Vendors on GT40s.com

[Ron Earp]

What is a potential vendor on a forum like this?<o></o>
<o> </o>
A company that makes GT40 cars and kits? Is it a little guy that makes a run of 50 parts and sells them to fun his/her hobby? Is it a guy who knows people and gets a manufacturer to create some critical component that he is then a dealer for? Is it a person who makes a living doing custom fabrication and work on GT40s? Is it a person who sells GT40s in their spare time? Is it a company or person who makes wheels? A company that makes engines? <o></o>
<o> </o>
What is a vendor?<o></o>
<o> </o>
This question is fairly critical for the forum to answer. GT40s.com started taking advertising around 2004/2005. Up until recently there were two sorts of vendors on GT40s.com:<o></o>
<o> </o>

• A Supporting Vendor for $250/year that did not include a banner advertisement<o></o>

<o> </o>

• A Sponsoring Vendor for ~$800/year that does include a banner advertisement and the possibility to purchase a subforum<o></o>

<o> </o>
This two tier system came into being around 2006/2007. <o></o>
<o> </o>
But there was an unintended consequence of the two tiered system. The lower priced support level gave vendors the same access to the forum as the higher priced support level (sans banner adverts), thus many vendors gravitated to the lower priced level while still frequently posting about their wares (as is their right as a vendor).

Coupled with the recent economic downturn that caused some businesses to fail and others to reduce advertising, GT40s.com suffered the lowest yearly income stream since we started taking advertisers. Therefore, the two tier system was removed since it seemed to not be good for the forum.<o></o>
<o> </o>
We (I) file taxes for GT40s.com and in the past we’ve either broken even or shown a slight (< $1200 one year, best ever I think) profit each year. If there is a profit it stays with GT40s.com and is used for future use or improvements in the following calendar year.<o></o>
<o> </o>
I currrently have people asking about advertising on GT40s.com but they don’t consider themselves “vendors”, whatever a vendor might be. They consider themselves, I suppose, hobbiests out to make a little money on the side for their own hobbies. The forum can use the income stream, for sure, but should the forum have a two tiered vendor scheme again? <o></o>
<o> </o>
What are your thoughts on the situation? <o></o> Write them here or take the poll, the poll is anonymous by the way.
<o> </o>
Thanks,<o></o>
Ron <o></o>
<o> </o>

 

[Ron Earp]

Just to clarify, Option number #4 is the poll probably isn't realistic at this point. Individual forum contributions have been steadily dropping off over the years. I sort of doubt we could get enough individual contributions year end and year out to make ends meet. Of course, there might be a different model I'm not thinking of and if so, lay it on me.

 

[Keith]

Not a vendor, sponsor or owner so nothing to lose - here goes :lipsrsealed: - any manufacturer wishing to host their own forum is one tier and rightly so. Any costs can be recouped in a single sale so that should be the highest category.

In business terms, I would rather have 200 guys paying $50 than 100 guys paying $100, (example only, not suggesting these figures) more throughput means more choice for members.

Anyone who sells parts or services for profit whether to fund a build or as a commercial enterprise should pay a fee for the privilege - $100 PA ? - it's cheap! This cost can be recouped in a couple of sales... These wares to be posted on a specific forum that does not interfere with the flow of build threads and members queries etc. Your current rules re: vendors not peddling their stuff willy nilly works well IMO.

Any owner wishing to dispose of unwanted parts amongst other members should perhaps be able to do so for free - this is pretty standard stuff in most enthusiasts clubs - again, on a specific forum.

It's mind boggling that such a medium as this forum that touches every corner of the self build specialist market (not just GT40's) with so much knowledge is on tap for bugger all. If vendors had to advertise their wares in a traditional way and get the same quality exposure it would cost many $'000's per year for far less coverage than GT40's.com offers and bring in more than a couple of thousand time wasting tyre kickers to boot...

It's an exemplary medium worth it's weight in gold so I would not hesitate to charge those that profit by it's existance. I would however, lower the costs and embrace many more "vendors".

It goes without saying that "robust" moderation and vigilance would be needed to avoid exploitation.

By the way, while I'm here, is anyone interested in a brand new set of ******** Ok, kidding I'm just kidding, right? :laugh:

No offence meant to anyone who currently contributes on here - it's just an opinion is all.

 

[Randy V]

I voted for a Tiered System...

However - I think that there could be some other changes that would help.

Forum Sponsor - Allows vendors to sponsor a forum but they are only allowed to advertise their wares in that forum.
That's the cheapest level of entry for an advertising vendor.
This vendor gets a banner ad placed "only" on the forum that he is sponsoring. Vendor will be listed in the Supporting Vendors list.

Supporting Vendor - Pays higher still but is supporting the site in general. This goes in 6 month agreements. These vendors are able to advertise their wares anywhere on the site with the exception of a forum that is sponsored by another vendor with a competing product or service. Supporting Vendors get a Banner that rotates in on the header of every page except those pages that are of a Forum that is sponsored. Vendor will be listed in the Supporting Vendors list.

I think there could be a third category -

Cottage Vendor - This would be the Cottage Industry person that has no more than 6 (put whatever number you want here) products / services and it is not his primary source of income.
This vendor would get no banner rights - but could include his website / contact info along with his signature and would be listed in the Supporting Vendors list.

Discourage those who would tend to undermine the system - much as we currently do in the GT40 Cars For Sale forum.

Just thoughts...

 

[RichardH]

A tiered system is the way to go. Based on turnover? or product value? Someone selling complete vehicles should expect to pay more than someone selling the odd piece part?

 

[JimmyMac]

Priviliged vendors moderating sub-forums is not good.
Ron should not have to hack it out with suppliers to keep this forum going.
And those who believe in systems for vendors should also consider putting their hands in their pockets first.

If there is a funding problem, then it should be be OUR problem.

This means that everybody should contribute their equal dollar.

If you really want it and to join in, then pay for it.

Otherwise there is really such a thing as a 'free dinner' ?

 

[JimmyMac]

A tiered system is the way to go. Based on turnover? or product value? Someone selling complete vehicles should expect to pay more than someone selling the odd piece part?

Why ?
I would expect that a one page advertisement in the Times should costs the same for one of my companies as a page paid for by Microsoft.

 

[Ron Earp]

There are some good points that have been brought up.<o></o>
<o> </o>
I have one concern/question about the multi-tiered vendor program? How do we decide who is a lower level vendor and who is a higher level vendor? I’m sure everyone wants to pay the lowest rate. Right now we have a few “Supporting Vendors”, the lower level tier, that will expire sometime this year. About the only way to discuss it is to use real world examples of the lower tier structure now and I’m not picking on anybody, just using good examples.<o></o>
<o> </o>
Cushman Competition - Cushman Competition I don’t know much about Cushman Competition except that they offer a large variety of services and parts, bodies, racing services, etc. Jay maintains they are a small operation and should be on the lower tier. They are small compared to some retail operations, but from what I know of them I’d consider them large in comparison to many in our industry. I know there are many original type parts seekers on this forum and where else would one get a captive audience like this? <o></o>
<o> </o>
How about individuals that offer services to the GT40 community? Frank Catt is one such individual. Wealden Engineering Development He maintains that he is a small time operator and would like some sort of alternative plan to advertising on the forum that is different from the main stream advertisers with banner adverts. I don’t know the size of Frank’s business and should I be the judge?<o></o>
<o> </o>
The one aspect about the single vendor program I liked was that it took out the ambiguity. Some of my thinking was: Want to advertise on the site, this is how much it costs and this is what you get. No ifs ands or buts. Pay to play, keep the site going, or move on to another site. Hard road, I know, but look – I do this in my spare time, and for free, and don’t need the headache. Same as the other Admins, those guys work for nothing and out of the goodness of their heart.<o></o>
<o> </o>
That said, I do sense a need for a different setup. <o></o>
<o> </o>
But then I think, really, is the difference between say $250/yr for low tier and $600-$800/yr for high tier that crippling for a business? Even a part time business? Especially given that many members contribute $100 to the forum out of the goodness of their heart. If $600 to $800 is that crippling I might submit that your business is in deep trouble. <o></o>
<o> </o>
So I’m still on the fence.

Why ?
I would expect that a one page advertisement in the Times should costs the same for one of my companies as a page paid for by Microsoft.

Excellent point.

 

[Malcolm]

Hi Ron

I ticked the tiered system but only with this thought in mind. All Vendors pay a fixed rate and I am just plucking numbers here, say at $600 but for a small extra of $200 they get a banner ad. No other tier differentials. I think the banner is more in your face as a user but not everyone wants one. Make it cheap and it is a simple extra that is easier to justify to the advertiser, but the core payment is sufficient to cover gt40s.com costs and with one set of rules for all easier to manage from your position.

 

[flatchat(Chris)]

I like Randys thoughts . I think, I could happily conform to a "cottage" type vendor

 

[Russ Noble]

<o> </o>
I have one concern/question about the multi-tiered vendor program? How do we decide who is a lower level vendor and who is a higher level vendor?

I would think it would be easy to define a high level vendor as one who has their own website, otherwise they are low level.

If someone with a website wants to claim low level status, it's easy, they have a choice, they can either get rid of their website, or pay the higher level rates, or not advertise on this site.

Malcolms suggestion also has merit but I would submit that the price of the banner ad option should be on a par with the fixed base rate. Thus in his example an additional $600. The guys using banner ads should have no trouble justifying this sort of expenditure in their advertising budgets or general overheads. The word insignificant springs to mind.

However, adapting Malcolms example again. I would say have low level rates around $2-300. High level rates $600. Banner rates additional $600.

Or whatever rates need to be struck, based on supply and demand and desired income stream. Possibly a larger differential between low/high level to encourage support from the "cottage industry" guys

 

[Russ Noble]

Why ?
I would expect that a one page advertisement in the Times should costs the same for one of my companies as a page paid for by Microsoft.

I can see the logic of that one Jimmymac but we are talking here about a forum for enthusiasts.

And possibly a guy who has produced for himself an item, and finds he can defray some costs by producing a few more, probably in small quantities, and more than likely in his spare time and offer them to other members. It is a mutually beneficial deal. It's about as far away from Microsoft or "one of my companies" as you could get.

I think someone like this should be able to have exposure as a vendor at a lower cost, otherwise we may never find out that they can supply something that we desire. Also it does give them a foot in the door and they may find their niche market takes off and becomes a fully fledged business......., own website........, high level rates......., banner ad......., etc.

Got to be win/win surely?

 

[Dave Wood]

I didn't do the poll, but have read all the input. As someone that is/has considered advertising on the forum I only want a clear set of standards, whatever they may be.I build cars, I am the only employee, but I do have a website. The suggestion that because someone has a website should automaticly place them at some higher tier seems absurd. The cost of a website is not as much as may be projected( I am referring to a small business website, not a forum like this), since we do our one website maintenance, which is currently a little behind because of a new program we installed.So whatever standards are applied, I think the having a website is a little "narrow" of a reason to place someone in the high tier category. As someone that has yet to own a GT40, I could easily say that anyone that can afford a GT40 should have to pay $xxx in order to enjoy the forum, but that is just as absurd. Whatever is decided upon will impact my decision, but I can tell you ahead of time that if owning a website is the criteria for the "high tier" category...I'll likely pass.

 

[JimmyMac]

Russ,
I can partly agree with you and the man manufacturing something we need deserves his space in our group and win-win is OK, but how do you grade them ?.

Previously my main point was, that I think the readership should also pay a fee, however small, this would reduce the vendor's rates for their spaces and our dependancy upon them for the upkeep of the site.
It might even be possible to apply a single rate for all vendors and avoid the proposed grading scenario.

Let me also say that the membership is continually expanding and in my view, if you want to run this forum for the long term it is unfair to always expect the goodwill (and dollars) from Ron and those volunteers who maintain and moderate this machine to continue without our contribution to it's upkeep.

It costs me $10 per week for my newspapers and I wish that I got as much fun from those every day as I do from this community.

 

[Russ Noble]

As someone that is/has considered advertising on the forum I only want a clear set of standards, whatever they may be.I build cars, I am the only employee, but I do have a website.

Well there you are. That's a clear standard, what ever it may be! What's wrong with it?

If it captures a lot of vendors who don't consider themselves to be major players, then the rate will work out somewhat lower than it would otherwise have been. What's wrong with that? Until you know the figures and how it stacks up, how can you say that you are unlikely to be in?

And as I notice after 154 posts you still do not support the forum, I am not surprised that you are unwilling to pay for any other benefits either. It is non contributing members that have led to the situation of needing advertisers.

Previously my main point was, that I think the readership should also pay a fee, however small,

I totally agree with you but in practice that is not happening.

 

[Dave Wood]

And as I notice after 154 posts you still do not support the forum, I am not surprised that you are unwilling to pay for any other benefits either. It is non contributing members that have led to the situation of needing advertisers.

I appreciate your assessment of my overall position, especially with no personal knowledge of me. You are a true psyhic. Since you were so adept at seeing my post count you surely also noticed the extent of time I have been a member...4 years, that is about 40 posts a year ( I'll give you the adavantage although it is somewhat less). Let's see, that's less than 1 a week. Part of any forum is the tech help supplied, I would venture that if I looked at all my posts, more than half are of that type. I misunderstood the value of technical knowledge. But since you seem to be the arbitor of who or who shouldn't pay to play...how much is 1 post a week valued at, since any technical assistance is of no value apparently, I'm curious as to how much you feel is an appropriate amount.
How do I know that I would likely pass? Pretty easily, I do absolutely NO advertising what so ever. My website is the core of my business. I am one person, I can only do so much, thereby limiting the $$ I can generate. If the scale is set to put myself in the same category with companies with even 10 employees, I couldn't afford it...not so tough is it? You can surely see that 10 people, even mediocre, could generat much more $$ in a given time than a single person. Maybe not 10 times as much, but definetly more. As a single person...let's see I answer the phone,e-mails, give Tech assistance locally at least 3 times week( for no pay) oh,oh and I have to build something or there is no money over which to ponder. Fortunately my Tech help is of value locally, probably why I had a mistaken impression of it's value.I am speaking of the proposed "tiered" system mentioned, not by Ron, but in the thread. I did like the one suggestion of a flat vendor fee and an extra charge for those that wanted banner ads.
It appears that I probably shouldn't post any more on the forum since I haven't contributed and Tech help has no value. Thanks for clearing that up, if it had been explained so succinctly 4 years ago I could have avoided taking up all that bandwidth.

 

[Keith]

Crikey guys! What gives? It's a community for God's sake please please don't get personal. For some it's a hobby, for others it's friendship and for many it's a business. We have one thing in common and it's the iconic car, the history, the circumstances and the result. It will never be repeated and as such it's (this site) is very worth preserving and maintaining in it's present form.

I was an early contributor until events overtook me. If the 'membership' so rules, I will contribute again despite circumstances. I have learned so much about cars, engineering and people from many countries that I don't even want to put a value on it and logging in forms an important daily ritual for me. I have made friends with people on this forum I would never have met otherwise.

How much do you need Ron? I can go $100 if you need it mate... :thumbsup:

Don't bicker - this is the best forum on the planet.

Gone....

 

[Chris Martino]

I think some of the vendors could benefit from making contributions to promote their business every other year. Once posts/threads are made many seeking a product/manufacturer will simply do a search here and find what they are looking for - hence no need to support every year. As long as one plants the seed within a forum and the posts/threads made by a vendor are not removed then banner ads are (IMHO) a luxury, especially for the smaller businesses.

Although my products start at $6.00 I will pay to support this forum in 2010 as I did in 2008. That's my way, every other year and you can call that what you will but this is not the only forum I support and I do the same there as well. I think with over-lapping vendor support from year to year you may see more consistency and not peaks and valleys.

Bottom line is set a price to advertise here, no matter the business model and be done with it. It takes money to make money, advertising a fact of life so spend accordingly.


Chris

 

[Pat Buckley]

I haven't taken the time to read all the posts on this thread so I may be repeating what someone else has already stated, but here goes....

If you want to advertise your wares on this site then you pay for that - how much you pay depends on the size of your ad...from a small square atatic box ad to a moving banner ad - rates tbd. It shouldn't make any difference if you're selling original GT40 chassis or insurance or diapers....

If you try to sneak your "ad" in during a post and you aren't an advertiser, you get your post deleted - with a warning.

Members should be encouraged to contribute - if you get something out of this place then you should contribute - even if it is $25 a year. If you can't contribute that much you shouldn't be here.

There should be a yearly fund drive.

 

[Mark Clapp]

I guess I am one of the "cottage guys". I've posted 2-3 times about the pieces I supply since joining in 2001, mostly as a reminder and to let the new members know. I'd like to mention my info from time to time and would be willing to pay something less than $600/year as I don't need a banner, etc.