Would it be possible to buy a 1 day pass to GPA?

[mysterio]

Offering an on-demand product will eventually impact revenue derived through subscriptions. Anyone who endorses this type of a revenue model clearly hasn't thought through the business impacts, and/or doesn't care about hurting a businesses bottom line if it means saving them a few bucks.

 

That revenue model doesn't seem to affect Netflix - probably due to the fact that on-demand users and subscribers are two different kinds of consumers. It's pretty clear here that there are two kinds of GPA users in this thread, it'd be the choice of the company of whether or not they want to engage the casual user or not.

 

I don't see it quite the same way. Netflix has a transient customer base, so even if their trial users cover their dropout ratio, it's a meaningless statistic that doesn't disturb their overall subscription revenue. I see the on-demand proposition with the type of model GPA runs similar to a Manhattan piker jumping into a moving cab, whose already seated a guaranteed airport fare rider at $60, throwing the rider out of the cab, and asking the cab driver to pull a U-turn to take him around the block for a $5 ride.

 

I see the example as being more like you pay a fee to ride any cab you want at any time anyplace in the city, but then if I just wanted a ride to the airport I couldn't pay a separate fee to get that ONE ride.

 

The point of using this example has more to do with effecting a business at the core when you're asking for a stripped-down version of the service. Especially when they have a customer already in the waiting.

 

You aren't taking into account how it disrupts their current subscriber base (which in itself is a major issue), nor are you taking into account the cost, hassles, retooling and additional administration required to provide a "light" version of the service. I think a business would be entirely within their right to just say no, rather than trying to explain all the intricacies of how the burden and cost of retooling for on-demand service very likely would not guarantee the kind of significant increase in revenue to justify the change.

 

It may not be worth the extra admin costs to the site, which would be totally understandable. I see it as a way to capture more casual users, but if it would cause too many monthly subscribers to jump to casual (cheaper) use then it wouldn't make sense.

 

But I am still unclear how this new service would take something away from the customer in the waiting. Again, I am not taking anyone out of the cab in your example above, just trying to catch a single cab of my own. Unless that would equate to taking away monthly subscribers, which could happen I guess, what I am proposing would not take anything away from folks that do pay the monthly fee to use the site.

 

I'm just trying to pay to use a service in a way that would provide the value I would like for what I'm willing to pay for it. People need/deserve to be paid for the work they do, and that is all I'm trying to say here. I would like to pay a smaller fee for a smaller bit of information as that is the level of utility I need. If that is ultimately not in the interests of the site that is fine and totally understandable. If that can't happen with GPA I likely won't ever subscribe. I'm sure they'll still sleep ok at night, as will I.

[Reno McCoy]

I'll look up recent values for any book for $3 if anyone is interested. Just send me a PM.*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* I don't have GPA, and I'm known to drink heavily, so it's possible the values I supply are outdated or wrong.

 

 

[comicwiz]

Offering an on-demand product will eventually impact revenue derived through subscriptions. Anyone who endorses this type of a revenue model clearly hasn't thought through the business impacts, and/or doesn't care about hurting a businesses bottom line if it means saving them a few bucks.

 

That revenue model doesn't seem to affect Netflix - probably due to the fact that on-demand users and subscribers are two different kinds of consumers. It's pretty clear here that there are two kinds of GPA users in this thread, it'd be the choice of the company of whether or not they want to engage the casual user or not.

 

I don't see it quite the same way. Netflix has a transient customer base, so even if their trial users cover their dropout ratio, it's a meaningless statistic that doesn't disturb their overall subscription revenue. I see the on-demand proposition with the type of model GPA runs similar to a Manhattan piker jumping into a moving cab, whose already seated a guaranteed airport fare rider at $60, throwing the rider out of the cab, and asking the cab driver to pull a U-turn to take him around the block for a $5 ride.

 

I see the example as being more like you pay a fee to ride any cab you want at any time anyplace in the city, but then if I just wanted a ride to the airport I couldn't pay a separate fee to get that ONE ride.

 

The point of using this example has more to do with effecting a business at the core when you're asking for a stripped-down version of the service. Especially when they have a customer already in the waiting.

 

You aren't taking into account how it disrupts their current subscriber base (which in itself is a major issue), nor are you taking into account the cost, hassles, retooling and additional administration required to provide a "light" version of the service. I think a business would be entirely within their right to just say no, rather than trying to explain all the intricacies of how the burden and cost of retooling for on-demand service very likely would not guarantee the kind of significant increase in revenue to justify the change.

 

It may not be worth the extra admin costs to the site, which would be totally understandable. I see it as a way to capture more casual users, but if it would cause too many monthly subscribers to jump to casual (cheaper) use then it wouldn't make sense.

 

But I am still unclear how this new service would take something away from the customer in the waiting. Again, I am not taking anyone out of the cab in your example above, just trying to catch a single cab of my own. Unless that would equate to taking away monthly subscribers, which could happen I guess, what I am proposing would not take anything away from folks that do pay the monthly fee to use the site.

 

I'm just trying to pay to use a service in a way that would provide the value I would like for what I'm willing to pay for it. If that is ultimately not in the interests of the site that is fine and totally understandable. People need to be paid for the work they do, and that is all I'm trying to accomplish here. If that can't happen with GPA I likely won't ever subscribe. I'm sure they'll still sleep ok at night, as will I.

 

The bolded part is exactly what I'm inferring. And I'm not claiming to know this will happen for certain, but you cannot underestimate that there will be subscribers who are on monthly plan because there isn't an alternative.

 

I run an online business that uses a subscription model. The service was designed and engineered from the ground up to have a certain subscription model in place, so I really think it is unfair to my paying customers to deliver the same or similar value to someone who is asking for the same resource/archive access for less than what I'm charging everyone else.

[mysterio]

Offering an on-demand product will eventually impact revenue derived through subscriptions. Anyone who endorses this type of a revenue model clearly hasn't thought through the business impacts, and/or doesn't care about hurting a businesses bottom line if it means saving them a few bucks.

 

That revenue model doesn't seem to affect Netflix - probably due to the fact that on-demand users and subscribers are two different kinds of consumers. It's pretty clear here that there are two kinds of GPA users in this thread, it'd be the choice of the company of whether or not they want to engage the casual user or not.

 

I don't see it quite the same way. Netflix has a transient customer base, so even if their trial users cover their dropout ratio, it's a meaningless statistic that doesn't disturb their overall subscription revenue. I see the on-demand proposition with the type of model GPA runs similar to a Manhattan piker jumping into a moving cab, whose already seated a guaranteed airport fare rider at $60, throwing the rider out of the cab, and asking the cab driver to pull a U-turn to take him around the block for a $5 ride.

 

I see the example as being more like you pay a fee to ride any cab you want at any time anyplace in the city, but then if I just wanted a ride to the airport I couldn't pay a separate fee to get that ONE ride.

 

The point of using this example has more to do with effecting a business at the core when you're asking for a stripped-down version of the service. Especially when they have a customer already in the waiting.

 

You aren't taking into account how it disrupts their current subscriber base (which in itself is a major issue), nor are you taking into account the cost, hassles, retooling and additional administration required to provide a "light" version of the service. I think a business would be entirely within their right to just say no, rather than trying to explain all the intricacies of how the burden and cost of retooling for on-demand service very likely would not guarantee the kind of significant increase in revenue to justify the change.

 

It may not be worth the extra admin costs to the site, which would be totally understandable. I see it as a way to capture more casual users, but if it would cause too many monthly subscribers to jump to casual (cheaper) use then it wouldn't make sense.

 

But I am still unclear how this new service would take something away from the customer in the waiting. Again, I am not taking anyone out of the cab in your example above, just trying to catch a single cab of my own. Unless that would equate to taking away monthly subscribers, which could happen I guess, what I am proposing would not take anything away from folks that do pay the monthly fee to use the site.

 

I'm just trying to pay to use a service in a way that would provide the value I would like for what I'm willing to pay for it. If that is ultimately not in the interests of the site that is fine and totally understandable. People need to be paid for the work they do, and that is all I'm trying to accomplish here. If that can't happen with GPA I likely won't ever subscribe. I'm sure they'll still sleep ok at night, as will I.

 

The bolded part is exactly what I'm inferring. And I'm not claiming to know this will happen for certain, but you cannot underestimate that there will be subscribers who are on monthly plan because there isn't an alternative.

 

I run an online business that uses a subscription model. The service was designed and engineered from the ground up to have a certain subscription model in place, so I really think it is unfair to my paying customers to deliver the same or similar value to someone who is asking for the same resource/archive access for less than what I'm charging everyone else.

 

I get that, and if I was trying to say that a casual user should get the same level of value as the monthly subscriber I would completely agree with you. I don't think that the casual/day pass type of user ought to get the same value. If you paid the fee to get to look at data on one book that is all you would get, which is less value than a monthly subscriber who could look at anything would get. GPA didn't spend any more time/money to compile that data, but I just paid for it as a revenue stream that they wouldn't have otherwise gotten. If I buy a one day pass I don't get updated info on subsequent dates so my information gets outdated quickly (especially on hot books like WD, for example).

 

If this would eat into their business too much they would be stupid to implement this, I couldn't agree more. I was just posing it as a question.

[MR SigS]

I pay for GPA monthly and sometimes I don't even use it even once in a given month.

Me too.

 

What will you say when it goes away because it's not cost-effective to operate as a business?

 

 

(George has said that he doesn't mind if people ask for data occasionally.)

 

 

(Not sure if you're asking me directly) I'm not saying I think GPA should change their policy- I like it the way it is. I just understand what "the other side" is saying.

[MightyBeanComics]

I think coffee should be available by the sip.

 

 

Here at the office we pitch in for 1 cup of coffee...then sip and pass....

[marvelcollector]

$10/ month ... 33 cents a day.

 

I can see why you'd want a pay per view option ....

 

$10/day also equals $120/ year.

 

If - like some of us - you would like/need GPA to look up about 20 books over the course of a year, that's $6 a pop. That's not a great value. Worse than CGC's grader notes in fact.

 

"Toggling" the membership month by month is frankly a PITA, and the times you need it are pretty much spread out across the year anyway.

 

Not everybody has the same outlook/needs.

 

I think $2 for a day would be great, and the only way I'd likely sign upm again...

[comicwiz]

I think coffee should be available by the sip.

 

 

Here at the office we pitch in for 1 cup of coffee...then sip and pass....

 

[VintageComics]

I think coffee should be available by the sip.

 

 

Here at the office we pitch in for 1 cup of coffee...then sip and pass....

 

[CKB]

Offering an on-demand product will eventually impact revenue derived through subscriptions. Anyone who endorses this type of a revenue model clearly hasn't thought through the business impacts, and/or doesn't care about hurting a businesses bottom line if it means saving them a few bucks.

 

Many businesses are finding lots of success in the on-demand model.

Tech firms doing managed hosting (referred to as "the cloud" by the general public and marketing) have thrived on this model of selling services ala carte as the customer needs them. It expands your customer base more often than reduces it, and creates a very easy onramp for "upsell" of 1 off customers to become subscription customers...

 

think, you sell the 1 shot service for a few bucks, and the delivery of the info comes with a link to turn the 1 time order into a subscription, or there could be enough BI behind the system that after a few 1 shot orders it sends you a "glad you like our service, for just a couple extra dollars you could have access to EVERYTHING!"

 

dont discount this approach, cause it works well in many markets...

 

itunes, netflix, cable-on-demand (for movies and premium chanels) have success in cleaving off small offerings and using them as an inroad for more longer term revenue.

 

I think if GPA did this they would need to limit it at almost a per-book level. So you would pay to uncover the full pricing data for each entry you opened in the database. They could even do it such that if you hit the amount you would have paid for a monthly sub you get full access for 30 days.

 

I can see that working. I would be hesitant to do the full limited time access thing though. It can invite abuse.

 

 

[sckao]

I pay for GPA monthly and sometimes I don't even use it even once in a given month.

Me too.

 

What will you say when it goes away because it's not cost-effective to operate as a business?

 

 

(George has said that he doesn't mind if people ask for data occasionally.)

 

 

(Not sure if you're asking me directly) I'm not saying I think GPA should change their policy- I like it the way it is. I just understand what "the other side" is saying.

 

It wasn't meant for anyone in particular... (thumbs u

 

 

 

 

[mysterio]

$10/ month ... 33 cents a day.

 

I can see why you'd want a pay per view option ....

 

$10/day also equals $120/ year.

 

If - like some of us - you would like/need GPA to look up about 20 books over the course of a year, that's $6 a pop. That's not a great value. Worse than CGC's grader notes in fact.

 

"Toggling" the membership month by month is frankly a PITA, and the times you need it are pretty much spread out across the year anyway.

 

Not everybody has the same outlook/needs.

 

I think $2 for a day would be great, and the only way I'd likely sign upm again...

 

This.

[comix4fun]

How much for one rib?

 

 

 

 

 

Pour it in my hand for a dime!

[mysterio]

Offering an on-demand product will eventually impact revenue derived through subscriptions. Anyone who endorses this type of a revenue model clearly hasn't thought through the business impacts, and/or doesn't care about hurting a businesses bottom line if it means saving them a few bucks.

 

Many businesses are finding lots of success in the on-demand model.

Tech firms doing managed hosting (referred to as "the cloud" by the general public and marketing) have thrived on this model of selling services ala carte as the customer needs them. It expands your customer base more often than reduces it, and creates a very easy onramp for "upsell" of 1 off customers to become subscription customers...

 

think, you sell the 1 shot service for a few bucks, and the delivery of the info comes with a link to turn the 1 time order into a subscription, or there could be enough BI behind the system that after a few 1 shot orders it sends you a "glad you like our service, for just a couple extra dollars you could have access to EVERYTHING!"

 

dont discount this approach, cause it works well in many markets...

 

itunes, netflix, cable-on-demand (for movies and premium chanels) have success in cleaving off small offerings and using them as an inroad for more longer term revenue.

 

I think if GPA did this they would need to limit it at almost a per-book level. So you would pay to uncover the full pricing data for each entry you opened in the database. They could even do it such that if you hit the amount you would have paid for a monthly sub you get full access for 30 days.

 

I can see that working. I would be hesitant to do the full limited time access thing though. It can invite abuse.

 

 

I can see that, which is why I think a per book fee would work too. If you get to a show and find a book you are thinking of buying you could check on the fly. It also works if you have a half dozen slabs to sell and want to check prices, but then wouldn't use the site again for a while. And yeah, it would be nice if you paid 10 or so individual book fees and then got the rest of the month thrown in (and some would likely spend the extra just to get the month once they get close).

[bababooey]

This is like part two to yesterday's "How much is it worth" thread.

 

This is the "How much is it worth to find out how much it is worth thread!"

 

[VintageComics]

$10/ month ... 33 cents a day.

 

I can see why you'd want a pay per view option ....

 

$10/day also equals $120/ year.

 

If - like some of us - you would like/need GPA to look up about 20 books over the course of a year, that's $6 a pop. That's not a great value. Worse than CGC's grader notes in fact.

 

"Toggling" the membership month by month is frankly a PITA, and the times you need it are pretty much spread out across the year anyway.

 

Not everybody has the same outlook/needs.

 

I think $2 for a day would be great, and the only way I'd likely sign upm again...

 

This.

 

There will always be people who disagree with a service model, and most complaints are going to be about prices.

 

Again, I'd put it into perspective - do the people who think $10 a month ever splurge on coffee, tea, donuts, candy bars, chips, magazines or anything else.

 

Not trying to create an argument but to keep it in perspective, I think many of us might lose $10 a month in change in the couch or car. I know we do up here in Canada with our $1 and $2 coins.

 

Stepping back and looking at the wealth of information available for $10 a month is pretty astounding, especially if the books you are buying are topping $100 or $1000 a month (and going by what Mint likes I think they are).

 

So again, I understand the perception that it's a lot of money but in the grand scheme, it's about the cost of a few bus tickets, enough gas to get around the city for a day or a cheap, fast food meal complete with dessert.

 

George (GPA) is about the easiest going person I've ever met through this forum but combine that with a model that really needs to be profitable and any online business needs to draw some lines as to what they can and cannot provide.

 

You can't cut costs forever to please everyone.

 

End of pontification.

 

 

 

[chrisco37]

I know we do up here in Canada with our $1 and $2 coins.

 

 

 

You canadians are all the same with your beady little eyes and flapping heads and loonies.

[BlowUpTheMoon]

I know we do up here in Canada with our $1 and $2 coins.

 

 

 

You canadians are all the same with your beady little eyes and flapping heads and loonies.

 

Don't forget they drink their milk out of bags.

 

[VintageComics]

[Dr. Balls]

nor are you taking into account the cost, hassles, retooling and additional administration required to provide a "light" version of the service. I think a business would be entirely within their right to just say no, rather than trying to explain all the intricacies of how the burden and cost of retooling for on-demand service very likely would not guarantee the kind of significant increase in revenue to justify the change.

 

GPA uses WorldPay as their payment gateway. Thanks to this amazing thing called the internets, I can talk to a WorldPay company representative about their services via chat window. It's amazing, I know. What will they think of next?!?!

 

Thank you for choosing WorldPay. A representative will be with you shortly.

 

You are now chatting with 'Shirley'

 

Shirley: How may we help you?

 

you: Does world pay support subscription-based payments? I have a website that I would like to have a subscription option to access it and expire in 3 days rather than 30. Can you help me with that?

 

Shirley: I believe recurring payments can be customized to fit your needs. We need additional details about your business in order to answer you correctly.

 

Shirley: What type of business do you own.

 

you: Undergarment Restoration and Stain Removal business.

 

End.

 

Yeah, that's some pretty difficult and expensive retooling.