Forgive me for being unware but do we have any data on the amount of people joining for 1-2 months finishing a project and leaving?
Take a look at this extensive analysis that @Brandon_Green posted.
Thank you, I wonder if we made the minimum # of months of membership to 3 if it would increase or decrease revenue.
Likely to also have an inverse affect of people wanting to sign up but cannot afford or do not want to afford 3 months of membership for only a 1 month project. At $180, its close enough they could probably just afford whatever tools theyâre missing or pay the labor to have someone else do it. As opposed to just $60
I canât imagine that having a positive trend. I wouldnât have joined if I had to pay $150 up front.
Perhaps if thereâs a money back guarantee associated with it but even still I donât know how many people have that kind of liquidity, arguments aside as to whether they should or not.
Would it have made a difference if signups were billed monthly, but a minimum 3 month contract would be required? This would also have the add-on effect of giving people a little longer time to plan out getting into classes.
I probably would still have joined if DMS had levied a one-time, non-refundable $1,500 âJoiners Feeâ in addition to ongoing $60 monthly dues.
Thatâs a bit more palatable but youâre still asking people to commit $180 to something they have 30 minutes of experience with. Maybe Iâm just overly financially conservative but I donât see the public at large being ready to jump at that.
Monthly membership is $60, no contracts
Three months membership is $50, paid up front, no refunds if you cancel early
Annual memberships are either $45 OR come with a perk like a premium storage area only annual members can get a bin in, free classes/credits on runtime, swag bag, etc.
Spending time trying to find the most optimal member cost rates or convoluted number of different rate packages sounds like its chasing the wrong end of a member retention issue. A member that is quitting after a finished project in 2 months wonât be inclined to stay for a difference of $10. If you really want to know exactly why a member is no longer active, there needs to be a overhaul of the deactivation process. As I understand it now, you simply just remove your billing information so the system canât auto bill you, correct? Theres no exit interview or cancellation process that provides feedback (other than someone making an angry post on Talk about it). I have no expertise in any membership systems but something as simple as a check box questionnaire that must have one option selected before you are granted access to the final cancellation step would give DMS a lot more info to go off of on how to improve membership
There are âexit reasonsâ elicited and received when members quit. None of them point to any specific cause that DMS can action (e.g., Iâm moving, I lost my job/can no longer afford it, traveling, etc.)
Kurt, I think that is a great idea and at the same time question if we should believe the answers. Hereâs why: The DMS membership has a high proportion of intelligent, compassionate, talented introverts who for the most part are not looking to make waves. (And yes, there quite a few that are the polar opposite.) But my guess is that introvert tendency is at least 50%. If we want an exit survey that is meaningful, again Iâm guessing here, it probably needs to be really well designed so you can determine:
- Did you find the Space friendly? If yes, what was a highlight? If no, what suggestion would you make to improve things?
- Did you find a group or activity of kindred souls you could be with?
- Did you get to know people by name?
- Did others learn your name and use it in conversation?
- Did you have trouble finding the tools or materials that are supposedly at the Space to use if only you knew where?
- Did you use the calendar to find classes that might be of interest?
- Could you find information you wanted on the Wiki?
- Did you check out the Talk forum and if yes did it work for you? If not, what would have made it better?
- What are the top 2 things you wish the Space could offer that would make remaining an easier decision?
From what I hear about the exit emails, the reasons tend to be generic: moving, canât afford, donât use enough, etc. All of which are easy options for an introvert to use regardless of what might actually be driving the action. Again, donât make waves, donât burn bridges, etc. because in the future there might be a time to try joining again.
And then you have those who leave proudly proclaiming the DMS is Number 1 in sign language.
Based on the join rates since the $60 was instituted and consumer science we know that the new $60 isnât an optimum price. People are showing up, but they arenât biting at $60 a month like they used to despite more on offer and easier access to training. We can either roll back all membership or incentivize longer term commitments with a âsaleâ. Based on the data posted about training costs, 3 months is the break even point. A 3 month membership also allows us 30 days to renengage the 2 month guys with a new project to catch their fancy.
We can certainly deactivate annuals if having one more package is too convoluted. This proposal is not about member retention. Its about addressing the massive slowing of new memberships that was reported, especially if the leaving members are not different from before the hike. We have a downward slope. Exiting and churn have been constant unless Iâm totally misinterpreting this data. That means our issue isnât retention its acquisition.
However, with a $60 minimum commitment (some only $40), given that it currently costs us $100 (average) in honorariums, we lose money on all of those people.
Not saying we should be making a profit, but we shouldnât be losing money either.
IMO.
Technically, that shouldnât be $100/member â it should be $100/3 members, minimum. Plus, the $50 that goes to the committee is spread among many members, if the committee is doing their spending right.