Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Paying for Mumsnet

14 replies

BIWI · 28/05/2017 18:20

There have been eleventy billion threads (only a slight exaggeration) about the advertising on MN becoming more and more intrusive. And calls, inevitably, for it to stop.

We all KNOW - we're not stupid - that MN is a free-so-use site, so needs to take advertising to keep going.

However, lots of us on the various threads have also said that we'd be prepared to pay for an ad-free version of the site.

So you'd run two sites - one with advertising, which is free, and one which costs [x amount] per month/year.

Have you actually tried running your figures and working out how much revenue you'd get from people who are prepared to pay, and different scenarios, e.g. If x% pay y amount, we'll achieve x revenue?

Because it feels every time this issue is raised that you just pat us on the head and tell us that you're 'looking into it'

YetAnotherHelenMumsnet · 29/05/2017 16:57

We're looking into it.

Actually, we're not sure if this would come under TSSDNCOP or not, but promise to flag to the higher ups and get back to you when they tell us what's what.

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 09:12

Hi there,
Thanks for the comments - very interesting and useful to hear people's thoughts on this. In answer to BIWI's question, yes, a two version model, ad-free subscription model is something in our thoughts - we are currently scoping out the development requirement.

In general, over the next few years Mumsnet is likely to move to fewer display advertising formats as advertisers embrace more native solutions which they've already started to do (eg content, insight, direct engagement).

Added to that we are currently reviewing our display ad mix and the viewability of ads (how long they are on the page for), which is something advertisers really care about. The upshot will be that we'll be disallowing some annoying formats but that the ads are likely to be on screen for slightly longer when you scroll for instance - much like the Guardian does here. That should take place in the next few weeks.

Overall our aim is to reduce our reliance on display advertising over the next 3-5 years with a larger share of income coming from e-commerce and potentially subscription.

Will take a look at Reddit's Gold system - thanks for the pointer.

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 10:18

@peaceout

Subscribe to mumsnet?? Actually pay a fee to read all this gobshite, stream of consciousness asinine bullshit Hahahaha Good luck with that

Go on, say what you mean, Peaceout. Don't hold back Grin

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 10:35

@BigDeskBob

Wouldn't it be like paying to see the btl comments in a newspaper?

The times has subscription to pay for journalist, other newspapers use advertising. What unique content are mumsnet offering?

An ad free version of Mumsnet is the unique content. I doubt we'd ever force subscription however - we've always been of the view that it would be wrong to exclude someone desperate for advice if they couldn't afford to pay for it.

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 13:02

@Saucery

I do think the content is worth subscription. I just don't want to risk any rl info being accessed. Even when deregistered the Insight stuff is still there and never deleted despite repeated requests. I don't think member security is taken as seriously as it should be. Be sad not to use the site when subscription brought in, but hey ho.

Hi Saucery - not quite sure what you mean by Insight stuff never deleted - could you explain?

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 13:28

@Saucery

Do you think MNhQ will address problems with intrusive ads that make a site slow and unusable? I don't. You'll be politely pointed towards the ad free, Extra Areas version of MN for a fee.

It might come as a surprise how much accountable MN will have to be towards its paying customers. Racism and disablism left up? Reports about dodgy stuff overnight left to volunteers? Might have to smarten up the moderation.

Well it's always a balancing act but, as said, we are working right now on improving the ad situation and I can guarantee we'll be losing some of the more intrusive formats over the next few weeks and months

We are also looking at buying an outsourced solution to improve site speed.

I don't want to over promise and under deliver (!) but I think over the next few weeks and months, the user experience wrt to ads and speed will improve considerably for all users, no subscription required

There's always going to be some dispute about some of our moderation calls as we do try to err on the side of free speech where possible and not everyone's in agreement with that policy I know. But we do have an excellent, paid team of moderators and some very clear guidance on what we'll tolerate. Obviously we're not perfect, there are grey areas which emerge all the time and we will make some mistakes but in general - and this is born out by research - our moderation is very highly rated versus other forums.

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 13:30

@MiaowTheCat

I wouldn't pay. I don't think a lot of the demographic who don't have much money and don't parent according to the MN list of righteousness would be likely to pay to be told how shite they're doing.

Miaow - totally understand that - but I have to say your response does beg the question of why you come, never mind pay for MN!

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 13:33

@peaceout

An ad free version of Mumsnet is the unique content

Content provided for free by those who post on the site, you want to sell something which is provided for free by the community, you think we would pay you for the work that we do

Yes much of that content is indeed kindly provided for free. But obviously there is a lot of cost involved in hosting, moderating, securing user generated content as well as producing non-user content.

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 13:34

@MiaowTheCat

Someone's got to remind the world there's life beyond Waitrose!

Haha - Lidl is one of MN's biggest advertisers! (Don't think Waitrose ever have... possibly feel they don't need to Grin)

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 13:36

@BertieBotts

Actually, that Guardian one isn't so bad. I was bracing myself for one of those annoying overhanging things but the fact it does scroll up as you scroll down makes it okay for me. I don't want

A lot of sites do ad-free subscription vs free, ad-supported versions and do it well.

Doing it badly, IMO, is repeated, intrusive requests to subscribe, poor management of ads on the ad supported version (the ads should not be too intrusive or annoying, slow down the site or contain dodgy content), anything which attempts to shame users using an adblocker (this makes me use the adblocker to block the warning, or stop using the site entirely.) Sites which use a subscription/donation model well tend to have a small nicely fitting in button or text-only note saying that an ad free version is available and to click for more information.

I've linked to it before but if you do want to work with users who currently use adblockers, here's the most popular adblock's guide to getting your site's ads automatically whitelisted. adblockplus.org/acceptable-ads

Lastly although Patreon isn't really appropriate in this case it could be that you look at popular Patreon subscriber benefits and perhaps take some ideas from there WRT extra benefits for subscribers.

I don't think mumsnet should ever abandon its free to use concept, and I don't think this is being suggested, just an optional extra for those who are interested.

Thanks for that Bertie, very useful - we'll look at all those.

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 13:54

@NameThatPrune

I have posted this on another thread, sorry to repeat.. but I recently noticed that the MN logo is now on packets endorsing DC ice creams, (which gave me a wierd sensation of my online life popping up IRL Grin)

Anyway while you are about HQ, is product endorsement another revenue generator that will enable you to tackle advertising bother/ improve the user experience? (I missed it if you've already been talking about it somewhere on here).

I'm also nosily interested to know what HQ's criteria for the 'MN rated' product endorsement is (...does a MNer have to have posted about it?) and what the limits are to what the MN endorsement can be applied to.

Yes has been for a quite a while now - we have a panel of 10,000 odd testers (who get free stuff!) and products that get high approval ratings can license a badge for physical use. You can sign up here

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 14:17

@Saucery

Justine, when I was on the Insight Panel as well as a poster I continued to get emails from the former despite repeated requests after the hacking to remove all my details, every last one of them, from your databases. They are probably still sending them, but the Yahoo address I had is no longer in use. I know they are separate pools of info but from a security point of view not being able to delete them at your end doesn't fill me with confidence that a bank account or PayPal details would be safe with MN.

The moderation is ok here. Overstretched, I'd say, but for the most part they get it right. Paying customers are going to want it to be perfect though (well, some of them!) so I can see workload going up when staff have to deal with complaints.
The Night Watch is inadequate for a paid service.

Hi Saucery,
Will certainly check out the insight panel stuff and get back to you (will you mail partnerships@mumsnet with the email address in question?) - We do have strict rules on the data we hold - who has access and when it is deleted.
I'm not sure I agree the nightwatch is inadequate - very few if any complaints of late - obviously they'll miss things now and then but humans do. Plus a subs version of MN would be likely to be an offer around no ads and extra features (not extra moderation).

JustineMumsnet · 31/05/2017 14:17

@AudacityJones

I would pay for an ad-free version. I actually do use an ad-blocker at the moment so miss most of the ads, but I spend time on MN and find it useful so would be happy to contribute to its running and upkeep.

To the posters saying we generate the content - sure we do but surely you also realise MN pays for servers and hosting and moderators and such right? Think of how difficult it would be to recreate the community (as flawed as it is) if MN disappeared?

Thanks Audacity - good to know.

JustineMumsnet · 20/06/2017 07:35

Yes it's a fair point CoteDAzur. That said, our annual wage bill is close to £4.5m and, call us old fashioned, but we do like to have money in the bank to pay the staff in case of catastrophe (it's a zombie plan of sorts). But the point about intrusive ads/ alternative models to support MN is well made and something we are very much thinking on. We've already removed the T-bar ad on mobile (the one that goes across the top and the side) and we won't be having it back.

One of our problems is that a lot of our display advertising is served by third parties and stray code sometimes slips in which makes ads render wrongly and seem more intrusive than they're meant to be.

Longer term we are reviewing several options including subscription for for a premium model but we'd be very unlikely to put the access to MN forums behind a premium model as we do believe it should be free to use as a point of principle.

Thanks for the input, as ever, and promise to keep you all posted.

@CoteDAzur

Justine - re "Yes much of that content is indeed kindly provided for free. But obviously there is a lot of cost involved in hosting, moderating, securing user generated content as well as producing non-user content."

As at year-end 2016, Mumsnet Limited has almost £3 million in cash, with a net worth of almost £4 million.

Do you really REALLY have to have so many obtrusive ads? Sure money is cool, we all like it. But still... It is possible to aim for a middle ground where you can make money without pissing off your users who also happen to be your content providers.

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates

End of posts

There are no more MNHQ posts on this thread