that's it. The news reports are how the climber gets word out about their ascents because climbers are interested in cutting edge ascents. We are in contact with most of the UK's (and beyond) top climbers and we work with them to produce news reports.
News reports about ascents are just one part of the news at UKC. We report on many other topics that w think maybe of interest to climbers, for example conditions reports like the one on the news page today.
http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51507
Top 40 posters threads, top photograph threads are autogenerated, once set up by Nick they don't really cost anything.
An online media like UKC is different than a print media. First we have far more space for content and we are accessible all the time by anyone. We not only report news, publish articles, gear reviews etc but we provide space for photographs, have a logbook for which people can log their ascents and have a forum where people can express themselves.
How is UKC funded? You'll notice their is no cover charge like there is for a magazine, but like a magazine, advertising is our main source of revenue and we pride ourselves on providing an exceptional service for climbing and outdoor companies.
http://ads.ukclimbing.com/whyukc.html
How many people work for UKC on a weekly basis...around six/seven people..about four full time jobs.
I hope this helps.
Mick
Some climbers who operate at the cutting edge do get sponsored. Some climb full time the majority don't, they have other jobs.
There's a lot of misunderstanding about what sponsorship is. Most 'sponsored' climbers do not get money to climb but have a gear allowance from a company.
They are given gear each year and in return they must fly the flag for that company by publicising their significant ascents. These ascents are sometimes reported in the climbing media both web (UKC) and print (Climb and Climber).
In these news reports, often the company who sponsors the climber is mentioned, we started this as standard about 4 years ago. Also if there are pictures of the ascent the companies gear and logo is often shown.
http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51265
Some climbing companies give the climber a photo incentive deal, a small amount of money if their gear/logo appears in the photos. The company will also expect feedback on the gear so that they can develop it.
The bottom line for the sponsored climber is for them to help the company market and sell gear.
Above the gear only sponsorship deal are various sponsor packages that may involve a financial retainer. As well as gear and perhaps a photo incentive the climber may get some money, in the UK this may range from around £500 to several thousands of pounds. For this the climber usually has to work several days a year for the company at trade shows, do shop visits, keep a climbing blog, go on photo shoots, maybe help with copy for websites and catalogues. If they are really lucky they may get an small allowance for climbing trips
I do not think there are any climbers in the UK who can earn a living by just climbing and sponsorship. If we you want to make a living as a professional climber you have to be talented, indispensable and have several ways of generating income by writing books, articles, making films, doing lecture tours, coaching and training, route setting a well as representing the climbing companies at trade shows, doing shop visits, attending gear seminars for retail staff etc
To the question: Does any media pay for news reports. No. They may pay for the photographs, that's it. The news reports are how the climber gets word out about their ascents because climbers are interested in cutting edge ascents. We are in contact with most of the UK's (and beyond) top climbers and we work with them to produce news reports.
News reports about ascents are just one part of the news at UKC. We report on many other topics that w think maybe of interest to climbers, for example conditions reports like the one on the news page today.
http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=51507
Top 40 posters threads, top photograph threads are autogenerated, once set up by Nick they don't really cost anything.
An online media like UKC is different than a print media. First we have far more space for content and we are accessible all the time by anyone. We not only report news, publish articles, gear reviews etc but we provide space for photographs, have a logbook for which people can log their ascents and have a forum where people can express themselves.
How is UKC funded? You'll notice their is no cover charge like there is for a magazine, but like a magazine, advertising is our main source of revenue and we pride ourselves on providing an exceptional service for climbing and outdoor companies.
http://ads.ukclimbing.com/whyukc.html
How many people work for UKC on a weekly basis...around six/seven people..about four full time jobs.
I hope this helps.
Mick
In reply to toad:
While I'd agree that there's much that's good about them, I'd really like to see an efficient tracking system (not just the RSS feed) for monitoring replies to threads you've participated in and have that take you to the first unread reply.
Not sure about the hunting and eating bit, but agreeing that some things are just not necessary!
> (In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com) For the record, compared with practically any other forum I've used, the UKC ones are far and away easier to use, even if they don't have the (usually unnecessary) features of others.
While I'd agree that there's much that's good about them, I'd really like to see an efficient tracking system (not just the RSS feed) for monitoring replies to threads you've participated in and have that take you to the first unread reply.
> PS If you ever introduce Avatars and signatures, I will hunt you down and eat you. Really.
Not sure about the hunting and eating bit, but agreeing that some things are just not necessary!
In reply to jl100:
It's a free website to begin with. This doesn't mean that they are "ranking in the money". I'll assume that they have trouble getting paid/finding funding to run the site.
As a monopoly on climbing media its much easier and quicker to get out new route/ascents/repeats on the web that over on paper media. I know magazine like Climber and Climb do a good job reporting on everything, but they are limited in what they can produce. Doesn't it always feel like your reading something in Climber/Climbing that you read on the net about a week ago? Seeing as sponsored climbers have to get themselves in the media spot light to stay sponsored, such a website as this is an excellent venue for them.
As for Top climbers moaning about not getting enough money. Well I'd personallt love to devote my life to climbing hook, line and sinker. I can't because I can't afford it. I spend all my spare time climbing or training or repairing, cleaning my gear and then holding down a job as well. I get out and climb as much as I can and get away on trips when I can afford it. The top climbers who are still making money are the ones still doing ascents, still pushing the boundries of this lifestyle (or sport). There still have the passion and drive there to do what is nessessary. Look at Andy Kirkpartick. He's got some amazing ascents under his belt, but spends his time writing, working with gear companies to develop and test products, lecturing, being in climbing films. He's promoting himself constantly in the climbing media, but what was the last hard ascent he did? Stevie Haston on the other hand has whined and complained about not getting any money from climbing, but what does he do. He pulles off a hard ascent, but doesn't promote himself. (Rant over)
IT nerds presenting information? Jack Geldard doesn't exactly strike me as your typical IT technition. He is clearly pretty good with a computer as well as all the team that run ukc, but Jack is also one of the countries top climbers. He's going out there, he's climbing, he's prompting himself. So yeah he might just be a IT nerd sticking some facts on the net, but I'll be he's had to do a hell of alot of work to get those facts.
This isn't a spiteful retort to your argument. It just seems that you arguements are based on lack of thought rather than sound reasoning. I think UKC is great (apart from the b*tching, but even thats usually just funny). It's good quick access to loads of climbing information, it's free, and it's a place to discuss every aspect of climbing.
It's a free website to begin with. This doesn't mean that they are "ranking in the money". I'll assume that they have trouble getting paid/finding funding to run the site.
As a monopoly on climbing media its much easier and quicker to get out new route/ascents/repeats on the web that over on paper media. I know magazine like Climber and Climb do a good job reporting on everything, but they are limited in what they can produce. Doesn't it always feel like your reading something in Climber/Climbing that you read on the net about a week ago? Seeing as sponsored climbers have to get themselves in the media spot light to stay sponsored, such a website as this is an excellent venue for them.
As for Top climbers moaning about not getting enough money. Well I'd personallt love to devote my life to climbing hook, line and sinker. I can't because I can't afford it. I spend all my spare time climbing or training or repairing, cleaning my gear and then holding down a job as well. I get out and climb as much as I can and get away on trips when I can afford it. The top climbers who are still making money are the ones still doing ascents, still pushing the boundries of this lifestyle (or sport). There still have the passion and drive there to do what is nessessary. Look at Andy Kirkpartick. He's got some amazing ascents under his belt, but spends his time writing, working with gear companies to develop and test products, lecturing, being in climbing films. He's promoting himself constantly in the climbing media, but what was the last hard ascent he did? Stevie Haston on the other hand has whined and complained about not getting any money from climbing, but what does he do. He pulles off a hard ascent, but doesn't promote himself. (Rant over)
IT nerds presenting information? Jack Geldard doesn't exactly strike me as your typical IT technition. He is clearly pretty good with a computer as well as all the team that run ukc, but Jack is also one of the countries top climbers. He's going out there, he's climbing, he's prompting himself. So yeah he might just be a IT nerd sticking some facts on the net, but I'll be he's had to do a hell of alot of work to get those facts.
This isn't a spiteful retort to your argument. It just seems that you arguements are based on lack of thought rather than sound reasoning. I think UKC is great (apart from the b*tching, but even thats usually just funny). It's good quick access to loads of climbing information, it's free, and it's a place to discuss every aspect of climbing.
In reply to mlmatt:
It's been and is hard work and has taken some time, but I wouldn't say trouble as we provide a great service and have the best 'reach' of all the climbing/mountaineering media in the UK.
We have a fantastic team and a great readership.
> (In reply to joe larner)
>
> I'll assume that they have trouble getting paid/finding funding to run the site.
>
> I'll assume that they have trouble getting paid/finding funding to run the site.
It's been and is hard work and has taken some time, but I wouldn't say trouble as we provide a great service and have the best 'reach' of all the climbing/mountaineering media in the UK.
We have a fantastic team and a great readership.
In reply to petestack:
Amen. I started a thread about that recently and didn't get much support. That you have to 'manually' hunt for replies (to you) is a bit behind the curve.
> (In reply to toad)
> [...]
>
> While I'd agree that there's much that's good about them, I'd really like to see an efficient tracking system (not just the RSS feed) for monitoring replies to threads you've participated in and have that take you to the first unread reply.
> [...]
>
> While I'd agree that there's much that's good about them, I'd really like to see an efficient tracking system (not just the RSS feed) for monitoring replies to threads you've participated in and have that take you to the first unread reply.
Amen. I started a thread about that recently and didn't get much support. That you have to 'manually' hunt for replies (to you) is a bit behind the curve.
In reply to jonny2vests:
That's something I'd like too. Another forum I use has a clever way of linking to things or people that you're talking about, through specific tags added after the title of the thing or person. It would be cool to have that as a way of linking to the logbook page for a particular route, or when mentioning a particular poster so they can join in a discussion that others think is pertinent to them. It all takes resources, though.
That's something I'd like too. Another forum I use has a clever way of linking to things or people that you're talking about, through specific tags added after the title of the thing or person. It would be cool to have that as a way of linking to the logbook page for a particular route, or when mentioning a particular poster so they can join in a discussion that others think is pertinent to them. It all takes resources, though.
In reply to James Oswald:
Supply and demand. Their rate card is hardly a closely guarded secret: http://ads.ukclimbing.com/ratecard.html (For lots of gumph about UKC advertising click on the 'advertising on UKC' link on the left of the page)
As to which companies support UKC, that is fairly easy to guess from how often you see the banner ads. Which are very good value by the way. Does that get us a discount next year Mick?
> TO Mick Ryan:
> Would you be able to explain to all us UKC users (especially and including me as I'm interested) just how the UKC forums are funded?
> Would you be able to explain to all us UKC users (especially and including me as I'm interested) just how the UKC forums are funded?
Supply and demand. Their rate card is hardly a closely guarded secret: http://ads.ukclimbing.com/ratecard.html (For lots of gumph about UKC advertising click on the 'advertising on UKC' link on the left of the page)
As to which companies support UKC, that is fairly easy to guess from how often you see the banner ads. Which are very good value by the way. Does that get us a discount next year Mick?
In reply to Tall Clare:
Yeah, although I am a bit surprised Nick Smith wrote it / maintains it from scratch when free open source software has been around for quite a while.
> (In reply to jonny2vests)
>
> It all takes resources, though.
>
> It all takes resources, though.
Yeah, although I am a bit surprised Nick Smith wrote it / maintains it from scratch when free open source software has been around for quite a while.
In reply to jonny2vests:
Sometimes it's just nicer to work on your own and know exactly what's there.
> Yeah, although I am a bit surprised Nick Smith wrote it / maintains it from scratch when free open source software has been around for quite a while.
Sometimes it's just nicer to work on your own and know exactly what's there.
In reply to jonny2vests:
Ours is far better.
And yes, there will be improvements, as always.
> (In reply to Tall Clare)
> [...]
>
> Yeah, although I am a bit surprised Nick Smith wrote it / maintains it from scratch when free open source software has been around for quite a while.
> [...]
>
> Yeah, although I am a bit surprised Nick Smith wrote it / maintains it from scratch when free open source software has been around for quite a while.
Ours is far better.
And yes, there will be improvements, as always.
In reply to petestack:
I can understand that too, being in a similar position.
> (In reply to jonny2vests)
> [...]
>
> Sometimes it's just nicer to work on your own and know exactly what's there.
> [...]
>
> Sometimes it's just nicer to work on your own and know exactly what's there.
I can understand that too, being in a similar position.
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Hi Mick
Great description of the climbing business halfway down.
As a occasional contributor to the site, I have essentially 'given' UKC content, although I prefer to see it as 'exchange' content for links from articles.
When my Slate Photo article went online I saw a 500%+ increase in site traffic, something that print media just can't replicate.
Great description of the climbing business halfway down.
As a occasional contributor to the site, I have essentially 'given' UKC content, although I prefer to see it as 'exchange' content for links from articles.
When my Slate Photo article went online I saw a 500%+ increase in site traffic, something that print media just can't replicate.
In reply to jl100:
At the end of the day if you are climbing hard enough to be featured on UKC news then that is raising your profile and free publicity. I see that as a positive for the featured climber/s.
At the end of the day if you are climbing hard enough to be featured on UKC news then that is raising your profile and free publicity. I see that as a positive for the featured climber/s.
In reply to jonny2vests: I'm fairly sure there was not an open source solution back in the day when UKC took over from the old email subscription newsgroups, And i havent seen any open source solutions as streamlined as UKC for handling such a massive amount of information in a way thats easy to navigate and give so little emphasis to the advertisements that you can quickly check the new or forums without been force fed patagucci's new gear or big freds new climbing wall (see outdoorsmagic and associated group sites, 27 different advertisers on the same forum page!)
If you could point me in the direction of such open source soloutions it would be much appreciated
If you could point me in the direction of such open source soloutions it would be much appreciated
In reply to antwan: I looked at this the other day and just tjhought it was a bit incomprehemnsivble, but now it looks as if the OP is suggestingnb that people in the news should get paid for being in the news.
That would mean 0.5p or whatever for Tony Blair every time he was on telly or in the newspaper. There is no reason why climbers should be any different. It was in fact a very odd thing to say. I haven't read the entire thread due to its tedium but feel obliged to point this out.
That would mean 0.5p or whatever for Tony Blair every time he was on telly or in the newspaper. There is no reason why climbers should be any different. It was in fact a very odd thing to say. I haven't read the entire thread due to its tedium but feel obliged to point this out.
In reply to jl100:
What a load of shit!! IMHO
> As UKC/Rockfax is making alot of money from their monopoly on climbing media basically just for being IT nerds and presenting news/information. Is it time for those who make the news and collate the information (the definitive guidebook writers) to get a cut? Perhaps 0.5p per unique hit for news stories could go to the star(s)? Many top climbers moan about not getting enough money (Haston and Simpson for example). Think what would be possible if they had more... Salathe ledge to ledge? or many other amzaing climbs in foreign countries. This would be far better than having a 40 biggest losers list posted every week surely? or another rockfax guidebook covering an already well-covered aread. Obviously such a system would be open to byass but if UKC sided with certain climbers theres enough other hit-starved others out there to report on them so there would be no overall loss in information. Any thoughts?
> I realise that UKC/Rockfax members dont all have filipino maids and huge yahts put relative to the amount of money in climbing they must be raking alot in.
> I realise that UKC/Rockfax members dont all have filipino maids and huge yahts put relative to the amount of money in climbing they must be raking alot in.
What a load of shit!! IMHO
In reply to Richard Baynes:
I only saw this after I posted, am same youth! in fact im goin to stop wasting my time typ...........
> (In reply to antwan) "I haven't read the entire thread due to its tedium but feel obliged to point this out."
I only saw this after I posted, am same youth! in fact im goin to stop wasting my time typ...........
In reply to Simon Lyons:
Ieveryoneelse'sHO too
> (In reply to joe larner)
> [...]
>
> What a load of shit!! IMHO
> [...]
>
> What a load of shit!! IMHO
Ieveryoneelse'sHO too
In reply to Simon Lyons:
I'm sure Joe was originally sincere, but like many in retrospect he will claim that it was a troll as he realises what a silly idea his original post was.
However, that's by the by, and what usually happens in these cases, some constructive discussion does occur.
I'm sure Joe was originally sincere, but like many in retrospect he will claim that it was a troll as he realises what a silly idea his original post was.
However, that's by the by, and what usually happens in these cases, some constructive discussion does occur.
In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
It would be nice to hear what he's got to say on the matter. Come on Joe, n point being shy now.
> (In reply to Rhythm24)
>
> I'm sure Joe was originally sincere, but like many in retrospect he will claim that it was a troll as he realises what a silly idea his original post was.
>
> I'm sure Joe was originally sincere, but like many in retrospect he will claim that it was a troll as he realises what a silly idea his original post was.
It would be nice to hear what he's got to say on the matter. Come on Joe, n point being shy now.
In reply to jl100:
I think it's worth remembering that we're lucky we even have a site as good as this and an established framework that is efficient and supportive of communicating news effectively. I sometimes feel the general public at times is too concerned with expecting to get some sort of financial benefit from corporations/organisations/comapanies. UKC could, if it wanted to, turn around and make us all pay for their hardwork through user subscription... and it's damned nice of them that they haven't.
I think it's worth remembering that we're lucky we even have a site as good as this and an established framework that is efficient and supportive of communicating news effectively. I sometimes feel the general public at times is too concerned with expecting to get some sort of financial benefit from corporations/organisations/comapanies. UKC could, if it wanted to, turn around and make us all pay for their hardwork through user subscription... and it's damned nice of them that they haven't.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...