PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Threads closing suspiciously 2?
View Single Post
Old 10th Jan 2007, 19:13
  #19 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PPRuNe Towers View Post
You've made a series of assumptions in the above post. They may well appear logical to you. They appeared logical to the guys in 2001 who claimed our database of addresses had a base value of several million.
We weren't interested then and we aren't interested now.
You guys aren't customers. Don't kid yourself. You are users.
We don't give a stuff regarding advertisers. No sales people - none. We got suckered into that sales thing a couple of years ago and ended up with the site being run to pay the sales people. I've very glad to say we fired them a year ago. Advertisers now come to us under our terms. No pay by the click. No forum targeting. No one on commission. We set a price - they pay it or the ad doesn't appear. Just in case you can't read between the lines we don't like ads - they are a pain in the arse. Get the site back down to 10,000 users and we can do without ads like we used to.
We do our own thing and as the Australians and Jetblasters have discovered we have no qualms simply shutting down a forum until folks get the point.
Military Aviation threads stay. Charity threads go. The political testiculation goes. We put our time and money into running a set of aviation forums for the past ten years. We do not care what you think. Please consider that sentence carefully. We run the site for our pleasure not yours. You want to play political strategist or polemicist go elsewhere.
That is our choice and not yours. Please understand this. We don't care, we simply don't care if you use the site or not. As I said at the outset your assumptions are wrong. This isn't a commercial site, we've never borrowed a penny to fund it. We have no need to 'stroke' customers and advertisers because both come to us.
And so to those assumptions again Tigs - by everything you understand regarding commercial reality and customer service this site should soon be a wasteland. However, a search on my posts will find a 6 year history of taking the cyberbaseball bat to forums. The tumbleweed has still not appeared despite such long term lack of respect by Danny and I. It is extremely annoying but it is our site, it is private and while we thoroughly enjoy the pissed off going on the blanket with protest posts and threads there is only one thing to remember - the house always wins.
Sum up: Charity threads get chopped, non service threads go, political science wankfests for apprentice leader writers go. It's a huge internet out there and loads of other places are desperate for non aviation stuff.
Regards again,
What a truly amazing post. A fantastic insight into your regard for advertisers, your 'users' and the whole aviation community. (Which in case you hadn't realised, goes far, far beyond a few 'Professional pilots', who are never happier than whinging about their awful T & C's). Actually, for 'regard', please read 'stupendous contempt'.
I have saved this page as an example of exactly how a media owner should NOT treat their audience and, if you are unlucky, we will use it in our next issue, as an example of the contempt shown by some media owners towards their readers and advertisers.
For what it's worth, I will add that PPRuNe didn't have either the courtesy or decency to even acknowledge, let alone reply to my memo /application to assist with advertising sales (a subject I am MORE then familiar with) on a basis which wouldn't have left you open to anything. As it was, it sounds like your ego got the better of you and you got taken for a ride (you mug) .
Frankly mate, your attitude sucks. You wish to play god with threads, which is your perogative, but you have played the 'innocent' card once too often.
'We do not care what you think': Pretty much sums it up I'm afraid.
I DO care what my readers and advertisers think and that is what separates us.

Last edited by cargosales; 10th Jan 2007 at 19:22. Reason: Grammar
cargosales is offline