GOAL and the Outdoor Message - What the hell?

[pjorg]

Wow! 500 x $21 = $10,500 per year.

There is NO WAY this website (plus a couple free guns) costs that much.

Nice revenue stream.

So what? Someone saw a need, and created a business to fill it.

Also, as someone who has developed PHP websites, you probably know that as traffic scales up costs do increase substantially. Especially when you want the service to have any measure of reliability. A single dedicated server from a reputable hosting company will run into the hundreds of dollars a month, at minimum. If one were to separate the database and web server instances onto two separate servers for performance reasons, you can double that.

An endeavor like this would also require a nontrivial amount of upkeep (moderation, for example?) and socking some funds away in a "rainy day" legal fund is always a good idea. Perhaps doubly so considering the subject matter in this case.

 

[Jamie]

I don't know what happens with MRGCI shoots, I always assumed they might go to a NH gun org, but it's no secret that money from NES shoots is going to gun orgs. Right from the "Hosting a NES shoot at your club" instructions:

$5 per person will be collected and donated to the most prominent gun owners rights advocacy organization in the state where the event is being held

That's what I thought too. Not GOAL specifically. Maybe I was just splitting hairs with Jims comment above. No ill will intended.

 

[JimB]

I have some experience with both print and online media/marketing and know the effects of not having it.

There is quite a lot to be said about being top of mind and without something showing up in the mail reminding you of the fight we are in, the good things going on in the community, the bad things going on in legislature, then the cause becomes a once-a-year thought.

If this print mail is discontinued you better believe they will lose membership and people will become complacent because they will be uninformed about what is going on.

Whether or not you read every page of the OM, it doesn't matter. The average attention span of a person is roughly 3 seconds nowadays. If all you see is a picture of someone enjoying a firearm on the front page, or glance at a ridiculous new bill that is being considered then the OM has done some good.

since you put it that way, i can agree with what you wrote.

if the motive is to keep the readership involved, "including those who

do not read NES or some other forum" it might be a good strategy.

The hard part is measuring the effectiveness of it.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Also, as someone who has developed PHP websites, you probably know that as traffic scales up costs do increase substantially.

I helped another shooting forum move from it's low cost "unlimited traffic" hosting plan to a dedicated server because the vendor noticed the traffic load and told the owner he was exceeding the limit of the unlimited plan.

 

[economist]

Just so we're clear, my observations and comments are based on what I've read here and some deduction, not inside knowledge.

It was stated that GOAL, GOAL Foundation and TOM are three separate organizations. We know that TOM has subscribers that are not GOAL members. Therefore we can be sure GOAL's membership information is made known to TOM and added to the probably much larger subscriber list of TOM. This is not a "bad" thing, provided TOM has a confidentiality agreement with GOAL not to resell that information.

My point was that because of the way this is setup, GOAL has visibility to a much larger audience than it's own membership. That's not only *not* bad, but it is *good*.

IF GOAL pulls away from TOM this should be considered, that's all.

I hear you. Most nearly all of us here are struggling without access to the inside knowledge.

But you raised a good point. Apart from the membership list (which we are told is kept safely, even if at the non-GOAL controlled Outdoor Message entity), there is a mailing list of non-GOAL members and advertisers. That list has value, and presumably has been cultivated over time by TOM. If GOAL has no rights to that list, then having TOM out there as a separate entity came with at least one additional significant cost: without TOM, GOAL would be unable to reach these subscribers. That gives TOM a monopoly, if true, and monopolies have a habit of demanded very high prices for their goods. Who knows? Without the inside information we are left with little more than speculation.

To be absolutely clear, we don't know much at all. It may be that all is well and ethical at GOAL. Without disclosure and transparency, however, there is no way to be sure.

Anyway, I can't see what else there is to say. GOAL can either explain itself or not. All I want, and all I believe most of us want, is clarity. We want to know that things are being run honestly and effectively, and that member donations and other funds are used properly. When we contribute, as I have in the past, we want to be certain that our money is used appropriately. I always thought this was the case, until this thread started. Now I don't know.

There's not much else to say until GOAL decides to speak for itself. At this point, if it were my problem, I would provide full financial disclosure at the line item level for the past several years. If things are above-board, where is the harm in doing that? Doing less, however, will just leave the door open to doubt and uncertainty.

 

[JimB]

I thought the same thing. But GOAL wouldn't have to produce a whole paper. They get, like, what... two pages in it? How much would that cost?

Also, they'd be able to give people the ability to opt out and just get the email newsletter (I would) which would save even more money.

I bet eventually, it would all be electronic.

ITS why web sites have replaced a lot of print advertising. my wife

continually gets offers for rags at ridiculouos prices, $5 bucks for

12 issues, same for the local paper.

 

[jaypap]

The only thing I know is when you join GOAL it says $7.32 of the membership goes to The Outdoor Message.

They tell you that $7.32 is for the subscription to The Outdoor Message. I new when I joined because it is explained on the membership application.

I enjoy the paper, I read it look for sales at gun stores, and club functions.

Also the Legislative page which explains what is going on as far as laws trying to be passed is helpful.

A public thanks to Goal I have no regrets being a member $7.32 for twelve issues to a pro gun newspaper is a deal for me.

 

[Bob P]

I hear you. Most nearly all of us here are struggling without access to the inside knowledge.

But you raised a good point. Apart from the membership list (which we are told is kept safely, even if at the non-GOAL controlled Outdoor Message entity), there is a mailing list of non-GOAL members and advertisers. That list has value, and presumably has been cultivated over time by TOM. If GOAL has no rights to that list, then having TOM out there as a separate entity came with at least one additional significant cost: without TOM, GOAL would be unable to reach these subscribers. That gives TOM a monopoly, if true, and monopolies have a habit of demanded very high prices for their goods. Who knows? Without the inside information we are left with little more than speculation.

To be absolutely clear, we don't know much at all. It may be that all is well and ethical at GOAL. Without disclosure and transparency, however, there is no way to be sure.

Anyway, I can't see what else there is to say. GOAL can either explain itself or not. All I want, and all I believe most of us want, is clarity. We want to know that things are being run honestly and effectively, and that member donations and other funds are used properly. When we contribute, as I have in the past, we want to be certain that our money is used appropriately. I always thought this was the case, until this thread started. Now I don't know.

There's not much else to say until GOAL decides to speak for itself. At this point, if it were my problem, I would provide full financial disclosure at the line item level for the past several years. If things are above-board, where is the harm in doing that? Doing less, however, will just leave the door open to doubt and uncertainty.

Absolutely. One of the things I found greatly disturbing when I started digging into this was that I was unable to come up with a financial report released to members subsequent to 2008. Neither the 2009 nor the 2010 annual reports had financial report out.

 

[CLMN]

The only thing I know is when you join GOAL it says $7.32 of the membership goes to The Outdoor Message.

They tell you that $7.32 is for the subscription to The Outdoor Message. I knew when I joined because it is explained on the membership application.

I enjoy the paper, I read it look for sales at gun stores, and club functions.

Also the Legislative page which explains what is going on as far as laws trying to be passed is helpful.

A public thanks to Goal I have no regrets being a member $7.32 for twelve issues to a pro gun newspaper is a deal for me.

This!!!

And if at the end of the day a few pennies from that last 32¢ happen to end up in Mike Yacino's pocket as (God Almighty help us!) profit from the newspaper and for 30-something years of service to Massachusetts gun owners including me, I say Hooray and thank you Mike for your fine service!

CLMN

 

[Martlet]

This!!!

And if at the end of the day a few pennies from that last 32¢ happen to end up in Mike Yacino's pocket as (God Almighty help us!) profit from the newspaper and for 30-something years of service to Massachusetts gun owners including me, I say Hooray and thank you Mike for your fine service!

CLMN

Then why hide it? Is that the only money he gets from the organization? Who else is profiting for their "years of service"? Is that the best use of our dues?

Who knows. Maybe there is absolutely nothing to get excited about. We can't decide as long as they've got the blinds closed.

 

[economist]

This!!!

And if at the end of the day a few pennies from that last 32¢ happen to end up in Mike Yacino's pocket as (God Almighty help us!) profit from the newspaper and for 30-something years of service to Massachusetts gun owners including me, I say Hooray and thank you Mike for your fine service!

CLMN

Then why hide it?

+1.

If some of you want to use GOAL funds to provide income to a guy you like, just disclose how much he gets and how he gets it. Then the rest of us can decide if we want to support that.

 

[Bob P]

This!!!

And if at the end of the day a few pennies from that last 32¢ happen to end up in Mike Yacino's pocket as (God Almighty help us!) profit from the newspaper and for 30-something years of service to Massachusetts gun owners including me, I say Hooray and thank you Mike for your fine service!

CLMN

Cool. So you want us to pay Mike but you use Derek's site for free. Double Standard?

 

[CLMN]

Cool. So you want us to pay Mike but you use Derek's site for free. Double Standard?

Oh Lordy Lordy Bob! Is that your real beef??? Apples and oranges Bob... think apples and oranges.

PLEASE go out and start your own pro-gun group and do all the things you want to do with it. Please???

If it ever proves to be as effective as GOAL has been over my lifetime in keeping my rights alive in this crazy moonbat state, maybe I will even join your new group. How's that?

I'll even promise not to bitch about the billboards. Okay?

CLMN

 

[Palladin]

This!!!

And if at the end of the day a few pennies from that last 32¢ happen to end up in Mike Yacino's pocket as (God Almighty help us!) profit from the newspaper and for 30-something years of service to Massachusetts gun owners including me, I say Hooray and thank you Mike for your fine service!

CLMN

If that's the case, then I didn't know I was providing a pension!!!

 

[CLMN]

If that's the case, then I didn't know I was providing a pension!!!

Oh dear God!!! Is there no end to the crap, accusations and lies that you folks are willing to throw at GOAL???

If you really hate that organization so much, Please, please, PLEASE go out and form your own group.

Show us all how you folks can do it so much better with no one ever spending or making a dime on anything!

CLMN

 

[Martlet]

Oh dear God!!! Is there no end to the crap, accusations and lies that you folks are willing to throw at GOAL???

If you really hate that organization so much, Please, please, PLEASE go out and form your own group.

Show us all how you folks can do it so much better with no one ever spending or making a dime on anything!

CLMN

Why? He's a member. You don't think he should have a voice in this group? Is it just for the "in" crowd, and he can stay as long as he shuts up and gives them money?

 

[CLMN]

Bob's got a valid point. You look like an idiot for claiming that people who've never seen the use of TOM ought to shut up and continue contributing to the pension / retirement fund via a 501(c)3- (or whatever the organization is at this point)- for an individual who was at the helm back when a substantial number of us had only recently been born / were still in school.

Especially when you're not even willing to support the forum you're making those claims on. I guess it's the MA way, though. Scam a dollar here, scam a dollar there, while claiming because you're fighting the good fight for your particular interest group that you're not accountable the way your enemies ought to be.

Oh oops! Ha Ha! That $1 we were going to get from every new license was just in a draft! You know... a draft we wrote when we were drunk and pretending to be on the other team! Like as a joke and stuff! Ha ha!

No real surprise there.

Forgive me. I'd reply but I can't even tell what your post means.

CLMN

 

[CLMN]

Why? He's a member. You don't think he should have a voice in this group? Is it just for the "in" crowd, and he can stay as long as he shuts up and gives them money?

I'm just suggesting that Bob would be a lot happier if he kept his $30 and used it to start-up a brand new group much more to his liking. Anything wrong with that?

CLMN

 

[Martlet]

I'm just suggesting that Bob would be a lot happier if he kept his $30 and used it to start-up a brand new group much more to his liking. Anything wrong with that?

CLMN

I think you're wrong. I think Bob would be a lot happier if he continued his membership with GOAL, and worked to remove the perceived retirement fund aspect of it. Anything wrong with that?

 

[CLMN]

I think you're wrong. I think Bob would be a lot happier if he continued his membership with GOAL, and worked to remove the perceived retirement fund aspect of it. Anything wrong with that?

Just between the two of us, I think Bob has a lot more problems with GOAL then he is letting on.

CLMN

 

[Martlet]

Just between the two of us, I think Bob has a lot more problems with GOAL then he is letting on.

CLMN

Perhaps. I can't comment on what I don't know.

 

[economist]

I'm just suggesting that Bob would be a lot happier if he kept his $30 and used it to start-up a brand new group much more to his liking. Anything wrong with that?

CLMN

Just so I understand: Are you saying that GOAL is providing money to an insider, but that we shouldn't ask how much money or how he gets it. And, if we have a problem with this, we should just take our dues money and walk?

 

[BBQ.Uncle]

Just so I understand: Are you saying that GOAL is providing money to an insider, but that we shouldn't ask how much money or how he gets it. And, if we have a problem with this, we should just take our dues money and walk?

BINGO. And if that's the case, I'll take my dues money and run.

 

[CRSIII]

I'll tell you what; if we're being flim flamed by GOAL, things are worse than they look.

 

[KMS]

This is getting very interesting

 

[MagGus1820]

I'll tell you what; if we're being flim flamed by GOAL, things are worse than they look.

Sad times in MA for sure. I have reservations about renewing my membership until some light is shed on this matter.

 

[Coyote33]

Yeah, but on the up side, if there truly is a problem, and it gets rectified, that will actually improve the lot of gun owners in MA, right? Come ON, people, keep positive.

 

[yanici]

Yeah, but on the up side, if there truly is a problem, and it gets rectified, that will actually improve the lot of gun owners in MA, right? Come ON, people, keep positive.

Couldn't agree more. It may be that GOAL is so busy and shorthanded that they haven't really sat back and looked at some ways to be more dollar efficient. Sometimes the routine needs a change.

 

[CLMN]

Just so I understand: Are you saying that GOAL is providing money to an insider, but that we shouldn't ask how much money or how he gets it. And, if we have a problem with this, we should just take our dues money and walk?

BINGO. And if that's the case, I'll take my dues money and run.

You guys really like to put words in other people's mouths and twist things all around backwards, now don't you? Very creative. Very cute.

One more time. Pay attention. Last time. My point is very simple:

I honestly don't think that Bob is ever going to be truly happy with GOAL regardless of what the GOAL BOD may or may not be willing to do for him. His methods, priorities and approach seem to be very different from GOAL's and that's really too bad. But it is what it is and the entire membership of GOAL should not have to change its ways just to suit Bob and his admirers here.

Rather than attack GOAL and try to bring it to its knees with all this crazy nitpicking bullstuff, I'm just suggesting that Bob consider starting up his own pro-gun group. All you belligerent and dissatisfied folks here could join that group and everyone would be happy. You could all go out and admire your billboards and assure each other beyond any shadow of a doubt than no one ever made a dime on them.

I may sound a little snotty and disgusted here so please forgive me for that. But my suggestion is a serious one. No joke. Why not start a new group? Who says there can only be one? Bob seems to have enough support for a new group with new tactics and 100% open & transparent finances... everything published and out in the open right down to the very last cent!

If Bob's new group is successful, I may even join myself... if you guys will have me, of course.

CLMN

 

[yanici]

CLMN, I wouldn't call it nitpicking. Some valid issues were raised. We'll see how this all works itself out.