I do not like the new site - think it’s a pain in the neck in many ways - but you can download a PDF of the horses show record, which is handy… so since my horse is for sale, I’d be happy to share that with anyone interested, and its certainly easier to share than it used to be given the PDF format. That is the ONLY thing i like about the site.
[QUOTE=Cannonball;9029736]
If you don’t have the $25 for the membership and maybe can only pay the $5 for 5 searches (i mean are you really negotiating down from $25??, what do you call that membership level? the cheap and easy?)[/QUOTE]
The Arabian Horse Association has tiered access to its database ($10 for X access, $25 for X access, etc).
I actually have used their $10 access in the past when I wanted information and just needed to get in and out of the database. I’ve also used Equibase’s per-report pricing when I wanted access to something specific.
I really appreciated not having to pay for a “membership” and a bunch of features I didn’t want just to get access to the information I did.
I wouldn’t have bothered with the AHA lookup if it had been more than $10, even though it was related to a horse purchase. It was useful information, but the sale didn’t hinge on it.
So yes, some of us do appreciate the super cheap and easy access to information, even if you don’t see the purpose or point to it.
25 a year seems reasonable to me. And if I am horse shopping and have no intentions of showing I would still want to see results. If many DNF’s or low ribbons you can then get an idea of the horse.
WRT horse purchases I look at it like paying for CarFax or Consumer Reports when paying for a car.
Agree that the violations should be publicly accessible.
Mostly I like the new site, at least on my desktop. On my phone, it is impossible to select a date range bc it’s blocked by some other window. I also can’t access the additional pages of a report without getting the PDF.
(are they ever going to fix the quoting function? Sigh. I’d pay COTH $25 to have that back. 
I have been shopping and looked up results without a real plan of showing anywhere that would require me to be a USEF member. Here are some reasons:
-
I want to get an idea for the level of honesty of the seller. Depending on how you phrase things, you can inflate a horse’s record fairly easily. If someone is putting 2nd out of 30 in AA hunters, etc, we are good. But if they note top ribbons at XXXX show…and you look at the division was poorly attended, well, that’s different.
-
I want to see how many shows the horse has been to recently and were results consistent. Are the results spotty…good shows here and there with DNPs or no scores at others.
-
Were there any large gaps in showing that could point to an injury that is not being disclosed.
-
How many times has the horse changed owners/trainers/riders? Helps determine if more questions should be asked (there are plenty of answers to these questions that are just fine…but there are also some that aren’t.)
-
I’ve used the database multiple times to look up my horse’s ID number.
I show rated infrequently, don’t keep her number handy, and have had occasion to need it for entry forms that must be sent in right away.
Does that mean I’m opposed to paying $25 to use the database as a non-member? Nope. Does it mean I will join if there is no other reason but the database? Nope.
[QUOTE=Cannonball;9029736]
It is beyond my comprehension how people could expect to get information from a membership driven organization for free. Nothing is free people! The members are paying for the hardware, software and data entry so you can look up show records of horses you are never going to buy. If you don’t have the $25 for the membership and maybe can only pay the $5 for 5 searches (i mean are you really negotiating down from $25??, what do you call that membership level? the cheap and easy?) you probably shouldn’t be horse shopping. [/QUOTE]
Wow, that’s kind of rude, who would have thought a discussion of website access would strike such a nerve with someone!! Personally I have a full membership, so it is a non-issue, but I can imagine there would be people who have no use for the rest of the features of the website and would not think the reports were worth $25, given the one-time need or limited use, and who might thus look elsewhere for the information, but might be willing to pay a lesser fee to for the reports. So, I think it would actually have the potential to be an additional revenue source to capture the people who aren’t interested in either the full membership or the $25 membership.
So does USEF require members from other nations who already are members of their countries to now pay this $25? It may not seem like a lot of money, but when you consider that it may not just be USEF members looking at purchasing a horse but somebody that’s already shelled out a lot of $$ to their association, it would be nice to know that there is a reciprocal agreement in place to check show records!
Someone has to pay for YET ANOTHER change in the letterhead, name, logo, web design etc. They cost alone had to be astronomical. So little real value for your extremely high dues. Once again, the grass roots members take the hit. Also, the site is clumsy and difficult to navigate. Not a fan.
To answer your question - No, they are not going to fix the quoting function. There is a thread in the help section on this and Mod 1 has also posted in several other threads on it.
The loss of features is because of the hack and they are not going to spend the time fixing the issues because they are actively working on a new set up so their energy is going towards that.
If you want to quote you can do it manually.
Type it like this, without the spaces:
[ quote = poster name ]the stuff you copy and pasted that you wanted to quote[ / quote ]
It will look like this:
If website access isn’t worth $25 to you (about $2/month) than I guess just don’t look at it. $25 is a pretty fair price for an unlimited year of accessing records, video on demand, the rulebook, and other services (IMHO). You get everything on the website, no restrictions and no limitations, for $2/monthish. If you think that’s too much, than what you’re really saying is you don’t value that information. If you don’t value it, don’t access it. Simple as that.
Maintaining the website and database cost money. It was nice when it was free, but now it’s not. Over the years, more and more has been added to the website to the point where they’re now producing exclusive video content just for it. That costs something.
I know of very few equine organizations/registries that offer all their content for free. You have to pay/join to look up APHA and AQHA records.
Perhaps a “pay per access” option would work better, if you think so you should write/call USEF and ask for that. I think that’s not an unreasonable suggestion. But if a lookup is $10… at that point isn’t the $25/year flat fee a much better deal? I just have trouble seeing how the cost of a single look up isn’t going to be ballpark near that $25 fee. But if you think a “fee per lookup” makes more sense, I would communicate that to USEF.
It costs money to produce things, and one way companies recoup that is by charging for access. Do you complain that Netflix isn’t free? That you can’t just drive in/out of the carwash gratis because you’d like to? That you can’t graze off the buffet at Whole Foods for free because you only go there a couple times a year and you’re not that hungry?
I am in favor of discipline coming out from behind the firewall. That, to me, has an element of “newsworthiness” and broad shunning isn’t possible if people at large don’t know about the discipline. But horse/rider records and the videos? If you want them, pay for them. It’s nice when things are free but not everything is.
[QUOTE=AmmyHunter;9030590]
Wow, that’s kind of rude, who would have thought a discussion of website access would strike such a nerve with someone!! Personally I have a full membership, so it is a non-issue, but I can imagine there would be people who have no use for the rest of the features of the website and would not think the reports were worth $25, given the one-time need or limited use, and who might thus look elsewhere for the information, but might be willing to pay a lesser fee to for the reports. So, I think it would actually have the potential to be an additional revenue source to capture the people who aren’t interested in either the full membership or the $25 membership.[/QUOTE]
You are correct that it was rude, I apologize. What struck a nerve with me was the idea that the USEF information should be made available for free to nonmembers who are in reality just browsing through the info for pleasure. And the idea of creating an additional membership level would be additional expense put out by the USEF to save someone $20. This same someone likely has a horse and is spending so much money every which direction that they likely don’t know the last time something for their horse only costs $25. The USEF created a lower priced membership as an outreach to those wanting the info but not wanting a full membership. They did not have to do that, they clearly did it as a way to increase the base membership in hopes that they will become full members. But as with most things in our country, people complain, say it’s not fair, why can’t they do exactly what I want, they don’t care about poor little me. I’m clearly over reacting and will end my rant but grow up people! The world does not and will not revolve around you!
[QUOTE=Cannonball;9030721]
You are correct that it was rude, I apologize. What struck a nerve with me was the idea that the USEF information should be made available for free to nonmembers who are in reality just browsing through the info for pleasure. And the idea of creating an additional membership level would be additional expense put out by the USEF to save someone $20. This same someone likely has a horse and is spending so much money every which direction that they likely don’t know the last time something for their horse only costs $25. The USEF created a lower priced membership as an outreach to those wanting the info but not wanting a full membership. They did not have to do that, they clearly did it as a way to increase the base membership in hopes that they will become full members. But as with most things in our country, people complain, say it’s not fair, why can’t they do exactly what I want, they don’t care about poor little me. I’m clearly over reacting and will end my rant but grow up people! The world does not and will not revolve around you![/QUOTE]
I agree with everything you said. Other NGB for sports also charge for site access. I know USA Cycling does. I wish COTH would charge to access this Forums. Maybe that would eliminate the Spam and troll posts.
I guess it is between the competing theories on how to generate revenue versus grow the base.
In theory, checking results might be something a person does before they buy an entry level horse (by entry level I mean rated show entry level). In reality, probably not. But still, how many people do you think will fork over $25 to look at results? Probably not many, so is putting it behind the subscription wall generating revenue? Probably not. Is it potentially restricting membership growth? Highly unlikely, but I suppose it is possible.
Now $25/year for USEF TV is a smart idea, although I hope they are also smart enough to have some free events, because you do need to advertise to grow the base. They’d probably be even smarter if they were reaching out to local affiliates to bundle their membership with local membership fees. You know, the target audience and where a lot of their membership has gone to…
Not allowing public access to violations is incomprehensible.
Public free access to the list of suspended horses and humans and disciplinary action is something I do agree should be available. That would allow new entry non members to see if they want to buy a horse from that person or board and train with them before they take the plunge instead of learning afterwards the hard way. Most don’t join until they have to for show purposes and most trainers, (even the good ones) will tell them they can wait to join until they have to.
That I do support as a member. It shouldn’t be a secret.
[QUOTE=vxf111;9030704]
But if a lookup is $10… at that point isn’t the $25/year flat fee a much better deal?[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily. $10 for a report + $15 left over to buy a book on Amazon is going to have much more value to me than $25 for a report and access to a site that I won’t use again during the year.
But them when you realize oops, you need a second lookup or want to stream something… now it’s $20 and for $5 more you could have been using it in an unlimited way all along. I just think that delta is a little small but maybe the USE would offer a per lookup price. $25 seems like an unbelievable deal for unlimited access if you like/want the content. If you don’t… don’t buy it. I don’t get Showtime. Wouldn’t watch it. Not worth it to me. I do have Netflix. A bargain IMHO. Different strokes…,
[QUOTE=vxf111;9031152]
But them when you realize oops, you need a second lookup or want to stream something… now it’s $20 and for $5 more you could have been using it in an unlimited way all along. I just think that delta is a little small but maybe the USE would offer a per lookup price. $25 seems like an unbelievable deal for unlimited access if you like/want the content. If you don’t… don’t buy it. I don’t get Showtime. Wouldn’t watch it. Not worth it to me. I do have Netflix. A bargain IMHO. Different strokes…,[/QUOTE]
You could say the same thing about the ability to do the non-member fee at shows. One show it’s valuable, two it’s pretty close to membership. Decide to do a third show in fall? Whoops, should have just bought the membership. Or however many shows you can get in before you hit the tipping point; I admit I haven’t looked at it in a long time. And yet many people like the non-member option if they are only doing one or two shows a year. Same principle.
I’m not suggesting USEF should implement it without researching to see if it’s actually worth the investment in getting it up and running, but it’s an alternative approach that would get people engaged with the site. And if the people did run two and three and more queries, they would in fact realize that, hey, they get a lot of value out of this and a membership makes more sense. Isn’t that USEF’s thing right now? Needing more members? And if they don’t convert to membership… USEF still gets revenue.
But who knows. Maybe the $25 membership thing will work for USEF and they’ll get all the members they need/want out of that. Good for them, if they do.
It’s true, I think they intentionally set the non-member fee so that if you show as a non-member more than 2-3 times, an annual membership was a wiser idea. Which makes it smarter, for a lot of people, to get the annual membership.
Just like if the USE was to allow a lookup for $10, it’d probably be smarter just to get the $25 fan membership if there’s any change you’ll want to access the site more than 2-3 times.
I don’t see it as being different. I think most people look at the member fee and decide an annual membership makes more sense, and that most people would end up deciding the same weighing a $10 one-time-access against a $25 yearly access fee.
I mean… how much cheaper than $25 can you get for something? Not a whole lot. But maybe a single access fee would make sense, and if you think you’d use that I think it’s a worthy suggestion to make to the USE.
[
To answer your question - No, they are not going to fix the quoting function. There is a thread in the help section on this and Mod 1 has also posted in several other threads on it.
The loss of features is because of the hack and they are not going to spend the time fixing the issues because they are actively working on a new set up so their energy is going towards that.
If you want to quote you can do it manually.
Type it like this, without the spaces:
[ quote = poster name ]the stuff you copy and pasted that you wanted to quote[ / quote ]
It will look like this:
[I]
[IMG]http://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by poster name
the stuff you copy and pasted that you wanted to quote
[/I]
[/quote]
Thanks, trubandloki. I’m actually quite well versed on how to quote. :yes: What I’m not so well versed on these days is following the minutae of COTH. I knew the site got hacked, that I could no longer quote and that’s about it. Oh, and that the post reply button has been messed up for what feels like years (which, I know, is unrelated to the hack).
Despite knowing full well how to quote, not having the feature makes it very difficult to read a full thread before responding, which I’ve always done out of respect for the group. By reading the whole thread, I can see if someone else posted the same response as me or if a brouhaha has died down and doesn’t need to be stirred up again. As I read, I mark posts to quote and then try to form one reply. That is quite difficult on multi-page threads with no quote feature. Oh well, I suppose. I’m glad to hear they are working on a new platform/version/update/whatever.
Thanks, Cannonball, not often you see people own it and apologize on forums! And for the record, if I wasn’t a full member, I would have no problem with a $25/year membership, I just think another tier for research could bring in (and potentially hook) another layer of users. I was on a Delta flight recently where they offered 30 minutes of wifi for $3, and I can just imagine how many people paid multiple $3 charges rather than a larger one-time fee because it seemed cheap and once they were online, they wanted more!
I was always surprised we got so much great content from USEF Network for free, particularly compared to what FEItv charges, given the costs involved in production.
As for the reply with quote feature, if you right-click on “reply with quote” and open in new tab or open in new window, it still works (at least for me) without having to copy and paste or type the user name/brackets.
