New terms - commercial content on RMweb

[Neil]

There is a bit of a conundrum here. For many the weekend represents time off, time to indulge in hobbies like spending time here; however if your job is running the forum then it would be valued if the weekend didn't throw up stuff that caused a headache. I can see both sides and have sympathy for both. I was going to say that there are no easy answers but that would be wrong; "all" we have to do is put the pointy sticks away and not pick silly arguments.

[RJS1977]

My thinking was that if Andy didn't want any posts at all over the weekend, he would have locked the thread. Therefore I interpreted it as not wanting anything controversial.

[BRMSarah]

Hello everyone.  I am Sarah and I'm the "Ad Boys" you've heard so much about.  It's great to see so many of you understanding what we're doing with RMWeb and why.  If anyone has any queries please feel free to message me direct on sarah.jarman@warnersgroup.co.uk.  For those that have already messaged I have just come back from annual leave today and I'm working my way through my inbox so please bear with me and I will get back to you over the next couple of days.

[MarkSG]

On 02/08/2024 at 10:53, AY Mod said:

It will be self evident if a business posts a topic which is about their products or services; a bit like Ford posting a advert video on Youtube - they don't have to say it includes paid content does it?

 

I'm a little reluctant to add heat to an already somewhat overheated topic, and please don't think this is a criticism of the plan itself, because it isn't, but this is a point that I think needs considering. 

 

A publisher publishing their own content doesn't need to declare it as an advert, because no money is changing hands. YouTube accounts are free, and nobody pays YouTube to be able to post a video, so the videos themselves are not advertising even if they are promotional content. But the adverts that appear within YouTube videos are adverts and are clearly labelled as such.

 

On the web, as in print, it is a requirement that any paid content is clearly labelled as such in some way. That's potentially enforceable under consumer protection legislation, as well as being a key part of most advertising industry codes of practice. And that obligation rests with the publisher, not the advertiser. With things like Google Adsense then it's simple enough because the ad network uses a design which incorporates an indication that the content is an ad. But where someone is paying you directly to publish their advert, or is sponsoring the forum in return for being permitted to post promotional content, then you do have an obligation to indicate that in some way. Sometimes, with things like banner adverts, the design alone is enough. But with forum posts, then you will need some way to indicate paid content.

 

I don't know how far down the road of actually setting all this up you are, but probably the simplest way of doing it would be to create a  new membership category, similar to the ones that already appear with everybody's profile icon against their posts. So as well as "Members", "Administrators", "RMweb Gold", etc, you could have a category of "Sponsors" for members who have entered into the relevant commercial agreement.

 

Doing that isn't just a means of meeting a legal and regulatory requirement. It would also forestall the otherwise inevitable complaints when person A gets their post deleted because it's promotional content, but person B's equally promotional post gets left in place. Or when person C posts promotional content and person D thinks they shouldn't have been allowed to because they don't realise that C recently upgraded to being a sponsor. And so on. Full transparency heads that off at the pass.

 

That doesn't mean you have to indicate how much each sponsor is paying. That's a commercial agreement, and you're perfectly entitled to keep that aspect confidential. Most people will understand that BigModelCo is paying more than PinMoneyTrader. All that matters is that people know that both BigModelCo and PinMoneyTrader have an agreement which allows them to promote their goods and services.

[Nick C]

On 05/08/2024 at 18:39, MarkSG said:

But where someone is paying you directly to publish their advert, or is sponsoring the forum in return for being permitted to post promotional content, then you do have an obligation to indicate that in some way.

Andy's already said earlier in the thread that they're going to do so...

[Sir TophamHatt]

On 02/08/2024 at 10:15, Phil Parker said:

 

It's a big picture thing - ask yourself this, who should pay to keep RMweb working?

 

If someone is making money out of advertising here, should they not contribute a little?

 

I think it's a mis-understanding here of what this forum is.

 

A few years back, it seemed like a community of like-minded people that talked to each other about the hobby on a little forum.

Now it's a commerical enterprise and needs to pay for itself.

 

I'm not saying either way is right or wrong, but just noticing the difference between what it was and what it is now.  This new announcement is just making the latter a little more blatant.

 

People don't pay for Gmail (I know you can) or Outlook...  there's hundreds of services I use that I don't pay for as it's supported in another way.

 

Again, not saying RM Web should be, but will it end up being a closed forum for "subscribers" only?

[Phil Parker]

2 minutes ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

Again, not saying RM Web should be, but will it end up being a closed forum for "subscribers" only?

 

To tackle that one first - no it won't. Everything we do is aimed at keeping RMweb operating, and free to use.

 

3 minutes ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

A few years back, it seemed like a community of like-minded people that talked to each other about the hobby on a little forum.

 

Which @AY Mod paid for out of his own pocket. There were still hosting costs etc. and these have grown as the forum has become more popular.

 

4 minutes ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

People don't pay for Gmail (I know you can) or Outlook...  there's hundreds of services I use that I don't pay for as it's supported in another way.

 

By using those services, you are happily handing lots of lovely, and very saleable, data over to those who provide them. We don't do that.

 

By all means though, if someone has a brilliant idea how RMweb can be funded that doesn't involve subsidy from a magazine that most people on here won't buy, then let us know. It's a conundrum that media companies around the world are grappling with.

[JSModels]

As a small business owner who uses RMWeb to promote my products (when I remember to post about them!) I for one would be happy to pay a reasonable amount to support the forum. The money has to come from somewhere, and I can imagine the cost of hosting the website isn't cheap. The magazine, like probably every other print media, is probably struggling a little, so asking for the sales of theprinted magazine to subsidise the website isn't really feasible. Asking businesses who advertise their products on the website to contribute is only fair, IMHO.

 

The issue is going to be establishing what level of cost is appropriate, justified, and reasonable. I just hope that the costs are within what I can afford*. I don't pay for magazine adverts as that simply doesn't generate enough sales to cover the cost of that (and I have tried it in the past). RMWeb has historically generated sales directly, particularly in the early days of my business, but the levels aren't massive. If it's a few quid a month then that's fine, but if it's going to be hundreds a year then I would really struggle to justify paying it.

 

*I emailed @BRMSarah last Monday for pricing, but haven't received any figures yet...

 

Jonathan

JSModels

[Phil Parker]

5 minutes ago, JSModels said:

*I emailed @BRMSarah last Monday for pricing, but haven't received any figures yet...

 

She's on holiday I think, so there is still catching up to do. Carry on as you are for the moment.

[Oldddudders]

2 hours ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

I think it's a mis-understanding here of what this forum is.

 

A few years back, it seemed like a community of like-minded people that talked to each other about the hobby on a little forum.

Now it's a commerical enterprise and needs to pay for itself.

But you only joined in 2016, long after Warners had stepped in to take the £ burden off Andy Y. It is still, for the most part "a community of like-minded people that talked to each other about the hobby on a little forum", and some of us choose to pay a little to support it, in my case because I want it to continue, and I can afford £1 a week. A small number of members make, perhaps, a little 'beer and baccy' money from promoting their typically-home-brewed products here - and they certainly add value to the place, of course. A proportional contribution is what I think is being sought now. 

[Matt C]

Just a thought on 'pin money traders' 

They may not make a profit,or even trade at a loss ( They enjoy and support our wonderful  Hobby with thier own time) but sometimes they DO gain ASSETS. If you buy a high end 3D printer to print your own designs and you then sell ' just a few bits' to friends and mutual acquaintances to offset your outlay on the printer you don't  really make any money, but you DO end up owning a very good 3D printer, which allows you to continue to print and sell more items. So in a way, yes you DO  profit, or at least minimise your financial  outlay ?

 I think it is at this level of 'trader' that will need a fine balancing act by Andy &  Warners to work out what content  'Value' these traders bring to RmWeb, and what advertising  cost ( if any) they should pay. It's  then up to those traders to decide  if they can justify  the cost or live without RmWeb exposure.   very difficult  choices on both sides and one's I'm  glad I don't  have to make !

[009 micro modeller]

3 hours ago, Matt C said:

Just a thought on 'pin money traders' 

They may not make a profit,or even trade at a loss ( They enjoy and support our wonderful  Hobby with thier own time) but sometimes they DO gain ASSETS. If you buy a high end 3D printer to print your own designs and you then sell ' just a few bits' to friends and mutual acquaintances to offset your outlay on the printer you don't  really make any money, but you DO end up owning a very good 3D printer, which allows you to continue to print and sell more items. So in a way, yes you DO  profit, or at least minimise your financial  outlay ?

 I think it is at this level of 'trader' that will need a fine balancing act by Andy &  Warners to work out what content  'Value' these traders bring to RmWeb, and what advertising  cost ( if any) they should pay. It's  then up to those traders to decide  if they can justify  the cost or live without RmWeb exposure.   very difficult  choices on both sides and one's I'm  glad I don't  have to make !

I was thinking the same thing but what happens if it’s someone who just produces something for their own use, posts about it with no intention of even selling in a small way and then someone messages them and asks them to print them one (which they then do at cost). This is different from a small trader in that they don’t seek to create an ongoing business or promote themselves, and they also don’t really make any money but just cover their costs.

 

On a slightly different topic, is there any issue with people who are members of scale/gauge etc. societies recommending (in appropriate threads/contexts) that others join them? I only ask because usually when people post ‘newbie 009 advice’-type threads I mention my experience as an 009 Society member (which is legally now a ‘company’, but not a commercial organisation) and that it’s a good idea for newcomers to 009 to join. I’m not a committee member (which in some ways would make the circumstances slightly different) and I see it in much the same way as somebody recommending a product they’ve bought. I’m not sure if the fact that the thing being bought is a membership makes it different though?

[martin_wynne]

24 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I was thinking the same thing but what happens if it’s someone who just produces something for their own use, posts about it with no intention of even selling in a small way and then someone messages them and asks them to print them one (which they then do at cost).

 

That is not advertising a commercial service, even if you are paid more than cost for your trouble. Advertising is when you let folks know that you would be willing to make them for others -- unless you give them away free.

 

 

[009 micro modeller]

8 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

That is not advertising a commercial service, even if you are paid more than cost for your trouble. Advertising is when you let folks know that you would be willing to make them for others -- unless you give them away free.

 

 

Exactly, I only mention it because it’s about where you draw the line. I think @AY Mod and @Phil Parker have handled it well so far though - but would be good to find out the answer to my other question above if possible?

[Phil Parker]

1 hour ago, 009 micro modeller said:

Exactly, I only mention it because it’s about where you draw the line. I think @AY Mod and @Phil Parker have handled it well so far though - but would be good to find out the answer to my other question above if possible?

 

Sorry, I was having my tea. 

 

Basically, @martin_wynne is right. We aren't going to chase down some doing the odd item at cost, but if you want to turn this into a business and use RMweb to easily advertise to thousands, then things change. 

 

And you can recommend a scale society in a thread. You can even recommend a commercial firm. 

[009 micro modeller]

44 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

Basically, @martin_wynne is right. We aren't going to chase down some doing the odd item at cost, but if you want to turn this into a business and use RMweb to easily advertise to thousands, then things change. 

Yeah, fair enough and that seems completely sensible. Edit: and sorry, didn’t mean to sound like I was hassling you - hope cake was consumed as well as tea?

 

44 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

And you can recommend a scale society in a thread. You can even recommend a commercial firm. 

Thanks, just thought I’d check - the distinguishing feature from somebody recommending a product that I wasn’t sure about is that I am a (in this case 009 Society) member myself, which implies an ongoing involvement rather than a one-off thing. As a member of the society I don’t directly benefit from more people signing up of course - the only difference is that it might mean the society is able to cover its costs better and have a bit more money for things that all the members benefit from.

 

I do sympathise with the argument others have made earlier about small traders who are not making a massive profit but doing it mainly as a service to other modellers, but on the other hand if you get too far into that argument where do you draw the line? It’s not as if they are legally different (like charities are) for instance.

Edited August 14 by 009 micro modeller

[Sir TophamHatt]

On 13/08/2024 at 14:48, Oldddudders said:

But you only joined in 2016, long after Warners had stepped in to take the £ burden off Andy Y. 

And in that best part of 10 years, I have seen the shift.

Perhaps it's more the hobby in itself rather than this particular forum.  Perhaps it's where people's lives are.

 

My post wasn't a challenge, it was simply observations and questions.

 

Should Jimmy selling a few bits and bobs have to pay a fee for advertising here?

Should someone who is running a small, but their full time job business have to pay a fee to covertly advertise here?

Should the likes of Bachmann and Hornby have to pay a fee to advertise here?

 

The big risk is those who can't afford / don't want to / don't see the value in paying will just leave and along with them, discussion and expertise.  When there are other platforms offering free discussion "forums", it's a big decision for many creators.  And if the companies I am interested in stop posting here, there is little incentive for me to.  That sounds a lot more dramatic than it's meant to be and no, I am unlikely to stop posting here but there could be a large shift over the next 12 months from where this forum is now to where it could be.

Edited August 15 by Sir TophamHatt

[AY Mod]

1 hour ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

Should Jimmy selling a few bits and bobs have to pay a fee for advertising here?

 

Yes.

 

Premium membership only costs £12 p.a. which enables this. If there was no charge or record of details there would be abuse of the facility by some who do not participate in other ways and more people getting fleeced. There's Facebook for that.

 

1 hour ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

Should someone who is running a small, but their full time job business have to pay a fee to covertly advertise here?

 

Yes.

 

1 hour ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

Should the likes of Bachmann and Hornby have to pay a fee to advertise here?

 

Yes.

 

1 hour ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

When there are other platforms offering free discussion "forums", it's a big decision for many creators. 

 

RMweb offers better facilities and a less transient platform than other social media. There are other 'free' forums out there, there always has been but RMweb is still the busiest, and IMHO, the best.

 

1 hour ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

there could be a large shift over the next 12 months from where this forum is now to where it could be.

 

There's been numerous times others have said that. It's still as busy as ever here in traffic volumes.

[Phil Parker]

2 hours ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

That sounds a lot more dramatic than it's meant to be and no, I am unlikely to stop posting here but there could be a large shift over the next 12 months from where this forum is now to where it could be.

 

To continue with the melodramatic theme - if RMweb doesn't cover its costs, then there is very likely to be a dramatic shift, from there being an RMweb to there not being an RMweb.

[Nile]

2 hours ago, AY Mod said:

3 hours ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

Should Jimmy selling a few bits and bobs have to pay a fee for advertising here?

 

Yes.

 

Premium membership only costs £12 p.a. which enables this.

Thanks, I thought the marketplace was only for gold members. Was there a change that I missed?

[MarkSG]

3 hours ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

Should Jimmy selling a few bits and bobs have to pay a fee for advertising here?

Should someone who is running a small, but their full time job business have to pay a fee to covertly advertise here?

Should the likes of Bachmann and Hornby have to pay a fee to advertise here?

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "covertly advertise" in the second of those questions. Obviously any advertising, in the traditional sense (eg, display adverts either placed directly or via an intermediary such as Google Adsense), has to be paid for. And that applies to small businesses as much as large ones.

 

My understanding of the plan is that it's intended  to effectively eliminate "covert" advertising, by requiring payment for "product placement" (to use a term familiar within the broadcasting industry)  within the discussion threads rather than paying for display advertising. So it won't be covert any more, it will need to be up front both with Warners and with other members of the forum. Sponsored posts (or posts from "sponsor members") will be identifiable as such, just as banner ads are identifiable as advertising. 

[AY Mod]

49 minutes ago, Nile said:

Was there a change that I missed?

 

Hiding in full view. 😁

 

It was included from Day 1 of Premium in addition to the absence of Google ads.

[Phil Parker]

6 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "covertly advertise" in the second of those questions. Obviously any advertising, in the traditional sense (eg, display adverts either placed directly or via an intermediary such as Google Adsense), has to be paid for. And that applies to small businesses as much as large ones.

 

My understanding of the plan is that it's intended  to effectively eliminate "covert" advertising, by requiring payment for "product placement" (to use a term familiar within the broadcasting industry)  within the discussion threads rather than paying for display advertising. So it won't be covert any more, it will need to be up front both with Warners and with other members of the forum. Sponsored posts (or posts from "sponsor members") will be identifiable as such, just as banner ads are identifiable as advertising. 

 

Yes - the big display adverts have always been paid for, as are the Google served-up ads. But plenty of people like to set up a thread announcing a new product, because they know it will be in front of thousands of people, and that's the area that's being worked on. For the big players, those whose shoulders are broadest and who will be contributing the most, Sarah and her team have been in touch with them. The tiny guys are much more of a work in progress.

 

I'm not sure what "covert advertising" is, as adverts, by their very nature need to be uncovert (is that a word?) as there's not much point in advertising if no one sees it. I suspect it means popping in mentions of your product into existing threads. This is a tricky area, which is why we're still working on it. If someone keeps banging on about how they produce a range of left-handed LNWR widget holders suitable for EM gauge modellers, then that's advertising, and we want a share of those millions being made, to pay for the bandwidth etc. used by the person selling them.

 

Another part of the process, is that we are offering more package deals to advertisers. With three magazines, World of Railways, RMweb, enewsletters and shows, it makes sense to do a one-off deal that covers everything, rather than continually being bothered when a new opportunity arises.

[Sir TophamHatt]

10 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "covertly advertise"

 

You should be more sure of yourself - your reply was what I meant :)

There are some posts I have seen that seem to be subtly / covertly advertising their products, but they are far and few between.

 

I guess define advertising.

 

There are some posts here that are blatant "buy my product".

There are others that are "here are some things I have made, you can buy them here if you want".

There are some that are in between.

 

A forum member not connected to any company posting here with what the newest releases are - is that advertising?

A forum member not connected to the company but suggesting products they have used successfully and easily - is that advertising?

A forum member who is connected to a company (by way of being on their staff) but their account seems more personal rather than a "company profile" posting here what their newest releases are - is that advertising?

 

I am completely not affected as I don't make anything worth selling :P

 

But what I am worried about is certain people / companies not paying a fee and thus not posting here meaning I may miss an announcement of a product that I would like to buy.

[martin_wynne]

1 minute ago, Phil Parker said:

uncovert (is that a word?)

 

overt