Fee Based Awards: Part 2
by Wally Gross, Webmaster
Surfers Choice Internet Awards
15 August 2001
This article is a sequel to Fee Based Awards: Part 1. If you have not read Part 1, may I boldly suggest you take a minute and do so now.
Feedback from Part 1
I received more feedback from this article than any other I have written over the years. Some were delivered by intelligent, clear thinking individuals, and others came directly from hell. The latter will get no free press here.
The first article starts out by saying that free is fast disappearing from the Net and that I, for one, am elated about it. This comment seemed to set off some of the pontificators out there who suggested that people like me fuel this stuff by writing about it.
I suppose people don't understand the old platitude: "Don't shoot the messenger." Since my first article, and I have written nothing further about it, more and more of what used to be free services are disappearing from the Net. Content, newsletters and others services that used to be free are now either gone or fee based. This is the reward we get for taking and never giving. However, there will always be free goodies on the Net. Maybe not enough for some, but they will be there.
Others thought my comments were accurate and only wished they could somehow run their own awards program on a fee based platform. Well, when I get it right, if I ever do, I'll be sure to share the information.
When the going gets tough, the tough get going!
For anyone who is working the Net and trying to put the groceries on the table and keep the rain on the outside, the last 8 months or so have been tough. The Internet is definitely in a state of metamorphosis, and it will continue to be so for at least another 8 months. Then it should come out of its cocoon sporting a whole new look.
Tough times breed ingenuity and creativity and that has to be a good thing. It's the movers and shakers who know how to handle it, and somehow they always seem to come out smelling like a bed of roses.
Setting up a free award service is easy.
Anybody (and I do mean anybody) can set up a site, or part of a site, and start giving away free awards for Web site excellence. Once promoted these sites will have the hit meter spinning as there is no shortage of award seekers, most of who want nothing more than to fill the walls of their site with award graphics — no matter what it takes. Yes, even if most of the awards they post are pretty much useless.
It's easy, really, anybody can do it. It is also the reason why the Internet sees the Awards Industry in a somewhat negative light. It's why people like Jeffrey Zeldman, Wired Magazine, and others have taken some heavy shots at us. Most award sites are useless and the public isn't being fooled. Some may not like this statement, but I hear it over and over again. I tend to agree with it as well. Shoot the messenger, oh go ahead!! Why listen when it hurts so much?
I don't mean to criticize the efforts of hard working award site owners, but I make this statement based on my experiences. There are only a handful of award sites that really get it right — fee or free — and these sites have my utmost respect. There are also many who are dedicating their time and efforts to services like Awards Scoop, among others, and are helping to change this image in positive ways. Keep it coming!!
Charge a fee and watch it change.
Few site owners will pay a fee for an award, any award. Even the powerful giant, the Webby Awards, serves a small audience indeed. I can only venture a guess, but I doubt they receive more than a few thousand paid entries annually. They make it on advertising dollars from sponsors, not from site reviews.
There are reportedly 45 million Web sites out there. Perhaps 36 million just aren't good enough to win an award, but where can I find the other 9 million all in one neat place (hint)?
Again, pure speculation, but I would guess that all of the thousands of award sites out there do not list more than maybe a million sites as winners. I would also say that a large percentage of these listed sites are token awards and most of them would not qualify for a highly rated award.
Surfers Choice is a fee based award, and it's not an easy endeavor in any respect. The site gets an average of 12-15,000 unique visitors each month, yet we only receive about 35 award applications. Most of the applicants are excellent Web sites. This is good in some ways as it gives us time to provide content and do the best we can for each awarded site. We also generate in excess of 100,000 page views, of which 60,000 result from onsite searches.
The latter figure is proof positive that the majority of our visitors are there to view site content. Listed sites get the majority of activity. The average page views per month is about 1,400 for the first page of the application process. Clearly 1,350 of those people slam on the brakes and put her in reverse when they see that a fee is involved.
The reasons for this are twofold: first, the vast majority of these sites are award seekers without a budget for Internet marketing; and second, they're on some "hell bent for leather" campaign to amass hundreds of awards for reasons I really don't understand.
The buck doesn't stop here.
In a small tent on some free government land is where I'd be living if I had to depend on the income from Surfers Choice to feed the hungry stomachs of those residing one floor above me. Since I started a fee based system, Surfers Choice has averaged about $1,000 US monthly in income. This is far better than $1,000 Canadian, but it's still not enough to even justify its existence.
I firmly believe in the concept of free enterprise, but the whole thing depends on the flow of money. Money is nothing more than a reward for services rendered. There is nothing wrong with charging a fee for providing a good service or product. In fact, it is the right thing to do. Great content costs money. Really good services and products are just not free.
The buck does not stop at Surfers Choice. Each and every month Surfers Choice pays its server fees; its long distance and toll free bills; buys software on the Net; purchases hardware; pays for newsletter subscriptions and makes other significant contributions.
Every dollar we spend filters its way back to others in some way. This means that someone else benefits because we receive and give back. You do the same thing everyday, perhaps not on the Net but in the world of bricks and mortar. If you didn't, things would be in a sorry state indeed.
Charging a fee means giving value in return.
Many serious site owners who need the exposure will shell out $800 US to get listed at Yahoo, Looksmart, AltaVista and a few others. The visits that these sites can provide make it well worth the cost.
Most site owners who want services beyond the award will not shell out $75 Sams unless they see exceptional value. Most of them do not consider awards sites to be in the same league as the major directories or search engines. There appears to be no real good reason why they should.
Naturally, those who seek awards for the meaningful purpose of personal satisfaction and recognition of their efforts are not concerned so much about the promotional aspect of an award.
So what's different about Surfers Choice?
I believe most of us strive to be unique and to put out our best efforts to service our customers. That's really what I focus on. So I don't know how Surfers Choice is different, but I can tell you what we do for our site visitors and award applicants.
| 
