Gear Swap & Capilene

RE: "Marmot Prince" aka "Chuckie Cheese" — "Maybe if you told me to invest in BPL before these changes I would be able to consider it, but regardless of the price I now have to hold back 2-6 months to see if there is a precipitous drop in use the swap area and forum in the general."

BPL website became a valuable, unique resource for lightweight backpacking long before it ever opened its site up to gear swapping and forums.

And BPL succeeded for a lot of reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with "selling gear" or funding a facility for gabfests.

One of BPL's big attractions is that the folks who created and maintain the site did so as a "labor of love" for backpacking the light way, and (get ready, this will be a huge enlightenment for some of BPL's current mean-spirited critics) those BPL folks quite obviously were not interested in "investing" their own personal time, money, and effort for the purpose of making themselves rich, or to "compete" with other webites.

Put in very simple terms with one-syllable words: They love what they do; they do it very well; and they want to share what they know and do with others.

Got it?

Having regularly followed Ryan Jordan and others at BPL ever since I first discovered their website about 8 years ago or so, I am completely confident that their decisions to modify procedures around here, like the recent rule allowing only members to list items for sale in the gear swap forum, were undertaken after a great deal of thought for how BPL can be sustained as a valuable resource for the future.

BPL's gear swap forum, as well as all its other forums, wouldn't even exist without BPL doing what it's done so well already without those features, and for far, far longer than many of its non-member critics have been coming by to participate (and sell gear) for free.

For anyone who thinks being able to sell their stuff through BPL's gear swap forum is so valuable, then by all means join as a member and go for it.

And as for any non-members who believe BPL's decision allowing only members to sell gear in the gear swap forum doesn't offer them enough "free benefits" as non-members (due to their choice not to purchase a membership and not to make any contribution at all to paying the bills at BPL), it's just like what they themselves repeatedly keep on saying: there are a lot of other places for them to "invest" their time by selling stuff.

So what's the big problem? Go for it!!! It's a free market.

Ain't it great!

Re: Richard Scruggs

It's nice to offer your perspective on the history of BPL but it speaks little to my points about how restricting use can negatively impact the site for all. It's obvious gear swap attracts people to BPL and restricting these features could reduce use of the forum. It's pretty clear BPL has grown since the time before it offered gear swap.

I use these forums to respectfully ask and give advice and I expect to pay little or nothing because that's how much my use adds to the forum's costs.

You can be proud to be a member but I do not use any of those additional features, which apparently includes the ability to look down on people who just want to use an internet forum without being charged money.

RE: "You can be proud to be a member but I do not use any of those additional features, which apparently includes the ability to look down on people who just want to use an internet forum without being charged money."

No one is "looking down" on anyone. That's fine if someone wants to get things for free, which they do at BPL, as for example, the free unrestricted use of a great many BPL articles, reviews, and forums.

Sometimes "free" works out OK; sometimes it doesn't.

And if something is "free" at first, then not free, what's really been lost?

More specifically, since when was anyone endowed with an entitlement to have folks at BPL make a forum available for people to sell gear without any restriction?

I want a free pack. And no one is giving it to me. So what.

I also want BPL to succeed as a tremendous resource for lightweight backpacking, and am happy to support their efforts to make that resource available for a long time.

Some people, on the other hand, are only interested in what they can get for free, and have no commitment, or even desire, to help BPL sustain the remarkable resource that BPL provides, regardless of anyone's opportunity to sell gear at a BPL forum.

Everyone is free to do their own hike. How is that "looking down" on anyone?

"Some people, on the other hand, are only interested in what they can get for free, and have no commitment, or even desire, to help BPL sustain the remarkable resource that BPL provides"

There are other ways to contribute other than money and in fact those contributions, forum posts, that I want to read and make, are provided by free from BPL users, like me. I even think it's clear these contributions are bigger than any financial assets BPL has.

The forums and BPL as a whole were built by the community of users, and I have contributed in my small way to these forums. I'm not entitled or have a right to free access but I am stakeholder, I do benefit these forums, and I can voice my opinion about these changes. That's all I'm doing.

"I want a free pack. And no one is giving it to me. So what."

That's pretty ridiculous to compare free forum access to demanding free gear.
Maybe it would be true if packs cost almost nothing to give, and by giving free packs away improves and enlarges your community and business by attracting contributing members. Doesn't quite fit does it?

I think your perspective is pretty different than mine. It's almost of the flavor that you see BPL as beset by freeloaders who are robbing it of funds when it fact it is these people who have contributed to it and give it no real burden.

By the way I can't use BPL articles, or reviews for free, nor am I asking to.

No, my point isn't that BPL is "beset by freeloaders" at BPL's expense.

And I do agree that forum postings by members and non-members alike are a benefit to BPL and its followers.

But it goes too far to make this claim: "I even think it's clear these contributions are bigger than any financial assets BPL has."

Forum postings don't pay a dime toward the electric bill other than to the exent that posters and readers actually contribute financially by becoming paying members to help sustain the ride.

A poster can put up a masterpiece, and no matter how many millions of folks "oooh and ahhhh" as they read it, the electric bill goes unpaid by any of those people who remain non-members.

Guess they just hope that other folks keep paying dues.

"No, my point isn't that BPL is "beset by freeloaders" at BPL's expense…Guess they just hope that other folks keep paying dues."

Richard, you say the site isn't beset by freeloaders, but then you say people are using the forums and not paying the bills.

"Forum postings don't pay a dime toward the electric bill "

Actually they do and a dime would go pretty far. Do you understand the increase in hosting fees caused by the use of the forums by the average user is probably under 1 cent for an entire year? As stated by other knowledgeable users above, it is quite possible to make a site hugely profitable by selling ads for traffic, because once it is setup, costs are VERY low. In other words, "non-paying" users can and probably do pay for the forums through other means. Ever heard of or use google? gmail?

This "covering costs" argument is probably the worst one for restricting membership. Maybe BPL is writing brilliant articles or feeding starving orphans with your money, but it definitely isn't using most of it to cover site costs unless it is incredibly bad as a business.

Guess you missed the point earlier: The object of BPL has not been to make its website "hugely profitable" and BPL certainly does not "restrict" membership.

As far as your ideas for helping BPL sustain (i.e., pay expenses) its existence and value as a unique resource, you have surely sent Ryan Jordan an email, or given him a call, to share those ideas. No?

As for ads? Like pimps and prostitutes soliciting johns to take their money?

Plenty of that to be found elsewhere. One of the unique attractions of BPL is its commercial-free policy, although there was a time when ads were a part of BPL (in its print magazine).

By the way, contrary to your belief that non-members have no access to BPL articles and reviews, it would appear that there are BPL articles and reviews that non-members do indeed have free access to read.

Checking just the first page of current listings for the "most popular" articles and reviews disloses the following "free" BPL material:

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/backpacking_v_thruhiking.html

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/mike_clelland_weekly_tip.html

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/00277.html

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/00184.html

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/snoseal_review.html

And all the above articles are just in the top ten of "most popular" page link.

I'm new to this site. I just signed up today. So I guess I'm a non member or a free loader. I hope nobody minds. But I've noticed in this thread that alot of people will. So if I need to close my account to keep the members happy, I will.
I just came to try and learn a few more things and to be apart of another bpacking forum.
The price for membership isn't bad. I just can't afford it. I had my third back surgery a few weeks ago. So every penny I come across is precious to me. I was just hoping to use the expertise of people here to learn how to lighten my load some and take the pressure off of my lower back. But I will say again, If members don't want me browsing or "freeloading" just let me know.
I did come across a post the other day about a man who had a homemade bpack. I contacted him hoping that this pack would help to lower my weight on my back. If it doesn't work for me I promised to post it back on here to find it a good home. Man I love how hikers are kind and generous. I can't think of any bad ones that I have ever met in person. The internet is a different story though. Maybe sometimes people just don't get their point out right. I know I've been guilty of that in the past.

I was also wondering if we were allowed to see the expence sheet for this site and what money gets generated through it. It seems that ALOT of the members here have those numbers by reading their post. Maybe if we all could see them, it would help people to understand the position the site is in. But even so, I still couldn't contribute due to my financial position recently.

Anyway, Just wanted to say "HI" to everyone. And to also let members know that not everyone can afford to be a member. And for them to try and not belittle me for that. My finances are out of my control right now as I'm sure it is for others who just haven't spoken up.

I hope to meet you all on the trails someday!!!

As for ads? Like pimps and prostitutes soliciting johns to take their money?

Plenty of that to be found elsewhere. One of the unique attractions of BPL is its commercial-free policy, although there was a time when ads were a part of BPL (in its print magazine).

I think you should talk a look at some, or any threads on BPL for ads. Like this thread you've been replying to for the last few hours.

Like pimps and prostitutes soliciting johns to take their money?

Huh?

By the way, contrary to your belief that non-members have no access to BPL articles and reviews, it would appear that there are BPL articles and reviews that non-members do indeed have free access to read.

You said I had free access to reviews and articles, I said this wasn't true. Looks like there is a minority of articles that is freely accessible. I don't use, want, or was even aware of this content, and has little to do with our discussion about forum access, but I guess in your mind you got to score a point.

Guess you missed the point earlier: The object of BPL has not been to make its website "hugely profitable" and BPL certainly does not "restrict" membership.

Huh? I never said anything like the goal of BPL is to be hugely profitable or that it restricts who can have membership. This and the rest of your point doesn't have much to do with my post or the topic.

I carried on this conversation with you Richard because it could help enlighten the discussion about the pros and cons of restrictions to forum access to the community. If you have no interest in reading my points or even making sensible replies this really serves no purpose.

Marmot said: "I even think it's clear these contributions are bigger than any financial assets BPL has… The forums and BPL as a whole were built by the community of users, and I have contributed in my small way to these forums."

Great point. Fact is, BPL forums are of value mostly because of what the users have contributed over time. That is the essential nugget of worth. The BPL staff are great and all but no matter how high speed/low drag they are in the UL world, the sum of their experience pales in comparison to the total experience of the forum users'.

Richard Scruggs said: "As for ads? Like pimps and prostitutes soliciting johns to take their money?"

That's a flippin' stupid comment, man. If you are so against capitalism and businesses making money, make your own gear 'cuz that's what you'd be left with. Ridiculous.

"As for ads? Like pimps and prostitutes soliciting johns to take their money?

Plenty of that to be found elsewhere. One of the unique attractions of BPL is its commercial-free policy, although there was a time when ads were a part of BPL (in its print magazine)."

OH PLEASE!…. Like Tarptent, MLD, SMD, and those *(@&* cat shovels, etc aren't a big freaking AD every time they post their stuff.

I certainly don't mind them being here, they provide an excellent source of feedback and communication with the company that is great. but don't be all high and mighty and say that you don't have Ad's on here.

you've also been spraying all thread about how beneficial getting a membership can be. who's ask who for what now? riiight.

PS Ad revenue is done by page clicks and views NOT by how many times someone clicks their Ad/link so a few small logo's on the side of the page would get you guys some income without taking away from the users.

"BPL membership is a bargain and you're supporting an information source that you can't beg borrow or steal anywhere else: the yearly membership is about the same as one book. I think it is interesting to note that there are what– three books in print on UL hiking?"

+1, to which I would add: If you can't afford the dirt cheap price of a BPL membership, how in the d!ckens can you afford to go backpacking? Seriously. I think Nick pencilled it out to be something like 7 cents a day.

Would you believe, the profanity police busted me for using d-i-ckens?

Marmot Prince, aka Cuckie_Cheese: Perhaps you are right. Why should ANYONE invest in high power computational resources. Before I retired I ran, purchased, and supported about 1/4 as many computers as there are members here for a major university. Clearly they didn't need to do the raw research into nano tech, nor organic engineering, nor genetics, nor solor power, nor…well, we just don't need it. They could have gotten by with an abacus and a big file cabinet. Think of the energy you could have saved them alone!!! This obvious sarcasm was meant to illustrate that I *do* know computers, server farms, individual machines, and OS's. Bottom line: someone, somewhere has to pay for it. That cost WILL be passed on. BPL is NOT a freebee company, it is a company looking to make money. As always, there is a cost to every bit and byte. Even if it is $.0001 per byte, it ain't free.

"I ran an internet forum in university and had several thousand users, with hundreds on at a time. It worked faster than BPL and I paid $100 per year, and I had LOTS of hosting power left over (I overpaid). By the way I don't see any investments in the forum to improve its functionality. How much staff expenses does it take to monitor the swap forum, which gets 10-20 new threads per day? Comeon."
Obviously, you ran it. Equally obvious you did NOT administer it. It costs more than $100 a year to fire up my poor old computer. A simple 100mbit symetrical data line costs more than that. For example, I pay 39.95 per *month* for a 10mbit asymetrical data link. Lets see, hiring a person costs x dollars at a rate per hour of x dollars. 7 days per week, 24 hours per day? hmmm, might we better have 4 people for that? Social Security is something the *employer* pays for each person. I am ignoring benefits, of course, we treat them like slave labour. Simple monitoring ain't cheap. Facetious? Yes, absolutly. But no worse than that final statement…just don't tell Roger, he'll want a raise from his dollar-a-day drudgery!!!

"This is particularly Orwellian. Yeah members will benefit by seeing less stuff to buy so the site will be faster. HUGE benefit. Even better don't look at the site and your time spent loading will be zero."
I would term it more Dawinian, myself (never cared too much for pigs.) The nature of the new economy requires changes in BPL, not status quo as you seem to advocate. I feel that a smaller, more targeted, lightweight collection of gear on swap will suit this community better and be more in line with the origonal goals than a larger more generalized collection of outdoor gear. But, hey, we all need to start, somewhere. There are other forums for that, though. I would suggest you post there rather than loose any business. Corse, you really shouldn't be running a business through BPL. I must admit to purchasing an odd old pack on swap that weighed a real lot, a bit better than 2 pounds…I think this was my one and only use of that forum. From my personal end of things, yes, it *could* go away and save all that bandwidth for my very own personal use. Wow…Good Thinking and well contributed to the lightweight comunity here. We will all walk away and petition Ryan to turn the whole site over to free gear swap for as long as the site lasts. NO! The closer reality is that we need gear swap, but NOT in it's past form. Bandwidth costs dollars. Webhosting, not subsidized school sites, costs real money. Staffing costs money. Freelance writing costs money. As a member, you could contribute your fair share to the sport. Not just take a few dollars in freebee sales ads, a drp in the bucket, so to speak.

"But it's not a new benefit, members could post there before. I really hope this quality of thinking isn't share by the admins of this board."
Nope, all mine.
You are not a member. You cannot post to swap.
You are a member. You can post to swap.
I believe this qualifies as a new(as in recent) benefit to membership, however you care to twist the semantics of my poor writing. Sorry for being so unclear!

This thread is becoming a circling trolling pising contest of an argument. It is what it is. Lets move on with life.

Yeah, nuff said. I do appologize, I was getting a bit upset…

"That's pretty ridiculous to compare free forum access to demanding free gear.
Maybe it would be true if packs cost almost nothing to give, and by giving free packs away improves and enlarges your community and business by attracting contributing members. Doesn't quite fit does it?"

Oh, I think it fits quite well indeed, to a tee in fact. Do you really think this website costs nothing to set up, maintain, populate with content, etc? It is a service, with economic value, just like a tangible good. It is growing increasingly clear that the current BPL business model is not sustainable, and that additional funds must be obtained from one or more new sources if BPL is to stay in business. They are experimenting with advertising, and many of you who are not members are howling about that, along with a lot of members. So, where is the additional revenue to be found? One obvious source is to persuade non members to contribute their fair share by becoming paying members, either by appealing to conscience or by making desirable aspects of BPL available only to members. There is no free lunch. If you value BPL as much as you say, I would encourage you to join and help BPL stay alive. BTW, many, many paying members also contribute posts of value that make BPL a very desirable site to visit. Your posts are no more or less worthy than theirs. The difference is that they are also paying their way instead of claiming that the value of their posts is payment enough for full access to the forums and many articles.

Costs aren't large just because people can write a small essay listing the various costs (over and over and over again). I've already responded about how dubious it is that these fees are supposed to "cover forums costs" and there's plenty of statements from people, not just me, that these costs are low and ad supportable.

I've been on these forums a couple of years, I respect the admins in a general sense but I am generally a skeptical and realistic person. I don't have a strong passion for the people behind BPL, as I sense some of the people in this thread have, which is why we are talking through eachother.

There are principled, long-term paying members, who are critics of BPL who are concerned about its management and future. You can read this post for one example.

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/xdpy/forum_thread/50852/index.html?skip_to_post=431680#431680

I would support BPL in principle but I don't have a clear opinion about the management, one way or another. I see alot of monetization and low investment in the forums and I don't see these as good signs of its future. The point is to be cautious and that even well meaning people don't deserve money without good logic. And I'm not very good against arguing against religious people.

They could keep working the myog articles. Those are why I had a membership last year. I'd like to see those expanded. Charging for the forums puts a bad taste in my mouth, especially when they're doing it in a way that doesn't favor members that much. Yeah, now only members can sell, but they still get no special treatment when buying. As I recall, quite a few members were upset about how they didn't get first dibs when BPL was selling all their review gear earlier this year. As a buyer and seller, I would appreciate members having first dibs, even if I'm not member myself. In fact, that might actually encourage me to get another membership.

Its interesting that mec does not charge anything for the use of its online gear swap … You do not even need to be a member

They do it i believe as a way to reuse old gear and prevent rampant consumerism …

Now bpl needs to support itself, but from what i understand from online marketplaces, critical mass is key …. The more goods you have listed, the more likely buyers will visit yr site …

Regardless all this is speculation … The only facts will be seen in the data … Namely will there be an increase in membership to offset any decline in traffic to that forum

In other words how many non members will become members due to this policy change … And how will it influence future non members to sign up or not

Numbers are what matters

My personal feeling is that it may except for very specific sites such as the wsj/nyt/etc …. Restricting access will decrease the popularity and reach of a site

I dont particularly like the decision to restrict the gear forum purchases. This is the first site that i have seen do this. Now as a non paying memeber I really dont have much say and shouldnt.

I would however say that a non paying member does bring value to the site in a few ways.
1) They provide content and opinion and ask questions. The value of the forum is off of posts. Newbies who arent members yet drive a lot of the discussion with their questions and experienced non members answer quetions as well. Without discussion there is no forum.

2) Every non-member is a potential new member.

3) Traffic driven to a website can be monitized through adds.

Now point 3 is where I think BPL is missing the boat. Their desire for no ads is admirable however they are missing the most common form of internet income. BPL seems to see the forum as an expense however most forums that are just forums that do not generate their own content see the forum as a source of income or at least breaking even.

So i think that BPL would be better off generating as much traffic as it can and monitize it with adds common to all internet forums. Then a membership Benefit would be the removal of adds. Adding restrictions to one of your largest traffic generators in my opinion is just putting a tax on yourself and restricting growth.

I think the biggest risk is when a user like me finds a different site to post used gear on that i might like the other forum and decrease my traffic here. But since BPL doesnt monitize traffic that isnt a loss for them and in fact will save them money.

I am not a paying member, but I have bought and sold on the gear swap. I also lurk and read the majority of the posts– it's just I don't have much to contribute when compared to all I learn/have learned by reading others postings.

The recent policy change for gear swap sales seems to just hurt the paying members. There will be less selection for them to buy, yet "non-(paying)-members" can still pm to purchase items that paying-members list for sale.

Caleb

"I would support BPL in principle but I don't have a clear opinion about the management, one way or another. I see alot of monetization and low investment in the forums and I don't see these as good signs of its future."

This. I was getting closer and closer to buying in, largely b/c Dave Chenault is becoming a regular contributor, but I continue to hestitate b/c I really don't know where the site is going. As I said upthread, I'm happy to pay for stuff I want to support, but something just doesn't smell right with this, and it doesn't help that no one seems to know exactly what the plan is or bothers to announce or explain anything. IMO, BPL management needs to decide what they want and make that known instead of *%@#ing around changing this or that while continuing to maintain radio silence on the forums. I also can't say I'm impressed with the pay up or gtfo atittude I'm sensing from some paying members. That's not a club I want to join.

"Now as a non paying memeber I really dont have much say and shouldnt."

On the contrary, you and I the ones BPL wants money from! Non-paying members should be making it clear what they're willing and not willing to pay for.

The bottom line is this:

Requiring a paid membership to post gear for sale will reduce the quantity of gear offered on gear swap which is a huge negative for paying members such as myself.

As I've already stated, I believe the gear swap section is a catalyst to increased lightweight backpacking awareness in general, which in turn leads to a thirst for more specialized and specific knowledge. I think people are then willing to pay for this knowledge by accessing the great in depth reviews and other articles published by this site.

The bottom line is that I am now getting less for my already paid membership (through less buying options on gear swap) and am being told by the powers that be, that it's really in my best interest. If the owners of this site need more money to sustain the site or just want to make a profit I'm all for it, but there must be a better way than hurting your already paying members.

I'm pretty sure I will not be renewing my membership which is a shame. Would someone please tell me the name of other sites that have similar gear swap sections that are open to all?