There's been a number of good ideas generated here for keeping RHP financially sound.
Also, it's obvious that quite a few people seem willing to donate time/money/brainpower/skills/spirit
to keeping this site running. it may be time to organize a serious effort to take advantage of this.
first things seems to be to find out who is willing to help out, and to what extent. Perhaps a mass
emailing to all RHPers, asking for them to respond if they are willing to help. Better yet would be a
web page where those who are willing to help could sign up and get on a mailing list of helpers.
There seems to be, at least in the forums, decent support for making this a pay site, and the most
quoted fee seems to be around $15.00. Perhaps an emailed poll to verify this, see what people are
willing to pay. The point is to try to maximize the amount of revenue, and getting 1000 people to
sign up for $9.95 is better than getting 600 people to sign up for $14.95.
As far as fees go, there is a possibility of a sliding scale:
Free. This is an introduction. 10 or 20 games total, then no more. And no more to THAT email
address, not just that nickname. IE keeps people from (easily) just signing back up under a new
nickname.
9.95 yearly. Unlimited games, only 10 active at a time. This is what RHP has for free now.
14.95 yearly. Unlimited games, unlimited play. That is what Pawnstars get now.
24.95 yearly (or something). Some added features. Things like:
1) the ability to have multiple nicknames under one log in. Since people here obviously have
multiple nicks, admit it and charge for it.
2) post game analysis, similar to nimble knight.
3) play against the computer. You say playing against Rival chess used to be quite popular, add
this back as a paid for feature. (especially since it takes quite a bit of server time). Add the many
chess engines available for free (crafty, gnuchess, etc)
4) other things folks think of.
Also, a chess coaching bulliten board/area.
Allow top players to sign up to coach/teach - where they get paid. RHP gets a percentage, say 10%
and administers the site.
Of course this gets into being a real business (ie what if someone demands their money back from
RHP because the chess "coach" maggoteer sucks at chess!). But I do know that quite a few people
are here because they want to learn to play chess. Why not encourage it, and make a few bucks at
the same time?
And so on....
Michael
Greetings:
Well, i read something about downsizing or expansion. What i would
like to see, is maybe a family account or something like that, were
you could have up to five accounts, pop access, e-mail chess, and real
time chess. maybe at a charge of about $50 a year; yes, i know i am
dreaming, but it is a nice dream. i am sick have playing in the likes of
kasparov, and yahoo, and then having to switch to play my e-mail
chess elsewhere. it would be good to have everything under one roof.
I play my improvisatore as myself, but i would like another account to
play my chessmaster 8000, or whatever other engines i plan to get in
the future.
I don't know what would be the best way to do things. if i had the
money, i know that i would buy the site!! another thing, if half of the
people that play here, actually became pawn stars, then maybe that
would help a little. it is a minimal charge after all. chessworld is now
charging £15 a year, kasparov for the champions club is $70 and
upwards a year. I really think that a $18 pawn star one off fee is very
reasonable!!
slan...
imp..
RHP should change a small fee, like the $9.95 you suggest each year,
to play rated games. Unrated play could be free.
The ICC charges about $50 a year for rated play with unrated play
free, and they are doing extremely well.
There are a lot of chess players here who would fork over $9.95 a year
to have their game rated. This would still be a bargin.
The weak and mentally infirm should be fined for their ineptitude. You should
have to pay for every game you lose. The charge should be five cents for every
point in the standings you dropped. For example; if you lost sixteen points in a
game, you would have to pay eighty cents. This would give some financial
incentive to improving the quality of your play, and would provide a deterrent to
letting your games time out. People who couldn't pay would have their fines
waived, but would have to have the dreaded "flaming dunce cap" symbol next to
their names (instead of a pawn star). Also, it would be acceptable (even
encouraged) to unmercifully abuse them in the forum. These rambling thoughts were
visited upon me in a dream of such solemnitude, that I believe they will provide
for the ultimate financial salvation of RHP...well, for at least a week anyway.
making losers pay would destroy this site.too many games would end
up who's got the best prog.we must look at the things that make this
site valuable and market them.there is a lot of trust on this site.it is
unique.it is more than just a bunch of chess players,it is a
community .it is a community under threat and we aint going down
without a fight.
lyn.