I thought either Ben or Ran mentioned they were going to commission long essays on Golf Architecture. They are not cheap - particularly if they come from the talented writers in this industry that they are sure to target - I collect some income as a writer and it can pay fairly well. A longer research essay would be quite expensive relative to the contributions.

I would assume that this income from advertising is slated for that purpose. I always thought - through Ran's previous yearly update - that the contributions have for the most part paid for the sites operation and changes. I could be wrong, but that was my interpretation.

It’s still all up to you on how or whether you want to contribute or participate.

I've donated generously to charities in GCA's/Ran's name for causes far more important than this site . . . if operating costs are an issue let's have a $100 USD annual membership fee.  

Your charitable donations in the name of GCA, Ran or anybody else is irrelevant to this discussion, but thanks for telling us.  Having a mandatory membership fee will likely drive many members away.

$150,000 USD to cover the site and offset the costs of travel/play, etc. for our moderators should surfice.

Why do you want the site members to reimburse the moderators for their travel and play?  Not only is this a foolish notion, but it is highly unlikely that it was ever considered.  If you want to start a site that operates on the model you propose, do so.  If not, decide to stay or go.  

I'm ambivalent as to whether those who run the site actually make a profit but the critical question is from what source comes the revenue?

It is Ran's site.  It is his decision, like it or not.

I can't help but think the ads are the beginning of the end for GCA.com.

The ads are of no interest to me whatsoever.  I fail to see how they can inspire such fear in you.  You appear to have little faith in Ran or the other members of the site.


I'll send Ran a check for $500 USD if the ads are removed (permanently) and ask that 100 other members match my offer.

It's putting my money where my mouth is to preserve the integrity of GCA.com.

Send in the money if you want to, but don't make it conditional on the behavior of others.  That is more troublesome than the ads at the top of the page.  If you feel yours is a more vested interest, you'll want a greater say in how things are run and we'll be in for more conditions and more beratements.  Better that you keep your conditions and your money.

Quote from: JKBlasberg on January 27, 2008, 12:04:45 PM

Quote

What if the site remains uncompromised?
Shouldn't we give Ran and co. some credit?

Quote

I'm taking another approach-I'm clicking on  the ads each time I open the site so Ran and co. gets paid.
regards,
Jeff

 

I guess this message from the contributions page no longer applies..

"GolfClubAtlas.com continues to run commercial-free for the calendar year 2008 thanks in part to the annual voluntary contributions this year of the following people or organizations.."

Jason, we all have our limits of what we personally will tolerate according to our own beliefs and sensibilities.  Your bright line apparently is commercialism on this site.  Mine might be politicism (not to be confused with the occasional off topic political debate)  Others, would abhore my willingness to have the occasional O.T. political food fight break out.  We all must enforce our personal standards, as it should be.

FWIW, I agree with Wayne above about your offer to buy out Ran's decision.  That would lead to the highest bidder getting his way on content and administration, which to my mind is highly elitist and exclusionary by the factor of wealth.  We have plenty of people on this site that don't have that kind of "editorial-content-administration purchasing power".  Should they; either accept a factor of charity and be allowed to continue posting their ideas on GCA and let the wealthier run the site preferences by their $$$?  Or, should they slink off because they can't match the kind of $$$ more wealthy participants are willing to put out and demand Ran do what they say?  

Jason, your's seems to be a bright line you are entitled to draw, and you run the risk of now having to stick with your ultimatum.  Whose loss in the end would that be if you choose wrong, and leave over a seemingly innocuous issue?  

The links to ads are so non-intrusive I can't believe anyone cares.

And it is Ran's site.

 I dinked around the links and found a new "Dear" friend at an ad for Trump National in LA.

From experience with another similar site.. these ads don't bring much dough in.  With the current traffic I'd estimate $15-20 a day.

If the ads bring in $15-20 a day, that works out to ~$5000 a year. This site shouldn't cost more than $2500 a year in hosting and software costs - if Ran is paying more than that per year, he's getting ripped off.

My only concern is that this is now, technically, a commercial site.

I hope that doesn't lead to any restrictions on posting certain kinds of materials, although I'd guess the site wouldn't be liable for user-generated content.

Quote from: Michael Christensen on January 27, 2008, 02:27:20 PM

I just booked an August tee time at TOC.....for less than walk-up....these ads are great!

Are you serious about this?  If so, do you mind sharing the link?

Regarding the ad bar at the top, I never even noticed it until this thread.  

John Mayhugh:

Thanks for mentioning that you hadn't noticed the ad bar prior to this thread...  When I started reading this thread, I thought, 'Ads?  What are they talking about?  Then, a duh...'  

It's hard for me to even refer to those links as ads.  Since I didn't notice them, I have no idea when they appeared, but whenever it was, it certainly hasn't changed the content.

I just went to the contribution tab...  I didn't really count the listed contributors, but it looks like +/- 70.  Shame on me for not being one of them, but I will rectify that this week.

This is a GREAT site and whatever Ran needs to do to keep it going is fine with me.

Jason Blasberg
Guest

I see he deleted his account.. I guess he was dead set against the ads.

really too bad about JKB......I hope he re-appears....I still owe him some wine on his next GA trip!

my TOC comment was of course a joke.....I don't think any deal could be had from these ads...click on at your own risk...

If Ran's objective is to break even on running the site then I think this is a very sad day.  It more or less means that the members are not properly supporting Ran with financial contributions.  

However, if Ran is looking to make money, then more power to him.  I don't like to see the ads, but business is business.

Ciao