I don't know with regards to the last two posts. During the course of this thread I feel like I have gotten to know everyone a wee bit better.

In my book, that's not too shabby. 😮

KingOfSnake wrote:

 If you want an alternative perspective ask many who know the ins and outs of what is gonig no here, Steve James - the founder of Beoworld - has an interesting tale.

 

I believe that I am unique on the forum in that I have been on both sides of this discussion and I'm still an active member.

I was for some time one of the Beoworld Technical Advisers and had the same moderating priviledges as any of the other moderators.

I can assure everybody that there are definitely no agendas, hidden or otherwise, other than to ensure that ALL the members enjoy their participation in the forum.

No pressure is ever bought to bear on any moderator to vote in any way whatsoever. There exists a democracy, but in my time as a moderator, Lee never decided to do other than the majority view.

I don't recall any posts being deleted other than for links that were blatant advertising or the odd profanity and the OP was always emailed with an explanatary note.

One member was banned and his posts removed from the forum. All trace of him was removed from the site. He was a problem, my guess is that he continues to be a problem to this day!

Iconic-AV wrote:

This is the last I will add on this thread as it also saddens me to see the same thing been brought up time and time again and for the record has personally really upset me to have added my voice to this now boring issue, I only ever mentioned something similar when I first opened our website mainly out of sheer excitement that I wanted to share and have since been nothing but light hearted and friendly on BeoWorld to keep with the fundamentals.

I don’t think anyone could have done a better job transforming this site and am as most of its members eternally grateful for its invaluable existence and tireless efforts.

To stop the issue been brought up again and again which I’m sure everyone would be in agreement with, would be to simply have an anonymous vote/poll so no-one feels swayed in anyway, surely this is giving everyone the same respect.

Adding the simply but clear words ‘owned by’ to the advertising banner would be completely clear and above board in my opinion.

As it stands, no matter how you look at the rules the ‘1 reseller rule’ is only clear if you already know, and that is just wrong.

Yes, in the dealer section somewhere on the site acknowledging the existence of trustworthy competitors, not pushed in peoples’ faces would be respectful and helpful to all BeoWorld members but I respect this is your choice of course.

There are people like myself that are willing to also financially support this site without being on every page or swaying any of its opinions, all clear and above board.

I sincerely hope I haven’t caused any hard feeling, they are just my opinions and I thank-you for letting me express them.

No matter what, I will continue to support this site as a founder member as I dearly love BeoWorld and would never wish to harm it.

Just for the record Jason,

                                        your post on this issue I find very well balanced and valid to a certain extent. I have known you through this site for a fair few years and have nothing but total respect for both you as an individual, and your opinions. You note I mentioned the validity of your post "to a certain extent". By this I mean that you started as a serious trader well after Lee took control of Beoworld (please correct me if I am wrong) and feel it is a little harsh to criticise that he is the only pre-owned trader allowed to advertise. At the end of the day it was HE who took a huge financial gamble to bankroll the buy out so I feel it only fair that he should reap the benefit. I have read points raised about other dealers (similar to Lee's position) not being allowed to do this but the truth is that Lee was - and still is - the best man for the job and I shudder to think exactly how "independant" Beoworld would be in the hands of  any one of these traders.

No offence taken from your post and likewise none is intended to you.

Chris.

Well i've kept my distance, allowed discussion to flow, let people air grievances, let people reply to those grievances - and now i feel it's time to answer some questions directly, exactly as requested.

Firstly, let's finally wrap up the 'OP debate'. This persons post alerts all now bounce back to me as this person has successfully done a fabulously successful 'hit and run' and closed his email account. Ah well - as you say, i'ts raised questions that have obviously been bothering some people - so in all the bad, we have some good!  Let's call it 'Troll 1 - BeoWorld 1' and move on with a smile and a deep breath.

Firstly, let's look at the question of B&O putting pressure on me to remove the image..

I can categorically state that Bang & Olufsen did not ask/order me to remove the image, nor did they put any pressure on me to do so.  I received a phone call simply asking me to look at the image, then discuss it with the OP as to wether he/she would be offended if it was removed as it could spoil the launch of a product that's promised to be the saviour of many a B&O dealership. God knows, many are on the ropes and truly need this launch to work - as do B&O as a company.  At no point was there any mention of being sued over copyright issues, and nor did i expect there to be - we get on well enough with B&O now to be able to talk things through rather than have their legal team coming down on us.  That said, with a companies near future depending on it - i wouldn't hold it against them if they did.

So, i made the decision to delete the image until i could dig out the details of the poster and contact him/her to ask if he/she would be greatly offended if it was removed in the best interests of B&O as a company.  We have done this before, with some being left alone or reinstated and some being removed. Every case has it's own merits and demerits, but at the end of the day i saw the user had some 'made-up' personal details and therefore no communcation could be made.  So, it remained deleted.  My decision, made instantly and in my mind certainly in the best interests of a company i support whole-heartedly and also that of BeoWorld.

That said, i am sure that if BeoWorld decided to reinstate the image after discussions with both B&O, the moderating team and of course the OP - Bang & Olufsen would have accepted it, and although they wouldn't have been too happy - they would have bitten their tongue. They have done on other occasions, so please don't think they are a giant looking down at us ready to step on us - they are very realistic and accept the internet isn't watertight. The most recent being the BeoCom 5 image, which they actually slapped their foreheads over for being so slack as to put it in the background of a different product. We also posted sketches/diagrams of it. Oh, remember the Serenata 'type approval' drawing? There are plenty of others, and then some they have just shrugged their shoulders at.

Now for the latest burning topic..

On to BeoWorld being 'Independent'.  What are we independent of, and what does that mean exactly?  Well, from the standpoint 'are we independent of Bang & Olufsen' - then yes, we are of course. So much so we were asked to withdraw a mailshot where we wrote B&O were 'official sponsors' of BeoWorld.  I can tell you now that B&O do not want any more involvement than they have already, and this was made abundantly clear to me during that communique.  B&O see the independence from B&O as absolutely necessary, as do we all here.  They do not want to take us over, or to change things - but simply want to work together rather than against us.  This involves give and take on both sides, and as many of you have pointed out you are all enjoying the benefits of a civil relationship with B&O.  As one member points out, Steve James - the former owner of BeoWorld has some stories to tell... Yes, he does - and so do i, but i've always done the honourable thing and backed out of these debates.  B&O dropped this site like a hot brick for a reason, that's my final comment on that - so let's move on to another viewpoint.

Another facet of the 'Independent' question is of course sponsorship.  Now, this is a real political one as i'm very much damned if i do and damned if i don't.  As Peter has mentioned, this site was in a real financial mess when i stepped in and paid what was really a huge amount for a site that had no accounts, missing funds, a server which was permanently crashing (as it was overloaded at certain times due to other sites hosted on it) and an acrimonious relationship with the site whose products it supported.  I came in, having already been a sponsor of the site, and could have simply carried on as it was  - simply increasing the exposure my company had on the site.  However, i decided to take a loan out against my house and develop the site into what it is today with the help of Firebrand, Peter and the mod team. I had a clear vision of where i wanted it to go, and have always wanted the very best for this place. Does anyone remember that i was actually a BeoWorld moderator on the old site when i was simply a B&O fan with no 'agenda' at all ?

At the time i gave Steve James a five figure sum, which was happily accepted, i thought BeoWorld would have a flood of new members and the loans i had taken out would be paid off in record time. I was convinced we'd be giving BeoVision 7's away within the first year and having a ball.  I gave a BeoSound 4, BeoSound 1 and a number of very high value prizes away to start with - admittedly against the advice of a lot of people on here, and thought i'd be fine.  However, to say my projections fell flat on their face would be to give a fair assessment.

I rapidly found myself looking at taking on board advertising from elsewhere, whilst also being acutely aware of the current members enjoyment of BeoWorld being relatively 'advert-free'.  Once again, i was between a rock and a hard place but chose not to go for the adverts - i would keep putting money and prizes in via LifeStyle AV 'donations' and leave it as is. Of course, we had an ongoing spat for a while with morethanav, resellers of Bang & Olufsen products - who questioned the sites 'Independency', but i maintained we were independent of B&O as a company - and that was what really mattered. Financially, BeoWorld was dependent on me, the loan repayments, and the house my family live in if it all went wrong. 

So, the double-edged sword was held over me and put me in a very awkward position.  I wanted to keep the forum as uncluttered with adverts as possible (as the members strongly insisted), and yes - of course, i'd be a complete liar if i said i didn't want to solely advertise my company on my website at the end of the day.  To my surprise, Morethanav actually came good on his threats and started to build 'Beoplanet' - a site that he promised everyone could advertise on (i'd have been intrigued at my response to a request!), but he then decided it was going to be far more time consuming than he had anticipated. Fair play to the chap, he dropped it and has gone about his business with no hindrance to BeoWorld at all - and he has earnt my respect on that count.

So, here we are now - with a fair question that 'why can't everyone advertise'?  Well, i'm open to any suggestion - but if i open the floodgates for one, i will open the floodgates for all - i cannot and will not make exceptions to that rule.  BeoWorld has a huge readership now, and has caught the eye of some 'big boys' in the online advertising world.  I have been approached by mobile phone companies, party-gaming sites (yes, that's online poker etc), and computing companies to name a few. We rank very well in Google when a luxury brand name is searched - which is something they are currently looking for. The 'man in the street' is tightening his purse strings - so the natural target is the person not as effected by a recession - users and buyers of luxury goods.

I could, within a couple of months, have pop-ups, flashing '888.com - win big at roulette and poker' type adverts, the carphone warehouse bouncing their latest mobile phone around in a box all over your screen, computer store banners zipping the latest HP notebook down the side - you name it.  I could make a fat load of cash out of this site by throwing open the advertising doors.  If that's what we all want, then hey - i'm up for it. I could spend half of it on the 'Google adwords campaign to end all campaigns' for LifeStyle AV, and spend the other half on sports cars and nice holidays for myself and my family.

I'm happy to have a poll, and i'd be happy to make the extra money - but be assured, the site would never be the same. I'm almost certain Peter would walk, i would take a back seat and happily count my cash and the other moderators would eventually lose interest..  On the plus side, we could all see that there was more than one reseller of used B&O, assuming we've never heard of Google. Happy days.

As for Beocentral, and the 'closed shop' incinuation - that's pretty amusing.  Tim and Nick Jarman are actually real people with minds of their own and would have no hesitation in telling me to get lost if i upset them.  I rarely speak to them if i'm honest, but on the occasion i do they are polite and helpful.  I like to think they see BeoWorld as an 'equal but totally different', but we all know their reviews are much better! I do know morethanav advertised on there, but stopped suddenly - that's all i know.  I have not spoken to Beocentral about it as it's frankly none of my business.  If Nick and Tim have put free links to 'the other two' on there, then hey - thank you guys, but i never asked.

If anyone would like anything made clear in the forum rules, lets talk about it. As ever, many issues are as clear as mud and open to a huge number if interpretations - but if we can work to a definitive set of rules, then great. Nobody will read them first though i'm sure, then when the rule is contravened it will be requested it's re-written.  Still, progress and all that.

You are the members, and without you the site would be a lifeless place.  I can see too from the sentiments on here that the moderating team is appreciated, and that i do find heartwarming.  Those guys do a heck of a lot to keep this site flowing, and where we are now is largely down to their input and the input of a core of incredibly helpful and positive members who are always ready to help.  Hats off to you all.

I do try my best to keep this site fun, entertaining and a place where people can air their views.  I don't try and rule with an iron fist, and with the guidance and support of the moderating team i think we do a great job of letting free speech happen.  Personally, i am trying to build a relationship with Bang & Olufsen where a BeoWorld member is spoken to with respect not disgust when visiting his or her local dealer, where the company values our input and (one day) may even acknowledge they have acted on it, and to give something back to the members in the form of some great prizes that they may not necessarily been able to budget for or be able to buy on the open market. I also support Bang & Olufsen, and the last thing i would ever want to see is the company fail.  I've been to Quistrup, where it all started,  and i don't want to see the place where it all ended - ever.. and i'm sure none of you guys do either.

I've taken a long time to write this, and i'm going to sign off until tomorrow - it's been a long day. Thank you for listening.

Kind Regards

Lee

Well, in that case to be ready for the future, I suppose there should somewhere be a list of topics that are not allowed to be discussed. So that newbies would know as well.

I still fail to see where the trouble in this thread is. To me, it seemed like discussion on the underlying principles and facts behind the way Beoworld operates (and a pretty civilized discussion compared to most forums on the net). Can you explain to me how the OP "wins" if we discuss these things? If there is some lossage in this thread, I believe it has been completely self constructed...

To make it clear, I personally have absolutely no problem with any of these things, like how the moderating team works, or how the advertisers are selected. I also appreciate the hard work done behind the scenes, as well as Lee making all this possible in the beginning, and those who pay to keep it continuously possible. But I would also like to stress that without the ordinary members that post on the forums and create all the live content, Beoworld would be just another Internet collection of static documents concentrating on a narrow subject, instead of this wonderful forum that I love, and a powerful advertising platform for a few select companies. And that's fine with me - I just wish it could be openly discussed and even challenged from time to time if need be. Won't the members deserve that?

Edit: I started writing this before Lee posted his long comment above - which seems to contain all the answers 🙂

The site is owned by Lee and he has the right to do with it what he wants. I think the positives far out weigh the negatives, nothing in life is ever perfect. I'm sure that everyone can agree that Lee is a good and generous person and that goes for Peter too!!

I do think that the photo should have been left on the site, we have had peeks of other products before they have been offically launched. I don't think it was right of B&O to point out to Lee that the photo was on the site, it should have nothing to do with them. At the end of the day I feel Beoworld does a whole lot more for the B&O brand then B&O does for Beoworld and they should remember that. I think a sneak peek would have caused a lot of excitement.

Having said that, its not the end of the world. Lee and the moderators are only human and have the uneviable task of making these decisions and sometimes we might not agree but thats what being part of a community is all about. Different people with different opinions!

Sheesh, Lee, that was an even longer post than I'd be able to write. And I like to write :)

Excellent post, that one. That post ought to address most of the concerns (again, real or imagined) posted here.

This tidbit had me laughing out loud, though:

9 LEE wrote:

. The most recent being the BeoCom 5 image, which they actually slapped their foreheads over for being so slack as to put it in the background of a different product

😁

I think that the major problem (unfortunately a good one) is that the site now has such a large number of people viewing it that it inevitably requires a commercial slant to it.  Hosting isn't free, this sis the same of any site.  In this instance, one main form of revenue is advertising and to be honest, given the amount of work and effort (and money) Lee has put into it, he's welcome to advertise lifestyle as much as he feels is necessary unless anyone is willing to stump up the cash.  Certainly, as has been said, B&O themselves are hesitant to be seen to sponsor a separate fan-site. Similarly, given the number of posts Peter has (7611 currently) I think that the pretty much unrivaled dedication to the site he's given should rightfully give him a larger say than many of us as to how the place is run.

Much as I don't really post too often, I do visit the forum every few days and have done for about 5-6 years, dating back to the "old-old" site. In that time, I can't really fault the management and to be honest, I don't think it's any more commercial than it used to be.  Yes there are people that are secret dealers and promoting an agenda but yes there are others with criticisms and we do get proper debates going, that's what it's all about.  If all we got was a string of praise then we wouldn't keep visiting, same if it was just complaints, and surely this current debate (6 pages) is enough to show that opinions are welcomed by the community and the management, whether agreed with or otherwise.

Overall, I get the impression that the moderating seems to be legitimate and reasonable. I'm really glad that we don't see swearing or adverts everywhere yet we still get debate - that's actually really saying such a lot for a website these days - and I welcome it immensely.  At the end of the day, unless someone wants to stump up a bucket of money and time to running something better (offers?) then we should really just respect the work that's done and say thanks for the collective effort.

Thanks again Lee for all you're doing for the site, and even if I have voiced certain differences, I fully appreciate your efforts.

Well targeted advertising can be valuable information for the reader.

It could tell me where to find cheap B&O stuff, cables, non B&O devices that are Beo4 compatible, IR converters, software, Beoliving installers, etc... which is the information I am likely to be looking for when I am coming to this site anyway.

Advertising does not have to be intrusive. The top banner could be a rotating banner, changing every time you load a page (you are lucky that this is a site where you are likely to stay and read several pages). It can be location dependent and an australian reseller advert could appear only to australian readers - making it more relevant.

A larger number of sponsors/advertiser is also making Beoworld less (financially) dependant on any of them. 

I would welcome more B&O related advertisers, and would have no problem with other type of advertisement for products for which we would be perceived as relevant target (hotels, travel, electronic products, lifestyle magazines...), as long as they are not more intrusive that the current banners.

The 'sponsors' of Beoword are: LifestyleAV, Struer Design, Sounds Heavenly and STB Brackets. Obviously we know that Lifestyle AV is owned/run by Lee Marriott, Struer Design is owned by John Marriott, and Sounds Heavenly is owned by Steve Marriott.

It looks less likely that 'only 1 business per genre can advertise', but more like that you need to be a member of the Marriott family to be allowed into the party. I also understand that whilst STB are not part of the Marriott family they are very close friends of Lee and not simply business partners.

How common is this knowledge on Beoword?