Ad-blockers, subscriptions and money? ATS is worth $2 million and makes $466,920 a year

ATS has established measures against members using ad-blocking software and is considering a subscription system. It has also taken donations for months. People have expressed their desire to financially support ATS, but many want to see how the website is operating first. The members of ATS have yet to see a transparent answer detailing ATS' financial information, and while i don't expect the staff to go out of their way in publishing that, it would go a long way in helping people make a decision. Because as it stands, a cursory search shows that abovetopsecret.com is worth $2.1 million and has the potential to make $466,920 per year. These figures aren't 100% accurate, but they give us a ballpark estimate.

We don't know how much money The Above Network is earning and spending. We don't know the extent to which ad-blockers and other situations are hurting The Above Network's income. What we do know is that according to some sources, the website is doing okay.

Without any information, we don't know into which areas our money will be going. While Skeptic Overlord has elaborated on The Above Network's existing problems and financial troubles, i urge him to create a thread dedicated to a discussion on that matter. That way, more members will have a clearer understanding of the situation.

well yes, but greed is a corollary of snip

a reply to: daaskapital

the " worth " of a website is some fantasy number pulled out of someonse arse [ IMHO ]

If this is removed than that is the beginning to a conspiracy! Or if locked. Good find. I do not believe I have ad blocker and if I do it's really crummy at blocking ads...

a reply to: daaskapital

Is it really any of our business how much money the site makes ?..... I can tell you as a person who has ran a few businesses that as soon as the employees get an inkling of how much money the boss makes they start to make demands of their own, lets just say it complicates things....in my opinion the employee has no rights to be privy to such information....in our case here on ats i guess we are clients of the business ...still that does not give us rights to dictate to the business how where and when money gets spent or for that matter how the business is run.....

a reply to: daaskapital

i guess this thread is as good a place as any to regurgitate my opinion from an earlier closed thread :

you know what disturbs me in this issue ?

the vagueness

we are offered serveral chouces from one dollar to 10 dollars [ USD ]

and asked which would we pay to get " add free " ATS

the problem in my mind is if $1 USD will covver the loss of add revenue

where is the suplemental $9 USD [ if the 10$ per month is accepted and paid by members ] going to go

and of course if $1 USD will not cover the loss in adds revenue - why is it even offered ?

i dont really care - i managed for over 40 years with no ATS - i am sure that i shall cope if it implodes

i allready said i wont pay - but will acept the adds [ at current level ]

but if we end up with any sort of multi tier ATS with paying glitterati having more rights / priveleges than free peons - then my banning will probally seal the matter shortly

thats what bugs me - it smelt like a fishing expedition to see what ATS members would pay - NOT a proposal to replace the actual add revenue with an identical subscription

spot the difference ?

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: daaskapital

the " worth " of a website is some fantasy number pulled out of someonse arse [ IMHO ]

It's an estimate based on multiple factors. It's also likely that the numbers aren't entirely accurate. They say so themselves.

Despite this, i think it shows the average ballpark ATS is playing in, and it doesn't appear to be in dire need of assistance.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

in my opinion the employee has no rights to be privy to such information....in our case here on ats i guess we are clients of the business ...still that does not give us rights to dictate to the business how where and when money gets spent or for that matter how the business is run.....

The difference here is that the 'clients' are the ones supplying all of the content ... without any remuneration!

If the powers to be drive away the clients .... then the whole thing falls in a heap.

I agree with the OP that some accountability is due to all of the 'clients' since they drive the entire site.

P

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: daaskapital

i guess this thread is as good a place as any to regurgitate my opinion from an earlier closed thread :

you know what disturbs me in this issue ?

the vagueness

we are offered serveral chouces from one dollar to 10 dollars [ USD ]

and asked which would we pay to get " add free " ATS

the problem in my mind is if $1 USD will covver the loss of add revenue

where is the suplemental $9 USD [ if the 10$ per month is accepted and paid by members ] going to go

and of course if $1 USD will not cover the loss in adds revenue - why is it even offered ?

i dont really care - i managed for over 40 years with no ATS - i am sure that i shall cope if it implodes

i allready said i wont pay - but will acept the adds [ at current level ]

but if we end up with any sort of multi tier ATS with paying glitterati having more rights / priveleges than free peons - then my banning will probally seal the matter shortly

thats what bugs me - it smelt like a fishing expedition to see what ATS members would pay - NOT a proposal to replace the actual add revenue with an identical subscription

spot the difference ?

I agree with your assessment there.

It's why a main focus of this thread is urging Skeptic Overlord to provide more clarity on the entire situation.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: daaskapital

Is it really any of our business how much money the site makes ?.....

It is if they're asking us to support them financially.

If i am to give money to ATS, i want to know where it is going. If ATS needs the money to make a healthy income and to improve itself, i don't want it to be spent on a gimmick like NLBS or a partnership with a third party. If ATS wants my trust, it has to show me where they are putting the money.

Even if we don't end up giving them money for an 'ad free' version of ATS, some transparency is always good.

I can tell you as a person who has ran a few businesses that as soon as the employees get an inkling of how much money the boss makes they start to make demands of their own, lets just say it complicates things....in my opinion the employee has no rights to be privy to such information....in our case here on ats i guess we are clients of the business ...still that does not give us rights to dictate to the business how where and when money gets spent or for that matter how the business is run.....

As i said, i don't expect them to publish financial details. Some clarity would be nice though.

a reply to: pheonix358

The customer is always right and i agree us members are the heart and soul of the operation....

We also have the right to pick and choose where we spend our time and our money.....personally i will not pay a subscription, and further i believe that with one ats would not get any new clients so would need to survive on what members we have now....

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

People would leave. Or at the very least they said they would. Well. This could be the downfall. What a shame.

a reply to: daaskapital

If i am to give money to ATS, i want to know where it is going. If ATS needs the money to make a healthy income and to improve itself, i don't want it to be spent on a gimmick like NLBS or a partnership with a third party. If ATS wants my trust, it has to show me where they are putting the money.

Fair call, it is possible they are sinking money into places they shouldn't....me personally i will not be paying a subscription, if the business model is failing and needs its members to support it as far as i am concerned the business is not viable ....next thing you know they will be printing bills and fudging the books

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

We're not exactly paid employees of this business (however, our user-generated content keeps it going.)

But we are being asked to support it in various ways whether through donation, ad revenue, and the possibility of membership fee. At this point, yeah, transparency would be helpful as there are many of us willing to help out with more information.

Your analogy could use some refining.

Having said all that, I do appreciate SkepticO's open discussion about it. He certainly didn't need to tell us, the members, anything!

originally posted by: Tiamat384
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

People would leave. Or at the very least they said they would. Well. This could be the downfall. What a shame.

I too would be sad to see it go, but hey life is about change and its not healthy to obsess over an internet site ....

a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

I would consider us investors if we pay. As investors we want to make informed choices.

a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

pobody's nerfect

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

It isnt but I have come to greatly enjoy it and the people. Ultimately it would be the people I'd miss.

Anyway, all these threads are just going to get re-directed to Skeptic's discussion. I don't know why they keep popping up.

Be real. ATS is bending over backwards trying to give us what we want, all while trying to fund it, run it, and make a living at the same time. Us transients are not the heart and soul of this website. There are people who actually work, while we just log in and off at our leasure.

Support your communities, or watch them rot.