Chesapeake
Posts: 1,603
Dec 7, 2009 8:42pm
Wait, was that 12.00 for 2009 only? damnit they're tricky!
S
Society
Posts: 1,146
Dec 7, 2009 8:42pm
What exactly are you trying to say here?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.
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Dec 7, 2009 8:47pm
Ches, why did you edit that post around? Made more sense the first time.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.
Chesapeake
Posts: 1,603
Dec 7, 2009 8:49pm
If you don't understand it, i'm not gonna tell ya.Society wrote:What exactly are you trying to say here?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.
ytownfootball
Posts: 6,978
Dec 7, 2009 8:51pm
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.
It was a good run while it lasted.
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Dec 7, 2009 8:53pm
Ches, when you changed your post, it seemed like insider info has leaked through to you. What gives?
S
Society
Posts: 1,146
Dec 7, 2009 8:54pm
Fair enough.Chesapeake wrote:If you don't understand it, i'm not gonna tell ya.Society wrote:What exactly are you trying to say here?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.
M
mtrulz
Posts: 2,905
Dec 7, 2009 8:56pm
Huge mistake he made.
BRF
Posts: 8,748
Dec 7, 2009 9:00pm
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.
But that is now over.
And this looks like the place to build it up.
T
tigerfan82
Posts: 342
Dec 7, 2009 9:25pm
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 
N
Nate
Posts: 3,949
Dec 7, 2009 11:22pm
Let it burn in hell with Hitler!
krambman
Posts: 3,606
Dec 7, 2009 11:53pm
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.
Cat Food Flambe'
Posts: 1,230
Dec 7, 2009 11:57pm
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?
Some of your characters may be familiar with how these things work - comments?
Cleveland Buck
Posts: 5,126
Dec 8, 2009 12:00am
Heretic
Posts: 18,820
Dec 8, 2009 12:04am
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.
) 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.
zambrown
Posts: 1,093
Dec 8, 2009 12:11am
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
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Dec 8, 2009 12:13am
What are you trying to say? We're doomed?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
Mooney44Cards
Posts: 2,754
Dec 8, 2009 12:18am
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.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
J
JoeA1010
Posts: 191
Dec 8, 2009 12:19am
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.
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.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Dec 8, 2009 12:22am
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.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
zambrown
Posts: 1,093
Dec 8, 2009 1:36am
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.Mooney44Cards wrote: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.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
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Dec 8, 2009 6:23am
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.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.
C
Cmhs74
Posts: 174
Dec 8, 2009 6:42am
If, and I say if JJhuddle goes under do you think Bucknuts might rerout those trying to get to JJ to Bucknuts instead?
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Dec 8, 2009 6:51am
Good points. If it is true, if probably would have worked if they: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
1) Gave the news with more advance notice
2) Had ways to grandfather in the oldies
3) Weren't gay.
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Dec 8, 2009 6:53am
It's ok... let it all out. We're here for you.JoeA1010 wrote:As an early Huddler and someone who was in the top 10 in posts until a few years ago