>> Limited access on trials without mentioning it
 

Whats your opinion on giving away a trial membership for lets say $4.95 and you only give the customer limited access WITHOUT mentioning it on the joinpage?

Is anyone having any numbers on this/tested it? So does it help the sales or does it give you more CBs as you obviously tricked the surfer into getting a trial or at least thats how he/she can feel about it.

Had a surfer complaining about a site wich is doing this and he was pretty pissed about it ;))

Just wondering :upsidedow

Surfer state of mind....
 

I dont like that... :mad:

I would think any sites doing that are thinking short-term. It should lead to a big increase in Chargebacks I'd think :2 cents:

Like TCG?

:upsidedow

it wasn't TCG as we don't promote them. Doesn't matter who it is though as many seem to do so ;))


Would you promote it if they do so when they pay you on a PPS base? So it won't affect you directly as you are not depending on the memberships/retentions.

thatll get you some nice cb yes

Never good to fuck with the surfers give them what they want and they will come back

If surfers didn't like it, they wouldn't be updgrading as much as they are.

why would i care if im getting pps?

This will not result in more chargebacks. Those who are saying it will, please post your numbers here.

This is all part of "training" the surfer....we have trained them to expect everything for free....now we have to RE-train them to pay for it.....

We don't use this practice atm...but i am considering testing it on a few sites....

even with PPS wouldnt you get credited when they sign up for the full version?

cause if you are getting paid on revshare you need the memberships to make you money? With pps you don't realy care, same as upsales with pps and revshare imo.

well thats what I am wondering :)

whats what i meant, if i get pps i wouldnt care about advertising limited access or not.

lol read it difrently ;))

You can see it as building a relationship with your surfers type of thing, thats what I meant. Guess I put it wrongly lol

yeah, thats the only disadvantage. but if i could cash in a surfer for $35 i would do it.

ha.

If you want to see 60%+ off the trial, use a trial members area :) Otherwise, stop bitching. :thumbsup

A cap on the amount of content they can get through a trial is a good thing, maybe limit the bandwidth to a few gigs during the trial rather than limit access.
Otherwise people come in on a trial download the complete site then fuckoff..

yes ofcourse it can be a good thing, what I am wondering about here is if you should MENTION it on the join page yes or no.

All trials should be limited access, but everyone making the change all at once isn't going to happen.

90% of webmasters are more intrested in making the surfer happy then making money.

There is also a thing like AND make money AND make the surfer happy imo.

Take FreeOnes for example, people on FreeOnes (lots of bookmarks) now they can trust us to a certain level and this works out in a positive way. So no need to screw people over right ;)))

I have tested it both ways..

Not telling the surfer about the trial members area will increase refunds and complaints. Chargebacks will increase but not enough to make any alarms go off.

Telling them does lower complaints and refunds, and of course fewer chargebacks. It also decreases the amount of total sales you will get, a lot less trials will come through. However, I did notice that my monthly memberships increased by a little.

Telling them above or below the form, at the bottom of the page, etc.. Doesn?t mater. People that read will see your notice, people that don?t read which is most, never see the notice anyway and will still complain.

Overall, either way is fine. The increase in refunds & chargebacks is small. The member pays a small amount, they get a small amount, and it?s fair. A few others and myself have been using trial upgrades for years with no problems.

Ahh finally some input I was wondering about, thnk you kindly sir for taking the time to read the thread.