OK guys, the day has come. I've been approached by a vendor to become a sponsor here. You may be familiar with Street Lethal Performance already. David Mercier is who contacted me, and informed me they sell Koni and Ground Control among other things.

In a nutshell, I told David that if we were to bring him on board as a sponsor, it would be with the understanding that SLperf would not be immune to criticisms and they would be responsible for defending themselves and doing right by the customer. There would be no protection or favoritism given to protect the sponsorship income, as it is not essential to maintaining the site.

I closed by telling him we would discuss the issue among the members and arrive at a conclusion in the next couple of days.

So, I want an honest dialog here and whether you think we should bring in sponsors or not. This one would probably open padora's box.

Let me just throw out my thoughts on the subject. Personally I'd like to see sponsorships. I see it as part of the future for the site (which I think can be more than just a board...I see tech articles and such in the future). But anyway, I want to assure you guys as long as I own and maintain the site I will never compromise your ability to speak your mind. Sponsor dollars would/will never get in the way of that, and if it comes down to it I'd rather tell a sponsor to walk than create dissention among the members here. I also think that with the maturity level we have here, big blow ups with sponsors are not likely, but rather would be handled in an adult fashion.

So, with that, I'll let you guys hash it out. Whatever I think is the prevailing opinion is what I'll go with, despite my personal preferences. After all, without members, there is no FRRAX.com.

I think it's great that you informed them that they will not have protected status if they do wrong. Everyone is an equal here.

Here's a couple questions...

How large and where would their banner ad be on this site?

What's the policy on them advertising through posts?

Would we have a sponsors forum?

I just wouldn't want to see a technical discussion that contains posts about sales. Now if a poster is asking about part X I don't see a problem with the vendor posting saying they have brand X for $X and/or their experience with it.

Chris,

I am fairly new to the site, but I will offer up a few points.

I personally am all for sponsors, they pay the bills. Bandwidth and web space are not free. The issue that I have always had with the sites that I do frequent that are 'sponsored' is this... they don't always sell the best parts, nor have the best prices. But, the other sites I have visited will delete/edit post that reference someone to a different vender. IMHO these sites should be a tool for the members to stay informed, and get good information. The best part for someone is not always sold by a sponsor. I personally will pay a few dollars more, and buy from sponsors of the sites that use, they deserve our support, and keep the sites we love running. But I do not want to feel obligated to recommend a sponsor to someone.

Thats just my $0.02.

As long as there is no favoritism or protection given to the sponsor, then I don't have a problem with having them. I agree that they must understand that they must be responsible for handling complaints and issues, and that they are the ones responsible for their image. However, I would also say that we should have some policy in place allowing them the chance to respond/correct any issues before people start slamming them in an open forum.

Yeah. I forgot about non-sponsors. Sponsors need to know that we have the freedom to post a link to any other vendor we choose whether in direct competition or not.

This would be my policy....suggestions welcome though. Same thing we do at mtfba.org:

-We would have a sponsors/GP forum separate from the member classifieds. Only paying sponsors would be allowed to post in there.

-"advertising" per se would not be allowed in any other forum, moderators would have to watch this but shouldn't be much of a problem. Technical replies and Q&A about a product would be allowed as long as its not construed as a sales pitch. Non sponsors would still have rights to post/reply to questions and such as well, just not in the Sponsor forum. And members themselves, private persons, have the right to post whatever they want...no URL links would be deleted just because it links to a non-sponsor vendor.

-What sponsors would get for their money: 1. A small banner ad appearing on the forum index page. I personally like the 100X50 banners because they are small and you can fit several of them on there w/o taking up a bunch of space. 2. Rights to the sponsor/GP forum And, well, that'd be about it.

I think its important not to freeze out non-sponsoring enterprises...as they are still enthusiasts and can and do provide things we all need and can benefit from. They will simply not benefit from the special arrangements that sponsors get, which again would be the banner ad and the right to post sales/GPs in the sponsor forum.

If we can do it in a way that avoids the somewhat laughable situation that we've all seen on "other boards", where links get deleted, fights get started and tech info gets compromised, then it's a good thing. Bandwidth is not free. That is a known fact. So, if some positive cashflow can be generated to support the site and insure it's growth, that is a plus. One board I frequent has sponsors listed down the edge of a page. The thing is, that is a list that is nearly 2 pages long these days. Could a small add be placed on the top of the page that changes every few seconds (not so dial up freindly)? Or, could we keep the sponsors links on the Group Purchases and Vendors page. I don't want to cut into their advertising, but eliminating all the adds "strung everywhere" keeps the look of the board clean and makes it easy to navigate. I'm not sure these are workable suggestions (I guess if the ad price is "right", they will probably accept it just fine), but I thought I'd toss them out there.

Kevin

Chris, I think your ideas for sponsors are fair. I'd like to add though, please no pop-ups. I'd also want to emphasize keep the pages loading fast. Some of the sites have animated banners and other things that load slowly. I don't think there's a need for that kind of flash here.

Also, sponsors should not have moderator privileges on any forum. It's just too tempting for a sponsor to "edit" a post if they have that power.

Agreed Mike.

Sponsors being mods is a class 1 conflict of interest in my book.

For banners would could do a rotating image display that shows a different add every time the page is loaded at random. This could be in the top page header and could be shown on every forum/topic view, which would increase exposure w/o compromising page space if the image size was kept small.

I like LT4 Firehawk's idea of some type of mechanism for the problem to be resolved without the "don't buy from..." post coming up first.
Maturity level here is great at the moment, but that could change quickly.
Is there a procedure to follow for an issue to be arbitrated between a member and sponsor?

I don't have a problem with having sponsors since the world revolves around money and this site is no different.

I do like the fact that they are told upfront that there is no protection from criticism.

We should be able to discuss products that other competitors sell....regardless if they are a sponsor or not.

I also think we should be able to point each other to GREAT deals that someone is having regardless of them being a sponsor or not.

Those are few of my big beefs with that "other" site.

Now that was my .02 and someone was probably ripped off.

Most of the topics that would concern me have already been addressed.

A random sponsor banner in the space next to the red TA in the site flag across the top would be a nice location. Just an idea ....

A sponsor posting in a thread, giving an opinion, is more than just an opinion. It HAS to be clouded with a sale in mind. The sponsors that come to mind have shown that exact attribute when posting on other boards. So, it's not about the user, rather the sale. Nature of the beast as best as I can tell.

Sam, Jason, Lou and others I have yet to identify, all have great things to add based upon their experiences. Even though their respective username is covert advertising, so far it hasn't been an issue. But it certainly could, especially if the site continues to grow. I certainly wouldn't want to introduce policy that precluded those precious site resources from weighing and injecting their opinions. If I were a paying sponsor and had an opposing opinion on a part I recommended, I would question what the point of paying would be. That could easily be a moderating nightmare ... ask me how I know ...

We say sponsor get "no protection", but is that truly the case? I thought the "open environment" fostered on the site many of us came from worked out great and would have continued that way. Why? because we are grown-ups ... not having the street racer mentality that seems to foster conflict. We have heated debate and that is healthy. But we certainly don't need baby sitters.

So based upon that OPINION, I have to ask once again why would a vendor want to even sponsor this site with such gross exposure? If the vendor says because he loves us, then by all means, let them in ...

If sponsorship monies are coming in, I would like to see them spent for webspace to host images and video clips. That can get pricey really fast. But, I think with limited time in the space, limited file size, specific file types accepted, no external linking, available to only registered users ... it cold be easily managed and not be too costly.

There are a few pros and numerous cons to site sponsors. Lile Chris said ... let's openly debate this and look long term. I would REALLY like to hear from Jason, Sam and Lou and get their POV as they don't have a horse in this race .... yet ...

as mitch touched on and i'll add my $.02 (if its worth that much). I have a problem w/ members using user I.D.'s that double as advertising for their web based parts sales. and i think that paying sponsors will have a problem w/ this also. i don't have a problem w/ sponsors, but i do have a problem w/ protecting them because they are a sponsor. prefect example is the BMR PHB failures. there is no way those failures could have been justified or defended. if BMR had been a direct sponsor of the "other" site, it would have been deleted even though there was a valid safety concern.
also, how can you take advise about a part and believe its not "tainted" by the need to earn an income and survive in these hard financial times. there are exceptions to this, but its hard to tell when its TYPED here. sponsor often have to pay a vendor fee just to be authorised to sell parts made by other companies. its hard to just stop selling a part that you just realized is not the best, when you have a financial investment w/ that part/company.
anyways, its just my input. i'll go w/ whatever decision is made here by Chris and/or the majority.

Well with unemployment at 5.6% right now, it is lower than the average for the entire decade of the 90s (and the 80s as well). With that stated I think most of the "hardness" of the current times is media manufactured and that we are well on our way out of it anyway.

But, I digress

So what I seem to be hearing from Mitch and Glen is that you have concerns with vendors & sponsoring vendors discussing products outside of the sponsor forum? I must be misunderstanding, because this could already be happening regardless of sponsorships. Some of these concerns are existing problems that sponsorships would not necessarily worsen.

But please clarify, I want to be sure I get what you are saying.

I entirely agree with that, i broke 2 diffrent spohn control arms, at 2 diffrent times. and posted about it on another site, the posts got deleted 3 diffrent times, and i got warned by the site admins for posting a thread that was "talking bad about a sponsor, yo" , it was something i thought was a valid saftey concern, and should have been made a sticky, I did contact Spohn about the failures, and he did a good job of, looking into the failures, and actualy changed his design. but there are probably still many people running that older design, that could have been warned of a potential failure.

I think you have a good handle on all of the possible conflicts, and how to approach them in the discussions above. I agree that sponsorships are probably the future for the long term for the board. I too would like to see an archive of tech articles like "How to install/maintain Prospeeds" or other info that is good reference for the atypical Fbody.

My only concern is to avoid the post editing/shutting down/hero worship that went on on the "other" boards....now this of course is not entirely on the sponsors shoulders...we too share a responsability in "keeping it real" so to speak. I say go for it, we seem to be getting along well here so far, and we alone are responsible for keeping it that way.

Looks like what I wanted to say is already said... but here it goes:
1. No sales pitch in technical forums
2. Sales pitch in GP/Sponsor forum
3. OK to reply to a thread asking for a specific product if sponsor has it... but no spamming
4. Avoid Sponsor = Moderator... (conflict of interests can occur)
5. No immunity whatsoever for advertising other places.. if there is an issue, then step to the plate and deal with it
6. The more, the merryier... it will keep this site alive
7. Since we're all adults and sponsors get no protection, I will support the sponsors.. and in the end, that is what will keep the sponsor here... the $$$ generated by here... just make sure he knows you heard it from here.

It is happening and that's reason I said it was the nature of the beast.

But it's also the reason why I would like to hear Sam, Lou and Jason's POV so that I can make a fair judgement ... see both sides of the fence.

None of them are currently on your potential sponsor list, so I think their POV would be most beneficial in making an informed, long term decision.

Does that help clarify?

Yes, very much, thanks

Let me add that I make a distinction between an an advertiser and a sponsor.

A sponsor pays for advertising

Chris- Thanks for including us in your thought process and maintaining an open discussion. A great step in the right direction!

I feel the love.

I am all for having sponsors but as much as I hate to say it, with as many parts that are available sooner or later you will have a conflict of interest and the arguements will ensue (sponsor vs. sponsor) like we saw on LS1.com. That was one of the worst things I have ever seen on a internet board. 2 sponsors at each others throats.

As long as sponsors stay in thier perspective areas (sales/GP areas) and only reply to specific questions in the tech forum, HOPEFULLY we wont have any problems.

I do not have a problem with vendors or sponsors discussing parts, tech, or anything on-topic in any forum, as most of them have a LOT to offer besides a sales pitch. I may not agree with everything any of them say, but I greatly appreciate their opinion and participation.

I also prefer that they have their business name as a username. That way, I do not have to wonder if their opinions are biased by a motive to sell something.

I agree with everything else. I do not have an issue with sponsors as long as we have free speech.

I agree with Chuck.

But, isn't there a way to keep a board alive WITHOUT sponsors? CC does it right? I wan't to know what is available. I don't care who sells it, or who TELLS me about it.

If Jason is telling me WHY his PHR brackets are so great GOOD. He's the one who designed it! If Lou tells us why his new K-member is better than stock great. We now know that a better alternative exists. If Sam says that Bilstein is coming out with a new wiz-bang DA Mono tube Super.

These guys have the inside track about what's up with what we are doing. And that's what I want the inside info.

Sponsors should be able to post anywhere. As should everyone else.

I say NO sponsors. If you want to sell something do it by actually participating in our discussions. Not by "putting up money"

Lonnie I don't' think "putting up money" automatically gets these guys sales. They still have to offer a product people want, and ultimately the customer makes the choice to purchase, no one can force you into it.

I think there have been several valid points made by everyone and I agree with the majority of them.

However, I am not sure it is reasonable to pay for bandwidth out of pocket. Nor, do I think that money grows on trees (I've planted at least $85 in my backyard, so far....nothing.....). So, I think sponsors are an eventual "evil" (with all respect to those sponsors, potential or otherwise). But, I think we need to make sure that they don't impact freedom of speech on the board. Chris is on the right track with his ground rules. I'm not sure how many sponsors will go for the "no protection clause", but if the rates are reasonable enough, they may be fine with it (I know some boards get $125-$150 a month for ads, per vendor). If we can keep it at $50 to $75 (or whatever), they may go for it. And, if they build junk, get discovered and are called out about it, they are welcome to defend themselves, fix it, orget mad and leave. I don't want a reputation for sponsor abuse and I'm not suggesting Corner Carvers style beatings(though I have great respect for the info on that board and I cruise there on occasion). But, to protect people who manufacture "junk" because there is money in it is not a desireable situation (I'm already having visions of BMR, not to pick on out favorite whipping boy). I've got more questions than answers....

If anyone needs me, I'll be outside planting another 2 dollar bill.

I'd even be willing to put in a few bucks a year to have the open forum we have now. Then the users would be the sponsors (which could create some conflict in itself).

Sponsors are fine. But if it gets out of hand, this will be "just another site".

My initial thoughts would be $50 per month or a discounted $500 a year if the sponsor paid all up front. Get 4 or 5 sponsors around here and I think I can get all the bandwidth we could reasonably need for the forseeable future.

I understand the fears some of you have about sponsors going downhill. However I do not think sponsors in and of themselves are negative just by their mere existence. Perhaps framing them as advertisers is more appropriate, sense we are actually doing them a favor too by providing exposure. The term Sponsor connotes that we couldn't manage without them.

In my mind, an advertiser pays a fee, for which we provide exposure via a couple of mechanisms...the banner and the Vendor/GP forum....and IMO that completes the transaction. We don't owe the sponsor any more than that.

I'll tell you something I hate. I hate how advertisers influence content in magazines. Like GMHTP for example. They don't blatantly bias an article, but what happens for example is Holley, lets say, will agree to a large, lucrative, multiple issue advertisement if GMHTP will do an article on the stealthram intake, wink wink. Its done with the understanding that the article will be very positive.

Prime example is the issue last year when they put the Crane ignition on the LT1 car and glorified it as the solution to all LT1 ignition problems even though it is well known that ignition amplifier boxes accelerate opti death quite substantially.


I want to assure you guys that I'll never compromise your ability to speak your mind as long as its done in a civil manner. You have my word on that.

The problem I have with mass donations are multifold:

1. Inevitably only some are going to donate. Most will just piggyback and enjoy the benefits of the board w/o any contribution. This is not acceptable to me from a matter of principle. It just comes with the territory.

2. What if someone who has contributed funds gets banned from the site? Do I refund their contribution? Do I have to keep up with hundreds of donations? What are the expectations donating users will have of me and my site?

3. In comparison, it is much easier for me, from my perspective at least, to define the role and expectations of the board/sponsor relationship, and to manage and handle those vendors with regard to issues that will creep up from time to time, etc.

Well it looks like sponsors are gonna happen.

I do feel that sponsors should be allowed to post ANYWHERE. If we have the power in chosing then even a "sales pitch" shouldn't influence our decisions much.

Most of you know my position of vendor choice. The guy has helped me out going on three years. And I've seen him help out TONS, APON TONS of people. Should Sam choose to be a sponsor, he should also be aloud to post anywhere. If for no other reason that 1)he has helped a ton of people out 2)he is an enthusiast himself

And if we do that other sponsors would have to have the same oppurtunities.

OK so let me work on refining the guidelines for advertisers and firm up some "rules". I'll post them for review.

I have some ideas in my head as far as language, etc.

With regard to advertisers being able to post anywhere...I am thinking this: Advertisers get a banner ad and they get GP/vendor forum privileges...outside of that they are no different from any other vendor or private member, could post in any forum...as could non-sponsoring vendors. I don't know how to be any more fair than to say everybody can post everywhere

Another example was the 555RII test against Victoracers. Running pressures much higher than everyone has determined work best with RII's, GMHTP ran an article with a 2-page Nitto ad in the middle of it that had the RII beating Victoracers by 2 full seconds on a road course with the same car and driver. I asked Johnie Hunkins about it on cz28.com some time later, and after a long, slightly heated conversation, he posted that the Victoracers had been used a year before, and in storage since. He went on to say that several local racers assured him that age does not affect race tires

I had been a subscriber since they were HTP up to that point, and have not sent them a dime since.

I would be willing to PayPal a small fee to keep the site going. As long as we can be open and honest. The shared knowledge will save us all a lot more than the cost of keeping the site running.

I'm with Chuck on donations from members. A mixture of sponsors and members contributions might be a viable solution. That way sponsorship money is less important but is still present.

With the guidelines that Chris has stated, I would not be against sponsorship.

.....it would actually be kinda nice to be able to have a civil conversation/debate on product issues and keeping the sponsor from being "un-touchable" is a great idea.

I also like the idea that sponsors would be allowed to have their sponsor name in their user name.....yes, that's free advertisement but it also gives us the opportunity to know EXACTLY who were talking to.

I'm working on the guidelines now, which defines the expectations and roles for advertisers (sponsors), non-advertising vendors (other companies), and the rest of us private individuals (members).

I have one question though.

I've been reading through this thread and I've discovered one issue upon which people have fallen on both sides:

Some of you have said you do not want Vendor names in their usernames, because that is naked advertising in the tech forums. Others of you have said you want it plain and clear when you're reading a post that they are an advertiser so you know up front that the opinion is colored.

So which is it guys? Which is more beneficial to you?

Just put "Sponsor" in their user title or user group.

Put them in the names. It does two things.

1. Lets you know who you are talking to.

2. Lets you know the sponsors that are "active" in forums and have an "interest" in the hobby. (Sam Strano for example is always around and actively participating in discussions. Though not everyone agrees with him all the time, he has helped many people, he's probably generated far less income from the boards than some of the cam and cylinder heads guys and he's worked harder to get it). When buying from one of two vendors, I'd probably go with the one that helps and participates in the forums.

I'd put them in there.

My thoughts.

That jives with my thoughts.

Here's another:

The Sponsor sales & GP forum:

Obviously non-sponsoring vendors would not be allowed to post in there, as the sponsor is paying for that privilege. My initial instinct is to treat that forum like CamaroZ28.com does, that private persons cannot post notices for deals by non-sponsoring vendors either. I know that comprimises the freedom of members to tell each other about deals, but w/o that limitation is really cheapens the value of the sale/Gp forum to the sponsor.

Thoughts?

The benefits of knowing an individual user is a vendor would be most beneficial.

The point I tried to raise is that there really isn't that much of a benefit or incentive for an advertiser to pay, when any vendor can just register the name of his company as the username and gleen similar exposure.

Does that make sense?

So Chris, are you considering a sponor section and a non sponsor section?

Occasionally we stumble across great deals on shocks or tires or whatever. Where would we share that information?

That's the issue of the moment. I really hesitate to create a sponsor's forum and a non-sponsors forum...might as well just give away free banner space too, LOL.

here's three options:

1. Non sponsor deals could go in the classifieds
2. non sponsor deals could go in the respective tech forums. Like if you find a deal on shocks, you post about it in the suspension forum...but those looking for a sponsor deal can go straight to the GP forum and not get confused about who's a sponsor and who's not
3. Let it all go in the sponsor forum, which compromises the value of the forum to the sponsor but does not limit the members' rights at all.

I think this, plus the banner ad is the best policy.

I will agree with that. the only thing we would have to start doing as mods is policing up any of the non-sponsor threads.

How would we handle a general member plugging a non sponsor or posting sale info?

Well Boyce, goes back to my last post...what do we want to limit? Member's posting rights or sponsor's value?

More I think about it I think the best compromise is that members cannot post GPs and sales of non-supporting vendors in the Sponsor forum but they can do it in the tech forum that best fits the product that is on sale. (e.g. a "hey, great deal w/in" post in suspension tech about swaybars from ABC inc.).

I don't think we SHOULD monitor individual members giving a plug to vendors.

If I think that Sam is the best place to buy Ground Control parts I'm gonna say so.

Just like if Mitch feels that LG Motorsports sells the best LCA's he should have the right to say so.

Or if Chris says that Comp Cams makes the best cam for X application, and none of the sponsors sell Comp so what?

The reason this board has taken off is because of the conglomeration of info. And you can't have all the information available if you have to worry about posting things that conflict with sponsors. At least not until we are sponsored by EVERYONE. Which will never happen.

I agree, just think members shouldn't be doing it in the Sponsor GP/Sales forum since that cuts in on the benefit the sponsors are getting for their dollar.

But in terms of posting information in any other forum? No limits on members in that instance.

So, basically, business as usual everywhere but the "GP" section.

Fair enough.

I don't want to become the "link police", editing posts and such....We've seen where that leads.

Kevin

Right, and I even would hesitate to restrict non-sponsoring vendors from doing the same.

Say if Brand X came out with a new valvespring...I see no reason they can't go in the Engine Tech forum and make a post about it as long as they aren't advertising a special deal or GP...but just to say "we've got this new Brand X spring, priced at $80 a set, and here are the properties of it, go to www.brandx.com or call us at 555-5555 if interested."

I would not see any problem with that as long as its not in the Sponsor's forum and not terribly blatant.

I hate how you can't really even discuss any product or vendor that's not a sponsor at some of these sites....members should be able to discuss this stuff and vendors should be able to make us aware of new products.