JJ Huddle to be taken off life support December 31st?

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Serious Business ▸ JJ Huddle to be taken off life support December 31st?
Chesapeake's avatar

Chesapeake

Senior Member

1,603 posts
Dec 7, 2009 8:42 PM
Wait, was that 12.00 for 2009 only? damnit they're tricky!
Dec 7, 2009 8:42pm
S

Society

Senior Member

1,146 posts
Dec 7, 2009 8:42 PM
Chesapeake wrote: One thing that doesn't make it look like the plan is the pay by the year instead of month to month.

Seems they'd go with the November "strike 1", December "strike 2", January "Out" sorta plan.
What exactly are you trying to say here?
Dec 7, 2009 8:42pm
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Dec 7, 2009 8:47 PM
Chesapeake wrote: One thing that doesn't make it look like the plan is the pay by the year instead of month to month.

Seems they'd go with the November "strike 1", December "strike 2", January "Out" sorta plan.
Ches, why did you edit that post around? Made more sense the first time.
Dec 7, 2009 8:47pm
Chesapeake's avatar

Chesapeake

Senior Member

1,603 posts
Dec 7, 2009 8:49 PM
Society wrote:
Chesapeake wrote: One thing that doesn't make it look like the plan is the pay by the year instead of month to month.

Seems they'd go with the November "strike 1", December "strike 2", January "Out" sorta plan.
What exactly are you trying to say here?
If you don't understand it, i'm not gonna tell ya.
Dec 7, 2009 8:49pm
ytownfootball's avatar

ytownfootball

Bold faced liar...

6,978 posts
Dec 7, 2009 8:51 PM
I posted about Dec. 31st being fiscal year end and how it seemed kinda fishy, it was met with the sound of cricketts, eh.

It was a good run while it lasted.
Dec 7, 2009 8:51pm
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Dec 7, 2009 8:53 PM
Ches, when you changed your post, it seemed like insider info has leaked through to you. What gives?
Dec 7, 2009 8:53pm
S

Society

Senior Member

1,146 posts
Dec 7, 2009 8:54 PM
Chesapeake wrote:
Society wrote:
Chesapeake wrote: One thing that doesn't make it look like the plan is the pay by the year instead of month to month.

Seems they'd go with the November "strike 1", December "strike 2", January "Out" sorta plan.
What exactly are you trying to say here?
If you don't understand it, i'm not gonna tell ya.
Fair enough.
Dec 7, 2009 8:54pm
M

mtrulz

Senior Member

2,905 posts
Dec 7, 2009 8:56 PM
Huge mistake he made.
Dec 7, 2009 8:56pm
BRF's avatar

BRF

Senior Member

8,748 posts
Dec 7, 2009 9:00 PM
I agree with what some of the ex-Huddlers here have posted about it being sad and that it was THE premier site for a long time.

But that is now over.

And this looks like the place to build it up.
Dec 7, 2009 9:00pm
T

tigerfan82

Senior Member

342 posts
Dec 7, 2009 9:25 PM
Had a lot of fun and met some wonderful people over there the past few years.........sad to see someone run it into the ground........but as life goes, this is what we have and I believe it will grow enough to be just as good as what we had.....just have to watch that bandwagon jumping mantooth guy ;)
Dec 7, 2009 9:25pm
N

Nate

Formerly Known As Keebler

3,949 posts
Dec 7, 2009 11:22 PM
Let it burn in hell with Hitler!
Dec 7, 2009 11:22pm
krambman's avatar

krambman

Senior Member

3,606 posts
Dec 7, 2009 11:53 PM
I agree that it would seem off for Bucknuts to buy the site, then nearly three years later, let it die. Pretty elaborate plan if that was the plan all along. Now, if they recently decided that they didn't want to site, or that it wasn't making enough money, or whatever, and wanted to see it die I would think that they would have at least tried to sell it back to JJ or sell it to someone else, or if they saw it as competition, then why not merge the two boards into one? Seems like a very odd way of doing things if you ask me.
Dec 7, 2009 11:53pm
Cat Food Flambe''s avatar

Cat Food Flambe'

Senior Member

1,230 posts
Dec 7, 2009 11:57 PM
Could be an impending capital outlay or lease renewal that they can't afford or sustain - server contracts or required upgrades, maybe?

Some of your characters may be familiar with how these things work - comments?
Dec 7, 2009 11:57pm
Cleveland Buck's avatar

Cleveland Buck

Troll Hunter

5,126 posts
Dec 8, 2009 12:00 AM
Dec 8, 2009 12:00am
Heretic's avatar

Heretic

Son of the Sun

18,820 posts
Dec 8, 2009 12:04 AM
I'd guess they bought it to be the HS equal of the regular Bucknuts site, but the economy has been kinda bad recently, you know. My company has been downsizing (I L-O-V-E those 5 unpaid "personal days" I get every four months...:( ) and a lot of others have been, too.

They might have come to the breaking point where something had to change or go, so they tried to make the old Huddle a cash machine again and since that doesn't seem to have worked too well, it might be expendable now.
Dec 8, 2009 12:04am
zambrown's avatar

zambrown

Senior Member

1,093 posts
Dec 8, 2009 12:11 AM
Just a crazy thought here. What if the "pay-to-play" isn't what killed them, but rather the "open the gates to the masses" last summer where they made it free? They had hundreds (thousands?) of people join once it went free, but the quality of the site went down hill fast. Realizing that "going free" was a horrible mistake, they tried to rectify it by then deciding to charge everyone again. Hoping that, once again, the loyal huddlers would be the ones left and the "freebies" would leave, not wanting to pay. Clearly, it didn't work, but I wonder if that was the thought process... JMO
Dec 8, 2009 12:11am
justincredible's avatar

justincredible

Nick Mangold

32,056 posts
Dec 8, 2009 12:13 AM
zambrown wrote: Just a crazy thought here. What if the "pay-to-play" isn't what killed them, but rather the "open the gates to the masses" last summer where they made it free? They had hundreds (thousands?) of people join once it went free, but the quality of the site went down hill fast. Realizing that "going free" was a horrible mistake, they tried to rectify it by then deciding to charge everyone again. Hoping that, once again, the loyal huddlers would be the ones left and the "freebies" would leave, not wanting to pay. Clearly, it didn't work, but I wonder if that was the thought process... JMO
What are you trying to say? We're doomed? :)
Dec 8, 2009 12:13am
Mooney44Cards's avatar

Mooney44Cards

Senior Member

2,754 posts
Dec 8, 2009 12:18 AM
zambrown wrote: Just a crazy thought here. What if the "pay-to-play" isn't what killed them, but rather the "open the gates to the masses" last summer where they made it free? They had hundreds (thousands?) of people join once it went free, but the quality of the site went down hill fast. Realizing that "going free" was a horrible mistake, they tried to rectify it by then deciding to charge everyone again. Hoping that, once again, the loyal huddlers would be the ones left and the "freebies" would leave, not wanting to pay. Clearly, it didn't work, but I wonder if that was the thought process... JMO
They already had a running list of the people that paid the $10.....so they could've given access to all those people and then require everyone else to pay but they didn't do that. They treated the 5-10 year members who had paid $10 the same as they treated joe shmoe who just signed up that day. I don't buy that argument one bit.
Dec 8, 2009 12:18am
J

JoeA1010

Senior Member

191 posts
Dec 8, 2009 12:19 AM
I can't imagine the plan was to collect fees and then shut down the site two months later. If that was the plan, that is fraud and quite possibly criminal. At the least, though, if it shuts down here soon they knew that it was impending and still took $12 from people. That is unethical, at best.

As an early Huddler and someone who was in the top 10 in posts until a few years ago, I am sad to see the site go to waste, but not surprised that current management flushed it down the toilet.
Dec 8, 2009 12:19am
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Dec 8, 2009 12:22 AM
zambrown wrote: Just a crazy thought here. What if the "pay-to-play" isn't what killed them, but rather the "open the gates to the masses" last summer where they made it free? They had hundreds (thousands?) of people join once it went free, but the quality of the site went down hill fast. Realizing that "going free" was a horrible mistake, they tried to rectify it by then deciding to charge everyone again. Hoping that, once again, the loyal huddlers would be the ones left and the "freebies" would leave, not wanting to pay. Clearly, it didn't work, but I wonder if that was the thought process... JMO
No. They honestly believed their site was worth $12 a year to people, especially with all the "old timers" complaining how the site went downhill and how they'd wish it was pay-to-post again.
Dec 8, 2009 12:22am
zambrown's avatar

zambrown

Senior Member

1,093 posts
Dec 8, 2009 1:36 AM
Mooney44Cards wrote:
zambrown wrote: Just a crazy thought here. What if the "pay-to-play" isn't what killed them, but rather the "open the gates to the masses" last summer where they made it free? They had hundreds (thousands?) of people join once it went free, but the quality of the site went down hill fast. Realizing that "going free" was a horrible mistake, they tried to rectify it by then deciding to charge everyone again. Hoping that, once again, the loyal huddlers would be the ones left and the "freebies" would leave, not wanting to pay. Clearly, it didn't work, but I wonder if that was the thought process... JMO
They already had a running list of the people that paid the $10.....so they could've given access to all those people and then require everyone else to pay but they didn't do that. They treated the 5-10 year members who had paid $10 the same as they treated joe shmoe who just signed up that day. I don't buy that argument one bit.
I agree, it was a stupid plan and, yes, they treated the loyal posters who had or maybe hadn't paid initially and screwed us all over not once, but twice. Once when they opened the floodgates to anyone who wanted to post without having to pay, and the second time when they wanted to charge us again.
Dec 8, 2009 1:36am
Q

queencitybuckeye

Senior Member

7,117 posts
Dec 8, 2009 6:23 AM
JoeA1010 wrote: I can't imagine the plan was to collect fees and then shut down the site two months later. If that was the plan, that is fraud and quite possibly criminal. At the least, though, if it shuts down here soon they knew that it was impending and still took $12 from people. That is unethical, at best.
Not that I buy this as their intent, but remember that the person who owns Bucknuts and hence jjhuddle.com made his money in the payday loan business, so arguably any talk of ethics tends to be moot.
Dec 8, 2009 6:23am
C

Cmhs74

Senior Member

174 posts
Dec 8, 2009 6:42 AM
If, and I say if JJhuddle goes under do you think Bucknuts might rerout those trying to get to JJ to Bucknuts instead?
Dec 8, 2009 6:42am
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Dec 8, 2009 6:51 AM
zambrown wrote: Just a crazy thought here. What if the "pay-to-play" isn't what killed them, but rather the "open the gates to the masses" last summer where they made it free? They had hundreds (thousands?) of people join once it went free, but the quality of the site went down hill fast. Realizing that "going free" was a horrible mistake, they tried to rectify it by then deciding to charge everyone again. Hoping that, once again, the loyal huddlers would be the ones left and the "freebies" would leave, not wanting to pay. Clearly, it didn't work, but I wonder if that was the thought process... JMO
Good points. If it is true, if probably would have worked if they:

1) Gave the news with more advance notice
2) Had ways to grandfather in the oldies
3) Weren't gay.
Dec 8, 2009 6:51am
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Dec 8, 2009 6:53 AM
JoeA1010 wrote:As an early Huddler and someone who was in the top 10 in posts until a few years ago
It's ok... let it all out. We're here for you.
Dec 8, 2009 6:53am