Comments on: Membership Has Its Surveys

By: admin

admin — Thu, 28 May 2009 02:30:28 +0000

Cristina, Sean…both valid points. This isn’t something we’re taking lightly. It’s because of people who read and contribute that PFTA is even a possibility. I want to make sure we consider every angle.

By: Cristina

Cristina — Wed, 27 May 2009 21:08:51 +0000

I think more people will pay (even if employed) if it’s a minimal amount. Of course, unemployed, I’d pay more : )

By: sean

sean — Wed, 27 May 2009 20:42:58 +0000

i think as a freelancer, i’d be willing to pay if i wanted to use the portfolio tool of the site, but not just to do a job search.

personally, it kind of pisses me off when i visit a site that charges me to search for jobs. plus, there are a ton of other sites out there that let you search jobs for free: krop, authentic jobs, boxes and arrows, talentzoo, comm arts, etc. etc. that it seems like you would turn people away who were looking for a job.

so, i say, charge the agencies but not the seeker. unless they want to use your portfolio section, then charge them a yearly fee, like $25. it costs about $30 to have your own website, so this price point might entice people who don’t want to build their own.

By: admin

admin — Wed, 27 May 2009 02:15:29 +0000

CAL, you’re actually re-iterating what I’ve felt the whole time. The last thing I want to do is profit from people who have lost their jobs. I lost mine, and there’s no way I would pay for a frivolous membership. But I would pay a couple of bucks a month if I knew I got something of value in return. This survey is trying to gauge if others feel the same way.

By: admin

admin — Wed, 27 May 2009 02:13:07 +0000

Mark, I appreciate that. One of the ideas we’ve been throwing around is to have a section that allows for specific membership “drives.” For instance, I’d like to pay some of the designers who have busted their ass for the site. PFTA might try to raise a specific amount from current and prospective members and all money received would go to them.

By: Mark Trueblood

Mark Trueblood — Tue, 26 May 2009 19:11:00 +0000

I think a “Pay what you feel it’s worth” structure might work out pretty well for you.

I was one of the people who voted $10, but to be honest, you deserve more than that and i can afford it. That would be reflected in my contribution to the above structure.

I’m sure I’m not the only one out there who thinks similarly.

By: cal

cal — Tue, 26 May 2009 18:02:52 +0000

The unemployeds, who would need the job board most are the people who can afford it least. That’s why I voted for free.

By: Admin

Admin — Sat, 23 May 2009 11:41:58 +0000

Josh, thanks again for your input. I’d agree that the value is in the job opportunities. And the new site will certainly have them. I would also say that there’s additional value in the community built into PFTA. Some Animals have said they would pay for the blog as it exists today (which I find ridiculous to be honest). What I can’t promise is that just by paying for a service and posting your portfolio/bio/resume you will get a job. As you know, there are just too many factors that go into the vetting and hiring process. All we’re offering is exposure, a career tool and a community of people who want to help each other. If you feel like that’s not worth any kind of membership fee, there are indeed plenty of other job boards you can turn to. And that’s IF we decide to charge a (very small) fee.

By: josh

josh — Sat, 23 May 2009 05:57:51 +0000

k, punch me in the groin if I’m beating a dead horse here, but I’m still confused about the question of value.

tons of respect due, but isn’t the site really selling job opportunities? so hours may have been spent building the back end, but at the end of the day one thing gives PFTA value over any other job posting sites: sweet hookups.

er, you’ll build it, but the value lies in whether or not the opportunities come a’knockin… no? which is something we won’t know until after it’s up and running… hence the difficulty in rating the site’s value… no?

By: Ad7am

Ad7am — Sat, 23 May 2009 01:37:13 +0000

Shea’s idea ain’t bad. But to get what PFTA needs, in that case, how about access to the extra (non-blog) stuff requiring a registration with minimum one penny contribution? Taking shareware as an example, I tend to skip the donate button not out of cheapness but simply because it’s outside the process. I’m much more likely to take the time to pay — and pay what it’s worth to me — when forced to make a decision.

On the other hand, a micro-subscription reinforces **ongoing** value.

And there’s still nothing wrong with securing income as well from a few adsense placements, IMHO.