PDA

View Full Version : Poop Bob Gretz for only $99.99!!!!!!!


Mr. Laz
07-08-2010, 10:27 AM
Premium Subscription (http://www.bobgretz.com/premium-content-membership)

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr align="left" valign="top"><th>July 6, 2010 - Administrator | </th><th>
</th><th>
</th></tr></tbody></table>
Starting August 1, BobGretz.com will begin posting premium content.
Now is the time to register to become a premium member of BobGretz.com for the 2010 Chiefs season. Premium membership will provide access to all elements of the site, giving you the same coverage of the Chiefs and the NFL that youíve enjoyed in past seasons. That includes detailed practice reports from training camp and unmatched post-game coverage from the pre-season opener through the 16th game of the regular season. Playoffs? If the Chiefs are there, BobGretz.com will be there and your membership will continue until the day after the Chiefs season ends.

Our introductory rate is $25, available until August 1. After that, premium membership for the 2010 season will be $35.

Join now by punching the Paypal subscribe button! You can then choose to pay by major credit card or your PayPal account. Check ďRemember MeĒ during Log in to have the system automatically log you in each time you visit throughout the season.

KCUnited
07-08-2010, 10:30 AM
Buck got peeped on.

Pestilence
07-08-2010, 10:32 AM
Cheaper than $125.....and with more information too.

Mr. Flopnuts
07-08-2010, 10:34 AM
R

OnTheWarpath58
07-08-2010, 10:36 AM
R

Ricola?


http://modestto.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/ricola1.jpg

Mr. Flopnuts
07-08-2010, 11:10 AM
RE

Fairplay
07-08-2010, 11:12 AM
POST

Saulbadguy
07-08-2010, 11:15 AM
FUCKING TWAT, STOP REPOSTING SHIT YOU MORON

Fairplay
07-08-2010, 11:15 AM
For a short time included with this purchase is a Bob Gretz bobble head doll and soap on a rope for your joy time needs.

Detoxing
07-08-2010, 12:05 PM
He's got to make money I guess. Oh well. I think he should've waited one more season though.

mikeyis4dcats.
07-08-2010, 12:08 PM
you pay him, and I'll still get the news 5 minutes later.

Count Alex's Wins
07-08-2010, 12:23 PM
He's got to make money I guess. Oh well. I think he should've waited one more season though.

I disagree. This is the perfect time for him to start pushing premium content.

With River Falls out of the picture and lord knows what coming out of WPI this August, people are gonna run to Gretz's site for camp updates, knowing that he did a pretty good job last year. They'll see it's now a premium service, but at the paltry cost of $25 for an entire year, they won't hesitate to fork over the dough.

Where else are they getting quality, independent camp updates from?

The Star is more interested in pushing articles. And before you know it, they'll be charging for premium content, too.

Get used to this business model because it's not going anywhere.

Just Passin' By
07-08-2010, 12:25 PM
I disagree. This is the perfect time for him to start pushing premium content.

With River Falls out of the picture and lord knows what coming out of WPI this August, people are gonna run to Gretz's site for camp updates, knowing that he did a pretty good job last year. They'll see it's now a premium service, but at the paltry cost of $25 for an entire year, they won't hesitate to fork over the dough.

Where else are they getting quality, independent camp updates from?

The Star is more interested in pushing articles. And before you know it, they'll be charging for premium content, too.

Get used to this business model because it's not going anywhere.

"Pay per" has failed every time it's been tried, to date. What do you think is different about this attempt, especially when advances like Twitter have made delayed news even more irrelevant?

mikeyis4dcats.
07-08-2010, 12:26 PM
I disagree. This is the perfect time for him to start pushing premium content.

With River Falls out of the picture and lord knows what coming out of WPI this August, people are gonna run to Gretz's site for camp updates, knowing that he did a pretty good job last year. They'll see it's now a premium service, but at the paltry cost of $25 for an entire year, they won't hesitate to fork over the dough.

Where else are they getting quality, independent camp updates from?

The Star is more interested in pushing articles. And before you know it, they'll be charging for premium content, too.

Get used to this business model because it's not going anywhere.

not sustainable. The only place subscription based online content for news is sustainable is in smaller markets such as Manhattan KS where the Mercury can charge for online access due to the lack of local news coverage on TV and elsewhere.

Anything online in a "Premium" setting will be available to the masses within minutes or hours. Most understand this and don't see the need for the immediate access.

Count Alex's Wins
07-08-2010, 12:29 PM
"Pay per" has failed every time it's been tried, to date.

No, it hasn't. That's why more and more media outlets are turning to it. That's why dozens of well-run team sites on the Scout network are raking in cash. Tons and tons of newspapers have online premium outlets now.

Pretty soon the team sites are gonna have premium access, because they love money, too.

The age of 100 percent free sports information is coming to an end.

Just Passin' By
07-08-2010, 12:33 PM
No, it hasn't. That's why more and more media outlets are turning to it. That's why dozens of well-run team sites on the Scout network are raking in cash. Tons and tons of newspapers have online premium outlets now.

Pretty soon the team sites are gonna have premium access, because they love money, too.

The age of 100 percent free sports information is coming to an end.

Perhaps my characterization confused you, so my apologies if my post was unclear. There are exceptions to pretty much every rule, but the exceptions have been in the specialty areas (WSJ, for example). General information services have failed miserably. They tried the same thing in the 90's. They tried it in the 00's. Hell, an attempt by the biggest dog on the block, the NYT, crashed and burned very publicly in the 00's. ESPN insider has been absolutely useless when it comes to breaking information, and is all about follow up editorials and the like.

What do you think has changed to make it viable now?

chiefsnorth
07-08-2010, 12:38 PM
This model doesn't work. Maybe for a hobbyist like Gretz who just wants to defray his costs, but the media will report daily and will catch any major news.

Making money by controlling access only works if you have the market cornered for that product.

I know he is a good writer but $99.99 is an insane price.

Count Alex's Wins
07-08-2010, 12:39 PM
Perhaps my characterization confused you, so my apologies if my post was unclear. There are exceptions to pretty much every rule, but the exceptions have been in the specialty areas (WSJ, for example). General information services have failed miserably. They tried the same thing in the 90's. They tried it in the 00's. Hell, an attempt by the biggest dog on the block, the NYT, crashed and burned very publicly in the 00's. ESPN insider has been absolutely useless when it comes to breaking information, and is all about follow up editorials and the like.

What do you think has changed to make it viable now?

The internet as a media outlet, and the fact that sports franchises are tightening the flow of information.

People don't like this, but it's going to happen. But if you think the bitching is loud now, wait until the NFL starts implementing pay-per-view. They're already halfway home with exclusive games on their own cable network.

Count Alex's Wins
07-08-2010, 12:41 PM
This model doesn't work. Maybe for a hobbyist like Gretz who just wants to defray his costs, but the media will report daily and will catch any major news.

I know he is a good writer but $99.99 is an insane price.

It's $25, and yes, the Star will report anything major.

But there are tons and tons of people out there who thirst for detailed, daily reports.

I predict Gretz owns this training camp.

Just Passin' By
07-08-2010, 12:43 PM
The internet as a media outlet, and the fact that sports franchises are tightening the flow of information.

That's served to undercut premium content, as reporters are now quicker to pull the trigger and get the information out there. To date, it's had the exact opposite effect that you're predicting it will.

People don't like this, but it's going to happen. But if you think the bitching is loud now, wait until the NFL starts implementing pay-per-view. They're already halfway home with exclusive games on their own cable network.

The NFL is not going to implement pay-per-view in any manner that Congress doesn't like, which means that people are still going to be able to watch their teams for free.

I hear what you're saying but, again, you're saying exactly what people were saying in the 90's and the 00's. I just don't know that advancements have made this more likely to happen now than before.

dirk digler
07-08-2010, 12:46 PM
Arrowhead Pride does a pretty good job summarizing this. I think this will ultimately fail because all it takes is one person to copy and paste from Gretz's site and it will be all over the web.

Bob Gretz of BobGretz.com (http://www.bobgretz.com/) has decided to go to a premium website -- basically he'll be charging for content. Not all of his content will be behind a paywall, but the "breadth and depth of the coverage" that we've been seeing will be.

I understand the need to monetize blogging but charging for content, for any website, limits your traffic (especially because we won't/can't link to his pay stuff) and thus limits your relevance. It's not a long-term formula, unfortunately, and that's why only a handful of sites have been successful doing it (the Wall Street Journal comes to mind, the NY Times is coming soon).

Then there's Newsday, the Long Island-based magazine. A few months ago, a report came out (http://www.observer.com/2010/media/after-three-months-only-35-subscriptions-newsdays-web-site) that they had sold 35 online subscriptions over a three-month period. 35. For Long Island. Wow.

That said, with Gretz, it's an interesting situation. He and Josh Looney of KCChiefs.com are the only two who will report daily on practice during training camp. I'll be up there but not every day like Gretz and Looney. So really he's half of the daily camp reports. He's among the most reliable reporters/bloggers in the business (if not the most reliable). Is that worth $25? It's up to you.

For me, it's less about Gretz and more about the idea of paying for news. Charging for content is something that I am not a fan of. News should be free. You can get your news for free in plenty of places. If real news were breaking, people wouldn't put it behind a pay wall. They would want as many people as possible to read it. Evidence of this can be seen from Chip Brown and Orangebloods.com. The Rivals' site, normally subscription only, took away the pay wall during this Big 12 mess because Brown was breaking so much news they wanted as many people as possible to see (i.e. relevance) their reports.

Since we do a lot of news aggregation here, I'll be watching Gretz's site with plenty of curiosity over these next few months to see if the pay-to-read model works for him.

We've said before you'll never be charged to read AP and we'll stick to that.

Count Alex's Wins
07-08-2010, 12:47 PM
That's served to undercut premium content, as reporters are now quicker to pull the trigger and get the information out there. To date, it's had the exact opposite effect that you're predicting it will.

Nope. It's harder to get access to players now, at least in some places. So when you do get a few morsels from one, stuff that nobody else has....cha-ching.


I hear what you're saying but, again, you're saying exactly what people were saying in the 90's and the 00's. I just don't know that advancements have made this more likely to happen now than before.

Sports news on the internet was nothing like it is now 10 years ago. Not even close.

10 years ago newspapers were kicking ass and taking names. Now it's a dying industry.

Why? The internet is taking over.

BossChief
07-08-2010, 12:47 PM
As long as Directv continues to offer extremely profitable figures to the NFL in future contracts there is no need for them to opt to going pay per view.

Phobia
07-08-2010, 12:48 PM
This model doesn't work. Maybe for a hobbyist like Gretz who just wants to defray his costs, but the media will report daily and will catch any major news.

Making money by controlling access only works if you have the market cornered for that product.

I know he is a good writer but $99.99 is an insane price.

It's not like you would read anything except for the title anyway so I would recommend that you do not subscribe.

BossChief
07-08-2010, 12:49 PM
It's not like you would read anything except for the title anyway so I would recommend that you do not subscribe.

ROFL

ZING

Just Passin' By
07-08-2010, 12:54 PM
Nope. It's harder to get access to players now, at least in some places. So when you do get a few morsels from one, stuff that nobody else has....cha-ching.

Every "morsel" is on twitter in about 3 seconds, free of charge.


Sports news on the internet was nothing like it is now 10 years ago. Not even close.

10 years ago newspapers were kicking ass and taking names. Now it's a dying industry.

Why? The internet is taking over.

Your information is incorrect.....

http://www.theawl.com/2009/10/a-graphic-history-of-newspaper-circulation-over-the-last-two-decades

Average daily circulation of all U.S. newspapers has been in decline since 1987 as papers have faced mounting competition for reader attention and advertising.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/26/AR2009102603272.html

Count Alex's Wins
07-08-2010, 12:57 PM
Every "morsel" is on twitter in about 3 seconds, free of charge.


You flat out don't know what you're talking about. Simple as that.



Your information is incorrect.....

http://www.theawl.com/2009/10/a-graphic-history-of-newspaper-circulation-over-the-last-two-decades


Eh, OK, whatever. My point still stands...sports media on the internet was pretty "meh" 10 years ago. 15 years ago I'd rather have actually picked up a real newspaper.

The game has changed.

Just Passin' By
07-08-2010, 01:00 PM
You flat out don't know what you're talking about. Simple as that.

I was trying to have a serious discussion about this topic, and you go to this sort of stupidity after getting the circulation thing completely wrong?

Fuck you.

Count Alex's Wins
07-08-2010, 01:08 PM
Every morsel is not on twitter for free. The medium doesn't even lend itself to that.

You'll certainly find people advertising their premium content on twitter, though.

I didn't get the circulation thing completely wrong, either. I was off by a few years. The point remains that 10 years ago the internet was not completely leaving newspapers in the dust. Now it certainly looks that way.

Sweet Daddy Hate
07-08-2010, 10:47 PM
I'd pay him 25 bucks to stop candy-assing his work, yes.

Deberg_1990
07-08-2010, 11:18 PM
With camp being so close to KC, i expect plenty of amateur journalist reports on here everyday.

Sweet Daddy Hate
07-09-2010, 11:32 AM
With camp being so close to KC, i expect plenty of amateur journalist reports on here everyday.

And probably of better quality.

DaFace
07-10-2010, 07:37 PM
In case anyone cares, Bob's posted a Q&A about the new subscription service.

http://www.bobgretz.com/chiefs-football/answers-replies.html

ANSWERS & REPLIES
July 9, 2010 - Bob Gretz | Comments Off
Given the news and obvious reactions that have landed here I decided it was appropriate to answer some of the questions and comments that have come after the announcement of bobgretz.com going to premium content.
First, a very deep thank you to everyone who posted and the support you provided in some of those comments really poured fuel into my engine. One more quiet week and then I canít wait to move forward. You guys are too kind and although Iím a word merchant, itís tough for me to adequately express my thanks.

I have answers to some specific questions at the end of this post. Let me hit a couple common themes.

WHY NOT GO AFTER MORE ADVERTISING RATHER THAN FORCING READERS TO PAY?
First, we arenít forcing anyone to pay. This is obviously a personal decision and I understand everyone is not able or willing to become a subscriber. For two years weíve chased advertising and unfortunately there is simply not much of a market to pay the bills. Things might be different if this was 10 years ago and the Chiefs were riding high. But the last three seasons have chased away a lot of dollars from the team and businesses associated with the club.

As you can see we have advertising on the site. This is done through a national co-op and itís worked out well. But the monthly income from this service isnít enough to pay the bills.

THIS MOVE TO PREMIUM IS COMING AT THE WORST POSSIBLE TIME!
I know that and I feel for anyone out there thatís in a bad spot right now. Things have been tough around our house for the last two years. Thatís one of the reasons this decision was made.

HOW LONG IS A SUBSCRIPTION?
As stated, a $25 charge will bring you all content on this site through the day after the last game of the 2010 Chiefs season. This is not a yearly charge, but a charge for the season. Plans for the future have not been finalized, but a lot of what we do in the off-season will likely remain free. However, I expect to establish a charge for 2011 NFL Draft coverage.

WHAT WILL I GET ON THE SITE WITH THE PREMIUM LEVEL?
You will get all content that appears on the site with no restrictions, along with full access to comments. There are plans for more content, especially of the audio and video variety, and we will move forward with those if the bank account allows.

WHAT WILL BE AVAILABLE FREE?
Essentially things will work in this fashion: what you see today on the home page will always be available to everyone free of charge. If you want to click ďread moreĒ then the rest of the story is part of the premium package.
There will be times when a complete story is available free; there will be times when content is available only for premium subscribers.

COMMENTS AND CENSORSHIP
For long-time visitors to the site, you know what this is about. I agree with some of the posters about the history of comments and problems we had in the past with them.

I started this website with the idea that the readers and posters here would be adults and would handle themselves in such a manner. Turned out that wasnít the case and we had mayhem in the comments spurred on by one or two posters.

That forced a change in how we handled things, including eliminating the posts of several people along the way. Those mechanical changes in the background of the site caught some posters up in the net as well and they had problems getting their comments public.

I think weíve got a handle on these things now and hopefully those who visit feel the comments section is more adult and human.

Which seems a good time to explain whatís OK on the posts and what is not and will get you booted? Vulgarities will not fly. All those dirty words that we all know will get you bounced immediately to the trash; I donít even see those. Borderline words and various insults get you sent to limbo, where I must approve the post. Generally, 95 percent of the time a single word or sentence is edited out and the post goes up.

Stay out of the name calling; thatís not what we are looking or here. Good, healthy and rabid discussions do not require the use of terms like idiot, douche bag and pond scum. Stay out of the playground fighting or we may have to send you to timeout.

I do not remember a single post that has been removed in 23 months on this site for its opinion. Agree or disagree with me, it doesnít matter. Agree or disagree with the Chiefs, it doesnít matter.

Thereís also a limit on length. Sometimes you guys go crazy and write 1,000-word posts about your thoughts or the team. If you find yourself going on and on, then learn to edit yourself.

WHAT IS THIS SITEíS AFFILIATION WITH THE CHIEFS?
None. We cover the Chiefs; thatís 90 percent of the content on the site. But the Chiefs do not pay me or the site. They cooperate in covering the team on a daily basis, just as they do with the local fish wrap, TV stations and radio yakkers.

WILL OTHER SITES CONTINUE TO STEAL THE POSTS AND GIVE THE INFORMATION FOR FREE
We have some plans in place for this if it becomes a problem. There are a lot of websites out there that like to repackage other peopleís work. Thatís OK; itís actually great advertising for the site. But if any site starts carrying verbatim stories, then we go to Plan B. Hopefully, it wonít be a problem.

óĖ

Now, a few individual posts and answers.

CosmicPal says: I just wish you would have considered a donation-based service to begin with. I appreciate everything that you do for us fans and I would honor your tireless work by donating money now and then to continue my support and gratitude. Itís just that I canít afford a subscription right now. Sadly, Iím going to missing out.

Bob says: I did consider a donation-based service and in fact I talked with two different people who have political type sites who exist on donations. One said it worked for him, the other side it did not. Both had sites with a national subject matter, so they had far more potential readers. CosmicPal I hope things get better for you and continue to visit the site for the free stuff. Hopefully better times are ahead for all of us.

óĖ

el cid says: Ö Also paying my own way, I expect less censorship about items posted, not vulgar items but things the Chiefs might feel are less than loving, those sometimes seem to go into space and disappear.

Bob says: el cid, I have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to ďthings the Chiefs might feel are less than loving.Ē The club has no control over what is on this site. The person who has control is me, and for the life of me I canít think of a single post of yours that has ever been deleted or even edited. I know there was a time when we were cleaning up the posts that you also got caught in the net because of your ip address, but obviously weíve solved that problem.

óĖ

RickW says: I have posted many a time on here but unfortunately at this time wonít pay $25.00 to read premium news. Not that I canít afford it just that I to can choose to pay or not to pay and at this time I choose not to pay. Good luck Mr. Gretz. One curious question though why when the Chiefs got rid of you didnít you go to another city and start covering their games?

Bob says: Rick, I hope you will reconsider, but thatís your prerogative. The Chiefs did not get rid of me; I was released by KCFX and the stationís ownership. I was never an employee of the Chiefs. I was paid to write for their website, but that was on a per column basis. I was not an employee and did not have benefits of any kind. As to why I didnít start covering another team Ė this is where I live. This is where I raised a family. Kansas City is about a good a place to live as any in the country. The only thing missing is quick access to an ocean. I preferred staying in K.C. and trying to make a go with all the Chiefs experience and information that I have accumulated over the last 30 seasons of coverage.

Rain Man
07-10-2010, 07:50 PM
In case anyone cares, Bob's posted a Q&A about the new subscription service.


WILL OTHER SITES CONTINUE TO STEAL THE POSTS AND GIVE THE INFORMATION FOR FREE
We have some plans in place for this if it becomes a problem. There are a lot of websites out there that like to repackage other peopleís work. Thatís OK; itís actually great advertising for the site. But if any site starts carrying verbatim stories, then we go to Plan B. Hopefully, it wonít be a problem.



I wonder if Plan B involves calling us names. We'll soon find out since DaFace copied the Q&A verbatim.

Dinny Blues
07-10-2010, 07:59 PM
I paid Gretz the $25 for the suff he has put up for the last two years for free, not what he will post in the future.

I enjoy reading his work and will be able to continue doing so for this next season. I feel like it is a pretty good deal at that price.

I have a feeling there have been premium subscribers at many other places who have paid more money for less information.

This ranks up there with Little Debbie's Snack Cakes on the great value scale, IMHO.

Dinny

DaFace
07-10-2010, 08:02 PM
I paid Gretz the $25 for the suff he has put up for the last two years for free, not what he will post in the future.

I enjoy reading his work and will be able to continue doing so for this next season. I feel like it is a pretty good deal at that price.

I have a feeling there have been premium subscribers at many other places who have paid more money for less information.

This ranks up there with Little Debbie's Snack Cakes on the great value scale, IMHO.

Dinny

I tend to agree. I won't personally be paying for it, but I wish Bob all the best in making it a success.

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-10-2010, 08:02 PM
http://4gifs.com/gallery/d/129150-1/Tom_Cruise_crazy_laugh.gif

milkman
07-10-2010, 08:03 PM
I paid Gretz the $25 for the suff he has put up for the last two years for free, not what he will post in the future.

I enjoy reading his work and will be able to continue doing so for this next season. I feel like it is a pretty good deal at that price.

I have a feeling there have been premium subscribers at many other places who have paid more money for less information.

This ranks up there with Little Debbie's Snack Cakes on the great value scale, IMHO.

Dinny

What happeend to the Little Debbie double fudge cakes?

Dinny Blues
07-10-2010, 08:17 PM
What happeend to the Little Debbie double fudge cakes?

I don't know. Maybe they should have put some peanut butter in them.

I have always been partial to the peanut butter bars. It's hard to beat peanut butter and chocolate.

Dinny

milkman
07-10-2010, 08:22 PM
I don't know. Maybe they should have put some peanut butter in them.

I have always been partial to the peanut butter bars. It's hard to beat peanut butter and chocolate.

Dinny

I used to buy two boxes of duble fudge cakes every week.

The rest.......meh...

Halfcan
07-11-2010, 12:38 AM
Why not go to Chiefs Country-just about anything written about the chiefs is posted there for free. The owner of the site does not charge and continues to improve the site.

Manila-Chief
07-11-2010, 03:20 PM
Why not go to Chiefs Country-just about anything written about the chiefs is posted there for free. The owner of the site does not charge and continues to improve the site.

Hummmm!! I seem to remember a site called chiefsplanet.com that does pretty well at getting into up on the web. :clap:

WV
07-11-2010, 04:13 PM
No, it hasn't. That's why more and more media outlets are turning to it. That's why dozens of well-run team sites on the Scout network are raking in cash. Tons and tons of newspapers have online premium outlets now.

Pretty soon the team sites are gonna have premium access, because they love money, too.

The age of 100 percent free sports information is coming to an end.

I guess the key words here are well-run Scout sites, because I feel like I'm being robbed everytime I log into the premium section of WPI. I also doubt very highly that WPI is raking in anything except Athan's stable mess from all the $hit being spewed. They'd make more money selling fertilizer.

Count Alex's Wins
07-11-2010, 07:11 PM
I guess the key words here are well-run Scout sites, because I feel like I'm being robbed everytime I log into the premium section of WPI. I also doubt very highly that WPI is raking in anything except Athan's stable mess from all the $hit being spewed. They'd make more money selling fertilizer.

No argument. WPI has definitely fallen behind.

Reaper16
07-11-2010, 07:16 PM
Ooooooh, plan B! Scary!

If Gretz tries to fuck with ChiefsPlanet for posting his premium articles then I will sick 4 chan on him.

Sweet Daddy Hate
07-11-2010, 07:52 PM
Judging from his known body of work and possible alias of Rufus Dawes, again I must ask:

What exactly am I missing by NOT purchasing a subscription?

Answer:

Not...a fucking...thing.