Comments on: Charging for set reviews

By: kelly reid

kelly reid — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 05:01:09 +0000

Let me just say this: We make mistakes sometimes. It was probably an oversight on our part to not negotiate the deal to represent a benefit for insiders.

remember, i'm just a guy who likes magic and trading cards. i'm still learning the ropes here, as is Doug. I'm really glad people like Etienne were willing to GET ANGRY at us and say something. Else we'd never have known that it was received poorly.

when we make mistakes, we expect to get called on them. then we fix them. we renegotiated things a bit, and ideally, our resolution makes everyone happy. i can't stress enough that, rather than assuming we're just jerks, you can assume we're doing our best and sometimes….we just plain get it wrong.

that's why I love this site, though. when we screw up, people are willing to help us grow and fix our mistakes. i consider it the other side of the virtuous customer feedback cycle, and i welcome the harsh criticism.

I've tried to reach out to everyone who i saw was upset with this decision to let them know that, no, we're not just greedy. we're just trying to get writers paid, and sometimes we goof. this was one of those times. we evolve from your feedback, positive or negative, so keep it coming!

By: douglaslinn

douglaslinn — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 03:24:23 +0000

An update: this has been made free to all Insiders. The link to the article is on the front page, which is in three parts because it's server-crushingly big at 21k+ words : )

By: q1006662

q1006662 — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 03:07:33 +0000

I feel a little dismayed because I was under the impression that if I paid to join the site, I would have access to all of the articles you publish.To be faced with another pay wall the week after joining was an unpleasant surprise.

I understand what you are saying when you talk about there not being enough money to pay Steve for his set review. That may mean that it is not feasible to offer his articles here at the present time. I appreciate your efforts at engaging with the membership but this feels like the rollout of the "Insider Tier II" subscription.

By: enemymigs

enemymigs — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:39:45 +0000

thanks doug. post the cost for subscribing to insider please and a link to what i get. also if i subscribe then do gain acces tonthe set review or not?

By: Aberosh1819

Aberosh1819 — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:38:17 +0000

I’d actually be fine having my Insider money go toward having Steven write more material. I guess at $5, I don’t really care, I just want to read his stuff as well.

By: Etienne BEUREUX

Etienne BEUREUX — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:35:38 +0000

Regarding the "We have never represented that Steve’s articles are part of Insider, but I am still sympathetic to members who want to get a little benefit for being one of our subscribers.", let me remind you, as I did on TMD, what was written in the justification for the move to QS Insider :
"Since our financial content often helps our readers make money, we have decided to limit financial content to Insiders. Spike and Timmy content will remain free, though we may occasionally recruit guest authors for some Insider features."

Steve's set reviews should be the poster child of "guest authors" features, considering he really doesn't have a regular column here. Yes, you didn't explicitely mention his name. But if that's the kind of hair-splitting you want to get into, find yourself another customer. Had your QS Insider introduction featured that you reserved the right to print set reviews (or other MtG basic articles) as extra paying content, there is no way I would have registered.

By: Etienne BEUREUX

Etienne BEUREUX — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:35:18 +0000

Without knowing the specifics such as :
– how much you paid Steve for his 65-pages review of MBS
– how many Insider suscribers you have
– how many Insider suscribers are willing to pay extra in addition the $5 they already pay each month for a Vintage-targetted set review (not speaking for anyone else, but I know I'm not), which is the core of the problem, as non-insiders can still buy the ebook if they need it.

All your explanation amounts to very little and sounds like an apology. Without specifics, I absolutely can't believe that "a meaningful portion of their subscription fee to go to paying for Steve’s articles every two or three months", unless there are very few Insiders, in which case you have a much bigger problem on your hands.