Diamond
Sort:
I've looked how much premium costs, i ws shocked it costed 125 euros a year, i mean, wouldn't chess.com get way more purchases and more money if the price was at 25/30/40 euros a year? The total revenue will go up and people won't have to pay as much for premium features, thus giving more people acces to premium. I think that's a win-win situation.
Jul 17, 2023
0
#2
Somenickname1 wrote:
I've looked how much premium costs, i ws shocked it costed 125 euros a year, i mean, wouldn't chess.com get way more purchases and more money if the price was at 25/30/40 euros a year? The total revenue will go up and people won't have to pay as much for premium features, thus giving more people acces to premium. I think that's a win-win situation.
The site had the same pricing structure for for 14 years and update a little less than a year ago.
https://www.chess.com/article/view/prices-changing
I'm sure the site has sufficient data by now to know they were getting more memberships before and if the changes caused a decrease. If they thought that lowering prices would be a net benefit, they likely would do that.
Jul 17, 2023
0
#3
TheNamelessOne666 wrote:
I used to be a paying member but gave up on that after realizing how poor their customer service is. I agree with TheNameofNames - these people have no idea how to run a business. Ten years ago Chess.com had tremendous potential. Today, it's still at that same point - it has great potential which has now been unused/undeveloped for a decade.
Site started in 2007, has continued growing in size year over year, in members, activity, games played, events held/sponsored etc. The site staffing has also been increasing.
For not knowing how to run a business they seem to be doing pretty good 🤔
Jul 17, 2023
0
#4
TheNamelessOne666 wrote:
Let's say a website has 1,000 users in Year One and has the potential to have 5,000 users in Year Five.
Would you, then, consider it a success, if in Year Five the website had 1,800 users?
I guess once could choose to see 1,200 users in Year Two, 1,400 users in Year Three, 1,600 users in Year Four, and 1,800 users in Year Five as proof of 'constant growth' and call that 'success'. To me, that is an utter, utter failure.
There have been over 55 million accounts with at least 20 games played in Rapid over the last 90 days. In January of this year the site reached over 10 million active members in a day: https://www.chess.com/blog/CHESScom/chess-is-booming-and-our-servers-are-struggling
That doesn't look anything like a failure.
Jul 17, 2023
0
#7
TheNamelessOne666 wrote:
What you need to ask yourself is how many of the 55,000,000 users are paying members. The number of these is infinitesimal. Their income is enough to pay for servers and all employees and that's it. That's why there's been no actual growth in website performance/development for years. Again, hardly a success story, especially knowing they hold the coveted chess.com domain.
You have inside information to know that? Last year the site acquired the Play Magnus Group. The site is hosting multiple events with sizable prize funds, larger than in past years. Apparently something is going right and things keep growing.
I certainly won't say that the site couldn't be doing better but it's a very far stretch to say that a company with 600+ employees and continuing growth is a failure. Heck, if that's a failure I want to fail like that 
Chess.com is doing amazing as a business, it’s been growing in huge numbers recently, and also 100 US dollars a year isn’t bad. One full day of work at minimum wage in many places will pay for a fully year of diamond membership.
Please Sign Up to comment.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.