More Bandwidth and Revenue Needed

This forum is for site announcements. Please go here to read the SITE & FORUM RULES.

Postby Pwolf » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:16 pm

hmm this might be a good idea and encourage some to download (and give us dev people something to work on >.>) but maybe set up a priority system where donating members get bandwidth priority over those who don't. cap the bandwidth for non donators and thus encourages people to donate. i don't know how to implement it though.


Pwolf

ps: yea, i'm a leecher also. i'll probably donate sooner then i was expecting (<i>trying</i> to get a job so i can afford it) but i think i can spare a few $$ for the cause :P
ImageImage
ImageImage
Like the AMV .Org App? Think about donating to help me make it better.
User avatar
Pwolf
Friendly Neighborhood Pwaffle
 
Joined: 03 May 2001
Location: Some where in California, I forgot :\

Postby BasharOfTheAges » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:34 pm

I second the idea for a Priority Queue for downloading where donating members get higher priority than non-donating one. Bandwidth caps are also a good idea. The content is available either way, so caps are more arguably related to bandwidth useage.
User avatar
BasharOfTheAges
Just zis guy, you know?
 
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: Merrimack, NH
Status: Extreeeeeeeeeme

Postby godix » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:36 pm

I'd support Zarx idea of capping download speed. That isn't saying 'pay money to get the vids' it's saying 'pay money to get the vids QUICKLY'. The videos are still avalable to anyone but donation would have it's benefits.

Another possability to help lower demand is to place more focus of direct/indirect links. Perhaps a brief message on the upload screen explaining why, if possible, it would be better to do an indirect/direct link instead of local. You could even specifically point out one advantage if is the creator ever decides they no longer want the file avalable then they have the control do stop distributing it which local does not allow.

As far as increasing donation rate, this post alone might help. As a non-donator myself I know I've quickly gotten to the point where 'oh, it's ALWAYS asking for money. They aren't in real need, this is just their standard form' so increasing the number of donation pages I have to click through doesn't really increase the odds I'll donate since I've long since mentally blocked them. Now that I've read this topic and realize there's a more immediate need than usual I'll be sending in a donation shortly. Chances are I'm not the only one but we'll have to see.
Image
User avatar
godix
a disturbed member
 
Joined: 03 Aug 2002

Postby Kusoyaro » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:45 pm

godix wrote: place more focus of direct/indirect links. Perhaps a brief message on the upload screen explaining why, if possible, it would be better to do an indirect/direct link instead of local. You could even specifically point out one advantage if is the creator ever decides they no longer want the file avalable then they have the control do stop distributing it which local does not allow.


I don't think the aim here is to discourage people from using the server.
I have no idea how to use this new forum.
User avatar
Kusoyaro
LEGENDARY!!!
 
Joined: 16 Jan 2001
Location: HOT FUCKING

Postby kitsunebeolnet » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:51 pm

This was intended to be a joke, but the more I thought about it, the better it sounded...

How about actually 'selling' banners? $1 buys you a 'point' or 'vote' toward your banner. $90 completely buys your banner. Of course, banners would still be subject to acceptance rules for appropriate content.
members could 'bank' points toward a banner until they choose to use their points BEFORE a vote is taken. They would get a 'XX' yes vote head start unless they had the required 90 points to automatically 'sell' their banner. Once the points are designated toward a banner, they are used. Period.

Pro - It avoids the stigma of 'selling' AMVs.

The biggest drawback (of several, I admit) is that those who already donate might be inclined to divert their funds toward such a program.

This isn't intended to solve all money woes, but with the ego-game of banner acceptance, may be worth persuing.
User avatar
kitsunebeolnet
Wants Extra Stuff By Name
 
Joined: 07 Aug 2002
Location: Columbus, OH Oyaji in training

Postby anneke » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:54 pm

I always thought the site was to be a LIST / DATABASE of all AMVs created. Not the location to get all the AMVs out there. I wouldn't mind/care if a-m-v.org stopped offering downloads of AMVs, as long as the database/listing is still around.

As for generating funds... (Well I have no plans to donate now or in the future...as to why...I rather not get into that.) However limiting the non-donators downloads would be a great incentitive to get donations. Limit thier bandwidth, limit the number of videos they can download a month or a day or whatever. Maybe make it so that only donators can download on all days, while non-donators only can download on even days or just weekends or between specific hours...etc...

I think looking into people's download habits may help to determine a way to generate more donations. I do alot of searchs (as I'm looking to see if an idea I have has been done or not), but I rarely download videos. Limiting my bandwidth or how many videos I could download would not bother me much, and thus not likely to get me to donate. The only reason I've considered to donate is to make those annoying requests for donations to go away when I'm doing my searchs.

Limiting Downloads to payed donators should be done. I think you would have the support of the AMV community in doing so. Non-donators would still be able to get videos that are directly or indirectly linked. Which then puts more bandwidth on AMV creators who have videos hosted off of a-m-v.org. Those creators would then want to urge people to donate as well, to reduce the bandwidth they are getting hit with.

To get people to donate you have to have something they want to pay for. If your giving them the AMVs for free, they are not likely to pay for them. Why pay for something when you can get it for free?

Anneke
http://www.bakadeshiproductions.com
(Stop by for a different Video each month...)
User avatar
anneke
 
Joined: 06 Apr 2001
Location: California

Postby Phade » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:56 pm

Hey,

godix wrote:Another possability to help lower demand is to place more focus of direct/indirect links. Perhaps a brief message on the upload screen explaining why, if possible, it would be better to do an indirect/direct link instead of local. You could even specifically point out one advantage if is the creator ever decides they no longer want the file avalable then they have the control do stop distributing it which local does not allow.

If someone is willing to pay $5 to $10 a month ($60-$120/year) hosting their own videos and deal with bandwidth caps and ISPs kicking out their content due to overuse and such, why not donate that to the Org instead and have none of those problems?

The things with the number of members we have here, our costs are actually really low. If we got $10 from each person who downloaded a local video within the last 24 hours, we would have enough to run this site for an entire year, literally, with enough leftovers to get a new quad dual core server. This is the kind of low cost per member the site has. We just need to somehow get a few lazy members to help somehow each month.

Phade.
User avatar
Phade
Site Admin
 
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Location: Little cabin in the woods...

Postby Kusoyaro » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:57 pm

kitsunebeolnet wrote:How about actually 'selling' banners?


Selling banners for the most part wouldn't be any better than selling AMVs, since most people are using copyrighted images in their banners.
I have no idea how to use this new forum.
User avatar
Kusoyaro
LEGENDARY!!!
 
Joined: 16 Jan 2001
Location: HOT FUCKING

Postby SuperFusion » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:59 pm

The whole thing about limit non-donators to 20kbs download speed, the 56k'ers won't be affected so something else like limiting downloads sounds like a good idea(like others have sugessted).
SuperFusion
 
Joined: 11 Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL

Postby kitsunebeolnet » Fri Sep 09, 2005 3:59 pm

Kusoyaro wrote:
kitsunebeolnet wrote:How about actually 'selling' banners?


Selling banners for the most part wouldn't be any better than selling AMVs, since most people are using copyrighted images in their banners.


I stand corrected...lets stick to the concept of selling 'points' then.
User avatar
kitsunebeolnet
Wants Extra Stuff By Name
 
Joined: 07 Aug 2002
Location: Columbus, OH Oyaji in training

Postby Phade » Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:00 pm

Hey,

anneke wrote:(Well I have no plans to donate now or in the future...as to why...I rather not get into that.)

But that is the core of the problem. We need to find out why non-donators are not donating. We can only guess so much. Trying different methods to read peoples minds is just more guesswork and can backfire if done wrong.

Phade.
User avatar
Phade
Site Admin
 
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Location: Little cabin in the woods...

Postby kitsunebeolnet » Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:06 pm

BTW - I'd give $5 to get that 'Wants extra stuff by name' changed to my preferred tag of 'Oyaji in training'. :D

$15 to pick a new user name. :D :D
User avatar
kitsunebeolnet
Wants Extra Stuff By Name
 
Joined: 07 Aug 2002
Location: Columbus, OH Oyaji in training

Postby Pwolf » Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:07 pm

i think limiting what was first intended to be a free serves to those who donate is paying for videos, which i think is the wrong way to do this... i think limiting bandwidth is a great idea. but again, there is no way in telling if that will help any considering not everyone can download fast enough for the cap to take effect. but that would effect those with faster connections like myself.

you could use a queue system where there are only so many slots open for members to download at a time and thus forces members who don't donate to wait in line to download.


Pwolf
ImageImage
ImageImage
Like the AMV .Org App? Think about donating to help me make it better.
User avatar
Pwolf
Friendly Neighborhood Pwaffle
 
Joined: 03 May 2001
Location: Some where in California, I forgot :\

Postby SuperFusion » Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:08 pm

I wannab e able to edit information that becomes locked and be able to edit my posts. I remember someone saying that we weren't allowed to edit our posts is because we might flame someone then change edit our posts to make it seem like we did nothing wrong, tell a mod or something, and get people in trouble for making it look like they're flaming him/her for no reason.
SuperFusion
 
Joined: 11 Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL

Postby x_rex30 » Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:12 pm

Phade wrote:Hey,

anneke wrote:(Well I have no plans to donate now or in the future...as to why...I rather not get into that.)

But that is the core of the problem. We need to find out why non-donators are not donating. We can only guess so much. Trying different methods to read peoples minds is just more guesswork and can backfire if done wrong.

Phade.
This is a reason a lot of people are not donating that already want to. It's there not educated on how easy it is and/or they don't trust using the internet to transfer money. I've told some people about some good deals for DVDs, etc online and I sometimes get responses like, "I don't have a credit card", or "I don't trust making purchases over the internet". Try to make it seem like it's simple to donate, and you'll trick all kinds of people into donating, IMO.
User avatar
x_rex30
 
Joined: 10 Apr 2001

PreviousNext

Return to Site Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest