WOT freemium

alphacentauri
Posts: 3291
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:52 pm

RE: WOT freemium

Post by alphacentauri » Sun Apr 13, 2014 8:30 pm

Perhaps part of the impetus here is that WOT is having trouble getting investors because they have to counter the argument that a small number of users are the only ones really participating. The number of downloads isn't important if people aren't using it in a way that can be monetized in some way. They do have to eat in Finland, same as where I live.

I just don't think this "freemium" scheme is going to accomplish what they want. Will people still install WOT on computers they set up for other people? Probably, but they'll just learn to create an account and rate three sites before they turn each computer over to a client. That's not the same as having those clients as active users.

People are complaining they can't rate sites because they don't know what they're supposed to evaluate. And that's completely true. Having their uninformed ratings added into the mix isn't going to help them or anyone else.

What about a "WOT School," a set of online tutorials for how to recognize phish and other scams? (but NOT having the lessons created by the same people who created the inscrutable new scorecard ;) ) People get WOT free if they complete training sessions or pass online quizzes. It's a very high level of user engagement as far as investors are concerned, but it provides more value to the user than WOT does now, since it allows them to keep themselves safe when faced with a grey donut.

User avatar
Myxt
Posts: 4145
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 6:18 am

RE: WOT freemium

Post by Myxt » Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:56 pm

<quote user="alphacentauri">What about a "WOT School," ...[/quote]WoT is, and has long been, a school of sorts. The Forum alone contains much instructive material which could be organized and condensed, along with the Wiki, into courses, then branded and marketed: One course for web site owners, another for advanced users, and one for novices.

Just don't call it "School of WOT?"


Timo
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 5:11 pm

RE: WOT freemium

Post by Timo » Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:27 am

As of now we have stopped Freemium experiment. Safety icons on search results are now back to normal. It might take a while before you see a change on your browsers.

Thank you all for participating the experiment and all of you who shared your comments and ideas with us.

c۞g
Posts: 21225
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:02 am

RE: WOT freemium

Post by c۞g » Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:37 am

<quote user="timo">
As of now we have stopped Freemium experiment. [/quote]
Curious as to what conclusions WOT has determined from this experiment and what changes, if any, may be expected as a result.

Olivier.Marmini
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:30 pm

RE: WOT freemium

Post by Olivier.Marmini » Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:03 am

Curious about what 'cog' points out as well. :)

jpzip
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:48 am

RE: WOT freemium

Post by jpzip » Tue Apr 22, 2014 9:42 am

Well, we learned a quite bit. Or maybe more precisely, we were able to quantify some phenomenons we already intuitively knew (like, people prefer free stuff over paid stuff. Duh). We also learned about the difficulty of communicating the nuances of the change. For example, one core point of our message "paid features would apply only to non-contributing (i.e. activity score zero) users" didn't cut through in the middle of large philosophical debate about the justification of any price tag.

Companies, especially small ones, run (or at least should run) experiments all the time to hone their understanding about their product as well as their operative and business model. There is no direct decison-tree (If result>X, then do Y) but rather the results feed back to the overall decision-making process.

So I cannot give you an exact "what's next" statement. The rationale Timo put forth in the beginning of this thread (below ) still holds:
We have reached a point in WOT development where we will start testing a few monetization models
I'd like to clarify here what 'monetization' here means. Without giving any confidential numbers, one can quickly calculate that with the price levels we tried out (like USD 1.99 a year) and the exclusions of anyone who'd contribute even a little bit, the focus was not generating much of a BusinessWeek cover story. Rather, the focus here was primarily finding ways to offset the costs of the relatively sizable server backend that serves those real-time reputation checks. We've got quite many servers running 24/7 on high support levels and yes, the large majority of the traffic we handle is coming from the non-contributing users.

NotBuyingIt
Posts: 6548
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 6:21 pm

RE: WOT freemium

Post by NotBuyingIt » Tue Apr 22, 2014 1:37 pm

<quote user="jpzip">
We've got quite many servers running 24/7 on high support levels and yes, the large majority of the traffic we handle is coming from the non-contributing users.
[/quote]

I've been favorably impressed by how well WOT regularly responds. I hope that it finds a way to remain an independent and benevolent authority. It's a pity that many people don't value its service as much as, say, Angry Birds ([url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angry_Birds_%28video_game%29 t=_self]wiki[/url]).


redblade7
Posts: 520
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:18 am

RE: WOT freemium

Post by redblade7 » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:35 pm

I think WOT should focus more on its "review" nature than the add-on.

I would never recommend the addon to anyone, both on grounds of privacy (checking every site upon load is highly intrusive vs. browser blacklists) and how political/religious/corporate bias occasionally makes good sites look bad.

However, WOT is an excellent way to "review" the nature and safety of sites (including mainstream sites, like our recent exposing of the unethical behaviors of CNET and the NRCC)

We should all focus less on the addon and more on the reviews. What do you think?

donsorg
Posts: 4026
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:42 am

RE: WOT freemium

Post by donsorg » Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:07 am

<quote user="redblade7">
I think WOT should focus more on its "review" nature than the add-on.

I would never recommend the addon to anyone, both on grounds of privacy (checking every site upon load is highly intrusive vs. browser blacklists) and how political/religious/corporate bias occasionally makes good sites look bad.

However, WOT is an excellent way to "review" the nature and safety of sites (including mainstream sites, like our recent exposing of the unethical behaviors of CNET and the NRCC)

We should all focus less on the addon and more on the reviews. What do you think?
[/quote]

The add-on is just a delivery channel that brings the product closer to a user. Without that few people will use "just another review website". You may be impressed how much users value those red/green icons on search results.

In other words, only reviews functionality has a very limited audience, while the add-on is for huge one (just check the counter of downloads on the home page).

MysteryFCM
Posts: 4912
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:47 pm

RE: WOT freemium

Post by MysteryFCM » Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:12 am

Won't comment on the freemium (really do despise words such as this, but that's another discussion) model being discussed, but with respect to your post;

<quote user="kaspersky's virus detection team">If you want to throw insults at the truth, then you shouldn't be here to begin with but asking to pay for it is a joke.
W aste
O f
T ime is what WOT is being to evolve into.
[/quote]

Ironic to see you mention "throwing insults" (didn't see Timo do such), when posting childish things such as this. However;

<quote user="kaspersky's virus detection team">
I've been a member since 2008 and I've seen WOT become a non-reliable website advisor, nothing more. There is so much complacency and false reporting among it's members, it's no longer a viable site and quickly becoming a liability to most users. Forum discussions have turned into a who's who of insults and no longer carries any value. If there are false rating of a website then it should be brought to the attention of the members and discussed as adults, not children in the disguise of an adult.[/quote]

If you see posts containing insults, flag them or drop myself or one of the other moderators (or indeed admins) a PM and it will be dealt with appropriately.

Same for what you deem to be false ratings, there's a flag facility present for dealing with these.

<quote user="kaspersky's virus detection team">False ratings abound on quite a few outstanding websites and WOT does nothing to stem the tide of members misusing their rating capability.[/quote]

Sites such as ........ ???

<quote user="kaspersky's virus detection team">These members are sabotaging the ratings and the validity of the system. Ratings are emotionally based instead of being factual based. I've demonstrated it on numerous occasions, only to have the post deleted in favor of "no bad news agendas," bias moderation and politically based intervention.[/quote]

Haven't seen any of your posts you're referring to as being deleted myself, but if this is the case, drop me a PM with the URL to the post in question. If it was removed inappropriately, I'll gladly restore it.


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests