I won't quibble with a monthly fee of $15 for an old one, but I think that $25 per month is a fair amount for a senior member (65+) to pay.
To put that amount in perspective, it is less than a dollar a day, not enough to buy a cup of coffee or a McDouble at McDs. Where else can somebody get the benefits of membership in such a unique organization for only 82cents a day? Members have the opportunity to engage in social/technical/pastime/alter-ego activity with a diverse assortment of educated, experienced, and talented individuals, with access to a vast assortment of tools and equipment, for less than the cost of a handful of M&Ms or two postage stamps. PPP On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Torrie Fischer <[email protected]>wrote: > On Thursday, March 13, 2014 00:53:01 Craig Bergdorf wrote: > > I have mentioned in the past the difference in opinion in what a discount > > is when there is little incentive to buy. To me the discounts are not > high > > enough to incentive "hey let's both be members" when, as Torrie has > > mentioned in the past, the only difference is a vote. What married > couple > > would vote two different ways?, What married couple would see this and > this > > alone as something providing value? If one partner has gone the extra > mile > > to financially support us what is the incentive to 'do it again'? > > Well, you're absolutely correct. > > But, honestly, if people want to throw money at us to say that they're a > member, I'm all for it. > > Additionally, not every couple is attached at the hip, nor are memberships > transferable between people :) > > Personally, I think the incentive is still being able to participate in > governance. Otherwise, you'd be relying on your partner to represent two > people. > > This also isn't targeted at just married couples. I'm sure there are folks > who > would like membership for themselves and their kids. > > > > > My thought on this from long ago was $50/mo covers a couple and any kids > > that live with them acting as one entity in the space. This follows other > > organizations that do not require money to enjoy, unlike others, cell > > phones for example, that each member is getting direct value they would > not > > have with out paying. > > This is asking for a little bit more because you'll have more than just > > yourself here, but not too much more because you could anyway. Also, the > > interview process would involve the family (or couple) applying as one > > person, which I think is a better way to meet. The same commitment based > > percentage discounts could apply keeping everything simple. > > Nope, sorry, membership isn't transferable. One person, one member. > > > On Mar 12, 2014 11:56 PM, "Michael Griesacker" <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > I think family rates should be 10 to 15$ more per each additional > member > > > with no discounts for buying in advance. I'm fine with non family group > > > rates as currently proposed. > > > > > > On Mar 12, 2014 9:22 PM, "Omar Rassi" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> No problem, that's discuss is for! To help each other. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Torrie Fischer < > [email protected] > > >> > > >> > wrote: > > >>> On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 22:01:21 Seeley, Tim wrote: > > >>> > Would $94.50 be the rate paid by an individual paying 3 months at > one > > >>> > > >>> time? > > >>> > > >>> > (3*35) = 105 > > >>> > 10% of 105 = 10.5 > > >>> > 105-10.5=94.5 > > >>> > > >>> Yeah, you're both right. > > >>> > > >>> I'm an engineer, I swear. > > >>> > > >>> > V/R > > >>> > Tim Seeley > > >>> > > > >>> > From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] > > >>> > > >>> On > > >>> > > >>> > Behalf Of Omar Rassi Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 5:36 PM > > >>> > To: SYN/HAK discussion list > > >>> > Subject: Re: [SH-Discuss] Group discounts > > >>> > > > >>> > I think your 7 month 3 people example fall in the 20% discount if > the > > >>> > largest discount applies. Other than that I see no issue with this. > > >>> > > >>> Being > > >>> > > >>> > able to pay dues for multiple people seem like an more efficient > > >>> > > >>> structure > > >>> > > >>> > than having two different pricing plans (a family discount plan and > > >>> > > >>> bulk > > >>> > > >>> > membership plan). > > >>> > > > >>> > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Torrie Fischer > > >>> > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: I > > >>> > > >>> want > > >>> > > >>> > to resume our previous discussions about the family discount plans. > > >>> > > > >>> > Previous thread: > > >>> > > > >>> > https://synhak.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-January/006706.html > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > First, I agree with Andrew's suggestion that the student and senior > > >>> > > >>> rates > > >>> > > >>> > should be combined into one. $15 seems reasonable, yeah? > > >>> > > > >>> > Second, the discount system. > > >>> > > > >>> > I'd like to stick with the idea of being able to buy subscriptions > in > > >>> > blocks. However, I'd like to adopt a constant discount rate based > on > > >>> > > >>> how > > >>> > > >>> > many unique individuals are being paid for, with a disjoint > discount > > >>> > > >>> for > > >>> > > >>> > the number of months that are bought for a single person. > > >>> > > > >>> > Here's how I think it can be broken down for a single person: > > >>> > > > >>> > * 0% discount for 1 month > > >>> > * 10% discount for 3 or more months > > >>> > > > >>> > And if it is for a whole group: > > >>> > > > >>> > * 15% discount for 2-6 people > > >>> > * 20% discount for 7 or more > > >>> > > > >>> > If multiple discounts are available, the largest one will be used. > > >>> > > > >>> > Examples: > > >>> > > > >>> > * 1 person, 1 month: $35, 0% discount > > >>> > * 1 person, 2 months: $70, 0% discount > > >>> > * 1 person, 3 months: $101.5, 10% discount of $105 > > >>> > * 2 people, 1 month for each person: $59.50, 15% discount of $70 > > >>> > * 2 people, 2 months for each person: $119, 15% discount of $140 > > >>> > * 2 people, 3 months for each person: $178.50, 15% discount of $210 > > >>> > * 7 people, 3 months for each person: $624.75, 15% discount of $735 > > >>> > > > >>> > This should be quite a bit simpler than the previous idea, and > still > > >>> > > >>> keeps > > >>> > > >>> > with the original idea of making it easier for couples or families > to > > >>> > support themselves. > > >>> > > > >>> > Finally, I am considering developing a sliding scale for the low > > >>> > income > > >>> > rate. I'm not too sure how that would get implemented, but > charging a > > >>> > percentage of membership dues based on the ability to pay seems a > lot > > >>> > > >>> more > > >>> > > >>> > fair than pegging everyone at $15/mo, especially since we're all > about > > >>> > inclusiveness. _______________________________________________ > > >>> > Discuss mailing list > > >>> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > >>> > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> Discuss mailing list > > >>> [email protected] > > >>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Discuss mailing list > > >> [email protected] > > >> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Discuss mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
