Moderator: Community Team
Roughly 50% of CC members are premium, so they don't see the ads (right?). That leaves 4500 to potentially click ads. Of that percent, I assume most don't care about ads--some percent may install AdBlock+ and WhatNot. So, that leaves a minority of users clicking on ads x-amount of times per day. ($/click = unknown, maybe $0.01?).jimboy wrote:All this chat about how much CC is worth. You guys are all missing a significant source of CC's revenue. ADVERTISING. I have no idea how much CC actually collects from it but I think it throws the number of 64K for a ride and makes CC much more profitable than the estimates you guys were giving it.
There's still cows in the barn.ConfederateSS wrote:YAP ALL YOU WANT...THE VALUE OF CONQUER CLUB.. LIES IN IT'S MEMBERS.....PLAIN AND SIMPLE..NUFF SAID......CLOSE THE BOOK...COW'S LEFT THE BARN.DID YOU GET THAT?...![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
ConfederateSS..out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Compare that to the post by Pirlo 3 years ago ...WILLIAMS5232 wrote:9656
Pirlo wrote:When I look at the number of online users, I see it's like only 60% of the number I used to find a year ago.
This indicates CC is not even stable and non-growing; rather, it's declining!
17315 are the current users. I think they used to be +20.000 last year.
Keep all communication open in the game chat, so that everyone can see it. (Of course, keeping closed communication with your team is fine). Agreements made in game chat are not enforceable through ConquerClub, so if someone breaks a truce, it's still not a violation of CC's rules. Secret diplomacy (i.e. not keeping chat open with non-teammates) is illegal and punishable, so using private messages, wall chat, Skype, etc. for making agreements is cheating.jlassen wrote: Things I'm still not too sure about: What level does/is diplomacy supposed to play? Is there back channel discussions (Messages/chat channels, etc) as part of the planning/strategy, or is the game message system, with public communication that everyone sees where diplomacy is supposed to occure. My games have been mostly silent so far. I don't know if people are chatting up a storm somewhere and I'm just not seeing it.
I know at the table, I can whisper in a payers ear, or go in the other room. Not sure what the digital equivalent is here. In a game like Droidippy, such public/back channel interfaces are the core of the game.
Amazing how two different people can look at the same thing and come to such different conclusions. Obviously one was well thought out, authored by someone qualified to discuss these matters, and coming from a position of being well informed. I enjoyed the read Dukasaur. All the more reason for players who like and appreciate this site, to take some ownership and start giving back or contributing. We do indeed get a pretty big bang for our buck.Dukasaur wrote:Not really. First, take off the top probably something like 6 to 8% for the bankers' rake-off. The smaller the business, the higher the percentage the banks demand for processing credit-card payments, and for microbusiness (under $100K, which CC is now flirting with) 6 to 8% is not unusual. Okay, so you're down to 92K.Metsfanmax wrote:With 4500 paying members, that amounts to just over $100,000 per year in income. There's not much cost for staffing, but I don't know what the hardware and bandwidth costs are. Still, it's a reasonable income -- for now.asellas1025 wrote:I doubt CC's really that profitable now really. Might get enough to stay perhaps partially comfortable but maybe feeling it. Be my guess there.
Next, there's other transactional fees. CC accepts Paypal, and Paypal will refund a purchasers money with no questions asked. They don't even consider any evidence that the purchaser got his product already. I've never heard any numbers on CC, but the last internet game I got heavily involved with lost about 20% of Paypal receipts to dishonest people who would buy game credits, use them up, and then file a Paypal complaint and get their money back. If CC has similar problems, with lets say 25% of memberships being Paypal-based and 20% of those being chargebacks, that's another 5K down the toilet. 87K now.
Allow at least 5K for registrations, licenses, mandatory audits, and other government scams. 82K. (That's if you manage to jiggle it so you don't pay any corporate income tax, which can be done but not forever. You can play games with carrying income forward into losing years, but there's limits to how far that will take you.)
Bandwidth and servers. Lackattack was paying something like $3000/month for servers and bandwidth? I think that's the figure I heard tossed around. Now, BW has reduced the cost by using his own servers. Still, the equipment has to be amortized and the bandwidth cost can't be reduced by much, so maybe he got it down to $1500/month. Very unlikely, but let's be optimistic. There's 18K, so you're down to 64K.
64K for two full-time and one part-time admin? Gimme a break. 64K isn't a very good salary for one person, much less two-and-a-half. (Gotta consider salary at true cost, including payroll taxes, liability insurance, and the like. Low for an internet business, but not free.)
Make no mistake. BW is carrying this albatross on his own internal reserves, and he won't carry it forever. I have no idea how long, but I suspect if it doesn't start making money before spring, it's done.
I think the closest equivalent you'd find to that is team games. Obviously it does depend on which teammates you get, but the most likely place to see people chatting up a storm where you're not seeing it is in team chat.jlassen wrote: Things I'm still not too sure about: What level does/is diplomacy supposed to play? Is there back channel discussions (Messages/chat channels, etc) as part of the planning/strategy, or is the game message system, with public communication that everyone sees where diplomacy is supposed to occure. My games have been mostly silent so far. I don't know if people are chatting up a storm somewhere and I'm just not seeing it.
I know at the table, I can whisper in a payers ear, or go in the other room. Not sure what the digital equivalent is here. In a game like Droidippy, such public/back channel interfaces are the core of the game.
No, but obviously changes within the past year, or lack of them, has caused a decline. Complaining is often the start of finding a solution, for what need would there be for a solution if there were no complaints?stealth99 wrote:You having a complaint does not equal you discovering the single cause of CC's alleged decline!!
Shockingly enough, people speak to their friends more than they speak to other people, so they will know about their friends' reasons for leaving/complaining.stealth99 wrote:How come those of you who have a complaint seem to know so many people who have quit because of the very same problem you are now presenting? Who are all these buddies of yours, that have quit CC?? I don't have any that have quit? I don't hear my friends talking about any of their friends who have quit for any of these reasons. How come all the people quitting for the reasons that you mention happen to also be your buddies?
Even those that criticise the site still appreciate it to a degree, although you could argue that makes them quite hypocritical.stealth99 wrote:Seriously, can you please make your suggestion or state your problem without such a shallow and baseless attack on the site?
I believe flame wars has been brought up several times.stealth99 wrote:Can you also learn to present your ideas without the embellished cowardly claim that so many others are behind you? Perhaps some of that crap that you are writing is responsible the decline in membership that you speak of. Have any of your studies or surveys measured those results yet?
Fair point, although mostly addressed above. Something else to consider is that a very, very small percentage of players ever read the forums, and that number will decrease given the navigation re-arrangement.stealth99 wrote:Understand that when you claim that you know a bunch of people who have left CC for the very thing you are now bringing up, that it does not add strength to your arguments. It very likely does not threaten the owner (but I have never spoken to him so I wouldn't know for sure.....just a hunch). I suspect the added embellishment fools very few. To me it comes across as cheap and vindictive and it appears that you have an axe to grind as opposed to concern for our site. Credibility instantly disappears when outrageous claims are made that appear to be fabricated. Perhaps less is more here because I believe that trying to "beef" up your issue with that crap makes the author feel good but only ends up turning the reader off.

ehhhh... from almost 25K to under 10K (9600-ish) in a few years is not an alleged decline... and if you have been following the thread, many of the "complainers" have offered up ideas to help the site... and if you look deeper at the issue, many of the changes around here now are ideas that were brought up way back when lack was still the owner... Big Wham has been actually productive in doing things like offering tiered membership, mentor games for new players, etc... a lot of the complaints here are about the increased glut of maps (most of which suck, in my opinion), increased game options, rule changes that made the freestyle players jump ship, etc... so, a lot of the thread is actually quite productive and deals with the multiple exodus of players that have occurred on this site... i love CC, but i can't stick my head in the sand and watch the site go down the way i watched the forums go down... prior ownership destroyed the forums and as we all yelled from behind the yellow tape, we were told the same thing that you are saying now. Luckily, Big Wham is trying to bring the forums back, the same way he is trying to bring back the gaming aspect of the site... i for one think there are too many maps, too many game play options, new players should be given limited maps they can play only opening newer/more difficult maps after X amount of games on the basic maps, freemiums should be given open games on Classic, and change the freestyle rules back... most of what is wrong with the site is not Big Wham's doing.. he has the unenviable task of trying to un-knot the mess left behind him...stealth99 wrote:You having a complaint does not equal you discovering the single cause of CC's alleged decline!!
