I have nothing to say.
I looked at your pics before I formed my reply to your post.
Sorry.
Its a tricky one I guess.
We too know people that have the FREE accounts but from what I gather, this is because this is how they signed up originally. There is probably a legal reason that these people cannot be charged if they joined under a 'free membership' agreement.
Have got to say that our membership is due to run out soon and we're seriously going to have to consider whether we pay the higher price or switch sites. We prefer SH and having used a couple of others, this is by far the easiest and friendliest to use.
The improvements recently have been fantastic and show that the powers that be have listened to their customer and reacted accordingly. Well done to all involved.
Did think once, after reading few posts about inactive/low frequency users on site that perhaps a 'loyalty scheme' would be a nice idea. Those that use the site most and make it the success it is, should get discounted rates? Perhaps link it in with log on's, shrep feedback, forum posts etc etc.
Just an idea
We'll be sorry to have to leave but times as they are , gotta watch the pennies and if someone is doing similar for free or cheaper, its going to get a look in we're afraid.
x
Ok ok should I just hide my pictures for the night? I feel like one of those women that only gets her tits spoke to ... :grin:
But thank you essex & dirty xxxx
I think its the nature of success, capitalism etc. those in at the start reap the benefits. check out any thriving business or industry and the same set of things apply.
sometimes the idea of a share out works, fat bankers may forego their bonuses, set up charities etc.
but i think most of the old members would just stop using the site if they had to pay.
but i think its an example of how the internet seems to promise a lot but somehow just makes you pay for your own beliefs.
It's a really nice thought but I dont think that the powers that be in SH Towers woudl consider it at all.
Asking for a contribution from the free members would mean a loss of many of those members and there are a lot of them!! Fewer members mean that they couldnt advertise that they have over a million which drags in more gullible people. The fact that sooooo many of those million members have inactive profiles counts for nothing.
They should consider that lots of paying members are becoming a little bitter about the pay increases (together with lack of services each time the site is down). Would it be better to loose the people who pay to renew every year or the people who get it free??
We would be classed as a free member, but we pay for extras at the moment, and have in the past paid for a second profile just so that we could both chat in the chat room.
At the end of the day the new site owners agreed to never charge the original site members, and so if this was part of the contract of sale they are tied to it, and only by gaining the permission of all the "free members" would this be able to be changed. As you said the numbers of free members would not really have any effect on the site fees – and would probably in effect only knock a pound off if that.
What would have an effect on the pricing would be suitably discrete advertising, charging people for advertising commercial events. Maybe some efficiency savings need to be made – losing some of the sites lesser used functions and further advances in the sites features – fixing the searches so they actually work and aren’t clogged with defunct unused profiles.
Perhaps adding a feature which I believe was considered but never added was allowing couples to log in separately but using the same profile would have a positive effect on the site. It could also possibly be better then that shrek rubbish for proving that couples are genuine. It would enable both to chat at the same time and be able to cam together without it costing them the price of two logins - something which scares some people off, not just having to pay double!
One other thing that would help is scrapping this multi-room rubbish which just allows cam voyeurs to clog up rooms stopping people from chatting and grouping together to talk ad arrange meets. Localised rooms or rooms for specific meet types etc are often full of people sat there not chatting but viewing and wanking over the cams. This would happen on any sex site, but its worse on here recently as they can sit in as many rooms as they want to have access to extra cams. It is partially responsible for people leaving as you cant really chat properly anymore.
maybe there are better free dedicated swingers sites out there but i'd like to think that the thing that still sets this site aside from the others are the socials but as someone pointed out in another thread these are now advertised on the other sites and on things like facebook twitter and msn.
Does it not seem strange to people that if there are 1.5 million members and they were all charged £2 a month that’s £3million a month over 12 months = £36million. Back in December 2005 there were only 345000 members. Assuming that they are all still active which I doubt we would need to take £8,280,000 meaning there would still be an approximate total of £27million made from fees at £2 a month…now charging all the odd full paying members paying £70 a year should make approximately £77million a year. That should more then cover the 10 full time members of staff plus the 2 full time people took on to work the chat rooms wages (even if they picked up a million a year each) and the £80,000 worth of new dell equipment madmax told us about in the other thread and have a cool profit on top.
The fact is there is no-where near that amount of active members, but all that memory space is being clogged up by defunct profiles, pictures upon pictures that are no longer valid for the original purpose of the site... SWINGING! Maybe the unused profiles should come off the membership figures after being inactive for two months so we can all see exactly how many people are on here?
The fact is the profiles wont be deleted and nor will the pictures, which means extra hardware needed to store and hold them all. The reason being is that this is where the majority of the sites revenue probably comes from. This site has not been a swinger’s site for a long time now. It’s an amalgamation of porn, adult fun, and voyeurism. There are more people on this site that want to use it for wanking over pictures, videos and live cams in the chat rooms then there are genuine swingers.
The claims that we have designated coders and designers for the site don’t really wash... if you go on the symbios site the have a project called faces which from the screenshot on there looks like a very, very similar user interface to here - so either the money claimed to have been spent on redesigning this site shouldn't have been because its cloned from the faces, or perhaps some of the revenue from there should be taken to pay our coders wages as they've done all the work for that site too lol.
I’ve no idea what the solution is but perhaps its about time the site owners should place a mandatory questionnaire on everyone’s profile which they have to complete when they login otherwise they cant access the site. This could be used to ascertain what features are used, how much people would be willing to pay, which features are most popular, most flawed and need to be improved so that any money spent can be directed where its needed most…
Two-4, I agree with most of what you have said there and there is no straight answer I agree, but SH really do need to sit up and listen to its members, paying or free...
xxxxx 
hwoar: :phwoar: :phwoar:
