You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Can’t even write to the thread!
My music was switched off but nothing replaced it
How does this encourage new users? People are just going to leave immediately
There is also the problem of the occasional cookie pop up which refuses to pop down thus denying access. Meanwhile back on topic - ads are making this box jump about and typing very difficult. Whackasubmitbox
Interesting, I have never seen that outside of FB links. Have you thought of subscribing? It'll stop all that
At least if you are very board it gives the fullest game ever of find the cross to close the add (that doesn’t work)
Weirdly if you persevere beyond 2 minutes of absolute frustration most of the adds disappear.
Maybe there’s some new marketing science involved to winning new subscribers that I’m unaware of
Only took 15 minutes for the first prize
Have you thought of subscribing?
Yes but quickly dismissed
Thats kind of missing the point I’m making. At some point the original 100 die hard subscribers will be dead. I though most businesses try to encourage new customers?
New customers just get a wall of adds with no hope of getting to a forum
Posting a response is difficult as bloody videos pop up where your typing and obscure the submit button
My music was switched off but nothing replaced it
I appreciate this a very niche gripe, but I have real issues with my audible app that appears to be centred around the singletrack website. If I'm playing something through audible and look at the site it often turns it off. Even if I'm playing something on audible and the last site I looked at was STW and the phone screen is off and the phone is put down the audio is intermittently turned off. The solution is to close the browser windows that had STW in it or navigate to something else, then everything is fine again.
Android Google Pixel on the latest OS, using chrome. It's only STW that seems to do this and it does not seem to matter if I'm logged in (premium) or not.
But yes, like most local paper's websites (and ones like the independent) I can't imagine being able to use the site without premium membership. I occasionally see how the other half live when a work computer resets my cookies (and they don't have the sort of browser extensions we are not allowed to talk about) and it's not fun. I get it - people need paying (hence premium membership) - but there must come a point where the experience is so poor no one is seeing the ads to monetize the experience and it's counter productive. Regardless, making these thing financially viable is a job and conundrum I'm glad I don't have.
Even as subscriber that STW staff video in the middle of every thread is very annoying.
edit. Is it gone now? Great if it is so.
You can disable them. <br /><br />
May not autoplay but they're still there
Interesting, I have never seen that outside of FB links. Have you thought of subscribing? It’ll stop all that
The free forums are the shop window for subscriptions, why would anybody choose to pay when the free version is manifestly crap?
Makes it quite awkward to share links with non members.
There’s a report in the Guardian yesterday that Reach (behind local newspaper websites) is losing huge numbers of page hits due to poor digital reader experience. This site has been heading that way for a long while now.
https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2023/nov/08/reach-mirror-express-newspapers-publisher-cut-jobs
The free forums are the shop window for subscriptions, why would anybody choose to pay when the free version is manifestly crap?
Standard on most websites / forums / apps now. Make the free version basically usable but offer a paid-for version which is vastly more usable. chess.com is a good examples of that. When I was playing chess, I got so fed up of the limitations of the free version that I very quickly went to a subscription and got all the functionality and none of the crap.
Strava is another classic example and it's pretty much the default setting for dating sites - yes you can see all the profiles on the free version (in amongst the ads) but to actually message them, you need to pay.
Have you thought of subscribing?
😀 interesting sales technique
New user: oh, a cycling forum, this looks interesting.
content gets buried under several ads, random video starts playing, possibly the most irritating consent box pops up needing multiple clicks and scrolling if you want to disable some/all of it
Here, take my money!
Said no one, ever....
As convert said (audible issues aside as I've no idea about those) so many news and other websites have this issue.
I can't speak for how it looks here as I'm a subscriber but I think it has to be a real challenge for any online media outlet to balance advert vs. subscriber revenue and free and paying user experiences. With so much free content out there as well to compete with. You can't cut the ads if you don't have the subs base, you've got a small bit of screen real estate and a lot of need.
Trying to watch YouTube without a sub has become unbearable so it's not just online "print" that's got these challenges.
We've all got used to having a lot for free.
why would anybody choose to pay when the free version is manifestly crap?
Because the paid for version is manifestly miles better. But of course you can't see that.
Maybe allowing a certain number of views before ads get loaded? IDK if that is feasible, assume something can be done similar to being allowed to see a few articles on news sites before a subscriber wall goes up?
This idea has probably been suggested before…
How about letting Free Members have XXX number of ad-free page hits per day. That way they see what the paid version is like and may draw in new subs.
By taking an interest in the site and being a registered member they are already a ‘hot lead’.
Unregistered members get the full advert experience.
I know,the amount of PSAs is getting totally ridiculous
I had assumed the stickied 'PSA: PSAs' thread was going to become the (temporary) single place for people to post them all, but instead it was just asking users for hyperlinks when they spam the forum.
It would sort of make sense to keep a single sticky PSA thread in place (at least from now till the middle of Jan?) The etiquette being only to post if you have a useful PSA link and thank you's just take the form of a click on the like button..
Even as a subscriber I occasionally have to deal with the frustrating consent dialogue box and despite turning off the embedded videos in my options, they were playing again the other day.
Application of the old 'KISS' principle would probably help draw new users in. It's not like there's a cajillion sub-forums (one of the things in STWs favour TBF) so you'd think trimming the other fat would be a priority.
But of course you can’t see that.<br /><br />
correct I’m away at the moment so maybe my home wifi network goes some way to block all the crap, but it was truly impossible to get to scroll the forum earlier, adds physically blocked me from doing it
Why would anyone stay?
odly improved massively now
The forum software is shonky as hell.
For me, the majority of the value on this forum is user generated, hence anything that makes it harder for any user (free or paid) to generate new content is short-sighted at best.
I think the underlying problem is that (understandably) they’re trying to run a forum with an old media business model, using it to try and drive subscriptions.
More and more sites/forums/social media/you name it are swamped with adverts , with the option to sign up or pay to remove them.
Could it be that this is just the way of the world and just part of marketing and sales evolution - and it is accepted by the latest generation ?
People over a certain ago (me included) don't understand the need or justification in swamping us with crap but, do said younger generations just accept it is a way of life and thus posses a personal filter to swim through the crap, or subscribe.
Interested to find out what the demography is of people that don't like it and also the views of say <25 year olds - is the amount of advertising too much, or do you cope and get on/by with it?
As a fully paid up member I find using the Brave browser makes everything work better and faster than the alternatives
Make the free version basically usable but offer a paid-for version which is vastly more usable
Vastly 😕 Methinks rose tinted spectacles are being worn here.
Checks dictionary - Vastly; "to a very great extent; immensely"
Applies to STW...
Hmmmm disparity
Checks disparity in dictionary - Disparity; See STW
People don’t mind adverts generally.
Obtrusive adverts blocking the screen and making modern devices (iphone) freeze as a result of the volume of spam on screen is something people do mind.
I certainly use this site much less these days as a result.
The Reach website is so bad that you can't usually work out whether the content is finished or not. It is so bad...
Watty
Full Member
That sir, is just bollocks.
You might not like them but 66% of information superhighway passengers don't even use any ad blocking software. I prefer ads to sub fees...
Those are some boring ads served up to FunkyDunc, I remember when it was all lingerie, ugly watches and prestige motors. Sign of the times I guess.
I became a full member a few years ago because I found the site useful. Back then the ads were much less intrusive. I only renew my membership because IMO the site isn't worth the effort as a free member. If I was a new visitor to the site looking for information I'd click back to google and do another search for the information I needed and never return.
Why would anyone pay to join a forum where the same few people basically bully other people on practically every other thread and the website is genuinely terrible to use?
Why would anyone pay to join a forum where the same few people basically bully other people on practically every other thread and the website is genuinely terrible to use?
That's hyperbole and a pretty distorted picture. Avoid the politics threads, or other contentious subjects for starters to avoid the 'bullying', it's largely absent from most other threads. Paying subs does significantly improve the usability of the forum. It's still a long way from perfect, but nowhere near as bad as you're making out ime.
Mark has frequently said that if he could get rid of the ads, he would, so to those free members apparently won’t pay a couple of quid a month for a better, ad free (and much nicer to use) service, how do you propose STW fund the loss of ad revenue?
Folk get a proper mard on when sponsored content is used (that’s how the other websites do it), so that’s apparently out. Some folk get arsey when asked to provide links for PSA’s, thus limiting STWs ability to claim a small commission on those. Any other ideas?