Will you all be paying for Mumsnet Premium?

[WorraLiberty]

I'm not sure yet but I'll probably pay for a month and then see what other features they bring in.

Thread by Justine incase you haven't seen it

YABU = No

YANBU = Yes, I might give it a try

Sorry, haven't RTFT.

I probably will subscribe because I can afford it.
I would have been much happier to subscribe to an inclusive, not exclusive system but enjoy MN. That's nothing to do with MNHQ and everything to do with posters.

I think MN are profiteering during the CV crisis and I despise them for it.
Suddenly they can produce features that have been asked for for years. They kept saying "We're working on that".

Like hell they were.

Because they know that many disenfranchised people rely on them, particularly in a crisis, they've asked for more money.
Not just during a downturn in advertising but for ever.

You money-grubbing tossers, MNHQ.

And that's the first time I've ever used the word "tossers".
Knew I was saving it for something special.

No. I cannot justify the expense. I think MN should follow the Guardian model and ask for contributions rather than a subscription fee.

@Justmuddlingalong

Would premium members be able to open the thread they try to open? Or would random, often sponsored threads, still open instead?

Just started RTFT.

And this really rang a bell.

In my experience, MN has got slower and more "glitchy" recently. In preparation for announcing "Premium MN"?
And yes! Clicking on a link is much more likely to bring up "by mistake" an MN sponsored link.

I asked about this on a "Site-stuff" thread as did others. No decent reply.

Sorry - clicking on a "post" or "thread", not "link".

That Disney ad at the top of the page opens with the greatest of ease, even if you’re convinced you didn’t touch it. I even started a thread about how annoying it was.

How interesting.

No. I don't want any business to go under and hope no one will lose their jobs but I actually don't think mumsnet adds anything positive to my life, I just waste time here so won't be paying.

Not at the moment. I've lost ALL my incone for at least the next couple of months.

I am suspicious by nature, but consider Justine may have got a few influencers on here to say 'well I'm paying it' because human nature means others will read that and be more likely to pay. Not necessarily all those saying they'll pay, but I don't trust it. I can't see why anyone would pay. I can see why it would mark the beginning of the end of Mumsnet, but there are and will be free alternatives.

No, mainly because if you have to pay, the site won't be so diverse.

Also will the main sections mn is known for suddenly be able to pressure mn into setting their own rules.

If you, god forbid, is banned and have paid for a full year, is that just your own fault/loss.

No I won't be signing up. I know of a few local charities that are struggling so will be supporting those instead with any cash I can spare.

Not at the moment. It’s not a good site technically speaking. It’s very basic and so glitchy - they can’t even sort out basic things like unbookmarking a post. Surely some of that huge monthly salary cost is tech support. For £50 I’d want a better user experience. If it was £20 I probably would though so I suspect some of it is about the price point.

Follow the guardian model and ask for contributions
if we look at Mumsnet in terms of the guardian model than the posters would be the journalists because as has been said we are the ones that provide the content.
Does the guardian ask for contributions from its journalists?

I don’t know? Does it ask them to pay £5 a month for the privilege of writing for them?!

Yep agree AppleKatie

And UY

Does anyone know. Has mumsnet got shareholders? If this forum is about helping people surely it would be best as a not for profit organisation. Would feel uncomfortable about paying for a site where the owners/ shareholders make money off the back of people's problems.

I thibk paying would divide and rule by letting the Queen Bees take over.

Even if it’s true that 200 people signed up when MNHQ emailed, that’s a drop in the ocean. Seems pretty clear that the vast majority wouldn’t even dream of paying. And who knows what the truth is, or whether these people acted without thinking and will cancel?

I’ve been wondering for the last year or more whether MN has had its day. It’s been fraught with issues... the hacking, data breaches, poor functionality and moderation. Maybe they should have quit while ahead and sold the business so it could be properly revamped and brought up to date- both technically and in its ethos. I feel it’s a striking case of a business growing exponentially but mistakenly thinking huge growth Is the same thing as success, which of course it isn’t.

I agree with another poster that what i like about mumsnet is the large number of posters which means you get a range of people giving a range of responses.

I would be hesitant to pay if that then meant the replies were less diverse, and the reach became smaller. So id be paying for a service that is less interesting to me than the current one

Some other forums for example in the first 24 hours only paid users can reply or unpaid user can only post so much in 24 hours. That means new threads receive an onslaught of replies from a specific subset of users that probably isnt representative of the whole group. Eg. A post about money, is going to initially be posted on by people who can afford a subscription

I tend to lurk around the non parenting bits so think if more of the site goes under a pay wall then chat functions, pet bits, health bits will end up reverting to specific forums.

I think things like due date groups will go more quickly to Facebook groups which will be a shame to all those who benefit from reading others posts

Are there any other forums that ask people to pay for the privilege of posting and providing content for them? I can't think of them. And we shouldn't have to pay for an edit button either. Jeez I remember the heady days of posting on Digital Spy 15 years ago - they had an edit function back then.

MN clearly isn't equivalent to the Guardian or other sites that provide journalistic content (for free or for a price). It's a much more limited version of FB or Insta where the posters are the product.

The team seem to have gotten carried away with the webchats and assume people will pay for that. I've never listened to one of those in my life. I'm not starting now.

user1471590586

Does anyone know. Has mumsnet got shareholders? If this forum is about helping people surely it would be best as a not for profit organisation. Would feel uncomfortable about paying for a site where the owners/ shareholders make money off the back of people's problems.

It's a good point.
Threads and posts and posters* get removed due to "not being in the spirit". I've always assumed that's the spirit of MN.

The above idea outlined would seem to me very, very much not in the spirit.
Of common decency, if not of MN, in present circumstances.

*Not me, I hasten to add; this isn't a grudgey post. My dealings with MN have always been friendly and polite.
Right up until the reply I sent to the email generated by Justine.

12 software developers?

Where does this come from? I've seen 100 employees quoted but not a breakdown which states "12 software developers".

That said, for a very high traffic site with back end systems, multimedia content, subject to frequent external attacks and a load of technical debt I can believe that. Its the last two which cost the time and effort. I would guess also its cost them a lot to migrate to cloud considering that tech debt.

Are there any other forums that ask people to pay for the privilege of posting and providing content for them?

A great many have premium options and most of them only give minor perks such as badges, coins etc. People know they are paying to support the site.

I am quite aware that I am the product on a free site, I don't delude myself that my sporadic posts are worth a fiver a month.

A genuinely woman centred site is still quite unusual and I think it would be a loss. That said, its become more like the comments column of the DM with AIBU dominating the site and then there are the security issues which are a big issue for me.

So probably not, I think a donation model might have been a lot better from a PR point of view.

No I can’t think of a site that makes you pay to post your own content.

This muddied water between making a hefty profit and pretending to be a public service (even worse than to table top business trope they push out) is so crass it’s not funny.

Probably for the best this email hasn’t landed here.

Nope. I don't think it's good enough to pay £5 a month for. I'm using the app at the moment and it feels very dated / basic. I wouldn't pay and would be tempted to move over to another forum.

If this forum is about helping people
This forum is about helping people, and the people that own the forum make a profit because we the users give our time and energy for free to help each other.
The people who own the platform do not own the users, without the user's the platform is nothing, a ghost town.