Jump to content
Just visiting?
  • 0

VT App? and tapatalk

AshVillain

Asked by AshVillain,

Question

39 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
limpid Grand Master

limpid

Posted
  • Administrator
Posted

I wonder if I could find someone to sponsor the app?

 

I'm thinking that we get someone to sponsor (set up and monthly costs) the app in return for their name on the splash screen. The app would be free, but would carry ads.

 

Anyone got any ideas about that?

Link to comment
  • 0
legov Enthusiast

legov

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

In answer to your questions legov: More people = more opinions + more ad revenue = less outlay for the site owner/s. More money from other opportunities = less outlay for the site owners.

 

 

Yes, but with things running fine right now (I assume) there is little reason for the owners to take up the extra financial risk that comes with creating an app.

 

If you're running a business, it's fine because with that risk comes the possibility of extra profit. For a non-profit internet forum that already runs just fine there's just no need for that sort of risk, because the need for greater financial reward is smaller.

Edited by legov
Link to comment
  • 0
limpid Grand Master

limpid

Posted
  • Administrator
Posted

I'd prefer it if you just allowed Tapatalk access. Could you maybe offset the loss of ad revenue with enabling it for certain users for a (nominal) subscription charge?

There doesn't appear to be any way to limit who can use tapatalk. It is either on or off. I don't know why they've done that. I'm on their mailing list in case they change this as I'd be quite happy to do this for a certain level of donation.

Link to comment
  • 0
AshVillain Newbie

AshVillain

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'd prefer it if you just allowed Tapatalk access. Could you maybe offset the loss of ad revenue with enabling it for certain users for a (nominal) subscription charge?

There doesn't appear to be any way to limit who can use tapatalk. It is either on or off. I don't know why they've done that. I'm on their mailing list in case they change this as I'd be quite happy to do this for a certain level of donation.

I would pay a nominal sub charge if the app was free to begin with.

Legov: are you comfortable with the fact that running this site (as it stands) is costing limpid actual real life money? I don't think that right personally ... I agree with the fact that non-profit organisations in general do not concentrate on making money, and should not concentrate on that either, however I don't think that non-profit sites/charities/whatever should be running at a loss. I also agree (given the responses on here etc) that it would be a risk to make an app - but I would wager that setting up this site in the first place was a risk :)

Link to comment
  • 0
legov Enthusiast

legov

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

I'd prefer it if you just allowed Tapatalk access. Could you maybe offset the loss of ad revenue with enabling it for certain users for a (nominal) subscription charge?

There doesn't appear to be any way to limit who can use tapatalk. It is either on or off. I don't know why they've done that. I'm on their mailing list in case they change this as I'd be quite happy to do this for a certain level of donation.

Legov: are you comfortable with the fact that running this site (as it stands) is costing limpid actual real life money? I don't think that right personally ...

 

 

I don't think you understand what I'm getting at. I'm not talking about morality here (i.e. whether non-profits should do this or that), I'm already assuming that non-profits by definition do not try to make monetary profit. I'm trying to explain why I think non-profits in general (and in theory) might be more averse to financial risks, like (in our case) creating new apps - and applying that concept to our situation.

 

While running VT does cost limpid money, creating a full-fledged app costs even more. The benefit is, of course, greater revenue in the future. But that revenue isn't guaranteed. Businesses are willing to take that risk, because of the possibility of greater profit, which is in general their raison d'etre. But for non-profits, that incentive is smaller, because (assuming they're already running okay) any risk could incur for them great financial losses - and because greater revenue isn't as important to them as it is to businesses, the possibility of increased revenue isn't enough to offset the risk of financial ruin.

 

Simply put, businesses (especially corporations) are (theoretically) less averse to risk, because they see the potential benefit (monetary profit) as greater. For non-profits, why rock the boat?

 

Admittedly, in our case, it all hinges on something I'm not entirely certain about, and that is whether limpid and the mods are comfortable with the site's current financial picture. It has nothing to do with whether I think it's right for the mods to spend money on the site, and everything to do with whether the mods themselves feel comfortable with the VT finances.

 

Again, not saying I think limpid should do this and that, I was trying to explain his reluctance to commit to the creation of an app.

Edited by legov
  • Like 1
Link to comment
  • 0
blandy Grand Master

blandy

Posted
  • Moderator
Posted

...It has nothing to do with whether I think it's right for the mods to spend money on the site, and everything to do with whether the mods themselves feel comfortable with the VT finances…

Just for clarity, the mods spend/give what time and meagre brainpower we might have between us ( I think OBE andBOF have a couple of cells, maybe, each and the rest of us mods don’t have any between us, so look upon them as "Gods who walk amongst us”). Limpid though spends time & money, and is thus deemed to be a byte short of a packet by the rest of the team.*

* most of the above is untrue - BOF and OBE aren’t really that clever, for example. They just know the right moves to make to look clever**.

** that’s not true either.

Link to comment
  • 0
limpid Grand Master

limpid

Posted
  • Administrator
Posted

 

 I already have to subsidise the site personally

 

 

Well shit. After a few years it's probably time to donate. 

 

OT, but that's not necessary. The donations are really there for people who don't like ads. There's little difference financially. If you are happy with the ads, then feel free to stay as you are.

Link to comment
  • 0
legov Enthusiast

legov

Posted
Posted

 

 

 I already have to subsidise the site personally

 

 

Well shit. After a few years it's probably time to donate. 

 

OT, but that's not necessary. The donations are really there for people who don't like ads. There's little difference financially. If you are happy with the ads, then feel free to stay as you are.

 

 

And all this time I thought I was doing it out of the goodness of my heart... :unsure:

Link to comment
  • 0
dont_do_it_doug. Veteran

dont_do_it_doug.

Posted
Posted

I think VT needs less people not more.

It's a no from me.

I already have to subsidise the site personally

Well shit. After a few years it's probably time to donate.

OT, but that's not necessary. The donations are really there for people who don't like ads. There's little difference financially. If you are happy with the ads, then feel free to stay as you are.

There must be a tipping point?

Link to comment
  • 0
limpid Grand Master

limpid

Posted
  • Administrator
Posted

I'm going to need some beta testers. Android 4.0+ initially. Please post your name below if you're interested.

 

It looks like I'll only be able to do an Android app. You need to own a Mac to create iOS apps.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to question listing
×
×
  • Create New...
Â