Archive

JJ Huddle to be taken off life support December 31st?

  • Chesapeake
    Wait, was that 12.00 for 2009 only? damnit they're tricky!
  • Society
    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.
    What exactly are you trying to say here?
  • ernest_t_bass
    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.
    Ches, why did you edit that post around? Made more sense the first time.
  • Chesapeake
    Society wrote:
    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.
    What exactly are you trying to say here?
    If you don't understand it, i'm not gonna tell ya.
  • ytownfootball
    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.
  • ernest_t_bass
    Ches, when you changed your post, it seemed like insider info has leaked through to you. What gives?
  • Society
    Chesapeake wrote:
    Society wrote:
    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.
    What exactly are you trying to say here?
    If you don't understand it, i'm not gonna tell ya.
    Fair enough.
  • mtrulz
    Huge mistake he made.
  • BRF
    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.
  • tigerfan82
    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 ;)
  • Nate
    Let it burn in hell with Hitler!
  • krambman
    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'
    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?
  • Cleveland Buck
  • Heretic
    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.
  • zambrown
    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
    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
    What are you trying to say? We're doomed? :)
  • Mooney44Cards
    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
    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.
  • JoeA1010
    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.
  • sleeper
    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
    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
    Mooney44Cards wrote:
    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
    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.
    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.
  • queencitybuckeye
    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.
    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.
  • Cmhs74
    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
    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
    Good points. If it is true, if probably would have worked if they:

    1) Gave the news with more advance notice
    2) Had ways to grandfather in the oldies
    3) Weren't gay.
  • ernest_t_bass
    JoeA1010 wrote:As an early Huddler and someone who was in the top 10 in posts until a few years ago
    It's ok... let it all out. We're here for you.