Seeking Alpha's Feedback Forum
Our team reviews every post in this forum. However, we cannot guarantee a personal response to every post.
Important note for iPhone and iPad app users. We found an issue where after running the app for a while, it starts to have issues communicating with the server. This can manifest in an inability to write comments or general behavior issues with the app. If the app starts to act strangely, please uninstall the app from your phone and reinstall it from the app store. We are working on a fix for this issue and it will be available as soon as possible. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Is this new? I've never seen the requirement to buy Pro in order to see an article. I love you guys, but $900/yr is out of the question, just to access a few dated articles. You need a different path to cover costs and make a profit. How about a $15-$20/mo plan, I bet you would get a hell of a lot more takers!
After thinking on this a few days, I've concluded SA is making a massive mistake with its paid article archive. Please backtrack before you totally wreck what's good about SA. A few issues:
- The best feature of SA is ongoing reader comments on its articles, as company news changes and a thesis is proven or disproven. You're basically killing the vitality of that. Once people get out of the habit of making informed comment on articles they can read and continue to read, they will not go back.
- Seventy five dollars a month is too much. Thirty dollars a month is too much. I say that as someone who subscribes to three SA Marketplace services, and I've paid as much as $300 a month for single SA Marketplace services in the past. I might pay a token $10 or $20 a year for archive access, because without a vital comment stream....
- ... the SA archive really isn't that valuable at all. It's mostly old news and old speculation that goes on to be proven or disproven in time. The truly astute or comprehensive article is quite rare, probably less than 1% of articles would be publishable in traditional sources. I certainly wouldn't rely on the SA archive to reliably give me a "deep dive into less-followed companies" or other marketingspeak. That's frankly wishful.
- What was previously good about SA was that almost ANYONE could write and publish quickly. Previously you had choruses of voices weighing in on a stock, some professional, some amateur, some astute, some not-so-astute: many points of view. Readers could read everyone's take and reach their own conclusions. Now there is no ability to compare and no competing voices from the archive.
- As a marketplace subscriber to three services, I am frankly ticked off that you would abruptly lock me out of the archive, as well as hiding the articles I've taken the time to comment thoughtfully about. I've supported SA for a long time, and your thanks to me for this support is to ambush me with a change that breaks SA's entire model.
- As a consumer I do not like it when companies break trust with their longtime customers. Not long ago Evernote pulled a similar stunt: massively jacking up subscription prices and breaking the longstanding paradigm of "Your data on your devices." I had used Evernote for seven years and was a subscriber and fan. In one afternoon I pulled all of my data out of Evernote and put it into Microsoft OneNote; I haven't been back since. Users lost often don't come back once they lose patience. Your format and your platform is replicable.
- In addition to reversing this ill-conceived policy, SA leadership should consider meeting to craft a small-scale "SA Commmunity Bill of Rights" to help guide future policy, and give angry and future members of the community of what you generally will and will not do. The businessfolk in you probably bristle at the idea of handing any sense of control to the rabble -- after all, this is your property to monetize -- but "community" cuts two ways. If you want it, you can't just dictate to it, you have to appreciate it and grow it. Places like Facebook have little sayings and mini lists of users rights: one of Facebook's taglines is: "it's free and it always will be". If you're going to ask people to make a commitment of time to your community, you need to give a better sense of what they're buying into.
- Finally, if an issue driving this change is mobile ad revenue, or ad revenue generally, it may be partly because your mobile application(s) need a lot of help. They do only a subset of what the website can do, including frankly basic things like offering an integrated SA Marketplace chat. One user in one of our groups reports there is a separate "SA Chat" app, but he also reports that it was eating 10 gigabytes of cache data. Android users can enable "Desktop Mode" to get some functionality of the SA website back on their phones, but I have not found a way to persist this setting as I navigate between pages and articles: I'm continually led back to the lame mobile app. Many kids these days just don't use desktop or notebook computers that much, and an online property that doesn't do mobile is disadvantaged.
Anytime an author posts an article on a stock or ETF in my SA "Portfolio," it comes up in my portfolio feed. I would like have a setting such that I will never see articles from certain authors. To clarify, I'm not concerned about the "comments" section, just the articles.
Virsus alert: Please be advised that I am getting the following alert from my anti-virus application (AVG)
This happens when I click on notifications that inform me of new comments on articles and authors that I am following. It could be a false alarm but please investigate and advise. My email address is firstname.lastname@example.org.
To provide some more transparency here. Avast & AVG (and possibly others) incorrectly identified a piece of our code as Malware. We have rectified this issue with them and you should no longer see this message. If you still see it, try closing your browser and re-opening Seeking Alpha.
To be clear, no malware, virus or data breach occurred here.
Please don't hesitate with any follow up questions.
I started reading SA in 2014 and really enjoy it. It consumes probably too much of my time each day. Although I am retired, it's a great resource for both old and new investors. The new policy regarding paying 900. per year for PRO is absurd. That will probably prove to be a very bad business decision. You need to figure out a better way how to shore up revenue or you will undoubtedly loose good authors and followers.
Is this a money grab? I am not paying for articles that were once free. Go back to the old way, and make money like every other large internet site through ads
Any plans to add Canadian exchanges (TSX; TSXV; etc)? I tried to add ABCN and PTK to my portfolio but cannot.
You are now limiting the number of mutes to 3, or "start a free trial to Pro". After the free trial is over then what happens? Go Pro @ $75/mo or continue on "Basic" with only 3 mutes available? I am not interested in Pro, so my choices will then be to accept annoying posts ("noise") on StockTalks, or sign off. Of course, if I sign off I will no longer be seeing your ads. Is this really what you want to accomplish?
I am currently spending ~$650/yr on subscriptions on your site, and being able to read articles more than 30 days old is critical to my being able to evaluate either an investment idea or an additional subscription service.
Now if you had the expertise of a dedicated investment news outlet (WSJ, Barron’s, etc.), I can understand that there would be a return on that investment, but most of the articles are not written by an investment professional, let alone an SA staff writer.
If you need additional revenue to maintain and enhance the web site, I would gladly sign up for say $10/mo. Asking for an additional $900/yr for nothing more than retrieving information stored on a disk drive far is beyond reasonable.
Customer support service by UserEcho