Coming Soon!

[Becky]

ARS CHAMP System is scheduled to be released for site creation on 3/15. Until then, you can get more information here (http://www.arschamps.com).

[It's Me]

Becky, any hints as to what nich content will be available to use ? I'm hoping there will be content available for more niches than there are reality sites now

[msmaster]

That would be an important question for sure... knowing the niches will allow me to plan ahead...

[Becky]

I will try to get a comprehensive list of what is available so far. Please remember this is still in the works and things can change before launch. More info will be posted as soon as it's available :)

[Antxx]

I find the cost per scene to be very high. I would prefer if you start like 1-20= 50 , 20-50 =75 , 50-75=100, 75-100=125...something more scalable and more beginner friendly. I do love your 1000 points for current Byot owners :D . This look like an interesting program. I can't wait to update my byot sites (I will have an insane amount of work to do, i guess...).

[gypsum]

The cost for content does seem pretty damn high to me as well.
If you wanna buy clips to use it costs anywhere from $50 to $100 per clip.
I'd want to see what kind of use license that comes with before I really freak out, but this seems kind of steep.

[Saint]

ARS CHAMP System is scheduled to be released for site creation on 3/1. Until then, you can get more information here (http://www.arschamps.com).


The link requires a password..none of mine work.

[HowlingWulf]

I'm wondering what happens when/if a webmaster doesn't update once a month. Does ARS take ownership of the tour like they did with some tours in the old BYOT program?

[Marc P]

ARS CHAMP System is scheduled to be released for site creation on 3/1. Until then, you can get more information here (http://www.arschamps.com).

The link take me to a page which requires authorization (username and password).

[Antxx]

I'm wondering what happens when/if a webmaster doesn't update once a month. Does ARS take ownership of the tour like they did with some tours in the old BYOT program?

And also, if we have 1000 points to begin with (Since i have some byot already), are we obligated to spend it all for the launch of a byot ? Can we keep a certain amount for updating ? Is there a minimal amount a content required for the BYOT at first ?

I also have this question: Will you add new content providers eventually, or is this deal an exclusive one ?

[msmaster]

I think all the rules and details will get out on the 1st when it lauches...

AS for the points, the site was telling that normal webmasters gets 1500 points to start with and that byot owners will get 1000 points per byot they already own...

I sure hopw they have a minimum per site or we may get with sites that have almost nothing in the members area... :roll:

[Arg]

I'm curious about the US tax implications of the point redemption. In the past, redeaming rewards points meant the equivalent income was reported to the IRS. If ARS gives you 10000 in free "content points," and you "spend" them on CHAMPS content, would that be reported to the IRS as your having receieved $5,000 in misc income? If so, you'll owe Unc Sam $1,500-$2,000.

I don't think the CHAMPS system is aiming to be newb-friendly...it's a high cost, high risk venture for webmasters. Say you want 100 scenes per site, then that's 12500 points ($6,250) for the first site, and 20000 points ($10,000) for the next sites. ($30,000 if you want exclusive content.) Then you've got an obligation for monthly reinvestment (say two new scenes per week, $800 per month, or $9,600 a year) and maintenance. And while it hasn't been decided yet, right now there's no assurance you'd have anything to show for it if the rules change or the program closes. With a $2.50/month commission if other people promote the site, you'd need others to send hundreds of joins per month just to break even on the updates alone. I'm sure some folks will make good money with it, but it's not for everybody.

[Marc De]

Arg - content points and rewards points are 2 SEPARATE things. You get content points and there is no tax implication. You can REDEEM rewards points for content points if you like, again no tax implications as content points have no value.

[Antxx]

I don't think the CHAMPS system is aiming to be newb-friendly...it's a high cost, high risk venture for webmasters. Say you want 100 scenes per site, then that's 12500 points ($6,250) for the first site, and 20000 points ($10,000) for the next sites. ($30,000 if you want exclusive content.) Then you've got an obligation for monthly reinvestment (say two new scenes per week, $800 per month, or $9,600 a year) and maintenance. And while it hasn't been decided yet, right now there's no assurance you'd have anything to show for it if the rules change or the program closes. With a $2.50/month commission if other people promote the site, you'd need others to send hundreds of joins per month just to break even on the updates alone. I'm sure some folks will make good money with it, but it's not for everybody.

I would surely not even make one site with those kind of math. I hope they are not very well done, i was so enthousiastic about making them :cry: .And i am not exactely a newbie either. A gapping hole is still a gapping hole. It look to me it's more a road for bankruptcy as it is layout right now. The price is extremely high, and only profits the content provider. I don't see the parternship in that...at 800$ a month, might as well start your own paysites. Quite frankly, it would cost less doing a payed AVS site hosted by myself, with my own content. I don't know how you calculated this...

[magus13]

i too am concerned at the up-front cost of trying this new, improved, all-temperature program.

Webmasters will be able to "purchase" scenes. The "cost" per scene is determined by the number of scenes a webmaster already "bought". 1-50 scenes = 100 points per scene, 51-100 = 150 points per scene, 101+ = 200 points per scene.

it seems the larger the content area, the more cost per sceen. once the site is made, even the cost of updates will inflate over time. 1-50 scenes costs $50.00 per scene , then every following scene costs $75.00 until you reach 100 scenes. then you have to pay $100.00 per scene thereafter. seems kinda inverted to me.

now, every webmaster gets 1500 content points. that is only 15 scenes to try to make a member's area. (except for us BYOT owners that get an additional 10 scenes for each BYOT)

now, the idea of recurring content points will help greatly in the long run, but it seems very harsh to expect webmasters to foot the bill for building the system, maintaining the system and advertising the system.

if this type of upfront investment were required for BYOT, i know for certain many of the most successful (for webmasters AND ARS) designers would never had been able to dive in. right Tootie?

[Antxx]

You are right on the spot Magnus. It doesn't help for maintaining quality at all (As some tried to argue), but only favor the richer webmasters. Even with the extra 1000 points, i don't see the rest to be a motivating factor, quite the contrary. The quality is done by the reviewers, not by filtering with a paying system. Somehow i though that the performance of a site would have been a major factor in it's updating frequency, but since the point retribution is so fucking poor, it is clearly aimed to make you throw cash at them for those updates, and this is outrageous by any means, especially with even lower payout.

The paying $$$ for content should be taken OFF, simple as that. And put more point for rebills and signup. Give a 2-3 months period for updating, and put in place an incitive for updating once a month, like give an x amount of reward points, or extra points for content by x number of updates. Otherwise you will have a couple of rich webmasters doing your champ sites, and that's it. Webmasters like me can't even afford the actual content price (I make 500 to 700$ a month) and i will not invest money coming from other sponsors into that gapping hole...i can't imagine how a newbie will ever be able to start such a site without going bankruptcy after 3-4 months. It won't matter how good he is in designing, because the economic factor of your point system will reach him to his throath anyway. This is a bad point layout, and it needs rethinking before we jump into it.

[Marc De]

We may adjust the points given for sign ups and rebills but we've crunched initial numbers and all is good for now.

Antxx - I see you compalining a lot in regards to this ability to purchse points to get more content. You know what, that is an OPTION, meaning you do NOT have to do it. The program is not designed to have people purchase content points, but if you WANT to, then its an OPTION. Lets not blow this out of proportion as it appears to be right now! :)

[Antxx]

I will try, but i can't make any promises :lol:

But in any event, my point is that you should favor in terms of points distribution of the sales then the buying with $$$. I think the points for sales in general should be higher, and leave the $$$ to maybe, has it is (I would remove it if it was me). Your system needs to favor the sites that perform, not those who have more money to pay the content outside of their site performance.

You see, if a site is doing badly, someone can always update it with the $$$ months after months, etc...I know it's an option, but it kinds of detract the purpose of some of the things in that program, in my opinion.

You need to be more clear regarding that updating factor. It's really a major point in the program that is extremely blurry, and i would like an explanation before i decide to convert some byots, next month. I think you should put an incitive into updating, instead of a possible punitive way.

[magus13]

we have to remember that ARS has their hands full.

and change is almost always painful.

and not everything is written in stone.

and tossing out ideas sometimes DOES have an influence.

we have no idea WHAT all is entailed at headquarters. legal, fiscal, managerial, and even personal ALL have to be considered.


now as i look at CHAMP a bit more, (and hunger for yet more information) i *think* i have it figured out.

1. i want to build a champ site.
2. i must use DVD quality images by Option using points or cash to aquire them. or.... provide them (Option) with license to use my own exclusive OWNED material, which also meets the DVD quality standard.
3. I then create a killer tour.
4. I also create the 'backend' (whose minimum content requirements has yet to be described).
5. now i choose to either market it myself, (exclusive) or allow others to use it too. by being exclusive, i MUST provide the traffic in sufficient converting strength to maintain updates. (said updates have not been determined to be in ADDITION to the original 'scenes' or in PLACE of the original 'scenes' to maintain the same basic site amount) Pros and Cons for both possibilities. If open to across the board marketing, the chances of survival increase since it have my own PLUS other webmaster traffic.
6. last but not least, i have to select which payment option i desire. per-signup or recurring and all that it entails. Per-signup is immediate cash, recurring *seems* to be better for the CHAMPS model.


One of the big questions concerning webmaster owned content. Can I use NICHE content, even if it means that my CHAMP site is the only one with one-armed midgets with boners? or even slipping into the wonderful world of BDSM?

but there is so much yet to be deterimned that the decision making can not be effective. so we wait for Monday.

[JohnV]

Becky, any hints as to what nich content will be available to use ? I'm hoping there will be content available for more niches than there are reality sites now

Niche content covered should include these as well as some others that are not yet listed as niche's covered in CHAMP system are still growing.

Gay
Bi
Tranny
Teen
Hardcore
Facial / Oral
Anal
Movie
Ebony
Interracial
Lesbian
Orgy (gang bang)
Amateur
Asian
Big Tit
Mature

This is not a complete final list by any means, but should represent what were starting off with on 3/1.

[JohnV]

One of the big questions concerning webmaster owned content. Can I use NICHE content, even if it means that my CHAMP site is the only one with one-armed midgets with boners? or even slipping into the wonderful world of BDSM?



magus13, we will not be covering micro niche content like that....lmao@one-armed midgets with boners :lol:

[Arg]

Magus, I think you've got some good ideas. And if you can get enough exclusive DVD-quality one-armed midget boner videos, I am very confident ARS would welcome that or any other niche sites. Niches in themselves are not a problem, it's promising niche content and not providing enough of it on the back end that was a problem.

I read in another thread in another forum that the minimum content might be along the lines of 15 scenes, although it seems not completely decided yet. That would change my financial assumptions of 100 scenes/site considerably. On the other hand, 15 video clips, in my opinion, would make for a terribly anemic paysite. I mean say you shell out $20 or whatever, and you see:

"Clip 1 Clip 2 Clip 3 Clip 4 Clip 5
Clip 6 Clip 7 Clip 8 Clip 9 Clip 10
Clip 11 Clip 12 Clip 13 Clip 14 Clip 15

Stick around 30 days and see Clip 16!"

I mean obviously you'd bulk it up with wordy descriptions, thumbnail images, galleries of vid caps, and maybe spread it out over three pages, but 15 video clips is 15 video clips. Being able to view the other CHAMPS sites could be nice, but if you joined for that one site, and that's all that's there, recurring could be problematic.

Antxx, I think the system already vastly favors point distribution over buying content with money...money costs money, free points are free! Former BYOTs give you 1000 content points each, which is the cash equivalent of $500 in content, so you have a big head start. And if you make sales, you get more content points. If someone has a crap site, and makes no sales, their updates will have to be made out of pocket, and with zero income, such a crap site will be dropped before long. Rich people aren't going to be wasting money on content if it doesn't make a return. And if they are making a return, it's in everyone's interests that people with money be able to buy content. Retention in CHAMPS sites depends not just on your site being good, but on there being other good sites in the program. I think there are already market-based incentives to make good CHAMPS sites. There's a lot to consider with the new system. I'd keep thinking about the strategies and tradeoffs and business model...you might not find the planned policies so bad when you consider everything together.

[Antxx]

I will do a site, but will not put money into it, unless i get the money from it. I will not use my reward points, neither money from other sponsors revenue, neither money from ARS RI. Everytimes someones tells me that because of crappy design a site can not perform i remeber that i have saw a lot of horrible sites doing better than the nice one. It has everything to do with content and exposure. And i did learn something about the BYot experience: is that bringing the words to other webmasters is a very difficult thing to do.

I still think the points distributed upon the sales are pretty low, but Marc De said he will probabely change/adjust them. Regarding content price...i will have to see if the movies are worth the 50$, but in my current experience on the net, unless it's high quality wmv media, not often the movies goes above average quality. I have at least 3 byots on which i am interested to work with, on the 8 i had.

One thing i don't love is when a site start like that, is that it will start fast or slow, and both are merely a luck factor. I hope ARS will not ask for undue performance the first 2-3 months, because sometimes the words to words process can take times. Unless ARS is willing to put back the champ sites into his chains of pop ups, which i didn't see any mention of...

[jayeff]

On the other hand, 15 video clips, in my opinion, would make for a terribly anemic paysite. I mean say you shell out $20 or whatever, and you see:

"Clip 1 Clip 2 Clip 3 Clip 4 Clip 5
Clip 6 Clip 7 Clip 8 Clip 9 Clip 10
Clip 11 Clip 12 Clip 13 Clip 14 Clip 15

Stick around 30 days and see Clip 16!"


Ignoring that the CHAMP notes actually say that most movies will have 4-6 scenes, if you follow that pattern, it could get worse. By the time you want to get Clip 16 for your site, it may not be available (usage is limited to 1 exclusive / otherwise 5 times).

Anyway, are sequential clips from 1 up, the way to go? If you are basing a site on a limited number of scenes, and you can cherry-pick them, why waste the surfers' time with the warmup scenes that fill the beginning of most movies? Why not just give them the "hot" sequences? But if enough webmasters go that route, isn't there a risk that either ARSRI's or their content provider's numbers will get thrown off, or else that after a while the tame scenes will dominate the list of available clips.

I like the basic concept of CHAMP (as has been said, it's not so different from Adult Bouncer and that worked well), although I have some misgivings.

1. The haste to drop GIM/BYOT before the new programs are fleshed out, suggests that for whatever reason there is a lot of pressure on ARS to come up with something, anything, new. If that is the case, we are going to be very lucky to get a fully thought out program even by 1st March. That in turn might mean a potentially frustrating few months until everything is finally sorted. I'm hovering between being a getting in early to get the benefit of advertising something new but maybe having to be a guinea pig, or waiting until everything is sorted out and I can promise "access to hundreds of sites".

2. The list of really high retaining sites I have built up over the past 8 years - 20-30 including the likes of Karups and Scoreland - doesn't include a single one that is only video based. They all have video, but they also use a lot of still content and other material that broadens their appeal. So far I haven't seen mention of anything but video for CHAMP. I certainly hope that more will be allowed.

3. I don't know how the CHAMP sites will be made available to surfers once they have joined: a links list of some kind? Anyway the point is that once you build a system involving large numbers of sites, the system itself (rather than individual sites) becomes the main reason surfers renew their memberships for longer than at standalone pay sites.

In that respect CHAMP will be similar to an AVS system and over 6 years of AVS involvement (4 of them earning healthy six figures), I never found nor heard of a way for individual sites to positively influence the renewal ratio. There are lots of people convinced that this or that does the trick, but when they actually state their renewal ratios, they are always within a point or two of the overall system average.

Monthly updates in particular - although they sound like something that should work (and they do for standalone paysites) - achieved absolutely nothing. The vast majority of members looking for new content, do so by tracking newly added sites. If CHAMP is popular enough with webmasters, there may be new sites daily and it is much easier to track new sites than remembering to revisit specific sites just for a couple of new clips every so often.

IMO it would be far better to encourage the creation of new sites than putting resources into policing an update policy and having webmasters spend points/money doing something that is unlikely to produce any tangible benefit.

4. I'm leaning towards buying my own content, if not solely, then at least to supplement what my points can cover. Because of that, on my wishlist is a way to pre-approve certain content providers, so that you don't run the risk of commissioning a video and then having it turned down for some reason or other. I realize there are potential problems, but for site builders who do buy content, serious money is at stake. It would be a shame to discourage people who do want to buy, because they should bring greater variety to the program than is otherwise likely.

[Antxx]

1. The haste to drop GIM/BYOT before the new programs are fleshed out, suggests that for whatever reason there is a lot of pressure on ARS to come up with something, anything, new. If that is the case, we are going to be very lucky to get a fully thought out program even by 1st March. That in turn might mean a potentially frustrating few months until everything is finally sorted. I'm hovering between being a getting in early to get the benefit of advertising something new but maybe having to be a guinea pig, or waiting until everything is sorted out and I can promise "access to hundreds of sites".

2. The list of really high retaining sites I have built up over the past 8 years - 20-30 including the likes of Karups and Scoreland - doesn't include a single one that is only video based. They all have video, but they also use a lot of still content and other material that broadens their appeal. So far I haven't seen mention of anything but video for CHAMP. I certainly hope that more will be allowed.

3. I don't know how the CHAMP sites will be made available to surfers once they have joined: a links list of some kind? Anyway the point is that once you build a system involving large numbers of sites, the system itself (rather than individual sites) becomes the main reason surfers renew their memberships for longer than at standalone pay sites.

In that respect CHAMP will be similar to an AVS system and over 6 years of AVS involvement (4 of them earning healthy six figures), I never found nor heard of a way for individual sites to positively influence the renewal ratio. There are lots of people convinced that this or that does the trick, but when they actually state their renewal ratios, they are always within a point or two of the overall system average.

Monthly updates in particular - although they sound like something that should work (and they do for standalone paysites) - achieved absolutely nothing. The vast majority of members looking for new content, do so by tracking newly added sites. If CHAMP is popular enough with webmasters, there may be new sites daily and it is much easier to track new sites than remembering to revisit specific sites just for a couple of new clips every so often.

IMO it would be far better to encourage the creation of new sites than putting resources into policing an update policy and having webmasters spend points/money doing something that is unlikely to produce any tangible benefit.

4. I'm leaning towards buying my own content, if not solely, then at least to supplement what my points can cover. Because of that, on my wishlist is a way to pre-approve certain content providers, so that you don't run the risk of commissioning a video and then having it turned down for some reason or other. I realize there are potential problems, but for site builders who do buy content, serious money is at stake. It would be a shame to discourage people who do want to buy, because they should bring greater variety to the program than is otherwise likely.

1- If i remember correctelly Marc said it was a problem of cash flow. It seems the byot program was a money eater. So that why they shut it down so fast and leave themself a full month of recovery, i guess. Their is maybe more reason tho, that we don't know of...

2- Marc has talk about the screencaps, although he said he didn't know about the quality of those. Usually screencaps are extremely crappy...I agree with you that we should have some pictures content to go along the videos, but not put it in a predominant fation.

3- Excellent points your bring there. I am also not sure updating a site will be suficient to retain members. As for the popularity of champ, i wouldn't say it an automatic thing...we simply don't know how that updating thing will put it's pressure on the owners. It could be a major detractors to newbies and even previous byot owner. With the current point system, i am not optimistic for now, but hopefully it's not entirely set in stones. I am having trouble in perceiving the hole system as beeing viable in the long run. I'm feelling there are some flaws in it...

4- I agree, but...this might be an exclusive deal they have with provider. You are allowed exclusive content, but exclusive means a lot of money throw to the window. I don't think many webmasters will try this. I wouldn't do it, because it's not my site at 100%, if you know what i mean...