Jump to content

Monthly Premium Charge for Google Maps


Recommended Posts

$30 a year for membership. Really!? It comes down to the money (as always). I am so disgusted with the current state of maps, I am willing to put up $9.99 a month to have a subscription to geocaching.com. I have only been geocaching for less than a year, and became a premium member because it was "only" $30 a year to become one. We now have an opportunity to show that we are serious about this hobby and willing to pay to be a "premium" member. At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%. This should be enough to get a contract from Google (with advertising stating "brought to you by GoogleMaps"). $9.99 a month for a hobby that can be enjoyed by the entire family is not much to ask. Asking your premium members to take a major step back in technology and still try to enjoy the hobby? Way too much to ask. I am willing to pay whatever it takes to enjoy this hobby again. If it means trying to find workarounds or putting up with inferior technology, though...sadly, I guess it will be time to find another hobby.

Link to post

$30 a year for membership. Really!? It comes down to the money (as always). I am so disgusted with the current state of maps, I am willing to put up $9.99 a month to have a subscription to geocaching.com. I have only been geocaching for less than a year, and became a premium member because it was "only" $30 a year to become one. We now have an opportunity to show that we are serious about this hobby and willing to pay to be a "premium" member. At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%. This should be enough to get a contract from Google (with advertising stating "brought to you by GoogleMaps"). $9.99 a month for a hobby that can be enjoyed by the entire family is not much to ask. Asking your premium members to take a major step back in technology and still try to enjoy the hobby? Way too much to ask. I am willing to pay whatever it takes to enjoy this hobby again. If it means trying to find workarounds or putting up with inferior technology, though...sadly, I guess it will be time to find another hobby.

Sorry to see you go, hope you find something you like.

Link to post

At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%.

Wait, you're advocating increasing the membership fee by $90 a year? If they were to do this, there'd be a full-on revolt. There's no way 60% of the PMs would renew if that happened. If Groundspeak ever wants to thin out the herd, so to speak, they'll have to keep your idea in mind. It would be a great way to chase away masses of people.

 

I wonder how many of these people posting on here saying they're leaving will actually go through with it. I bet they'll go try the competition for a short time and then come crawling back when they see how bad things are over there.

Link to post

I am willing to put up $9.99 a month

Since adding maps would have a net cost of about 50 cents per premium member per year, that in no way justifies any type of rate increase, especially one that takes it from $30/year to $120/year.

 

People, this isn't about money, its about pinching pennies in a business model that already has a high profit ratio.

Link to post

I am willing to put up $9.99 a month

Since adding maps would have a net cost of about 50 cents per premium member per year, that in no way justifies any type of rate increase, especially one that takes it from $30/year to $120/year.

 

People, this isn't about money, its about pinching pennies in a business model that already has a high profit ratio.

Groundspeak is a private company that does not publish it's financial information. You have previously posted your "information" on the profitability of Groundspeak. I found most of the information suitable for fertilizing my garden. Unless you can cite a source of the information and provide useful and detailed financial information I will again have another load of fertilizer to haul out to my garden.

Link to post

Since adding maps would have a net cost of about 50 cents per premium member per year, that in no way justifies any type of rate increase, especially one that takes it from $30/year to $120/year.

 

People, this isn't about money, its about pinching pennies in a business model that already has a high profit ratio.

 

If you're going to make stuff up, at least make it believable.

 

As far as the original topic, raising that much would stop a huge percentage from staying members. Personally, for the way I cache at least, I don't see a huge difference in the google maps and the mapquest ones. If Groundspeak is able to give basically the same functionality for no added cost, I say go for it. The change hasn't impacted me in the least.

Link to post

As I said in an earlier thread, if access to Google Maps would significantly increase the cost of a premium membership (and yes, a 300% increase is significant), then I would rather see premium membership stay the way it is. Google Maps access can be part of a separate premium-plus type of account. Those who want the extra features can pay for them.

Link to post

That is very nice of you to assume people have money falling out their behinds. A hike like that would force me from out of the PM status.

 

Think about this, all it would take is a mass exodus from this site to that "other site" for the other one to become the go-to site for geocaching instead of this one. The "other site" would have a load of CO's adding their caches to boost the numbers.

 

$30.00 a YEAR is acceptable plus a TB every now and then. Raise the price and I and I imagine many others would go buh bye.

 

I can live with out the google maps*, after all they said they are working on their own server for tiles. That will help out a lot when done.

 

*pssttt... gm script

 

edited to correct month to year. to much cold meds. lolololol

Edited by TeamPennyFinder
Link to post

That is very nice of you to assume people have money falling out their behinds. A hike like that would force me from out of the PM status.

 

Think about this, all it would take is a mass exodus from this site to that "other site" for the other one to become the go-to site for geocaching instead of this one. The "other site" would have a load of CO's adding their caches to boost the numbers.

 

$30.00 a month is acceptable plus a TB every now and then. Raise the price and I and I imagine many others would go buh bye.

 

I can live with out the google maps*, after all they said they are working on their own server for tiles. That will help out a lot when done.

 

*pssttt... gm script

OMG for that price I'll buy my own TB's, thank you. My price point is closer to 30 cents a month.

Link to post

Since adding maps would have a net cost of about 50 cents per premium member per year, that in no way justifies any type of rate increase, especially one that takes it from $30/year to $120/year.

 

People, this isn't about money, its about pinching pennies in a business model that already has a high profit ratio.

 

If you're going to make stuff up, at least make it believable.

Go and get a quote from google, and no, don't copy/paste that low usage page that everyone keeps quoting.

 

Tell me whats not believable AFTER you get the quote.

Link to post

At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%.

Wait, you're advocating increasing the membership fee by $90 a year? If they were to do this, there'd be a full-on revolt. There's no way 60% of the PMs would renew if that happened. If Groundspeak ever wants to thin out the herd, so to speak, they'll have to keep your idea in mind. It would be a great way to chase away masses of people.

 

I wonder how many of these people posting on here saying they're leaving will actually go through with it. I bet they'll go try the competition for a short time and then come crawling back when they see how bad things are over there.

Link to post

Ok, how about $4.99 per year. The point of my post was not that I will "try the competition". There is no competition to geocaching.com, really. That's what makes this so hard to digest. The maps in my area are now useless on the computer, and I live in one of the 50 largest cities in the nation with fiber-optic internet. I don't have a gps, I use the geocaching ap on my android phone (which I paid $9.99 for). The live map feature on that is flawed, too, because you have to constantly hit refresh to find caches around you. If you are travelling in a car, forget it. C:Geo had an excellent live map feature, which was the only thing I used it for, but that was killed, too. We do this hobby because it is fun to do, but my kids are not yet old enough to be able to look them up on their own, and I don't have the time to find ways around the current problems to find them, either. My only option right now is to run pocket queries, but that does no good when we are on the road. I'm not threatening anything. I'm simply stating that anything that goes backwards in technology doesn't last very long. My prediction is that geocaching will still be around, but geocachers will move on if it becomes too much of a hassle to do the hobby any more. If only the new maps worked correctly, there would be no issues. No one ever said "Go back to Google Maps or we quit". How would you feel if Ford recalled all of their vehichles and replaced CD players with 8-track players? You probably would quit buying Fords.

Link to post

Is that why they switched to the new map? Google was charging Groundspeak too much? The new maps are useless on the iPad. You can see caches but you can't tap on them and get details. On the old map it worked fine. Hopefully they can fix this...

Link to post
The live map feature on that is flawed, too, because you have to constantly hit refresh to find caches around you.
If that's the feature you're looking for, then try Neongeo. It supports automatically downloading cache data as you move. Personally, I disabled the feature because I didn't like the way it kept cluttering up the map with nearby caches that I wasn't interested in, but to each his own.
My only option right now is to run pocket queries, but that does no good when we are on the road.
I've never had a problem using PQs when on the road. I don't even use the "caches along a route" feature. I just use regular PQs centered on the location I'm going to travel to/through. From what I've read, the "caches along a route" feature makes it even easier, since you can load a single large PQ rather than a series of smaller ones.

 

Is that why they switched to the new map? Google was charging Groundspeak too much?
Yes.
Link to post

$30 a year for membership. Really!? It comes down to the money (as always). I am so disgusted with the current state of maps, I am willing to put up $9.99 a month to have a subscription to geocaching.com. I have only been geocaching for less than a year, and became a premium member because it was "only" $30 a year to become one. We now have an opportunity to show that we are serious about this hobby and willing to pay to be a "premium" member. At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%. This should be enough to get a contract from Google (with advertising stating "brought to you by GoogleMaps"). $9.99 a month for a hobby that can be enjoyed by the entire family is not much to ask. Asking your premium members to take a major step back in technology and still try to enjoy the hobby? Way too much to ask. I am willing to pay whatever it takes to enjoy this hobby again. If it means trying to find workarounds or putting up with inferior technology, though...sadly, I guess it will be time to find another hobby.

Sorry to see you go, hope you find something you like.

That cracks me up, I couldn't have put it better myself...

Link to post

Is that why they switched to the new map? Google was charging Groundspeak too much? The new maps are useless on the iPad. You can see caches but you can't tap on them and get details. On the old map it worked fine. Hopefully they can fix this...

 

The new maps are FAR from useless on the iPad. They were useless to non-existant before the change. I couldn't do a single thing on them before.

 

Now, the maps are just fine. You can click on any cache in your PQ. I'm lucky in that I have a PQ of just about any area that I might randomly cache in. If I wanted to cache in another area....well, I'd just run another PQ.

 

I know it's not ideal, and that we should be able to click on any cache, on any page, on anydevice. GS is aware and working on that. For now, run a PQ...

Link to post

No one ever said "Go back to Google Maps or we quit".

OK, after re-reading your post, you didn't, but a HUGE number of people in these forums have said exactly this.

 

How would you feel if Ford recalled all of their vehichles and replaced CD players with 8-track players? You probably would quit buying Fords.

That isn't quite how it happened here, though. What happened is that the manufacturer of the only decent CD players jacked their price up enormously. Ford decided that rather than passing this increased cost along to the consumer, they'd subsitute a more affordable solution and keep the overall cost the same. What do you think would happen to Ford if they just jacked the price of all their vehicles up by $5000 (arbitrary number) to cover the increased cost of the CD players? That would probably make even more people quit buying Fords.

 

It was really a no-win situation that Groundspeak found themselves in. Whatever they did, it would tick off large numbers of users. I'd hate to have been involved in the group that had to make the decision. "What can we do to tick off the smallest numbers of users?"

Link to post

$30 a year for membership. Really!? It comes down to the money (as always). I am so disgusted with the current state of maps, I am willing to put up $9.99 a month to have a subscription to geocaching.com. I have only been geocaching for less than a year, and became a premium member because it was "only" $30 a year to become one. We now have an opportunity to show that we are serious about this hobby and willing to pay to be a "premium" member. At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%. This should be enough to get a contract from Google (with advertising stating "brought to you by GoogleMaps"). $9.99 a month for a hobby that can be enjoyed by the entire family is not much to ask. Asking your premium members to take a major step back in technology and still try to enjoy the hobby? Way too much to ask. I am willing to pay whatever it takes to enjoy this hobby again. If it means trying to find workarounds or putting up with inferior technology, though...sadly, I guess it will be time to find another hobby.

You won't be the first to quit with hurt feelings and you be the last.

This sort thing happens from time to time and yet caching survives. Go figure.

Link to post
How would you feel if Ford recalled all of their vehichles and replaced CD players with 8-track players? You probably would quit buying Fords.

That isn't quite how it happened here, though. What happened is that the manufacturer of the only decent CD players jacked their price up enormously. Ford decided that rather than passing this increased cost along to the consumer, they'd subsitute a more affordable solution and keep the overall cost the same.

And their solution was an 8-track player, how are you seeing it as anything different? It is a clear step backwards from maps that just simply worked, to maps that don't load, when they do they are very slow, missing tiles, and numerous other problems.

 

There are two realities that come out of this.

 

First and foremost, Ford was too stupid to negotiate with the cd player distributor, they didn't even try. Maybe they didn't even know they could negotiate, but if that's the case, that's clearly someone that has no clue how to run a business of any type.

 

Second, if Ford can't even figure out the true cost per customer (in this case, 50 cents a year distributed across premium members), then they don't even have a basis for considering a change, it was a change of panic, if it wasn't panic, then it was a change of absolute greed.

Link to post

First and foremost, Ford was too stupid to negotiate with the cd player distributor, they didn't even try. Maybe they didn't even know they could negotiate, but if that's the case, that's clearly someone that has no clue how to run a business of any type.

 

I don't recall ever hearing "Ford" say they didn't negotiate with the CD player manufacturer.

 

Second, if Ford can't even figure out the true cost per customer (in this case, 50 cents a year distributed across premium members), then they don't even have a basis for considering a change, it was a change of panic, if it wasn't panic, then it was a change of absolute greed.

 

I also don't recall hearing "Ford" give out a true cost per customer here.

Link to post

Since adding maps would have a net cost of about 50 cents per premium member per year, that in no way justifies any type of rate increase, especially one that takes it from $30/year to $120/year.

 

People, this isn't about money, its about pinching pennies in a business model that already has a high profit ratio.

 

If you're going to make stuff up, at least make it believable.

Go and get a quote from google, and no, don't copy/paste that low usage page that everyone keeps quoting.

 

Tell me whats not believable AFTER you get the quote.

 

If you're going to make a claim about how much more it will cost premium members a year to bring back google maps to the mapping page, the burden of proof is on your end to support your claim. While you're finding that piece of evidence to support your claim, perhaps you can also find the quote that specifiies groundspeaks "high profit margin".

 

I suspect that Groundspeak would not lose a lot of current premium members if the monthly cost went up 10 or even 20%. I also suspect that an 100-300% increase would result in a significant reduction in current premium memberships. Suppose it went up 50%, or a monthly cost of $45. That would almost certainly cause "some" premium members to decide not to renew their membership, especially those already on a fairly tight budget. Would the reduction in memberships be enough to cover the cost of google maps? I doubt that you'll find the answer to that with a google search. But it gets more complicated than that. What would the impact of a 50% increase in membership fees be on attracting *new* premium members? There is going to be some amount of attrition on premium memberships not matter what the cost as people lose interest in game (yes, believe it or not, some people do not live, breathe and bleed geocaching) and GS needs to be able to attract new members. Again, a google search is not going to provide a definitive answer regarding a fee increase and the potential impact on new customers but we can speculate based on information found in these forums.

 

There have been numerous threads over the years about premium memberships and which features are most important to those that have decided to become memberships. In every thread, the primary benefit people cite is *not* maps, but rather the ability to use pocket queries, and the less tangible aspect of feeling that one is helping support the site.

Link to post

I am willing to put up $9.99 a month

Since adding maps would have a net cost of about 50 cents per premium member per year, that in no way justifies any type of rate increase, especially one that takes it from $30/year to $120/year.

 

People, this isn't about money, its about pinching pennies in a business model that already has a high profit ratio.

 

You know how many premium members Groundspeak has???? You must have some inside information that no one else on the forums has.

Link to post

You know how many premium members Groundspeak has???? You must have some inside information that no one else on the forums has.

How I know the info isn't really relevant, but there are several ways of deriving the info even if I didn't know an exact number.

 

For example, a quick look at your profile shows you are indeed a premium member, but that's only one of about eight other ways. Not a productive way of counting PM's.

 

I could even derive a good estimate from google, without ever touching the gc site (which currently gives a count of just over 100k, so yeah, its a few k short).

Link to post
It was really a no-win situation that Groundspeak found themselves in. Whatever they did, it would tick off large numbers of users. I'd hate to have been involved in the group that had to make the decision. "What can we do to tick off the smallest numbers of users?"

 

I just hope Groundspeak is doing something to help us out. The present maps are terrible and the topo is poor quality. Back in the day I would enter cache data on my topo program on my own. Very time consuming and only workable in my home state where I have USGS topos on my computer.

Link to post

Yes- PLEASE GS!!! Bring back the Google Maps! I feel like I am using 'Prodigy' again! It is just not nice. You guys have the standard for the GC community. Google has the standard for usable maps. PLEASE work it out soon and give us good maps again.

If we must pay more, add another membership level to pay for it.

 

Just fix it! Please!

-Team WorldTour

Link to post

So, back on topic for this thread...

 

Would you pay an extra monthly fee to use Google Maps? The OP suggested $9.99 a month. Would you pay $9.99 a month? Would you pay more than $9.99 a month if that's what it took to cover Groundspeak's Google Maps bill?

Link to post

I have been watching this debate for quite awhile and I've been reading all the posts in all the different topics.I have finally found a topic that has enticed me to make a posting on this subject.

 

I for one would not pay more for google maps. They were a nice feature but it hasn't killed my fun. I don't cache near as much as I used to or would like to, but what I like about my PM is the ability to receive updates of new caches in my area. When I do decide to go out and cache, I like to be able to download all the information into my GPS for paperless caching. Whether this download is done from the cache page or via a PQ, it really doesn't matter to me as long as I can get the cache description, hints, and previous logs. I like having access to all of the forum topics within the forums. These are some of the main reasons I became a PM, it had nothing to about maps.

 

When I first started geocaching, I utilized Garmin's Mapsource as my mapping software database. I would load .loc files into it to get an idea of where the caches were that I was going to search for that day. I then moved to using Google Earth and downloaded PQ's into it to get an idea of how I was going to access certain areas for my aching adventure and create routes for me to travel. I eventually moved to using Delorme's Software and purchased the Satellite imagery plan and view my PQ's on that. Finally, I usually just pick an area that I haven't been to, look to see how many caches I haven't done in that area, and I run a PQ of that area and send it to my GPS. I really don't use the maps that much on the website.

 

To reiterate my position, I personally would not want to pay more just to be able to have different maps. I personally would hate to have to go backwards from paperless caching to paper caching and to not be able to fully utilize the features of my more expensive GPSr's than having google maps back.

Link to post

At $9.99 per month we're talking about $120 per year. With a number of cheaper/free options on the horizon, I'm not even sure a premium membership is worth the current $30 per year.

 

I have a bit of recreational cash at my disposal. For me, PQ's and full access with the mobile app are the 2 reasons I pay for a premium membership. Increasingly I find myself strictly using the mobile app so PQ's are not really that high on my priority list any longer. Google Maps don't even register.

 

I'm not sure how many people put the maps high on their list. Looking at all the threads it seems to be important to a lot of people. But I know that if Groundspeak were to raise their rate for premium membership just to bring back Google Maps that I would cease being a premium member and just move on to something better.

Link to post

I am willing to put up $9.99 a month

Since adding maps would have a net cost of about 50 cents per premium member per year, that in no way justifies any type of rate increase, especially one that takes it from $30/year to $120/year.

 

People, this isn't about money, its about pinching pennies in a business model that already has a high profit ratio.

Wow - I believe you are waaaaaaaaay off - at the number of maps delivered (per Groundspeak) times the price quoted from Google - the yearly total is over 2.5 million dollars annually. So you really believe there are 10 million paying users?????

 

I don't want to pay more - the new maps are not all that bad and have not ruined the experience in any way for me.

Edited by StarBrand
Link to post

At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%.

Wait, you're advocating increasing the membership fee by $90 a year? If they were to do this, there'd be a full-on revolt. There's no way 60% of the PMs would renew if that happened. If Groundspeak ever wants to thin out the herd, so to speak, they'll have to keep your idea in mind. It would be a great way to chase away masses of people.

 

I wonder how many of these people posting on here saying they're leaving will actually go through with it. I bet they'll go try the competition for a short time and then come crawling back when they see how bad things are over there.

 

I would pay $120 per year for access to:

1.'PMO' Caches that were really 'Premium Caches' E.G. Awesome location with truly worthwhile swag.

2. PQs of 2500 waypoints.

3. The ability to ignore all of a certain user's caches.

4. The ability to TURN OFF favorites points for my account.

 

There must be more, but that's all I can think of at the moment.

Link to post

At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%.

Wait, you're advocating increasing the membership fee by $90 a year? If they were to do this, there'd be a full-on revolt. There's no way 60% of the PMs would renew if that happened. If Groundspeak ever wants to thin out the herd, so to speak, they'll have to keep your idea in mind. It would be a great way to chase away masses of people.

 

I wonder how many of these people posting on here saying they're leaving will actually go through with it. I bet they'll go try the competition for a short time and then come crawling back when they see how bad things are over there.

 

I would pay $120 per year for access to:

1.'PMO' Caches that were really 'Premium Caches' E.G. Awesome location with truly worthwhile swag.

2. PQs of 2500 waypoints.

3. The ability to ignore all of a certain user's caches.

4. The ability to TURN OFF favorites points for my account.

 

There must be more, but that's all I can think of at the moment.

 

Perhaps I should have said 'The ability to cast a negative favorite point' rather than 'Turn off favorites points' Yeah I think so.

 

5. The ability to cast a 'Negative Favorite Point' for every ten caches I find. I could boost a really good cache, or show my distaste for a really bad cache.

Link to post

In most respects the new maps are a slight step down from Google.... but where are the aerial maps????? If you are outside of the US, aerial imagery doesn't display. MapQuest has it, but the maps aren't displaying it.

 

For this reason alone, the new maps are HORRIBLE.

 

Even if you are in the US there is no option to overlay streets on top of the aerial images.

 

And no map scale.

 

I presume these deficiencies are caused by Leaflet, but they really need to be addressed.

Link to post

 

I would pay $120 per year for access to:

1.'PMO' Caches that were really 'Premium Caches' E.G. Awesome location with truly worthwhile swag.

2. PQs of 2500 waypoints.

3. The ability to ignore all of a certain user's caches.

4. The ability to TURN OFF favorites points for my account.

 

.....

 

5. The ability to cast a 'Negative Favorite Point' for every ten caches I find. I could boost a really good cache, or show my distaste for a really bad cache.

 

I would too...for all of these. Easily.

Link to post

The new maps aren't really a major step back in technology. It's only a few different colors and labels are in a different font.

 

The cost for a PM should be $100... a month. That'll separate the sheep from the goats for sure. Then we can have the Google maps back, and Groundspeak will finally be able to afford to restore the forum avatars to their original size.

Link to post
The cost for a PM should be $100... a month. That'll separate the sheep from the goats for sure. Then we can have the Google maps back, and Groundspeak will finally be able to afford to restore the forum avatars to their original size.
1 member @ $1200/year = $1200/year = 40 members @ $30/year

 

Honestly, I'm not sure whether the net change in revenue would be positive or negative. I know I wouldn't renew my premium membership at $100/month though.

Link to post

$30 a year for membership. Really!? It comes down to the money (as always). I am so disgusted with the current state of maps, I am willing to put up $9.99 a month to have a subscription to geocaching.com. I have only been geocaching for less than a year, and became a premium member because it was "only" $30 a year to become one. We now have an opportunity to show that we are serious about this hobby and willing to pay to be a "premium" member. At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%. This should be enough to get a contract from Google (with advertising stating "brought to you by GoogleMaps"). $9.99 a month for a hobby that can be enjoyed by the entire family is not much to ask. Asking your premium members to take a major step back in technology and still try to enjoy the hobby? Way too much to ask. I am willing to pay whatever it takes to enjoy this hobby again. If it means trying to find workarounds or putting up with inferior technology, though...sadly, I guess it will be time to find another hobby.

 

No way would I pay $10US per month (more in my currency) for something I got back for free by adding a bit more software to my system.

Link to post

I would not pay more for Google Maps.

 

When I first saw the change, I was a little annoyed. But you know what? I dealt with it. And I'm getting by perfectly fine without them. So are thousands of other people!

 

Yes. They were nice. But I can live without them on Groundspeak. If I want good aerial photos, I copy and paste into Google. One more step, to be sure, but easy enough.

Link to post

I would not pay more for Google Maps.

 

When I first saw the change, I was a little annoyed. But you know what? I dealt with it. And I'm getting by perfectly fine without them. So are thousands of other people!

 

Yes. They were nice. But I can live without them on Groundspeak. If I want good aerial photos, I copy and paste into Google. One more step, to be sure, but easy enough.

 

Why would you copy & paste when the link to google maps is on every single cache page?

Link to post

Paying more money, only for using google maps here on the webpage? From my side a simple: Never!

 

There are several maps selectable, and OpenStreetMaps is just enough for me, especially as it's the map I'm using on my GPS too. I don't see a benefit from using google-maps instead.

 

And if the missing google map is the reason for someone to leave this hobby/sport/whatever, how serious has this one been into it really?

Link to post

$30 a year for membership. Really!? It comes down to the money (as always). I am so disgusted with the current state of maps, I am willing to put up $9.99 a month to have a subscription to geocaching.com. I have only been geocaching for less than a year, and became a premium member because it was "only" $30 a year to become one. We now have an opportunity to show that we are serious about this hobby and willing to pay to be a "premium" member. At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%. This should be enough to get a contract from Google (with advertising stating "brought to you by GoogleMaps"). $9.99 a month for a hobby that can be enjoyed by the entire family is not much to ask. Asking your premium members to take a major step back in technology and still try to enjoy the hobby? Way too much to ask. I am willing to pay whatever it takes to enjoy this hobby again. If it means trying to find workarounds or putting up with inferior technology, though...sadly, I guess it will be time to find another hobby.

Why should I have to pay extra for a feature that was there when I paid for my membership and then taken away?

Link to post

$30 a year for membership. Really!? It comes down to the money (as always). I am so disgusted with the current state of maps, I am willing to put up $9.99 a month to have a subscription to geocaching.com. I have only been geocaching for less than a year, and became a premium member because it was "only" $30 a year to become one. We now have an opportunity to show that we are serious about this hobby and willing to pay to be a "premium" member. At $9.99 a month, you should be able to get 60% of your premium members to renew, while increasing income by 400%. This should be enough to get a contract from Google (with advertising stating "brought to you by GoogleMaps"). $9.99 a month for a hobby that can be enjoyed by the entire family is not much to ask. Asking your premium members to take a major step back in technology and still try to enjoy the hobby? Way too much to ask. I am willing to pay whatever it takes to enjoy this hobby again. If it means trying to find workarounds or putting up with inferior technology, though...sadly, I guess it will be time to find another hobby.

Why should I have to pay extra for a feature that was there when I paid for my membership and then taken away?

Why should I pay extra for a feature I never lost?

Link to post

well.. i just say everything did get upsidedown with the new mapset on GC.com

Why... very simple.. in the city it probaly works fine, but in the north of sweden i just se three collors and old sett of it to...

so as i want to geocache i need to trye have the gps mapset side by side to se where the roads and swamps are... why even have the map on gc.com

 

i'm up for a higher yearly charge $50 (not monthly)just to se the google mapset..

Link to post

i'm up for a higher yearly charge $50 (not monthly)just to se the google mapset..

 

As long as those of us who already get the google maps for free using the greasemonkey script have the option of staying that way.

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...