A Big Thank You From PaulMcCartney.com
-
Peter - that is, of course, fair enough, but I take it you're not calling everyone who did sign up a greedy idiot? We all make a judgement call every time we spend money, and we all have different ideas about what constitutes good value. The site as promised sounded like something worth supporting, and something interesting (and something that would be good value for 10p per day). The fact it's turned out the way it has is only the fault of the people who didn't provide what they said they would, not those who believed in it. (But if you believe them again next time...that might be a different matter.)
-
cfergoid:
peter:
I am on a low income and i didnt fork out £40 for it. One it didnt seem fair value for the money ( and if i wasnt on a low income i wouldnt have forked out) and two it was divisive from the off. If people wish to take offence from general remarks there is nothing you can do.
Surely you can agree that it isn't fundamentally wrong to charge for a service though? Charging for goods is how the world works and it is up to the consumer to decide if they want to pay. If you don't see it as good value for money then don't pay but it is no more divisive than charging for his latest CD or latest DVD.
No, of course it isnt. I was arguing in the 70's with idiots that john and paul were capitalists along with the rest of the music industry. What I did think was that it was a stupid move to make this late in the game, I hope the MBA who came up with the idea is sacked. A premuim fansite is ok for a band or singer who are prolific in releases and touring not someone who is part time. I still haven't bought kisses but might next week as i think it has gone down to a fiver. The bills get paid for first.
-
Michelley:
hengirl:
martinput:
oobu24:
What a poorman's replacement the new 'music player' is for the jukebox feature. : :
That's exactly what AGreig means when he posts;
so please continue to post what functionality you would like to see and what functionality you enjoyed from the previous website.
If you'd like to see an enhanced music player akin to the Jukebox previously provided then post such a suggestion here. It seems MPL, having stripped away certain features, is genuinely keen to gather constructive suggestions as to how the revamped site should be developed to meet your wishes. Martin
The time for MPL to want to talk was weeks ago Martin,its that simple if you bother to work with people they will,generally work with you to get to a point that everyone is happy with the fact that MPL pulled the plug without consultation is shocking and if they where taking money through October then at best that's deceitful
Actually Web sites pull content all the time for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes users get warned but most times they don't. Such is the Web. But you can't complain that you weren't consulted and then, when you're asked for constructive suggestions, complain that it's too late for you to be consulted. The key word there is "constructive." Helpful. Civil. On all sides.
I agree to a point, Michelley. I think it's fair to complain when a service you paid for is pulled without warning. Some members of the premium section only just bought their memberships a month ago. How is that fair?
-
apu:
Peter - that is, of course, fair enough, but I take it you're not calling everyone who did sign up a greedy idiot? We all make a judgement call every time we spend money, and we all have different ideas about what constitutes good value. The site as promised sounded like something worth supporting, and something interesting (and something that would be good value for 10p per day). The fact it's turned out the way it has is only the fault of the people who didn't provide what they said they would, not those who believed in it. (But if you believe them again next time...that might be a different matter.)
I hope you never read a newspaper, listen to a politician etc etc, someone was venting better out than in. Being an old fart I wasn't that excited nor did i think that MACCA would put any engery into it.
-
Asking for constructive help after pulling out the plug on the titantic, is taking the proverbial ( feel free to use your own local saying).
-
Michelley:
hengirl:
martinput:
oobu24:
What a poorman's replacement the new 'music player' is for the jukebox feature. : :
That's exactly what AGreig means when he posts;
so please continue to post what functionality you would like to see and what functionality you enjoyed from the previous website.
If you'd like to see an enhanced music player akin to the Jukebox previously provided then post such a suggestion here. It seems MPL, having stripped away certain features, is genuinely keen to gather constructive suggestions as to how the revamped site should be developed to meet your wishes. Martin
The time for MPL to want to talk was weeks ago Martin,its that simple if you bother to work with people they will,generally work with you to get to a point that everyone is happy with the fact that MPL pulled the plug without consultation is shocking and if they where taking money through October then at best that's deceitful
Actually Web sites pull content all the time for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes users get warned but most times they don't. Such is the Web. But you can't complain that you weren't consulted and then, when you're asked for constructive suggestions, complain that it's too late for you to be consulted. The key word there is "constructive." Helpful. Civil. On all sides.
As far as im aware there wasnt any consultation going on was there? maybe a thread on the board maybe but that was about your lot i may be mistaken but thats all ive seen. Of course sites pull content but this isnt about just pulling content this is about a fundamental change to the website and when it has a payment attached to it then yes i darn well should be asked for my thoughts,to ask after the door has been bolted is nonsense frankly,because anyone attached to the site has had an email telling them its been changed so youre not telling me a similar email couldn't have been sent through the summertime ??.,if you chose not to take part in the consultation then fine but i feel a fair few of us would have taken part. As for taking payments late in the day well thats shocking if its true and perhaps if thats the case shows how rushed this move was.
-
That's a very good point. When the internet first became something that the majority of people started to use, there were hundreds of pay sites. David Bowie was one of the first, I remember. You had to pay to use all of the functions of Friends Reunited and so on. Hell, people even used to pay for porn! Then, there was an internet revolution which saw the majority of sites move towards free access, generally paid for by advertising. Many artists and paysites took the virtual walls down and the internet has become largely free, unless you wish to purchase something from it. I am a complete believer in an artist being paid for his or her work. I do not believe in free music, but I also do not believe in "premium" sections of websites which give the premium member very few benefits and the "ordinary" member a feeling of being a second class citizen. Peter's right. It is far too late in the day for Paul's website to introduce a premium section and expect the majority of fans to swallow it. How many fans do you think Paul McCartney has, worldwide? How many of these fans, percentage-wise, do you think are/were premium members on this site. I'm imagining the percentage is extremely low. It has probably been discontinued not because of any ethical problems, but because it was seen to be a commercial failure. Perhaps a little of both, who knows.
-
Dustbin Lid:
That's a very good point. When the internet first became something that the majority of people started to use, there were hundreds of pay sites. David Bowie was one of the first, I remember. You had to pay to use all of the functions of Friends Reunited and so on. Hell, people even used to pay for porn! Then, there was an internet revolution which saw the majority of sites move towards free access, generally paid for by advertising. Many artists and paysites took the virtual walls down and the internet has become largely free, unless you wish to purchase something from it. I am a complete believer in an artist being paid for his or her work. I do not believe in free music, but I also do not believe in "premium" sections of websites which give the premium member very few benefits and the "ordinary" member a feeling of being a second class citizen. Peter's right. It is far too late in the day for Paul's website to introduce a premium section and expect the majority of fans to swallow it. How many fans do you think Paul McCartney has, worldwide? How many of these fans, percentage-wise, do you think are/were premium members on this site. I'm imagining the percentage is extremely low. It has probably been discontinued not because of any ethical problems, but because it was seen to be a commercial failure. Perhaps a little of both, who knows.
I would imagine financial reasons more than ethical ones, to be honest. It's a rare artist/PR team that works on ethics, sadly. My thoughts are that the premium content remained restricted to the premium section for such a short period of time (because of file sharing, etc.), that the site/Paul's people couldn't keep up with it, and the premium pre-sales were an absolute failure.
-
I am glad to see the familiar Message Board back but I do miss the Jukebox feature. I did not like the tshirt nor the print in which you could barely make out Paul. Also, the pins and guitar pic that was included with premium membership; I can't figure out what to do with them!
-
walliebaby:
I agree to a point, Michelley. I think it's fair to complain when a service you paid for is pulled without warning. Some members of the premium section only just bought their memberships a month ago. How is that fair?
Nothing on the new site was guaranteed. We paid for a year-long membership (and most of us got just shy of that). We didn't "pay for the Jukebox." We paid for 12 months of the Jukebox. Sure I would like MPL to offer a better explanation for why it pulled the plug. But it's a private company and companies don't reveal their internal decisions. We don't know whether there were problems with the beta site that proved too expensive to fix. But I would never expect MPL to ask me in advance whether it's OK to get rid of the premium membership. It's not a public vote. It's a private business decision. We have the right to complain -- constructively and in a civil manner -- or to express disappointment. The people who just bought memberships in the past few months should get a refund. Definitely. But I've been really put off by the tone and some of the nasty comments I've seen on this thread. Some people have made demands that seem all out of proportion to their $50. The Web site I work for charges well over $50 for a year-long membership. And you know what that gets you for your $50? Access to read our site. That's it. No T-shirts. No posters. No guitar picks. No downloads. Just access to the site. Web content and jazzy features are a lot more expensive to provide than people seem to realize. My constructive suggestion: The site should bring back some version of Rude Studio and some limited version of the Jukebox. Those two things made the beta site really special. I wouldn't expect all of Paul's albums to be offered to everyone free but some limited, rotating selection of music on the Jukebox and in Rude Studio would be great.
-
Michelley:
walliebaby:
I agree to a point, Michelley. I think it's fair to complain when a service you paid for is pulled without warning. Some members of the premium section only just bought their memberships a month ago. How is that fair?
Nothing on the new site was guaranteed. We paid for a year-long membership (and most of us got just shy of that). We didn't "pay for the Jukebox." We paid for 12 months of the Jukebox. Sure I would like MPL to offer a better explanation for why it pulled the plug. But it's a private company and companies don't reveal their internal decisions. We don't know whether there were problems with the beta site that proved too expensive to fix. But I would never expect MPL to ask me in advance whether it's OK to get rid of the premium membership. It's not a public vote. It's a private business decision. We have the right to complain -- constructively and in a civil manner -- or to express disappointment. The people who just bought memberships in the past few months should get a refund. Definitely. But I've been really put off by the tone and some of the nasty comments I've seen on this thread. Some people have made demands that seem all out of proportion to their $50. The Web site I work for charges well over $50 for a year-long membership. And you know what that gets you for your $50? Access to read our site. That's it. No T-shirts. No posters. No guitar picks. No downloads. Just access to the site. Web content and jazzy features are a lot more expensive to provide than people seem to realize.
I respectfully disagree with you on this, but that's okay, as we're two different people with different perspectives. I still like you, though.
-
walliebaby:
I respectfully disagree with you on this, but that's okay, as we're two different people with different perspectives. I still like you, though.
Fair enough. I respectfully disagree with you, too.
-
martinput:
oobu24:
What a poorman's replacement the new 'music player' is for the jukebox feature. : :
That's exactly what AGreig means when he posts;
so please continue to post what functionality you would like to see and what functionality you enjoyed from the previous website.
If you'd like to see an enhanced music player akin to the Jukebox previously provided then post such a suggestion here. It seems MPL, having stripped away certain features, is genuinely keen to gather constructive suggestions as to how the revamped site should be developed to meet your wishes. Martin
Yes, that is why I am voicing my opinions here.
-
Michelley:
walliebaby:
I respectfully disagree with you on this, but that's okay, as we're two different people with different perspectives. I still like you, though.
Fair enough. I respectfully disagree with you, too.
-
Ive not seen anyone asking for "more than their moneys worth" i've seen a lot of annoyance and some people glad to see the back of it and it all good,its what a forums about. But ALL of this,this thread could have been avoided if MPL had bothered to communicate,its not hard to do,if the site wasn't working for whatever reason then speak to people,its good practice and good manners. People feel ripped off,rightly or wrongly that's their choice seriously what did MPL expect us to do,slap them on the back and good on you lad,no these are hard times,for most if not all this was a purchase that was made after a great deal of thought people expect value for money and maybe they feel they haven't got it i dont know,for myself i will just miss the features of the site simple as that,the daft little media players wont work for me. The simple thing for MPL to do was this,if they wanted to pull the membership give people notice a month say to get in touch with friends etc not just pull it the way they did yesterday.
-
I feel that we had this conversation a year ago...when we went apart in, Pay members and Free members, it wasn't easy...and many people has choosen stay out the new site, other like me decide to be part, and I'm not sorry, was a good experience, but deep in my mind It was this "noise" of two, even three class of members, and I have to say don't like me. I was educated in a democratic believes, where all the persons have similars rights, so for me to see three class of fans was a little hard. So now with this change, I feel fine. But I miss two sections: Jukebox and Timeline. And about the way the change were has comunicated, I think there better ways...but the world is not like we want...so go ahead
-
Ok..following my previous comments about my absolute dismay at what has happened to the website...I have come back to offer suggestions and constructive thoughts which may be more useful. Things I would like to see on the website: (1) Better news and information - I currently get all my Macca news elsewhere as the editors seem reluctant to share anything (eg; no mention of "Wings over America" re-issue being delayed til next year - got that info somewhere else). How about info on what Paul is up to - we know he's been recording with both Mark Ronson and Ethan Johns (from other sources obviously!)..how about an in-the-studio photo, some tidbits from the sessions - whet our appetites etc. More info on the "will never end in my lifetime" re-issue series. When I used to receive the "Club Sandwich" mags there was more info - backgrounds on MPL team / people Paul is working with etc. (2) Better historical content - I only glanced at a few bit about the albums on the site and spotted glaring errors, mis-spelt names, songs missing from albums, incorrectly labelled pictures - and this was from 3 albums!! I lost the will to look at the others for fear of what I'd find (Eric Stewart was in 10cc, not 100cc by the way!) - if you want someone to proof read and correct errors as well as writing better backgrounds to the albums (on "Press to play" it's described as 'being of it's time and timeless' which makes no sense!) then I'm happy to offer my time free of charge to assist. There's so much more that can be added - single sleeves, full and proper releases shown - with correct information! How about adding some audio/video bits to accompany. The book section is worse - you can view 1 or 2 of the pages - why not make them available in their entirety (as pdf documents) - hell, you could charge money if you really don't like anyone seeing them for free (note that most aren't available anymore so hardly anyone can see them!) (3) Open up the archive!! This is the biggest thing "promised" - that wonderful video of what HP are doing for you (have you sacked them now as they've disappeared from the website - as there's no info I can only guess!) - let's see more pictures, hear more audio and see more video - even the youtube channel is sadly neglected - think of all the videos that weren't on "McCartney years" dvd set - let's have them on the site so fans can see them! Share!! I'm surprised that you don't make videos available to download/sell - I'd love to have rare vids and own them - you're missing out on money there! If you want to look at other artist web-sites - check out the Bon Jovi one - their premium membership works fine (and is way more expensive than yours!) but his fans get literally thousands of photos, videos etc and he's been only been around for 30 years!! I personally miss the old fan club days - I expected there to be a charge as I was getting a regular magazine hence why I was ok paying to be a premium/pioneer member - if it means getting decent content - and lets face it - Paul has more stuff in his archives than most - then I would rather pay than get the current version of the website that offers so little it is barely worth my time going onto it. Also - please please sort the store price disparities between UK and US or explain why the KOTB film download in the US is $8.99 (£5.61) and in the UK is £7.99 ($12.80) or at least explain why it's cheaper for someone in the US to download something from you than it is for me... Please note that I offer my suggestions above reluctantly - you promise to take note of fans comments and I somehow know in my heart that you probably won't, and I've wasted yet more time and energy...to receive nothing back apart from a half hearted and empty apology about taking my money and running away with it.. I'm giving you my final benefit of the doubt...abuse at your peril as there's only so many times you can build up expectations and then not deliver without losing fans.. Thanks
-
I think even a week's notice (more would be nice, but I'm a dreamer) would have been appreciated and respectful, instead of the "Hey, you like the Jukebox and Rude Studio, do you? Well kiss them goodbye! " e-mail we received. It's their right to pull features, but not to take money from new premium members and then yank the premium site. I doubt the team decided it in an afternoon--it's something they've been contemplating for a bit, I'm sure.
-
I see no reason they needed to pull our individual pages either. I can't get in touch with some of those people anymore. Why not warn us?
-
Paulie H:
I have a question that I'd like an official or, at least, semi-official response to: I'm fairly sure there was a message posted from the webmaster that confirmed that the membership period for each member would be reset when the site exited its beta testing phase. That means that our membership hasn't actually started. So, if the package has been pulled, we should get refunds, surely, because the membership never actually started. If anyone from the website is actually taking note of these comments, could I please make the following plea regarding the proposed package of goodies: I don't think a download of Live Kisses is a nice gesture. By definition, Premium Members are gonna be hardcore McCartney fans, many of whom have to own everything. That's why they paid for Premium Membership in the first place. Consequently, I think most will want to own the DVD/BR of Live Kisses if only to keep their collections complete. I'd be hoping for/expecting something genuinely exclusive. Isn't that the point of PREMIUM membership???
I do not want a Kisses download. I don't even like Kisses so why would I want a download. I'd much prefer my $60--if anybody is even listening, which I don't think they are.