It is an excellent site for readers, not so much for authors.
As a contributor of 43 articles over the past 5 years, I can honestly say that my recent experiences with your editorial team have been extremely disappointing.
This is not the time or place to go into every single detail of every problem that I have experienced, but suffice to say that I have noticed a meaningful deterioration in the quality of SA's "contributor (customer) service" with your staff in a number of different areas.
These include the failure to communicate via e-mail in a timely manner, perfunctory reviews of articles, making suggestions for revisions to articles that if the editor had only bothered to read in its entirety, he/she would have noticed that the issue was already addressed by the author, poor turnaround time for initial submissions and even worse turnaround times for articles that have gone through the edit/revision process. Multiple request for author edits at different times in the submission process, instead of making all requests for revisions at one time. The list goes on and on.
I submitted an article last Friday afternoon at 5:48 PM Mountain Standard Time in the U.S. It went through one review by one editor, then another editor reviewed it, and it still sits in limbo with no feedback to me, or even an estimate as to when it may finally go to publication. I have sent multiple e-mails to one of your staff with absolutely no responses after almost 8 hours.
At this point, I have made the decision to publish my future articles using the Seeking Alpha Instablog format. My primary reason for making this decision was to avoid the hassles that have become all too commonplace when submitting articles as a regular contributor.
I'm sorry if I sound harsh in my criticism, but I thought that as the CEO you should be aware of the problems that your contributors (customers) have been facing.
I find most of them to be totally unacceptable.
Customer support service by UserEcho