Originally posted by David Tebb6000 subs at $30.00 = $180,000 (£100k) gross turnover. Leaving aside advertising.
There aren't really 200,000 players on the site! If we go off the statistics given in the player tables, there are just under 17,000 active players on the site (players who have moved in the last 100 days). That figure excludes players with provisional ratings. I would guess that there are about 1000 of those. So about 18,000 active players in total.
Of those, I reckon about 1/3 are subscribers.
Takeaway, VAT. Credit card handling fees. Rent of servers, Advertising etc.
6 years hard graft, building up a great brand and always improving the site.
Russ obviously does this for love more than money.
Originally posted by invigorateIts even less than that. Don't forget that the renewal fee never changes after you subscribe. So someone who has been here for a few years is only paying whatever they paid initially, and not the current $30.00.
6000 subs at $30.00 = $180,000 (£100k) gross turnover. Leaving aside advertising.
Takeaway, VAT. Credit card handling fees. Rent of servers, Advertising etc.
6 years hard graft, building up a great brand and always improving the site.
Russ obviously does this for love more than money.
I think the Idea makes a great deal of sense in some ways. However, there are those of us who cannot afford to subscribe and removing the vacation setting will make it difficult to complete games, especially given that vacations are scheduled far in advance. I hope that you will consider allowing all players to use the vaction setting to facilitate ease of use.
Thanks,
bla1089
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveIt wasn't just the postal service which made Correspondence Chess slow.
Put it like this - I wouldn't wait 5 weeks for someone to move in a game I started at 1 day timeout.[n/a timebank] Obviously, it's different if you are playing 100 games or can just start another to take the place of the deserted game.
Just because it's called correspondence chess doesn't mean it's compulsory to play at a snails pace. The rea ...[text shortened]... r to 14". If you mean games, I don't want to play that many games - 6 is the max anyway.
The normal time control was 10 moves in 30 days, but time saved was carried forward. So, for example, if you'd spent 20 days making your first 19 moves, you could spend 40 days on your 20th with exceeding your time limit.
And that's before taking holidays into account.
Nor does it take account that in many tournaments you had to exceed the time-control twice before you lost.
Originally posted by DoctorDaraThose with stars without the 'wings' are people who have only once paid. I believe this was back then optional (there wasn't a restriction on the number of games you can play at the same time?). This still holds, so they do not have to pay the fee annually. They are life time members. But they still do get advertisements op their screens. Annual paying members do not.
Really? Out of curiosity what did it used to be?
Originally posted by RussWhat month has 36 days?
You can have more than 3 days a month booked off. 3 days is just used to calculate the annual vacation allowance. (36 days, but you could book them all over one month if you really wanted to.)
The clock is always ticking - it doesn't stop just because you are away. Therefore, you must move in all games which would otherwise be timed before your 'vacation' ...[text shortened]... timeout' clock will then be reset for each game ready for a return to normal play.
-Russ
Originally posted by bosintangYour suggestion 2 is a great idea! Even better, simply have an autoflag option on the challenge settings. The non-subs can chose autoflag games.
Maybe two possible updates in the distant future if this vacation upgrade works out?
1) Have two different vacation flags. One "official", one "non-official"
2) Allow users to choose the option of ignoring timeout immunity when making a game challenge
This seems very obvious to me and will save us from 'Only accept if you are not going on vacation' game descriptions in the open invites screen.
Also, the minority (like me) who think vacation flags are silly can play autoflag games and 1 day N/A games will still be fast games.
This is not an improvement, it's forcing a philosophy on everybody. Why not let people opt out? If you are going on vacation don't accept the autoflag challenges - everybody's happy then. But that wouldn't be nearly as dramatic.
Originally posted by SpacetimeThis would be the obvious way to suit everyone.
Your suggestion 2 is a great idea! Even better, simply have an autoflag option on the challenge settings. The non-subs can chose autoflag games.
This seems very obvious to me and will save us from 'Only accept if you are not going on vacation' game descriptions in the open invites screen.
Also, the minority (like me) who think vacation flags are si ...[text shortened]... he autoflag challenges - everybody's happy then. But that wouldn't be nearly as dramatic.
I agree.
I can imagin that many good willing people are victims of the idea of abuse of the vacationflag and the need for protection of those but....the abusers will not be punished cause 36 days is a long time, long time...
When I will see that someone with a vacationflag moves in other games except in mine then I WILL take movetimeouts when that keep being possible, wheter the vacationflag is up or not. The same I do to people who behave arrogant to me.
Originally posted by IthrowwithClocksI thought someone would have said by now; you do know that you won't be able to do that soon don't you?
When I will see that someone with a vacationflag moves in other games except in mine then I WILL take movetimeouts when that keep being possible, wheter the vacationflag is up or not. The same I do to people who behave arrogant to me.
In 4 days time.