What would you pay per-month for an Ad-Free ATS?

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Sad thread. I may have missed it, only read a couple pages, but if this is decided upon then will the people who don't pay, yet have enough posts to not see ads now, still be ad-free or will they be bombarded with ads? Does this change that policy? I've vowed never to subscribe to an internet site, have thought it's going against the entire freedom of the net concept. So will I now have to fight the ads which I've escaped by having enough posts? And don't people posting here create the attraction which draws in the lurkers who must endure the ads, only now to be tossed back in that pool? Will go cry in my beer now.

originally posted by: SpongeBeard
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

$1 and $2 are too low. $5 is approaching the price of Netflix. Not sure what I'd price it at, but I'm really glad to see this discussion happening.

WRONG, $2 is too high, we don't use that much bandwidth viewing forums text. Amazon Prime is $100 a year ($8.33 a month), you can listen or watch all Prime content you want commercial FREE, plus you get free 2day shipping on Prime products.
Ad free version of ATS should be $12 a YEAR or less. That is more than they make from a single user in a year from that user viewing Ads.

So to sum up, ads are evil. Enforcing the rules everyone agreed to is awful. A pay section is horrible.

So how exactly is the site supposed to get paid for? It's not as cheap as people claim.

a reply to: Aleister

And don't people posting here create the attraction which draws in the lurkers

Fantastic point! ATS is what it is BECAUSE of the users. To begin charging them (albeit for ad-removal) is somewhat disrespectful.

originally posted by: EvillerBob

originally posted by: DupontDeux

Really...?
5$/month MAY make it worthwhile?

Such is the worth of the average ad loading member? That is not bad at all! Congratulations on that - that is just a couple of bucks shy of what Netlix needs to turn a healthy profit in spite of insane bandwidth usage and licencing fees. And their shares just SOARED.

You guys should go public!

Except EVERY user of Netflix is paying that. If you assume that only 1 in every 1000 ATS members might pay a subscription, that $5 has to cover the costs of the other 999 freeloaders (of which I am a proud flagbearer) as well.

I swear, ATS has one of the least economically literate userbases of any website I've ever visited. Mind you, I've never been to mumsnet which would probably be a serious contender.

No, if 1 in every 1000 ATS members pay a subscription that 5$ that has to cover the ad revenue that they otherwise would have generated. The 999 remaining 'basic' members would still see the ads that the 'premium' members pay not to see. The ad revenue generated by those members would be untouched.

Thus the premium members just have to cover the cost of lost ad revenue - the revenue that they would otherwise have generated. Which seems to be around 5$/month.

I am not sure why you assume that the 'basic' members suddenly would generate less revenue.


On a side note: Of course SO would expect the potential subscribers to be heavy users and above average revenue generators and has set the amount accordingly (but heavy users might also be those most likely to use ad-blockers, mind you), but still it is a pretty impressive amount, and SO should feel damned pleased with himself about that.

I hope he does!

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Happy to pay a subscription fee. But can we bring points and chat back ? Haveing chat alone will be well worth it IMHO.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
So to sum up, ads are evil. Enforcing the rules everyone agreed to is awful. A pay section is horrible.

So how exactly is the site supposed to get paid for? It's not as cheap as people claim.

How about opening up the books, show the members where all the forums Ad revenue is really going. ATS is paying people to make youtube videos, ATS is renting expensive studio in NYC. If the forums Ad revenue would only be used to cover forums hosting cost, ATS would always have enough money to pay the bills.

Interesting how some people think making a subscription based option will help weed out the "riff raff", as if riff raff types don't also have money. Lmao.

As for me? Not big on the idea of forum(s) existing for subscribed members only. Perhaps some other incentive? Whatever happens though, I am honestly unsure if I would be willing to pay or not.

a reply to: Echo007

You are comparing apples to oranges.

Amazon sells stuff and makes a great profit, so they can afford to offer their premium service at a reasonable price. What if Amazon offered their prime music/videos for free, but you had to look at/listen to commercials when watching/listening to their content? Do you think some would choose that over having to pay for no commercial interruptions?

ATS doesn't sell any product and makes no profit, so what it makes in ad revenue goes right into the maintenance of the site. At least SO is willing to give you a choice.

Don't block the ads (and view the site for FREE), or pay to not have to look at the ads. It would be your choice. Either way, some kind of revenue is necessary.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: introvert

As far as I know donations went towards better server usage.

And aside from the hiccup of the DDOS attack a couple of months ago the servers seem to be fairing well against attacks.

Fair enough.

That being the case, I'd still like to know more about how the money is being spent before I reach in to my own pockets.

Were the loans repaid?

Are people still donating?

Was/is there a surplus beyond the cost of the loan? If so, what is that being used for?

Will simply forcing people to disable ad-blockers to use the site organically increase ad revenue?

Many, many questions need addressed.

originally posted by: CIAGypsy
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I'll say it AGAIN...in case you missed it 10 pages back....

I'd pay a monthly fee for the following services:

functional chat room
access to subscription-only forums
access to "chat meets" with various people (ATS and non-ATS 'celebs' alike)
no ads

ETA - by 'celebs' I mean well known people in the conspiracy theory world. Not necessarily Hollywood celebs (no use for most of those morons)

I'll second this...if a choice must be made.

Above Top Secret is a one-of-a-kind website that just does not exist anymore.
Today's quasi-versions are like facebook and twitter, where even a moderate sum of anonymity is simply impossible.

I would gladly pay $5 a month to see this site remain in place - as is - minus intrusive ads and pop ups.

It is my sincere hope that a good outcome is reached rather than seeing one of my favorite websites of all time, disappear.

And yes, this is just one person's opinion - my own... but I'll stand by it.

Best to all

I wouldn't pay anything, in my professional experience a website of this type does not cost much to host at all. 15-25$ a month on the low end, and perhaps 50 a month on the high end.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
So how exactly is the site supposed to get paid for? It's not as cheap as people claim.

Does anyone on the team own some fishnet stockings and a low sense of self esteem?

originally posted by: theySeeme
I wouldn't pay anything, in my professional experience a website of this type does not cost much to host at all. 15-25$ a month on the low end, and perhaps 50 a month on the high end.

Wow, I want an account with your hosts.

$50 per month? For the (almost certainly) private servers this place is probably running on?

Other forums I'm on have yearly subscriptions, usually starting at $25.
I wonder though how much good feelings are generated towards products who's add that take over your whole page when your cursor sits on them for more than a second..gives me a negative feeling rather than I want to buy that, am I alone in this? How effective is predatory advertising?

a reply to: EvillerBob

He had a pretty good breakdown of how he got to that number. Either ATS is getting ripped off or they're telling stories and just want to move to a paid model and then perhaps plan an exit.

originally posted by: theySeeme


Sure, I know this website is not doing more than 40 million hits per day.

40 million hits per day on a website like this could be hosted on a $10 VPS (virtual private server) with like 1gb of RAM (if running on linux/centos, which this website already is), at minimum on what's known as a LAMP stack (combination of server software). When properly configured using a database cache, page cache, and tuning - along with php-fpm (which most already use), resource usage is extremely low.

Considering the amount of connection errors per page load (there are 5 seperate errors on this website), and poorly written code, as well as load time we can assume that this website is using quite a bit of resources, in which case a dedicated server could be looked at. 4 TB of storage space, unlimited bandwith, 700 Gbps of DDoS protection (no one else can beat that), 32gb of RAM + any OS can be had for just 45-75$ a month in multiple data centers around the world.

I'd like to mention that this server would be OVERKILL for this website - wouldn't require more than 8gb of ram (or perhaps 4gb on DDR4).

I'd also like to point out that this website doesn't even use an SSL certificate, so really - what expenses are costing the mods so much to keep this online? Let's be honest and transparent here.
I examine and build infrastructures far bigger than this on a monthly basis, trust me you can take my word for it.

EDIT: If Skeptic or some other site admin or moderator needs my assistance on running this entire website for under $20 a month guaranteed, I'll gladly sign a contract and help you guys get it set up and running, this way you can keep the site online for everyone.

originally posted by: yuppa

Ahem i submit into evidence exibit a....R.A.T.S forum. We already have a user forum that soem cannot access so whats the difference?

Skeptic THAT could be the pay spot for th e paid members and it wouldnt need tweaking or adding at all.

And how much money does that cost you to post in there?
Asking for people to pay $$$ to get special privileges and only those who pay get the privileges is completely wrong IMHO.
All of this chat on here is opinions and ATS will do what they like, they always do.

This is more than a slippery slope.

I'm not bothered about ads on ATS.

What I am bothered about though is paying to talk to people which is basically what we are doing.... talking! Talking is free... we are all blessed with that... mind you maybe tptb will start taxing what comes out of our mouth one day.

It's the same with 'dating' sites. Why should we have to pay to talk to someone? These sites popped up to scam singletons and there are a lot of fake profiles on those sites! Same with those other ones... like Adultfriendfinder for example. Facebook and Twitter are free to talk and so is email and skype!

And another thing.. I don't like to give out personal information which includes name, address, phone number, credit card details...

AT~S could basically become a Forum on facebook for free if the site owners actually wanted that.

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
I'm not bothered about ads on ATS.

What I am bothered about though is paying to talk to people which is basically what we are doing.... talking! Talking is free... we are all blessed with that... mind you maybe tptb will start taxing what comes out of our mouth one day.

It's the same with 'dating' sites. Why should we have to pay to talk to someone? These sites popped up to scam singletons and there are a lot of fake profiles on those sites! Same with those other ones... like Adultfriendfinder for example. Facebook and Twitter are free to talk and so is email and skype!

And another thing.. I don't like to give out personal information which includes name, address, phone number, credit card details...

AT~S could basically become a Forum on facebook for free if the site owners actually wanted that.

Thats what's so great here (and being completely missed over and over and over and over): it can still be free. You choose if you want to see ads, or if you would rather buy that space out so you don't have to see ads.

I am just not seeing how this effects anyone who doesn't want to pay to opt out of ads?