Is something wrong with ths picture?

[+emmett]

.

 

Some observations …

 

Geocaching.com would not exist were it not for the people who invest time and money in pacing and maintaining caches.

 

As those who own caches know, the amount of time and money is not insignificant.

 

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

 

Some of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee have been treated rudely by staffers (not reviewers) of geocaching.com.

 

None of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee are given any say in the policies that govern the web site.

 

Some services that were once free now cost money.

 

Some questions …

 

If geocaching.com is generating millions of dollars in revenue, why are reviewers unpaid?

 

Who is making all the money?

 

Since we cache owners are vital stakeholders, should we not have a say in the governance of the site?

 

.

[+KoosKoos]

Some questions …

 

If geocaching.com is generating millions of dollars in revenue, why are reviewers unpaid?

 

Who is making all the money?

 

Since we cache owners are vital stakeholders, should we not have a say in the governance of the site?

 

1) Servers, programming, and hosting fees are sucking up a lot of that revenue. The business model is to use volunteers as reviewers.

 

2) Programming consultants and hosting companies more than likely. (see note above, this isn't a complaint)

 

3) I think that Groundspeak could come up with better ways to get the voice of the consumer. Forum posters tend to be the most vocal which leads others to think that a select group of customers is driving all of the policies. (and on the flip side, others think only whiners are in the forums and everything is perfect)

[+D@nim@l]

In before the angst.

[+russellvt]

Since we cache owners are vital stakeholders, should we not have a say in the governance of the site?

With all due respect, and I can certainly understand and empathize with your points (and I might even agree with one or more of them). But, you probably own a cell phone, too (and pay a monthly service fee for the privilege)... but without buying a significant amount of stock in the company, it doesn't give you a right to tell them how to run their services. Put simply, you're a participant, free to pull all your caches whenever you feel like it (GC doesn't "own" them - you do)... you're not a stock (stake) holder.

 

Similarly, the reviewers do so because they want to... I'm pretty sure they could walk away from it at any time, as well.

 

And as someone already pointed out... there are lots of places revenue ends up going (more than just the obvious). Large dynamic websites tend to suck up a lot of time/money...

 

Edit: small clarifications

Edited July 9, 2008 by russellvt

[+WeightMan]

.

 

Some observations …

 

Geocaching.com would not exist were it not for the people who invest time and money in pacing and maintaining caches.

 

As those who own caches know, the amount of time and money is not insignificant.

 

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

 

Some of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee have been treated rudely by staffers (not reviewers) of geocaching.com.

 

None of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee are given any say in the policies that govern the web site.

 

Some services that were once free now cost money.

 

Some questions …

 

If geocaching.com is generating millions of dollars in revenue, why are reviewers unpaid?

 

Who is making all the money?

 

Since we cache owners are vital stakeholders, should we not have a say in the governance of the site?

 

.

It is difficult to respond to such generalities. For example: How are people being treated rudely by staffers? What services that were free are now charged for? How many millions are the $30 annual fee raising? How many other millions are being generated by the advertising revenue? Do those advertisers have any say in the policies of geocaching.com? Are there any reviewers complaining about the fact that they volunteer their time? If they are not complaining, why should we worry about it with so many other things in out life to worry about?

 

Just a few questions that occur to this non-reviewer who pays the $30 annual fee gladly to be able to use the services.

[knowschad]

 

 

 

[+trainlove]

Reviewers are voluntered by the community of moderators and reviewers that know them. I hear tell that there is a super secret forum that those people talk about all of us...

 

Sure it would be nice if they were paid, but then it would be too much like a job, they would have to be monitored to see if they are slacking...

I'm against working, I have not worked since 2004, well not really.

 

P.S. Then there are some cachers who have just too many caches, and too many hard cache series kind of near me but out of my normal way, and ... Every time I hope to complete something, up come a new dozen or so... And of course I have lost all the pieces of information gathered at so many of your caches over the years that I can't complete anything without starting over again.

[+DeskJocky]

 

Who is making all the money?

 

 

Disney...

 

If you are not happy about how you or others are being treated feel free to list your caches elsewhere. I know people who feel that way and have.

[+Prime Suspect]

Some observations …

 

Geocaching.com would not exist were it not for the people who invest time and money in pacing and maintaining caches.

 

As those who own caches know, the amount of time and money is not insignificant.

 

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

There is no fee charged for finding or placing caches. People can if they choose to, pay a very small fee to get access to some bells & whistles that are in the "nice to have" category, but not necessary to geocaching. Get your facts straight.

 

Millions in revenue? You would know the books of a private company... how? Besides, revenue is irrelevant. Now, if they were making millions in profit... I'd say, good for them!

 

Some of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee have been treated rudely by staffers (not reviewers) of geocaching.com.

 

None of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee are given any say in the policies that govern the web site.

 

Some services that were once free now cost money.

You're certainly free to comment on how you think gc.com should be run. There are even forums for that. But you don't get to dictate it, any more than you get to dictate how Target runs its stores.

 

As for services that were once free now costing money - name one, please. All member-only services have always been add-ons to the basic service. Nothing's ever been taken away and made MO. Get your facts straight.

Edited July 9, 2008 by Prime Suspect

[+KoosKoos]

If you are not happy about how you or others are being treated feel free to list your caches elsewhere. I know people who feel that way and have.

 

While I agree that posters often open the can of worms of "I was treated unfairly, GS is making billions of dollars, etc., etc., etc.", I think it's possible to have a discussion of how Groundspeak could improve their service without resorting immediately to "it's their ball, if you don't like it, find another playground" argument.

 

It's always an option, but why not encourage improvements here before walking out?

[+Prime Suspect]

[dup post removed]

Edited July 9, 2008 by Prime Suspect

[+russellvt]

I think it's possible to have a discussion of how Groundspeak could improve their service without resorting immediately to "it's their ball, if you don't like it, find another playground" argument.

 

It's always an option, but why not encourage improvements here before walking out?

There's already an entire forum pretty much dedicated to just that...

[+welch]

Since we cache owners are vital stakeholders, should we not have a say in the governance of the site?

 

.

I'll bite and say Yes.

Now tell me how you get thousands of people (assuming they care and want to take part) to come to some sort of agreement about what should / should not happen on the matter of ______ ?

Seems like in order to get any sort resonable quick consistant judgement you need a small group or maybe just ONE, right?

[+sbell111]

[+ThirstyMick]

Millions of dollars? Can I go work at Groundspeak?

 

Maybe they're making decent money, but Groundspeak does have employees to pay and servers to buy, electric, rent, etc. Not too long ago (maybe a year) logging finds on a monday was unbearable b/c of all the load on their servers.. I'd guess my $30 fee went to good use, b/c I haven't wanted to cry while logging finds lately.

 

Although, it's still not right that someone was rude to you.. whether or not you pay them or support their business..

[Mushtang]

Hey, you're right!!!!!

 

I've bought a lot of Rush albums in the past, I'm helping to give them millions of dollars. I should get to come up with the name of their next album and maybe help write some songs. I'm tired of their drummer treating me rudely.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Some observations …

 

Geocaching.com would not exist were it not for the people who invest time and money in pacing and maintaining caches.

 

As those who own caches know, the amount of time and money is not insignificant.

 

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

There is no fee charged for finding or placing caches. People can if they choose to, pay a very small fee to get access to some bells & whistles that are in the "nice to have" category, but not necessary to geocaching. Get your facts straight.

 

Millions in revenue? You would know the books of a private company... how? Besides, revenue is irrelevant. Now, if they were making millions in profit... I'd say, good for them!

 

Some of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee have been treated rudely by staffers (not reviewers) of geocaching.com.

 

None of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee are given any say in the policies that govern the web site.

 

Some services that were once free now cost money.

You're certainly free to comment on how you think gc.com should be run. There are even forums for that. But you don't get to dictate it, any more than you get to dictate how Target runs its stores.

 

As for services that were once free now costing money - name one, please. All member-only services have always been add-ons to the basic service. Nothing's ever been taken away and made MO. Get your facts straight.

I feel that Primr Suspect made all of the major points that I was about to, but got there first and said even better than I could have! Thanks! Well said! I would also add the following:

 

From the moment that I first read the OP's post, red flags appeared on my inner radar screen, because there were -- whether they were intentional or not -- in his/her post, a number of distortions and misstatements of fact and instances of pure hyperbole. Prime Suspect has already addressed a number of them, but let's skip the content of the issues/points themselves and, just for a moment, back out the the meta-level and take a look at the OPs post and the sum of her/his distortions, misstatements, hype and mis-assumptions. It is primarily here, in doing so (that is, in stepping back and taking a look at the whole post at the meta-level) that most of the red flags appear on my radar screen, and the biggest sense that I get when re-reading his/her post is that he/she seems to have a major sense of entitlement, and that further, this sense of entitlement seems to have affected the writing style and behavior of the OP to the extent that she/he gave in to the urge to engage in distortions, misstatements of fact, broadcasting of mis-assumptions, and hyperbole, all in the name of service to his/her cause. As a result of this...

 

I am rather disgusted and disappointed, so much so that I must forthwith go downstairs to my Revigator radium water dispenser and dispense about a pint of cold refreshing radioactive water (footnote 1) in my large ceramic mug, to better wash the bitter taste of disgust from my mouth.

Footnote 1: This particular batch is quite refreshing, invigorating and revigorating, for it exhibits about 235,000 pCi/L (picoCuries per liter) of radioactivity, and, due to a particular modification which I made to my radium water dispenser, is quite high in the extremely rare and short-lived radioactive trace element astatine.

Edited July 9, 2008 by Vinny & Sue Team

[+TexasGringo]

I've emailed and called GS and always have been treated great.

 

The reviewers (Wisconsin / Texas) have gone out of their way to get caches approved and posted.

 

Now on the other hand, my posting privileges were once suspended for a sarcastic remark I made to a moderator...after they first made a sarcastic remark to a question I asked.

 

But, that is all in the days work as a Geocacher.

Edited July 9, 2008 by Drooling_Mongoloid

[+briansnat]

Who is making all the money?

 

I don't know, but the last I knew Jeremy was getting around on a Vespa scooter, not a Porsche

 

Since we cache owners are vital stakeholders, should we not have a say in the governance of the site?

 

No. I'm not the one who started this site, invested my own time and money, then went out on a limb and quit my job to run it.

 

I use the site's services to advertise my caches. Heck, they probably should be charging me for listing my caches, but it's free. How great is that!

 

Speaking of great, I think it's wonderful that the site's business model allows any geocacher, whether a cache owner or seeker, to use it for free.

[+StarBrand]

I've always treated the few lackey's I have spoken to with respect and got the same in return. No complaints here.

 

We are all customers, if we don't like the product - don't buy it. Go buy a competitor's. I am actually amazed at how well Groundspeak does resond to the community and the well being of the activity. Sometimes TPTB act to protect thier revenue and product but mostly they act to protect and help us out. I am certain there are a few tens of thousands of Starbucks customers upset about 500 stores closing - but they don't get to tell the corporation to keep the doors open anyway.

[+Moose Mob]

Reviewers aren't paid?

 

At Geowoodstock, MissJenn gave me a big hug. That's pay enough for me.

 

I also got a hug in Seattle and Germany when we met there. It just doesn't get any better than that.

[+infiniteMPG]

I might be way off base here but it seems that most of the folks who post that they have been treated badly by someone from GS or a reviewer are posting a pretty bitter or harsh message to that effect. Not any kind of physiologist and I'm not even in the loop (unless I post a response) yet I often feel defensive by their presentation. I can only imagine what an overwhelmed volunteer reviewer must feel like, especially if it's not their first experience with that attitude.

 

“Be polite; write diplomatically; even in a declaration of war one observes the rules of politeness.” ~ Otto von Bismarck

 

If anyone is making money off this then kudo's to them and they get my nod of jealousy! We pay taxes that pay for the postal service who charge us a fortune to mail a letter, they mandate that they can't have any competition and yet spend millions of our dollars on TV and other advertising to try to get us to give them more business. I'm just glad we don't get charges 42-cents every time w log a find

[+steve p]

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

That got me curious. Emmett, can you tell me how many millions of dollars in revenue GC earns? Since you know that figure, how much of that revenue is income? Others might be interested in the numbers as well.

Edited July 9, 2008 by steve p

[+hukilaulau]

I might be way off base here but it seems that most of the folks who post that they have been treated badly by someone from GS or a reviewer are posting a pretty bitter or harsh message to that effect.

Well, here's a change... there is ONE person at GS whom I find rude and sarcastic more often than not, both in the forums and in his private responses to me and some other locals in this area.

But I'm not bitter and I've never made a (public) harsh statement about him. I agree with what others have said. I'm 98% happy with GS and I expect to continue paying for my premium membership.

Despite what the OP said, this is a fantastically inexpensive hobby for the benefits it provides.

After reading these forums for 3 1/2 years, I can tell you for sure I DO NOT want the general membership to have a say in how things are done!

(Oh, yeah... it is NOT my reviewer I'm referring to above. He/she is doing just fine, despite some disagreements we've had over the years!)

[+hukilaulau]

deleting double post

Edited July 9, 2008 by hukilaulau

[+D@nim@l]

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

That got me curious. Emmett, can you tell me how many millions of dollars in revenue GC earns? Since you know that figure, how much of that revenue is income? Others might be interested in the numbers as well.

 

There are over 1,735,000 user accounts. About 5-8% are premium members according to my calculations, times that by $30 puts it conservatively at $2.6m/yr. to liberally $4.1m/yr. Add in licensing, merchandise, advertising and the $1.50 for each trackable geocoin made and it adds quickly from there.

 

Money paid out to content providers $0 ???

Edited July 9, 2008 by D@nim@l

[+Metaphor]

This thread is a good reminder -- I'm due to re-up my membership next week (and I've only found 11 caches since the beginning of the new year...) It's worth it to keep the site running, and my area rerviewer, Quiggle, is one of the best around. You listening, Quig?

[+SUp3rFM & Cruella]

Bottom line: Who isn't happy may list his/her geocaches elsewhere.

 

Right?

 

_STOP WHINING_.

[+StarBrand]

 

There are over 1,735,000 user accounts. About 5-8% are premium members according to my calculations, times that by $30 puts it conservatively at $2.6m/yr. to liberally $4.1m/yr. Add in licensing, merchandise, advertising and the $1.50 for each trackable geocoin made add it adds quickly from there.

 

Money paid out to content providers $0 ???

For a bit of perspective, your typical neighborhood McDonalds store in a decent location generates between 600,000 and 4 million per year............. just 1 store.............. They don't expensive computer servers, internet connections, marketing staff, programmers, network folks etc........

 

2.6 to 4.1 with a staff of 25 or more and all those pcs = just not a lot of money.......

[jholly]

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

That got me curious. Emmett, can you tell me how many millions of dollars in revenue GC earns? Since you know that figure, how much of that revenue is income? Others might be interested in the numbers as well.

 

There are over 1,735,000 user accounts. About 5-8% are premium members according to my calculations, times that by $30 puts it conservatively at $2.6m/yr. to liberally $4.1m/yr. Add in licensing, merchandise, advertising and the $1.50 for each trackable geocoin made and it adds quickly from there.

 

Money paid out to content providers $0 ???

 

And for that kind of money you would think they could eliminate double posts. jeeez.

 

Jim

[+WRASTRO]

I keep waiting for the "rest of the story" post, but since no one else has done it I guess I will. It will be interesting to find out what the rest of the story is behind the OP since it is just a bit over the top.

 

This is a great game with great players, great volunteers and great staff and ownership at Groundspeak. Without all of these groups working so hard to make this a fun game I would need to be searching for something to fill a huge void in my life. Thanks to everyone who works so hard to keep this game so much fun.

[+D@nim@l]

 

There are over 1,735,000 user accounts. About 5-8% are premium members according to my calculations, times that by $30 puts it conservatively at $2.6m/yr. to liberally $4.1m/yr. Add in licensing, merchandise, advertising and the $1.50 for each trackable geocoin made add it adds quickly from there.

 

Money paid out to content providers $0 ???

For a bit of perspective, your typical neighborhood McDonalds store in a decent location generates between 600,000 and 4 million per year............. just 1 store.............. They don't expensive computer servers, internet connections, marketing staff, programmers, network folks etc........

 

2.6 to 4.1 with a staff of 25 or more and all those pcs = just not a lot of money.......

 

This may be true but that is PM revenue only mind you. The fact of the matter is: IF geocaching.com closed its doors tomorrow, geocaching would still exist. IF all the caches were pulled from geocaching.com tomorrow, it would no longer exist (well maybe that Waymarking thing would whatever that is).

[jholly]

This may be true but that is PM revenue only mind you. The fact of the matter is: IF geocaching.com closed its doors tomorrow, geocaching would still exist. IF all the caches were pulled from geocaching.com tomorrow, it would no longer exist (well maybe that Waymarking thing would whatever that is).

 

ah, hmmm. I don't follow this premise. If GC.com closed it's doors geocaching would still exist. How? The servers would be gone, hence geocaching would be gone regardless if the caches still existed or not.

 

Jim

[+webscouter.]

This may be true but that is PM revenue only mind you. The fact of the matter is: IF geocaching.com closed its doors tomorrow, geocaching would still exist. IF all the caches were pulled from geocaching.com tomorrow, it would no longer exist (well maybe that Waymarking thing would whatever that is).

 

ah, hmmm. I don't follow this premise. If GC.com closed it's doors geocaching would still exist. How? The servers would be gone, hence geocaching would be gone regardless if the caches still existed or not.

 

Jim

 

There are already several other sites that list caches. With GC gone they would pick up business rapidly.

 

But that being said I have visited those sites and greatly prefer GC.com

[+infiniteMPG]

There are over 1,735,000 user accounts. About 5-8% are premium members according to my calculations, times that by $30 puts it conservatively at $2.6m/yr. to liberally $4.1m/yr. Add in licensing, merchandise, advertising and the $1.50 for each trackable geocoin made and it adds quickly from there. Money paid out to content providers $0 ???

Psssst.... wasn't supposed to say anything but I don't think anyone is listening. Hate to break this to ya but everyone involved in geocaching except you is getting paid a base salary of $75K which includes a good benifits package, a bonus of $250 for each cache hidden, $100 for each find on our caches and $50 for each cache we find. GC was granted $10.3B in 1997 on some government earmark funding accident. I retired from my CEO position a few years ago to do this but I was told not to tell you. So don't say I told you, okay?

Edited July 9, 2008 by infiniteMPG

[+D@nim@l]

This may be true but that is PM revenue only mind you. The fact of the matter is: IF geocaching.com closed its doors tomorrow, geocaching would still exist. IF all the caches were pulled from geocaching.com tomorrow, it would no longer exist (well maybe that Waymarking thing would whatever that is).

 

ah, hmmm. I don't follow this premise. If GC.com closed it's doors geocaching would still exist. How? The servers would be gone, hence geocaching would be gone regardless if the caches still existed or not.

 

Jim

 

Put down the kool-aid kiddo. The website would be gone, but would my geocache suddenly disappear from its rocky home? Geocaching.com lists geocaches, they don't hide them. Geocaching existed before the website and will exist after the website.

[consequences]

http://ggaonline.org/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/94...51/m/2551081615

 

Hit above link.

 

Want to Cashe & get Cash?

 

The Georgia Geocaching Association has found a way to do it. The group is quitely discussing the "side activity" of personal wagering on FTF"s. Apparently this is big in GA. One casher notes, "side bets should perhaps be kept out of the public forums."

 

What do they call it down there? "Geowagering? Geobetting? Ante-up with GeoAnte?

 

Is this what caching has come to?

 

Again, hit the above link to view.

[+KoosKoos]

http://ggaonline.org/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/94...51/m/2551081615

 

Hit above link.

 

Want to Cashe & get Cash?

 

The Georgia Geocaching Association has found a way to do it. The group is quitely discussing the "side activity" of personal wagering on FTF"s. Apparently this is big in GA. One casher notes, "side bets should perhaps be kept out of the public forums."

 

What do they call it down there? "Geowagering? Geobetting? Ante-up with GeoAnte?

 

Is this what caching has come to?

 

Again, hit the above link to view.

 

What on earth does this have to do with the current topic???

[+Runaround]

Strange topic.

 

I pay $30 for a product, not to keep the site running. If PQ's go away, I'll stop paying.

 

GC.com is a business. They can run it anyway they want and treat customers anyway they want provided they aren't breaking the law. If you don't like the way they run their business, feel free to go elsewhere. Since they are a privately held business, they don't have an obligation to tell you anything.

 

And if Jeremy's other car is a Ferrari, good for him.

[+Headhardhat]

dual post

Edited July 9, 2008 by Headhardhat

[+Headhardhat]

 

 

 

 

Scooch over and pass the popcorn please...

[+flask]

i consider my $30 an investment in an activity i enjoy so much.

 

i also pay a significant amount of money for the privilege of putting on a number and hauling my sorry butt around a racecourse once a week. if the organizers can make money off of that, good. keeps the race venue open and convenient.

[+Renegade Knight]

.

....

If geocaching.com is generating millions of dollars in revenue, why are reviewers unpaid?

 

Who is making all the money?

 

Since we cache owners are vital stakeholders, should we not have a say in the governance of the site?

 

.

 

Reviewers are not paid because this site can't afford to. It's a private site that relies on volunteers to review, place, and find caches to bring the whole package together.

 

The reason owners and finders really don't get any say is that they didn't create their own site. They still haven't. They have to come here for the widest variety of caches to seek and to get their caches listed so others will find them. Plan B means one find every other year. Most folks don't have the patience to do what it would take to make a say happen. When isay most, I mean 99.9% of all and 98% of the one's who talk the talk.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Similarly, the reviewers do so because they want to... I'm pretty sure they could walk away from it at any time, as well.

Unfortunately not true. Sure, they volunteer, in their innocence, but then they are sucked into the frog's maw where they are held hostage and made to review micros and answer forum whines about where virts went until they have no willpower or cognitive process left, and therefore no desire to escape when allowed to go to work or events.

 

Pink Floyd wrote about Groundspeak's recruitment machine:

 

Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.

Where have you been? its alright we know where youve been.

Youve been in the pipeline, filling in time, provided with toys and

scouting for boys.

You bought a guitar to punish your ma,

And you didnt like school, and you know youre nobodys fool,

So welcome to the machine.

[+Team Birdaholic]

.

 

Some observations …

 

Geocaching.com would not exist were it not for the people who invest time and money in pacing and maintaining caches.

 

As those who own caches know, the amount of time and money is not insignificant.

 

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

 

Some of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee have been treated rudely by staffers (not reviewers) of geocaching.com.

 

None of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee are given any say in the policies that govern the web site.

 

Some services that were once free now cost money.

 

Some questions …

 

If geocaching.com is generating millions of dollars in revenue, why are reviewers unpaid?

 

Who is making all the money?

 

Since we cache owners are vital stakeholders, should we not have a say in the governance of the site?

 

.

The first two sentences may or may not have some measure of truth. The third item is false. People are not charged, They voluntarily pay a fee it they think that there is a need to. They do not have to pay this fee to enjoy the benefits of the site.

Maybe you have been treated rudely but I believe this is a rarety and not usual. I know for a fact that we are treated as we appear to be, we blame others for what we do ourselves, I think it would be nice if the reviewers were paid but then would there be enough money to go around. How many reviewers are there in the US? Bojab who reviews my caches has them listed within an hour of me putting it on line. Less than 10% pay to use the site and after all the electronic equipment to maintain and the running of it, I can't see that they are making millions in profit. I own some cache's but I am not a stakeholder in the company so I do not get a say in how it runs. This is the way of the world. I personally can't see anything that I would change on the site, I am most pleased with it. Another thing is that at the present time it doesnt cost me anything. Any hobby has a cost to start. EG - Stamp collecting. How much does this cost certainly an lot more than caching. Breeding exotic parrots. Many thousands of dollars to set up and get starting stock.. Car racing how much the cost to start? Geo-caching is the cheapest hobby I have set up in my life. Anyone is entitled to run a business as a profit. If you think that a business is making too much profit, then don't support it.

[+lrosell]

I can't see the picture...???

[+CrippledBlindSquirrel]

Some observations …

 

Geocaching.com would not exist were it not for the people who invest time and money in pacing and maintaining caches.

 

As those who own caches know, the amount of time and money is not insignificant.

 

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

There is no fee charged for finding or placing caches. People can if they choose to, pay a very small fee to get access to some bells & whistles that are in the "nice to have" category, but not necessary to geocaching. Get your facts straight.

 

Millions in revenue? You would know the books of a private company... how? Besides, revenue is irrelevant. Now, if they were making millions in profit... I'd say, good for them!

 

Some of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee have been treated rudely by staffers (not reviewers) of geocaching.com.

 

None of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee are given any say in the policies that govern the web site.

 

Some services that were once free now cost money.

You're certainly free to comment on how you think gc.com should be run. There are even forums for that. But you don't get to dictate it, any more than you get to dictate how Target runs its stores.

 

As for services that were once free now costing money - name one, please. All member-only services have always been add-ons to the basic service. Nothing's ever been taken away and made MO. Get your facts straight.

I feel that Primr Suspect made all of the major points that I was about to, but got there first and said even better than I could have! Thanks! Well said! I would also add the following:

 

From the moment that I first read the OP's post, red flags appeared on my inner radar screen, because there were -- whether they were intentional or not -- in his/her post, a number of distortions and misstatements of fact and instances of pure hyperbole. Prime Suspect has already addressed a number of them, but let's skip the content of the issues/points themselves and, just for a moment, back out the the meta-level and take a look at the OPs post and the sum of her/his distortions, misstatements, hype and mis-assumptions. It is primarily here, in doing so (that is, in stepping back and taking a look at the whole post at the meta-level) that most of the red flags appear on my radar screen, and the biggest sense that I get when re-reading his/her post is that he/she seems to have a major sense of entitlement, and that further, this sense of entitlement seems to have affected the writing style and behavior of the OP to the extent that she/he gave in to the urge to engage in distortions, misstatements of fact, broadcasting of mis-assumptions, and hyperbole, all in the name of service to his/her cause. As a result of this...

 

I am rather disgusted and disappointed, so much so that I must forthwith go downstairs to my Revigator radium water dispenser and dispense about a pint of cold refreshing radioactive water (footnote 1) in my large ceramic mug, to better wash the bitter taste of disgust from my mouth.

Footnote 1: This particular batch is quite refreshing, invigorating and revigorating, for it exhibits about 235,000 pCi/L (picoCuries per liter) of radioactivity, and, due to a particular modification which I made to my radium water dispenser, is quite high in the extremely rare and short-lived radioactive trace element astatine.

 

WHat the heck did he just say??????????????

[+lrosell]

Some observations …

 

Geocaching.com would not exist were it not for the people who invest time and money in pacing and maintaining caches.

 

As those who own caches know, the amount of time and money is not insignificant.

 

These very same people are charged a fee that generates millions of dollars in revenue for geocaching.com.

There is no fee charged for finding or placing caches. People can if they choose to, pay a very small fee to get access to some bells & whistles that are in the "nice to have" category, but not necessary to geocaching. Get your facts straight.

 

Millions in revenue? You would know the books of a private company... how? Besides, revenue is irrelevant. Now, if they were making millions in profit... I'd say, good for them!

 

Some of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee have been treated rudely by staffers (not reviewers) of geocaching.com.

 

None of these people who are building the geocaching.com brand by publishing caches and paying a fee are given any say in the policies that govern the web site.

 

Some services that were once free now cost money.

You're certainly free to comment on how you think gc.com should be run. There are even forums for that. But you don't get to dictate it, any more than you get to dictate how Target runs its stores.

 

As for services that were once free now costing money - name one, please. All member-only services have always been add-ons to the basic service. Nothing's ever been taken away and made MO. Get your facts straight.

I feel that Primr Suspect made all of the major points that I was about to, but got there first and said even better than I could have! Thanks! Well said! I would also add the following:

 

From the moment that I first read the OP's post, red flags appeared on my inner radar screen, because there were -- whether they were intentional or not -- in his/her post, a number of distortions and misstatements of fact and instances of pure hyperbole. Prime Suspect has already addressed a number of them, but let's skip the content of the issues/points themselves and, just for a moment, back out the the meta-level and take a look at the OPs post and the sum of her/his distortions, misstatements, hype and mis-assumptions. It is primarily here, in doing so (that is, in stepping back and taking a look at the whole post at the meta-level) that most of the red flags appear on my radar screen, and the biggest sense that I get when re-reading his/her post is that he/she seems to have a major sense of entitlement, and that further, this sense of entitlement seems to have affected the writing style and behavior of the OP to the extent that she/he gave in to the urge to engage in distortions, misstatements of fact, broadcasting of mis-assumptions, and hyperbole, all in the name of service to his/her cause. As a result of this...

 

I am rather disgusted and disappointed, so much so that I must forthwith go downstairs to my Revigator radium water dispenser and dispense about a pint of cold refreshing radioactive water (footnote 1) in my large ceramic mug, to better wash the bitter taste of disgust from my mouth.

Footnote 1: This particular batch is quite refreshing, invigorating and revigorating, for it exhibits about 235,000 pCi/L (picoCuries per liter) of radioactivity, and, due to a particular modification which I made to my radium water dispenser, is quite high in the extremely rare and short-lived radioactive trace element astatine.

 

Vinnie, that makes my brain hurt... Just like your caches do!

[Clan Riffster]

Is something wrong with ths picture?

I don't see a picture. Just text.

[+lrosell]

Is something wrong with ths picture?

I don't see a picture. Just text.

 

Hey! That was MY joke!!!