SCG premium?

[Dante]

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandnews.php?Article=8817

Steve - are all of your articles going to be premium now?  Will that affect the ability to discuss them here since obviously you won't be able to reproduce them and linking will only work if you pay/login....

Bill

[Hi-Val]

I welcome SCG going premium. It'd be neat if there were a way to only buy partial premium if T1 stuff is up, because I'm not so hot on reading draft picks for CoK. On the other hand though, I always make it a point to read Flores. What I really like is the writer payoff with 2 people getting the goods. Maybe it'll spur me on to actually writing more!

[Klep]

I basically have the same reservations as Doug.  I generally only read 1 or 2 articles per week out of the couple dozen that get posted, and it's a rare article that tells me more than I can get from hanging out in IRC.  

What I'm most interested to hear is what all of the featured writers think of this change.  Were they even told beforehand?  How do they feel about the fact that far fewer people are going to be able to read their stuff?

[nataz]

Although I certainly understand how Pete came to this decision, I can't help but feel disappointed.

I do go to SCG quite a bit to read the articles. I read

1) MJ
- <3

2) Limited Stuff
- Saves me the time/money of working it out myself, but generally, isn't that amazing, and I can live with out it.

3) Vintage Stuff

-Generally, Vintage info is better here, b/c the real discussion happens on the TMD boards. Is that going to stop? If someone writes a vintage strategy article on SCG, does this mean they cannot discuss that article, or the contents of that article, on TMD?

If this is true, I don’t know, that seems kind of dangerous community wise. Its almost as if by extension, some of the best content on the TMD boards is now pay-per-view.

I don't fault Steve for following the money, but It is kind of sad to see some of the best writers be enticed to move more off these community based boards.

Why post a primer here, where the only compensation will be to have to stand-up to (sometimes harsh) peer-review, when an author can just write for SCG, get cash, and only deal with their premium members?  

Not to sound all doom-and-gloom, I really do like SCG, just wish it didn't have to be like this. I only mention Steve because he happens to be in the description, but just out of curiosity, how many TMD’ers are going to be premium?    

Will I pay for it? I don’t know, but probably not. I’d say there are about 1-3 articles on SCG per-week that I really enjoy, the rest is fluff. I think I’ll probably just end up skipping those articles instead of sending in cash every month.

[Hi-Val]

You also have to remember that they'll probably be putting FW stuff up for free at times to entice people to the site daily and to keep readership up. Also, if you write a primer for a deck and you aren't a FW, it'll most likely go to the non-pay part. They still want to generate traffic.

I see this as a way to continue the SCG P9 tournaments, among other things. I can bet that their live coverage will be free as well.

[Smmenen]

I believe that my strategy articles will be premium.  On the one hand I really empathize with you.  On the other, this provides an important incentive.

I haven't actually had an article published on SCG since Nov 29.  I spend so many hours editing the articles that I write making sure that they are carefully written and well thought out that it really isn't worth my time unless its something I really want out there.  This will provide a very helpful incentive which will hopefully increase my output.

I think you will find that other writers will also pick up the pace now.

It's not that I'm greedy - it's basically that for the quality of effort I try to put into my articles, its more difficult to justify the time commitment otherwise.  I think the increase in output will be worth it for people who don't care about the few bucks a month.  

So, while I understand that you may not want to spend $5 for the same quality of articles that have been heretofor, the premium change will increase the number of quality articles.

@Klep: i was told before hand.  Basically, and I hope I'm not breaking any confidences here - as I haven't carefully read through what Pete has said on SCG, but it was basically premium or drop all content on SCG.  Seeing as the later alternative is much, much worse, I said I'd be for it only if it managed to work.

[mrieff]

I see this as a way to continue the SCG P9 tournaments, among other things. I can bet that their live coverage will be free as well.

Nope, quoting:

StarCityGames.com Premium members will have exclusive access to live coverage of the entire Star City “Power Nine” Tournament Series, with other events to follow!


I understand SC's move, I mean there is no such thing as a free lunch.
But how are we going to discuss Vintage articles when only a part of the people has been able to read them?

[Komatteru]

I understand SC's move, I mean there is no such thing as a free lunch.
But how are we going to discuss Vintage articles when only a part of the people has been able to read them?

Well, to be honest, "discussion of articles" around here usually break down into rants about various off-topic things that amazingly degrade even further after a bunch of new members post.  Then the mods lock it.

So maybe it's not so bad that there won't be too many more threads discussing articles.  It isn't appropriate to post the full text of premium articles on this (or any site not SCG), so that's definitely out.

[The Atog Lord]

It is kind of sad to see some of the best writers be enticed to move more off these community based boards. Why post a primer here, where the only compensation will be to have to stand-up to (sometimes harsh) peer-review, when an author can just write for SCG, get cash, and only deal with their premium members?

I agree. Well said.

Also, Brainburst used to be a great sight before it went Premium.

[Smmenen]

You realize that it was either go premium or close down the article content on SCG entirely?

[The Atog Lord]

Oh, I'm not faulting SCG at all. I am just sad that it came to that.

[Kowal]

To whoever asked whether or not we were informed:  I was.  I don't know about everybody else.

Honestly, I'll only be disappointed if type one players are so bent out of shape by a thirty dollar charge that they stop supporting the only non-TMD website that really caters to our interests.

As a featured writer, I get access to premium without paying, but I intend to pay anyway, as a way of saying thanks for their investments in the p9 tourney circuit and for hosting the highest quality vintage articles the internet has.

[Smmenen]

I see this as a way to continue the SCG P9 tournaments, among other things. I can bet that their live coverage will be free as well.

Nope, quoting:

StarCityGames.com Premium members will have exclusive access to live coverage of the entire Star City ?Power Nine? Tournament Series, with other events to follow!


I understand SC's move, I mean there is no such thing as a free lunch.
But how are we going to discuss Vintage articles when only a part of the people has been able to read them?

I'm not sure.  It's an issue.  Not all Vintage articles will be premium.  I think the site isn't going to be much like brainburst where all the non-premium articles are trash.  There will continue to be lots of good non premium stuff worth paying attention to.  I imagine that it won't stop people from talking about the decklists presented in articles either.

[Machinus]

I tried to start this thread last night, but my campus network went down.

    All of this has led us to a crossroads, and we're forced to make a decision: Either we introduce our own Premium service to offset the tremendous costs of operating the content side of the site, which allows us to fund additional upgrades and ensure that we could afford to continue hiring the best players/writers that this game has to offer…

     ...Or we could cease offering content altogether.

     We opted to introduce StarCityGames.com Premium.

     While I’d like to think that most of our readers would subscribe just for the sake of helping us out, I have a feeling that I’m going to have to offer a little bit more than that. So this is what StarCityGames.com Premium members can expect to receive, just for starters!

     Top-level strategies and new decklists from many of the best players in the world! Mike Flores, Chad Ellis, Stephen Menendian, Dan Paskins, Nick Eisel, Osyp Lebedowicz, Tim Aten, Antonino DeRosa, and many more of the game’s most recognizable names will give you the information that you need to get to the top tables and win more games!

     The latest sales statistics and trading tips from America’s largest Magic: the Gathering retailer! Why wait for printed price guides to give you information that’s already obsolete? In my exclusive column, I’ll not only tell you which cards are currently heating up and cooling down - but I’ll back those statements up with actual sales data pulled straight from the StarCityGames.com sales database! If that’s not enough, you’ll also learn how to take advantage of this information in order to maximize your trading opportunities, increase the value of your collection, and make more money!

     Live coverage of major Magic: the Gathering events! Thanks to the Star City “Power Nine” Tournament Series, 2005 is shaping up to be an amazing year for the Vintage community! StarCityGames.com Premium members will have exclusive access to live coverage of the entire Star City “Power Nine” Tournament Series, with other events to follow!

SCG has played a crucial role in the growth of the Vintage format in the last year. They have provided articles, primers, coverage, and even the tournaments themselves, which has done a great deal to advance the format. However, this is disappointing news for our community.

Overcoming the obstacles of exclusivity and elitism were very difficult, and SCG contributed significantly towards that end. Making the information more private will certainly have an effect on the growth of the format. We have no sideboard.com or mtg.com to provide coverage or analysis of the format. SCG is the only site that gives it "serious" attention. With the new subscription service, the vital things like results and strategy will not be widespread, and the growth of the community will certainly suffer.

Before I get flamed, let me say that I recognize the enormous service SCG has performed for the Vintage community, and I wish them the best in their financial crisis. I certainly hope they are successful and continue to make contrubitions to the community. However, the nature of our format is definitely going to change because of this.

[Zherbus]

None of my articles will be premium.

[Bram]

I believe that my strategy articles will be premium.

Indeed they will. From the membership form:

Top-level strategies and new decklists from many of the best players in the world! Classic Magic theorist Mike Flores, Pro Tour veteran Chad Ellis, Vintage expert Stephen Menendian, (...) and many more of the game's most recognizable names will give you the information that you need to get to the top tables and win more games!

I haven't actually had an article published on SCG since Nov 29

Well, you had better get crackin' then, or people will want their money back.

I can only speak for myself ofcourse, but I'll be juggling snowballs through hell before I pay Starcity 30 bucks a year to primarily read articles by people I don't know (read: pros) on subjects I don't care about (read: extended and standard). I'm sure this a good move on SCG's part though, and will probably be benificial to the magic scene as a whole. As such, I wish them the best of luck, but I'm not gonna be among their contributors.

[The M.E.T.H.O.D]

Yea im not suscribing either.

The thing is, they probably want to keep all their articles to themselves, so they probably don't want to put up articles by TMDrs and THEN have them up on TMD as well.

[Kowal]

That was true before premium.

[The M.E.T.H.O.D]

yea but now they can't link the article from here so we can view is without paying.

[Kowal]

I would imagine you still can, but for people without premium accounts, it would be like linking a basic user to the mod forum.

[Elric]

I'm not sure the format they are using is a good idea.  The Vintage content draws a different audience from most of the rest of the content.  As a result, having one uniform price does not make a lot of sense.  I won't be subscribing, for example.

[Jhaggs]

If SCG presents an option to pay for just vintage articles, then I would gladly pay a yearly fee.  I would be more than willing to contribute for something that I routinely use for research and entertainment.  However, paying for format information that I would never read isn't all that appealing.  Hopefully, SCG can remedy this concern as I'm sure others feel similliar to me.

On a sidenote, while linking artiles from premium sections of SCG won't be feasible, what's to stop someone from a simple cut and paste?  I'm certainly not advocating a practice such as this become the norm, I am curious to see if they'll be some sort of gentlemen's agreement between TMD and SCG.  

Finally, what sort of impact will there be to tmd users that are premium writers for SCG in regards to posting content here on this site?  I ask this question because I hope SCG new setup won't create a vaccum effect that may make some writers here at TMD reluctant to post information for TMD because they may what to save that for an upcoming article.

[Bram]

f SCG presents an option to pay for just vintage articles, then I would gladly pay a yearly fee.

Seconded. I omitted this sentiment in my initial comment, but this is more or less exactly what I wanted to say. It's just that I don't want to pay for stuff I don't want to read.

To any SCG officials reading this: please consider offering a differentiated subscription system based on content. It can't be that hard to implement, and my guess is many more people think like this.

[Jacob Orlove]

I'm not a featured writer, but I was about to start writing more. If it comes down to getting paid to write premium stuff for SCG, or posting it here, I'd much rather post it here. Hopefully I'll be able to write non-premium articles indefinitely, though.

[thecapn]

I personally don't think the price Star City is asking is too much, but then again I do keep up on other formats and am particularly interested in limited.

One idea I had was offering memberships with a certain amount of store purchases.  Would everyone who is adverse to a paying for a membership be opposed to buying some amount of their cards and supplies at Star City in exchange for a membership?

[Bram]

Coming from Europe, let me answer that with a 'yes'.

Shipping alone almost covers an annual membership fee. Even so, many teams will just chip in for 1 membership and c/p the content to their private boards.

[Triple_S]

Pete is a good guy and I enjoy reading the stuff by Flores, Aten, etc so $30 for a year isn't bad (I do that much in raw deal sales on ebay every other day easily).  Pete gives to the community, its time to give back some too.

[Bram]

Well, I don't doubt he's a good guy at all. And I know that SCG is an important resource. And like I said, I think this will be a good thing in the long run for the game as a whole.

But then again, I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in the occasional really good vintage article on his site. I couldn't care less about everything else he has on there. I wouldn't pay a 30 buck subsription fee either for, say, a bi-monthly magazine that tends to hold 1 article of interest for me.

I'm not flaming the idea or whatever; just pointing out that a subscription will just not be an option for me at that rate. If I were to heavily play (or possibly be even mildly interested in) other formats, I think I'd easily cough up the cash. As it stands, seeing the low number of times I actually surf over there to read up on Vintage, I'd be willing to give, say, ten buks a year for a Vintage-only membership or something, and not thrice that for a 'package deal' that has no added value for me.

[Matt]

I'd prefer to see it paid on a per-article basis. That would have several benefits:

1) I don't have to pay for things I don't want. This includes both articles about formats I don't care for and the case where the customer is only able to play during summer - some people can't get 12 months of use out of their $30 even if they want to. There's probably a significant market for the kind of person (like Bram) who would like to pay for some of the content, but can't justify paying for all of it, and so they end up not buying anything, which is the worst possible outcome from SCG's perspective.

2) They could possibly (probably?) make MORE money. Five days a week, $30 a year comes to about 11.5 cents per day. If they have an average of two premium articles per day, they could charge, say, 7 cents apiece and depending on the demographics of their readership make more money AND please their readers more.

3) Even if #2 falls through because the numbers just don't add up, people are willing to spend more money if it's bled out slower. Let's say I'm Matt Q. Reader. I very well might be willing to spend $45 per year, seven cents at a time than I would $30 per year in one lump sum, because of the opportunity cost associated with the larger cash flux.

[Bram]

True, but there's also transaction costs associated with paying someone 7 cts. each time. Not to mention the fact that it's annoying to boot up paypal or whatever every day.

There's middle ground though. I like Matt's idea. What would be ideal for me is making an account, and when I click on a premium article, I 'buy' it (for, say, 20 cts. or whatever) and they'd charge my card once a year or so for the bulk sum of what I read. Or once a month. There could even be like a 'shopping basket' that tells you how much cash you spent and actually stores links to the articles for future reference or some such shit.

Oh well. It's probably a good thing I don't run the joint, or they'd be our of business in no time flat. Still, I don't think it's too bad of an idea.