Thanks, Bill. The messing-about.com site does pay for itself now because of both Google ads and Amazon.com revenue. I have several members who support the site by clicking through my Amazon.com store to make their purchases; they don't pay any more and Amazon.com pays a small commission to me. I do the same for a favorite woodworking site of mine (I'm not allowed to click through my own store to get a commission on my own purchases).
The hosting business is part of that, also. If I included that income, it more than pays for itself. But the revenue from hosting customers is what allows me to create other communities, even ones that are not self-supporting. If I counted my time ... then no, its not a great business plan. But its a fun hobby, and its building slowly, so perhaps it can be "retirement income" for me. Bill Lamica wrote: > Thanks so much Frank. It means allot to start off with a clean slate. > I was not accusing, just complaining that your announcement timing was bad. > The rest I understand completely and commend you for thinking of the group. > I have never used wget. It's a good tip for us all. I'll have to give it a > try. > > I have visited your site on a number of occasions: > Although I'm not in favor of a cookie cutter stock design, I will say the > site > "works" extremely well; easy to use and follow - I like it allot. > > I noticed the Messing About section features Google ads, offers to build > websites, > hosting, etc. Will the Montgomery Owners site have those same banner ads and > offers? > And, does that generate enough revenue to cover the costs (as opposed to > donations)? > > Just me thinking again? > > Bill > > > > On 11/19/08, Frank Hagan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Bill, >> >> Sorry for the misunderstanding, Bill. >> >> I don't believe I have violated any copyrights, and would not do so. In >> my initial message, I made it clear that I wouldn't use anything without >> the ORIGINAL copyright owner's permission. For photos, that is the >> original picture taker, and for the text (captions), that would probably >> be you (although several articles have a byline, and under the copyright >> rules, while you would have first publisher rights, they can give >> permission for their article to be republished elsewhere). The only >> thing I have used is a single photo, with notice to the original >> copyright holder. >> >> You had an invitation on your site for people to download the content >> before you pulled the plug. Realizing that most people would view that >> as a onerous task to download all the content, I did so using wget, and >> have a complete copy of your site on disk. My intention was to be able >> to provide it after you pulled the plug but, as you can probably >> understand, I did have to grab it BEFORE the plug was pulled. >> >> I try to be very careful and respectful of other people's work. Anyone >> who has been to my site realizes that it is neither a copy of, nor does >> it use ANY content from your photo site. Feel free to take a look at it >> yourself at http://montgomeryowners.com, and if there's anything there >> you feel is infringing on your original work, please let me know (that >> goes for anyone in the group). >> >> I apologize for upseting you, as that was certainly not my intention. >> >> Bill Lamica wrote: >>> Frank, >>> >>> "I'm not sure you have to force everyone into a single Website solution." >>> I do not think you have been getting E-mail from the MSOG. Let me set you >>> straight on that Frank. The idea of combining the sites has been talked >>> about and considered for some time on this E-mail Forum. Not my idea, nor >>> something I would, or could, for that matter, force upon anyone. Since >> the >>> price we pay is well - free, I would be the last to consider ("fret >> over") a >>> free based Website as competition. Rather, it is better to consider what >> is >>> best for the Group. >>> >>> If you wanted to create a new site by copying my material, you should >> have >>> waited until I closed the site to make the announcement. At least waited >>> until I had the opportunity to finish negotiations with Bob E. I do not >>> consider your actions as competition - I consider it rude and you owe me >> an >>> apology... But, that's just my take on it. >>> >>> You have been given a good reference by some of the group: Here is hoping >>> you build a great site of your own design and creation. Here's hoping >> your >>> site becomes a resource for the MSOG. >>> >>> Bill >>> Photo Site >>> >>> P.s. If you care to discuss this further, contact me off list. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 11/18/08, Frank Hagan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Good news, Bill! I think a lot of people are breathing just a bit >>>> easier tonight. Everyone hates to see content disappear. >>>> >>>> I'll continue working on my site, and see if I can create something >>>> people enjoy. That's how "competition" ends up providing better choices >>>> for the consumer, so its not something to really fret over. Some owners >>>> are going to always like the maillist server, others will prefer the >>>> WebBBS style forums at Trailer Sailor, and others will prefer the Yahoo >>>> groups or the approach my website provides. I'm not sure you have to >>>> force everyone into a single website solution. But that's just my take >>>> on it. >>>> >>>> >>>> Bill Lamica wrote: >>>>> Hi All, >>>>> >>>>> We have a volunteer who has graciously paid the entire amount needed to >>>> keep >>>>> the Photo Site alive for the next 12 months. Never let it be said Bob >> Eeg >>>> is >>>>> anything but caring and sharing. Thanks Bob! >>>>> >>>>> I think we went through this exercise once before when we were trying >> to >>>>> figure out how to make four sites fit into one. And, now the problem is >>>> one >>>>> larger with Franks new site. So, the problem is there and Bob bought us >> a >>>>> year to consider how, or if, it is possible to fix. >>>>> >>>>> I am only one of the people whose work would need to be copied and >>>> replaced. >>>>> I am only one of the websites that would need to be linked directly to >>>> the >>>>> new site. I cannot speak for those other people. So I guess they need >> to >>>> be >>>>> asked, and certainly not on the list, that sort of negotiations are >>>> private. >>>>> That's not my job. Someone should be appointed. Are we collectively >> that >>>>> organized? >>>>> >>>>> Anyway thanks go out to Bob, I know it is appreciated by a whole lot of >>>>> folks. >>>>> >>>>> Bill >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats >> > _______________________________________________ > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats > _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats
