Jump to content

Defining A Geocaching.com "customer"


Recommended Posts

Like many others, I have been reading the "Texas Thread" and I seen the point that a business (Groundspeak) should listen to it's "customers". That got me thinking about just what a Groundspeak customer really is.

 

As far as I can tell, Groundspeak has created the website Geocaching.com and has made the process of having caches listed/reviewed and being able to read cache listings a free service to anyone who cares to point a browser to their URL. There are many, like me, who have utilized both the listing/review process and the cache listings without paying a single penny. Call this a Basic Membership.

 

The option exists of buying a Premium Membership, which I decided to do last week, which makes a number of convenient additional services available to the member which will allow him/her to spend less time manipulating data and printing out cache pages and more time enjoying the hunt.

 

This is just a guess on my part but I'd be willing to make a small wager that there are a lot more Basic Members using this site than there are Premium Members. Assuming that this is true, it would mean that the Premium Members are actually subsidizing the entire operation of this site. (I'm not including the Groundspeak shopping site in this because they are selling a more tangible product, like TBs, clothing, etc., and the profit margins in that kind of business are not exactly huge.)

 

How would people feel if they couldn't read cache listings, have a cache reviewed and listed or participate in the forums at Geocaching.com unless they were Premium Members? I think it would hurt the hobby a great deal and make it very hard for new people to get involved.

 

The point of all this is that, in my opinion, Groundspeak has two kinds of customers, paying customers called "Premium Members" and potential paying customers called "Basic Members". It also seems to me that Groundspeak probably pays more attention to the paying members than they do to the potential paying members. I know that I pay more attention to the people that are actually "doing business" with me than those who don't.

 

Consider the fact that you, the Great Global Geocacher, are offered the opportunity to use this site and it's services at no charge and that you get a great activity to do alone and/or with family and friends. Remember, it could very easily be different because server space, programming and bandwidth are neither free nor cheap. If you're gonna enjoy the hobby then consider paying for your membership at any and all of the sites whose services you use.

Link to comment
Basic members hide and seek caches, participate in caching events, and help promote the sport and, thus, contribute to maintain this site. I've never seen GC make any distinction between basic and premium members, which is a credit to this site.

Au Contraire, mon frere.

 

I don't think that finding and hiding caches adds a penny to the coffers of Groundspeak who happens to be paying for the very services that make hiding and finding caches so easy. Finding and hiding caches does, however, contribute the the enjoyment and, therefore, increased demand for these very services.

 

Simply put, my point is that there's no such thing as a free lunch and anyone who says otherwise is probably isn't the one picking up the tab.

 

You do make the point that Groundspeak isn't differentiating between the two type of members and that, too, is part of the point because they very easily could and would have every right to do so.

Link to comment
. . . there are a lot more Basic Members using this site than there are Premium Members. Assuming that this is true, it would mean that the Premium Members are actually subsidizing the entire operation of this site. (I'm not including the Groundspeak shopping site in this because they are selling a more tangible product, like TBs, clothing, etc., and the profit margins in that kind of business are not exactly huge.)

1st, the easiest point to refute . . . clothing and trinkets are some of the highest margine retail items around for many good reasons. Some general margines used in retail sales: Computers ~15%, Bicycles ~30%, Groceries ~10%, Clothing ~50%+. Heck, the markup for seasonal clothing is often 75% so it can go on sale for 1/2 off at the end of the season and still make a bit of money.

 

2nd, without geocachers hinding geocaches at their own expense and on their own time, Groundspeak would have nothing to sell! Are the premium members subsidising the basic members, or is the participation of the basic members providing Groundspeak with something it would not have to sell without them? Groundspeak has a very productive symbiotic relationship with its users. I think they have struck a surprisingly effective balance with their membership policies, and I applaud them for it. To claim subsidies is probably not a very revelatory assertion.

Link to comment
It also seems to me that Groundspeak probably pays more attention to the paying members than they do to the potential paying members. I know that I pay more attention to the people that are actually "doing business" with me than those who don't.

It would seem logical from a business perspective but as a Premium Member I can say that, from my perspective and experience, this is not the case where Groundspeak is concerned.

Link to comment

We treat basic members and premium members the same when it comes to basic services. All email that comes in gets answered first in, first out, we take calls from folks asking for opinions on GPS units even though we don't have to, and we consider the land managers that call us to remove listings of caches placed without permission. We consider law enforcement that calls us our customers as well.

 

The only non-customer would be a cache maggot, or someone that we have asked to leave the site. Due to the nature of the way the web works there is no such thing as "tresspassing" per se, but they're no longer welcome.

Edited by Jeremy
Link to comment
Like many others, I have been reading the "Texas Thread" and I seen the point that a business (Groundspeak) should listen to it's "customers".  That got me thinking about just what a Groundspeak customer really is.

 

As far as I can tell, Groundspeak has created the website Geocaching.com and has made the process of having caches listed/reviewed and being able to read cache listings a free service to anyone who cares to point a browser to their URL.  There are many, like me, who have utilized both the listing/review process and the cache listings without paying a single penny.  Call this a Basic Membership.

 

The option exists of buying a Premium Membership, which I decided to do last week, which makes a number of convenient additional services available to the member which will allow him/her to spend less time manipulating data and printing out cache pages and more time enjoying the hunt.

 

This is just a guess on my part but I'd be willing to make a small wager that there are a lot more Basic Members using this site than there are Premium Members.  Assuming that this is true, it would mean that the Premium Members are actually subsidizing the entire operation of this site.  (I'm not including the Groundspeak shopping site in this because they are selling a more tangible product, like TBs, clothing, etc., and the profit margins in that kind of business are not exactly huge.)

 

How would people feel if they couldn't read cache listings, have a cache reviewed and listed or participate in the forums at Geocaching.com unless they were Premium Members?  I think it would hurt the hobby a great deal and make it very hard for new people to get involved.

 

The point of all this is that, in my opinion, Groundspeak has two kinds of customers, paying customers called "Premium Members" and potential paying customers called "Basic Members".  It also seems to me that Groundspeak probably pays more attention to the paying members than they do to the potential paying members.  I know that I pay more attention to the people that are actually "doing business" with me than those who don't.

 

Consider the fact that you, the Great Global Geocacher, are offered the opportunity to use this site and it's services at no charge and that you get a great activity to do alone and/or with family and friends.  Remember, it could very easily be different because server space, programming and bandwidth are neither free nor cheap.  If you're gonna enjoy the hobby then consider paying for your  membership at any and all of the sites whose services you use.

I respect your opinion, but I think you have over looked one important thing. Google has zero “premium members” yet its profits are in the billions. How can this be? Advertising. If a website has advertisements, the more traffic it gets the better. Its not just premium memberships and merchandise sales that are the source of geocaching.coms income.

Link to comment
I respect your opinion, but I think you have over looked one important thing. Google has zero “premium members” yet its profits are in the billions. How can this be? Advertising. If a website has advertisements, the more traffic it gets the better. Its not just premium memberships and merchandise sales that are the source of geocaching.coms income.

Google has tons of people paying for all those links though. Would you REALLY want to start seeing that sorta model? Every time you load a cache page, you have to click or scroll past advertising for 3 companies. Add a banner or 3 to the forums, or better yet, make it like Yahoo groups, where every post or 2 you have to stop and click past an ad.

Link to comment

Interesting discussion ... and, so far, more civilized and productive than the aforementioned Texas/Cache Name thread. Thank goodness. B)

 

Anyway, here's my $0.02 worth ... available to both Premium and Basic members:

 

1. In order to maintain or grow, a business must produce/provide value. We found this out in spades during the dot.com bust. "Eyeballs" are not value. :cool:

2. Customers, in the traditional sense, pay for the value produced or provided by the business.

3. Suppliers provide something that assists the business in producing/providing value.

4. Prospective customers may be given some produce or service for free in order to entice them to become actual (paying) customers.

 

Assuming you agree with the above, I propose the following:

 

1. The value that Geocaching.com and Groundspeak.com provide is comprised of the following:

A. A forum (used in the generic sense) that helps facilitate a hobby/obsession. B)

B. Tools that can be utilized in the pursuit of that hobby/obession.

C. Supplies for that hobby/obession.

 

2. Basic members are both suppliers and prospective customers. They provide caches, they provide input into the forums and, for the most part, they contribute to the Geocaching community that is Geocaching.com and Groundspeak.com.

 

3. Premium members are both suppliers and customers. They provide caches, input into the forums and contribute to the community. They also pay for some additional services.

 

In general, customers are treated better than suppliers. However, smart businesses understand that without both they cease to exist. From my own personal experience, GC.com and GS.com are pretty fair in their treatment. Granted, my experience is limited and certainly may be different from that of others.

 

I suppose if I was going to find fault with the GC/GS.com business model, I would fault them for not promoting Premium memberships and services more aggressively. If they came to me looking for venture capital, that would be my first thought. I have no idea about the profitability of the company but there's very little doubt it would be greater with more Premium members.

 

Beyond that, the implementation of their model seems to fit well with the benefits afforded by the Internet. They also have developed a model around something for which people have a passion - always a good thing. Any time you sell something where passion overcomes reason ... you're "gonna make money."

 

Could customer (and supplier) service be better? Probably. Most companies could stand to improve in that area. Given the supply chain transparency of GC/GS.com I would probably focus on that area next.

 

All in all, I think GC/GS.com's customers are happy. Their suppliers, pretty much so and their ability to increase profits quite good.

 

Where did I put that venture capital money, anyway? B)

Link to comment

I have no idea what percentage of the 33,750 plus registered members are premium. I started as basic member and have recently moved to premium. Sure I wonder how the breakdown is but really dont care.

 

What little advertising there is thankfully it is not popups at gc.com.

 

All I can see so far.. REI.. yep.. ok by me. a link to Geocache gear at Groundspeak.. well heck ya ok by me too. Sure might like to see my fav LL Bean. I certainly would not like to see all those 'enhance this or that.. popups.. or find your lifetime soul partner here.. emm well maybe that one. NO NO NO.. what was I thinking.

 

Sure they are seeking advertisements. So long as they stay off to the side.. dont splash a banner over what I am tryn to read .. no biggee.

 

Basic members are getting one helluva value for the pleasure they get by finding this tupperware in the woods stuff.

Link to comment
I have no idea what percentage of the 33,750 plus registered members are premium. 

I think that number reflects only the members who are registered to these forums. I believe the actual number is much higher than that.

 

I am a premium member, and proud of it. :cool:B)

Correct, I just looked and there are over 311,000 user accounts on the website. No idea how many are inactive.

Link to comment

Absolutely, the amount of advertising on this site is minimal and could be much much worse. I also have no idea how much revenue this advertsing actually generates for the site. I’m sure its not much. My point was that “premium members” are not the only ones who are valuable to site like geocaching.com.

 

Everyone who uses this site is of some value when it comes to generating income. All basic members and all people who simply surf over to the site are potential premium members and potential customers of the merchandise store. Everyone should be treated like they are paying customers. Based on Jeremys post it seems like he realizes this, too. COOL!

Link to comment
Basic members are getting one helluva value for the pleasure they get by finding this tupperware in the woods stuff.

 

If you read back in the history of this site they have always stated that it would be free for listing and finding caches.

 

The above statement should be reversed and say that the paying members are getting a great deal for there money. Because of all the paying and non paying members hiding caches.

 

If you look at the features you get as a paying member, they are great if you live in the States and get the better maps and stuff. But outside of the states I can't justifiy the expense in Americian dollars just to get PQ's for the few caches I hunt once and while. And I have more fun thinking and hiding a few good caches a year then finding them.

 

This is still a good site and the staff do a good job of keeping it up nad running.

 

:cool:

Link to comment
I respect your opinion, but I think you have over looked one important thing. Google has zero “premium members” yet its profits are in the billions. How can this be? Advertising. If a website has advertisements, the more traffic it gets the better. Its not just premium memberships and merchandise sales that are the source of geocaching.coms income.

I don't like advertising. We only allow products that we think would provide a real service to geocachers instead of just taking a company's money for ads on the site. And the ads stay at a minimum for both maximum impact for the advertiser and a less obnoxious way to tell their story on geocaching.com

 

It is unfair to compare a search engine to a geocaching.com site for many reasons, the first being that they rely on usage volume for maximum ad revenue. And based on the click cheating issues they are very worried about the future success of this model. We'll never get enough traffic to justify an ad-revenue model.

Link to comment
We'll never get enough traffic to justify an ad-revenue model.

Just to satisfy our curiosity, without stating any concrete numbers, would you be willing to give us a gross idea of the percentage of total revenue that Groundspeak/GC.com receives from ads vs. merchandise sales vs. memberships?

 

It would be interesting to know how dependent Groundspeak is on service vs. retail vs. advertising revenue. I would think that membership is probably the primary revenue generator by far, but then, I can be pretty naeve about things once in a while as well.

 

Heck, while I'm being nosy, any chance you'd share with us how many full time employees and how many "volunteers" it takes to keep our favorite passtime up and running.

 

Thanks for anything you are willing to share.

Link to comment

I sort of like the analogy to public radio, if it isn't pushed too far. Something for everyone for free, membership is voluntary, members subsidize non-members, members get some extra perks.

 

Groundspeak is not a non-profit, and maybe an analogy to shareware (like GSAK) would be more apt, but I think a lot of people who can afford premium memberships pay for them not because of the benefits of membership, but because they think the site is worthy of their financial support, and want to do their part to keep it available for everyone.

Link to comment
Just to satisfy our curiosity, without stating any concrete numbers, would you be willing to give us a gross idea of the percentage of total revenue that Groundspeak/GC.com receives from ads vs. merchandise sales vs. memberships?

No. We don't disclose any of this info because we don't have to. I know this may seem particularly harsh but we like having the ability as a private company not to give out any information.

Link to comment

I will add something to this discussion as a volunteer cache reviewer.

 

When I see a new geocache submission in the queue, my first reaction is "oh goodie! a new cache... I sure hope it meets the listing guidelines so I can press the approve button." I can honestly say that I have *never* given any preference or special consideration to whether someone is a premium member. It is totally irrelevant to the fact that they've hidden a geocache.

 

Now, I do make a distinction between newbie hiders and experienced hiders. If a newbie with zero hides and 5 finds hides a cache, I will check the coordinates, maps, aerial photos, etc. very carefully, and I will ask questions about anything I see that is questionable. (When done politely, this helps them become better hiders and write better cache pages and reviewer notes.) When I see a new submission from a "regular customer"... someone who has hidden 50 other caches in my review territory with no problems... I can have a higher comfort level that their 51st cache is likely to comply with the guidelines. Yes, I will look everything over, but odds are, that cache will be listed a bit quicker.

 

If the newbie was a premium member and the experienced hider was a basic member for the past three years, my approach would not change one bit.

Link to comment
No. We don't disclose any of this info because we don't have to. I know this may seem particularly harsh . . .

Not harsh, just private.

 

BUT, I would think you could come up with a better reason. Just because you "don't have to" is pretty lame, if for no other reason than there are lots of things you don't have to do, that you do do. So, why not this one, even a little bit? :cool:

Link to comment
-BUT, I would think you could come up with a better reason. Just because you "don't have to" is pretty lame, if for no other reason than there are lots of things you don't have to do, that you do do. So, why not this one, even a little bit? :cool:

How about because it's none of our business?

 

Seriously, we don't need to know this information.

Why not ask everybody on here how much they make? B)

Link to comment
-BUT, I would think you could come up with a better reason.  Just because you "don't have to" is pretty lame, if for no other reason than there are lots of things you don't have to do, that you do do.  So, why not this one, even a little bit?  :cool:

How about because it's none of our business?

 

Seriously, we don't need to know this information.

Why not ask everybody on here how much they make? B)

I agree! B)

Link to comment
How about because it's none of our business?

 

Seriously, we don't need to know this information.

Why not ask everybody on here how much they make?  :cool:

Because it is "none of your business" is a lame reason as well, because there are many things that are none of my business that Groundspeak shares with me anyway. For instance, it's none of my business what Jeremy looks like or that he snowboards. None of the information logged regarding other geocacher's find counts, pictures etc. is any of my business. But it is all fun to know, and is regularly shared. So, "none of my business" is just as inconsistent a reason as "because we don't have to".

 

Don't get me wrong. I agree that it is none of my business and that Groundspeak doesn't have to. I even agree that there is no law that says reasons have to be consistent with previous decisions. But inconsistent reasoning is still pretty lame in my book, and I have little doubt that there are better, more legitimate, and more interesting reasons that are lurking in the background and maybe fun to learn about. B)

Link to comment

As far as I can tell, Groundspeak has created the website Geocaching.com and has made the process of having caches listed/reviewed and being able to read cache listings a free service to anyone who cares to point a browser to their URL. There are many, like me, who have utilized both the listing/review process and the cache listings without paying a single penny. Call this a Basic Membership.

As Jeremy pointed out and you did not consider, there is also the cache maggot, who is able to read your listing and other cache listings. This person is not a member in any sense and enjoys the benefits of the basic membership, except for the ability to list their own caches and screw up travel bug movements.

 

Currently there is no requirement to become a member and the cache maggot will become comfortable at taking from the game without giving back. It would be nice to see the loophole closed, and have them have to choose between a basic or premium membership. At least that way we might see some new hides come from these users.

 

Perhaps the site is still a bit insecure in it's ability to gain new membership without the cache maggot alternative being available. At the rate that I've been turning people onto the game, I doubt it would matter much to them if you needed to be a member or if the only option was a pay membership. They are anxious to go buy a GPSr and find their first cache, whether it is free or not. It won't be long that the site will have to turn membership away for fear that the game will have grown so big that it will stop being fun.

Link to comment

Here's the way I see it, as a brand new geocacher and as someone who will become a premium member in the next few days. I have only found one cache so far, but I have spent hours on the site reading the forums, reading cache descriptions, and everything else on here. For the cost of renting a few movies, I can have a premium membership and help financially support this web site. I have already had more hours enjoyment and education from this site than I would have received from a bunch of rental videos. So it's a darned good value. Considering the cost of a GPS receiver and the other goodies we have bought for this sport, $30 is really not very much money, and I think there are very few of us who would really be in a financial pinch if we spent the money to become a premium member.

 

From a business standpoint, I can relate to Geocaching.com's decision to allow non-paying member to access most areas and services of the site. That is how you (hopefully) show them the value of what you have to offer, and hopefully they will convert to a premium membership.

 

We travel fulltime in a motorhome and make our living publishing a newspaper/magazine for RVers and armchair travelers called the Gypsy Journal. In addition to our 10,000 paid readers, every issue we print several thousand extra copies, which we leave at RV parks and distribute at RV shows and rallies. People who are unfamilier with our publication pick up those copies and will hopefully either subscribe and/or purchase some of the books I have written on RVing and travel. We occassionally run into people who tell us they have been picking up our sample copies for years now and still have not subscribed. Do I wish they would write a check for a subscription? Sure I do, but what can I do? I just tell them I am glad they are enjoying our paper and hope someday they will find it worth the cost of a subscription. It costs a lot of money to produce a publication like ours, and we do not load the pages up with advertising, so every subscription and book order helps make ends meet.

 

I think geocaching is a wonderful activity, and I'm more than willing to support it in any way I can, from buying a premium membership to helping introduce others to the hobby. In fact, in our next issue we will be carrying a two page feature on geocaching, with several references to this web site.

 

I hope to meet some of you out in the field someday and pick up some tips from the pros.

Link to comment

Puzzler I choose to keep this discussion in the forums not my inbox so I will reply here.

 

I am sure that Groundspeak has very good reasons for not sharing this information with you. As a not so small business owner I can tell you flat out that I would not reveal that kind of information to you, because it is none of your business. All kinds of information could be extrapolated from a limited amount of "sharing" here. If Jeremy were to make public the information you requested I guarantee my accountants could tell me with a reasonable amount of certainty, how viable this business is and where the weak points are to attack it. If you do not believe that the business world is cut-throat and that you have to protect yourself at all times, then you obviously receive a check for your time, you do not "make money". Beyond that Jeremy has a responsibility to his employees and anyone else who has invested time or money in his dream to protect this business. Part of protecting your business means not divulging important information.

 

As curious as I am about certain aspects of this business, i applaud Jeremy for putting the businesses needs first. I would be disappointed otherwise.

Link to comment
Don't get me wrong. I agree that it is none of my business and that Groundspeak doesn't have to. I even agree that there is no law that says reasons have to be consistent with previous decisions. But inconsistent reasoning is still pretty lame in my book, and I have little doubt that there are better, more legitimate, and more interesting reasons that are lurking in the background and maybe fun to learn about. :cool:

How can I not get you wrong based on this?

 

If you want to argue/discuss something pick a side and stay on it.

Hard to believe you actaully have a point ratehr than just trying to stirthings up when you say that you agree that things need not be consistent, then say that inconsistent reasoning is lame....

 

I'm on to things more worthy of my time -

Link to comment
I guess you'll have to settle for me being a big inconsistent lame-o then.

No. I find most of what you do very consistent. I suspect your real reasons are very consistent, internally. I thought MonkeyBrad stated some good reasons quite eliquently, in spite of prefacing them with "it is none of your business".

 

And, maybe this is getting to the point that has been eating at me more than usual since the Texas thread yesterday. As I watch Groundspeak interact with us (geocaching.com users) I see a very effective system providing outstanding service, but over and over again, I read threads trashing Groundspeak, and TPTB specifically, because of what I percieve to be simple, silly or naeve missunderstandings.

 

After 1/2 a day of comments in the Texas thread it became clear, once again, that Groundspeak in general, and Jeremy (in thread replies), had failed to communicate their possition in an informative manner. This same lack of specific helpful information seems to fan the flames of the Buxley issue as well. There are too many people out here looking for conspiracies, and conspiracy seems to be a contangeous belief.

 

Without specific and useful information to help us understand the issue, missunderstandings are inevitable. Especially if one side is providing specific information while the other is not. If the issue is something where specific information is not appropriate to disiminate (like Groundspeak finances), then it should not be discussed in the forums (like finances). But, where the community is being brought into the discussion (and probably needs to be), such as the case with Buxley and Texas, clear communication would go a long way in making the ankst in these forums diminish, and support of Geocaching.com increase.

Link to comment

The angst in the forums will never diminish--that's just the way forums go. They have angst attacks every now and then, and TPTB get trashed every now and then. None of this would change one iota if they gave you all the information that you seem to require. TPTB aren't obligated to make you, perse, happy. All they need in order to be a successful business is to make a high percentage of the users of this site happy--which they do. So, you see, they are doing just fine--forum angst and all.

Link to comment
Because it is "none of your business" is a lame reason as well, because there are many things that are none of my business that Groundspeak shares with me anyway. For instance, it's none of my business what Jeremy looks like or that he snowboards. None of the information logged regarding other geocacher's find counts, pictures etc. is any of my business. But it is all fun to know, and is regularly shared. So, "none of my business" is just as inconsistent a reason as "because we don't have to".

Most of the information that you use as an example of why more info should be shared is very different than what you are asking for. What he looks like and enjoys is personal info shared in the forums - it has nothing to do with the business. The stats about cachers is part of the service he provides (pictures again are optional, supplied by the cachers). Information about the details of the business are not public, and need not be shared and no reason needs to be given or explained. He's said 'no, I won't share' - his choice, no other reason needed, and no complaints should be voiced.

 

Just becasue a store has items for sale (service), with prices listed (service related info), and the owner greets you at the door (what he looks like), that doesn't give you the right to demand info about the number of customers he has, his gross income, the wholesale cost of merchendice or anything else you "think would be fun to know".

 

It's not "inconsistant" for a private company to stay private - most of the time is sound business practices!

Link to comment
There are really only two business models you can use in geocaching to sustain a site in the long run.

 

Everyone pays, or a few people pay more.  That's it.  Anything else is subsidised out of pocket and that's not sustainable.  All free sites will someday charge, or die.

Thats not true.

You are right. Someone could seed an organization with enough money to where they can fund themselves out of the earnings. But it's not likely.

 

I'm all ears if you know of another way though.

Link to comment
There are really only two business models you can use in geocaching to sustain a site in the long run.

 

Everyone pays, or a few people pay more.  That's it.  Anything else is subsidised out of pocket and that's not sustainable.  All free sites will someday charge, or die.

Thats not true.

You are right. Someone could seed an organization with enough money to where they can fund themselves out of the earnings. But it's not likely.

 

I'm all ears if you know of another way though.

The point is, I was right. :lol:

Link to comment

Well, I'm back home from work and just finished reading the posts made since I left. There are some really interesting points of view here! I'd like to take just a moment to clarify a few things about my previous posts...

 

First, I'm not advocating that Groundspeak begin charging everyone in order to view listings and hide caches. I'm simply stating that they certainly could if they wanted to. But, I also think that all members, both Premium and Basic, should understand that Groundspeak is offering and facilitating this hobby for everyone's enjoyment. Hey, I'm ponyed up my $30 bucks because I like what I see and I think it's worth supporting. If someone doesn't want to upgrade, that's fine too. Just realize that funding often has a way of making things happen a little faster.

 

Second, I'm not trying to create an upper and lower class argument with regard to paying and non-paying members. I hide my one and only cache while I was a non-paying member and was happy to do so. I know very well that want or ability to pay for a membership has nothing to do with the creativity and desire to want to participate in the fun.

 

OK, that having been said, I'll make one more comment before I try to find the geocache that I'm certain is hidden under my pillow.

 

Folks, this is a hobby, something that you do for fun & entertainment. For a few people, it's a business and I suggest that we leave the stressful part of this thing to them...after all, they're the ones getting paid! What's the point in having a hobby if it creates as much stress as it's supposed to be alleviating?

 

I think I'll go sleep on that thought.

Link to comment
What's the point in having a hobby if it creates as much stress as it's supposed to be alleviating?

I think you have a very good point.

 

And, I will try to make this my last post off the topic of the OP.

 

Personally, I'm still trying to figure out where people got the idea that I was demanding anything from Groundspeak. I was feeling a bit ornory today and accusing Jeremy of using some pretty lame reasoning (which it was) to justify actions that surely had sound reasoning behind them, even if the real reasons were just personal preference. But the debate was about clear communication and consistent reasoning, not a "demand" for any personal information.

 

And, on that note, please go geocaching and quit reading my posts. Life is better that way! :lol:

Link to comment
I would think you could come up with a better reason. Just because you "don't have to" is pretty lame, if for no other reason than there are lots of things you don't have to do, that you do do. So, why not this one, even a little bit? :lol:

I'm not your monkey, Puzzler. I'll keep your posts in mind the next time you raise an issue.

Link to comment

I just wanted to say thanks Jeremy. I enjoy the website and have never had anything but good service. I think that you have shown a lot more patience than I would ever have in the past few days. Just the fact that you are willing to participate in the forums, shows me that you do care about your customers. It would be so much easier, and less stressful to ignore some of them. This satisified customer would be happy if you could make loads of money. :lol:

Link to comment
I just wanted to say thanks Jeremy.  I enjoy the website and have never had anything but good service.  I think that you have shown a lot more patience than I would ever have in the past few days.  Just the fact that you are willing to participate in the forums, shows me that you do care about your customers.  It would be so much easier, and less stressful to ignore some of them.  This satisified customer would be happy if you could make loads of money. :lol:

I also agree....i have no complaints and find the service great.

Link to comment

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...