Editor in Chief
-
Steve,
You said, "We have allowed vendors to 'suppress' the review." I remember reading an issue of PC Mag that had a terrible review of a product with a full page ad for that same product on the facing page.
Then there is that old quote about not being able to stand the heat in the kitchen. Surpressing bad news did not work in old Soviet Union and it, in fact, never works. When the word gets out, and it will, that a bad review was surpressed it will be an even blacker mark that the review could ever be.
ATBCharles Kincaid
-
I can confirm that sqlservercentral never *censored* my advertising on this site (unlike on sql-server-performance where I am restricted from running ads that compete with RG SQL Compare tools). so in this sense SSC *was* a free and open marketplace.
I had some issues with reviews in terms of who got first in line (always RG) and also the bidding process on SSC for ads was closed (for example the bottom banners were never offered). RG worked with one guy for sales (a SSC "principal" - not Steve). The rest of us got stuck with Kevin (just bustin' ya bro. much love. much love
)In terms of RG cancelling ads, all ads etc - let's be clear. They indicate they will cancel all *banners* but intend on continuing to run newsletter ads ... but of course ONLYRG newsletter ads. So some people might not pick up the nuance of "cancelling all ads" means banners only. RG purchased this site for the member list - as confirmed on "Database underground" and their own postings. They apparently plan on leveraging this investment to the fullest. How exactly they plan to do this in addition to just continuing newsletter ads we don't know - because there has been no clear and complete statement from RG ... still. do they plan to sell the list, use it for spam, use our profile info. we don't know. should we be told - yeah, I think so. a lot of other people do too.
Brian Lockwood
President
ApexSQL - SQL Developer Essentials -
Brian,
From my perspective, your rebuttals are taking on the tone of 'sour grapes'. While it is understandable for the users of this site to be interested in the details, this is a business transaction. Steve et al, owned this site; Redgate purchased it - and can do whatever they wish. Should they do something that someone does not like, they have the option to stop using this resource and opt out of future emails. The amount of disclosure already provided on this transaction far exceeds the openness of any private transaction that I can recall.
If what they (RG) are doing is so offensive to you, start a competing site. I'm afraid that you stand to do yourself more harm than good if you continue on this course. Yes, I know you have the 'right' to post your opinions, as do I - but, it IMO the 'high road' sells much better.
Just my .02 .
-
Brian,
You might be right, you might be wrong. But as others have said, you are beginning to sound like 'sour grapes'. We have all posted our concerns and added our 'we will give RedGate a chance and see what they do with the site'. Unlike you, we realize we have no control over this site and never did. Steve, et al, owned the site and could do whatever they wanted with it - this included selling it, which they chose to do. Over the years, they listened to our comments/suggestions about this site. Sometimes they used our advice, sometimes they didn't. They have now chosen to sell THEIR site. They could have just sold it and said 'There you go, it's a done deal - live with it'. Instead they have asked us for our thoughts on the sale. They have listened and responded, but the sale still goes on. That is their choice.
Did you ever offer to buy the site from them? Did you ever let them know you would be interested if they decided to sell the site? I guess you are like most of us - we like the site as long as someone else is running it (preferably the way we want it run). Now someone else owns it and none of us are sure how it will be run. RedGate could run it fairly to all and leave it as an independent site, or they could use it solely to their benefit. We, the members, will vote on the sale by either staying with the site or going elsewhere.
Right now, we all know you really hate the fact that you won't be able to advertise here and that you are afraid that only RedGate will advertise here. We know you claim you don't get fair advertising on other sites and that you base what will happen here on what happened elsewhere. You might be right. But let's wait and see. We CAN'T change anything. We didn't own the site and we didn't offer to buy it if it was offered for sale.
What is needed now, and what Steve has asked for, is our thoughts, fears, and constructive comments about the sale. He now knows that:
1. we are concerned that RedGate will use our email addresses to spam us
2. we are concerned that there might be censorship of non-RedGate products or if RedGate products are mentioned negatively
3. we are concerned that the only advertising will be RedGate's
4. we think they have done a great job with this site and while we are sorry they sold it, we also acknowledge it was their right and congratulate them for it.
Lastly, I have made my thoughts known and will wait to see what happens with the site. Then I will make my vote. If I don't like the direction it is going - I will leave. If I continue to like the site - I will stay.
-SQLBill
-
If Redgate wants to stand out, then let the site continue without interference and blocking of the their competitors advertising. Let them read the forum uncensored and learn what the community is saying and then provide product to match. This is a great opportunity for them to expand their sales if they handle it correctly and without overt pressure. Besides, I tend to ignore the ads until I need something. However, I may not know I need it until I learn about it in the forum and then I will remember those ads.
As far as competitors advertising goes, if they don't want others, they could just raise the rates until the competition doesn't want to pay. Then they can say its open to all, they just choose not to advertise here.
Of course this community would quickly see through that and at some point, a new "Steve and friends" will set up a new community elsewhere and start the process all over again and Redgate will be left behind wondering what happened.
And our beloved Steve will last be seen driving down the road in his latest new sports car with Brian and Andy in the back seat (holding on for dear life), dollar bills flying out the back and laughing all the way. Enjoy the ride guys, nothing lasts forever except for God's word.
-
Tim,
"If what they (RG) are doing is so offensive to you, start a competing site." While I appreciate the business advice, I don't appreciate a sql community split up into competing militias each with a private agenda of pushing their own product. If you do - my advice is to sit tight.
Nor do I appreciate the lack of disclosure and false pretenses of this deal. You call it "sour grapes" - I call it expressing my opinion that I earned carrying an M-16 for 6 years. I've had a few people flame me but for each person telling me to "shut up" politely, or not, I've got 20 thanking me for letting them know. In fact many people have found out about this sale from me.
I've kept my mouth shut for RG and watched this stuff for years. this so called "high road" resulted in a sql community totally uniformed about what really goes on. This time I spoke up. If talking up on this issue is the "low road" - let's hope this is the road most traveled going forward.
Brian Lockwood
President
ApexSQL - SQL Developer Essentials -
SQLBill,
see my previous reply on "sour grapes". I gotta add this to my FAQ
for comment about the sale - S, B & A could have sold it to Saddam Hussein - you are right. Nothing could be done. End of story. that's not my beef
for me offering to buy the site - like many of the backroom deals associated with RG I wasn't privy to the "back channel" in this case. I worked thru the regular SSC sales guy who apparently forgot to offer to sell the site to me (I've got a call in!). I could elaborate more on the closed bidding process RG secures for itself but I'd risk another sour grapes comment
And it's probably incidental anyway.You make some statements that I claim this, claim that - fair enough. I will post proof shortly in the form of my contract that specifies I can't compete with RG (should be clear enough). Note: DB Ghost "claimed" the same thing on a previous thread.
But you are a bit too fatalistic in terms of "we can't change anything". You can change everything. All you have to do is speak up - but singling out people commenting on this important issue for critisism doesn't really inspire a lot of others to forcefully advocate (which is really needed to effect change on the items you have mentioned). I've talked to a lot of people who just want to keep their heads down, stay out of the crossfire. They know RG is in tight with MSFT (launch partner etc) and now has significant (or total) controlling interests in two major sql sites! Some people consider that threatening and don't want to risk personal blow back. or payback long after this has died down.
If some don't want to advocate forcefully (or even care). that's fine. that's their right too. But unless I'm stating something factually incorrect - whether you like my tone (sour grapes) or not, isn't really important, and distracts from the major issues you, yourself, are trying to get accross here. Let's not throw water on the spark of free speech that is trying to ignite here. Do you really think if I shut up RG will just fully address these action items?
The only reason this thread even exists is because I started blogging about it and then Steve editorialized about it.
People can recline while RG opines - or they can speak out. I've chosen the latter.
Brian Lockwood
President
ApexSQL - SQL Developer Essentials -
I call it expressing my opinion that I earned carrying an M-16 for 6 years.
See, Brian, that's where you went down the wrong path... M-16 or the stick of an F-16.... Okay, okay, just kidding, my eye sight disqualified me from being a pilot as well as Combat Control (which is what I wanted to do), so I appreciate what this means. Some of my closest friends are infantry or Airborne or Rangers. Me, I'll also be a "Chair Force leg" to them.
On a more serious note, the truth is that when competition is stifled, often innovation is impaired. And usually the folks who suffer the most are consumers. In the SQL Tools arena that is us. So even if we aren't specifically buying particular tools, the fact that better tools are coming to market causes improvements like SSMS and the like as well as each vendor looking to improve/upgrade the products they do sell. So this is something we all need to be aware of.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley -
SQLBill,
as for your comments below - these are excellent
"What is needed now, and what Steve has asked for, is our thoughts, fears, and constructive comments about the sale. He now knows that:
1. we are concerned that RedGate will use our email addresses to spam us
2. we are concerned that there might be censorship of non-RedGate products or if RedGate products are mentioned negatively
3. we are concerned that the only advertising will be RedGate's
4. we think they have done a great job with this site and while we are sorry they sold it, we also acknowledge it was their right and congratulate them for it."
I didn't want to diminish the value of your "good cop" comments with my "bad cop" personna. but i think a combination of intelligent reflection and "fire and brimstone" is required to move corporate entities. they don't move on their own.
Brian Lockwood
President
ApexSQL - SQL Developer Essentials -
Brian,
Thanks for your response. I think you either misunderstood me or I didn't make myself clear. Let's try again.
1. We can't change anything. We can't. Steve, et al. sold the site. It was their site, it's their choice. Period.
2. You make claims. Okay, as I said they may or may not be true, I can't prove it either way. Your claims are: the new owner will shut you out to their own benefit and you were not offered a chance to buy the site. Okay. Like with RedGate, I give you the benefit of the doubt.
My problem, issue, whatever, is that you aren't adding anything NEW. Every post you make says the same thing over and over....when someone is beating me over the head with the same gripes everytime, I start to get annoyed.
Why not provide solutions? The sale happened. Steve, et al didn't have to offer it to you or me or anyone else. They didn't have to get anyone's approval. Alright, you feel it will hurt your business. Unfortunately, this is business. WalMart builds stores wherever they can and undersell the local markets. People protest. Sometimes the community does better with the WalMart, sometimes they don't. Solutions are what are needed, not the same comments over and over.
What I'm trying to say is: the deal is done. We all need to see what happens from here on. And if we don't like it, find or start another site.
You've done an excellent job of letting us know some of the problems that might occur with RedGate's ownership. Let's see what really occurs.
-SQLBill
-
Brian,
Just what is 'the issue' (your issue)? Why shouldn't RG be allowed to run this site- their asset, any way they wish? Same as you, me, Steve and any other business person. You don't like it- take your business elsewhere. Your opinion/viewpoint as a competitor is biased - and the tone of your arguments smack of dislike for RG for some past 'sins' to you. As for you not being told the site was up for sale, they had no obligation to do so. If you were interested in purchasing it and did not, that is your responsibility, not theirs. If you had expressed an interest and they chose not to contact you for a counter offer, then that is their choice as well. Calling it a 'back-room deal' is unfair to all parties concerned and is what further colors your opinion to others.
I'm not sure why the interjection of military metaphors (competing militias) - quite a bit of an exaggeration of the situation from my point of view. Regardless, I do not wish this to denigrate further. My point was simply to let you know that (IMO) there was a potential downside to this vehement stand you were taking in a matter which you have no input or control. (meaning the sale and running of this site). I've tilted at my share of windmills, never ended well...
For the record, I have no affiliation with RG, SSC or anyone in this community, just someone that has grown tired of the rhetoric. (and its not required for anyone to serve in the military to express their opinion, but I have done that as well and can compare family military pedigrees more extensive than most - all of which doesn't mean squat in this context, so please don't wave the flag as an excuse).
-
SQLBill,
I hear you and you are right. One problem is try to respond to everything (which begets redundency) vs leading with "new" information. If you follow my blog I posted an article today on the $ left on the table (for a new site). which is a new twist. I have some more.
but I think in fairness there is a decent body of information I've put out here that a lot of people never knew (because they've told me!). I'd rather risk being repetitive than having a community ignorant of some things. but I'm cognizant of the overkill factor to frequent posters/readers.
I have some other new stuff to post including some good essays on some solutions (I will post links soon). My goal isn't to beat anyone over the head - and in some cases I begin to bore myself as well!
To BK - Hooo Rah! Queen of Battle Baby
Brian Lockwood
President
ApexSQL - SQL Developer Essentials -
Tim,
"Your opinion/viewpoint as a competitor is biased" yes, agreed
"and the tone of your arguments smack of dislike for RG for some past 'sins' to you." I plead guilty!
you make some other statements that I don't really argue with nor are really pertinent to this issue. but I'm not waving a flag - but I bristle at anyone saying politely or otherwise that I should essentially "shut up". If you are tired of the rhetoric then stop reading, posting etc. My "rhetoric" created this thread you are posting on.
But there is information on this deal that needs to get out - your emphatic resistance to this notwithstanding. You might not want to hear it, like it, like me etc That's not my problem right now.
My tissue/issue is that false pretenses of this deal (SQLBill says I'm repetitive but this is a good example of why). After all this people are still asking what my tissue is. RG can do whatever they want - have I ever said anything differently? But just be open and honest about it. Don't say they are buying the site to "improve it". If you buy this - great. But a lot of people want to hear the real story.
Also I think the idea of a community degenerating into a bunch vendor owned websites is just a plain bad idea. The Militia analogy i think is good (i.e. Iraq). If you have something better let me know and I'll start using it.
If someone wants to step into a leadership role on this issue they can have it. But it needs to be an active not a passive mode. "let's wait and see" or "hope for the best" doesn't cut it for me. I've waited and seen for a long time - I'm not doing it anymore.
Brian Lockwood
President
ApexSQL - SQL Developer Essentials -
just an FYI .... all this beefing reminded me of 50 cent.
we've upgraded this offer recently to a full version (all 9 tools) of ApexSQL Universal Studio (we used to limit to 3 tools only)
http://www.apexsql.com/blog/2006/01/hate-it-or-love-it-free-tools-for-sql.htm
(the offer is free versions of all of our tools - no strings)
so if there are any SQL MVPs in the house (or SQL VIPs - I have to use a little discretion here - but 500+ posts would put you in good standing) - gimme a shout out and we'll hook u up
Don't say Brian Lockwood never did nothin' for ya.
Peace out.
Brian Lockwood
President
ApexSQL - SQL Developer Essentials -
Most all members on this site are here to learn about SQl Server and related issues than to compare products and reviews - the ratio between the two is disproportionate enough that I have never focused on it until now - the-SALE-announcement and its aftermath.
I still believe that those who didn't read the sale announcement haven't followed the unfolding drama and have no inkling about what's going on - all this being said I am a little puzzled by Phil Factor's blog - is the gist of it the fact that he who holds the pursestrings dictates the contents ?! If so, then Brian has been right to launch his tirade !! Also that bit about how he thought that an "advertising-free site would be a popular ambition" - surely not when the advertising is so focused and aimed at a virtually captive target-audience - I certainly didn't see any ads trying to sell anything irrelevant and impertinent in all the months that I've been on SSC or anyone complain about the advertising (until the corner peel ads).
So far the people most affected seem to be the advertisers - for us, the hoi polloi - I have a couple of comments from some of the other members...Remi said that ultimately this site has been created as much by us - the long-standing members - as they have by Steve, Andy & Brian. So if the RG takeover affects us in any way we'll just move on (as SQLBill says) till we find our next niche. But we'll have to wait and see - as another post points out - obviously now that RG has vested interests in this site it must be for some monetary gain - and if they are going to remove all advertising from the site then it leaves them with very few avenues..
It'll be interesting to see if people actually leave this site because of this...I still remember an exodus when this site published Sean McCown's article on "how to mess up an interview" and all the fanatically devout vanished in a huff...
ps:Tip for Apex-Brian for what it's worth - you've been shouting long and hard - your point's been made (many times over) and we've all now got our collective ears to the ground and our eyes peeled to see what RG is going to do - you get to come back and say "I told you so" when all your fears are realized - no one's ever said that Life's fair...hopefully your rabble rousing is actually going to result in some +ves for you other than just spreading awareness...
**ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI !!!**
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 47 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply