I don't think everyone who becomes a Premium member here even needs to regularly contribute, to be honest. Just contribute when you want to, when you have something of value to contribute, or think you do. There is also value in Premium for those who just want to continue to benefit from accessing the wit and wisdom of the regular contributors, as well as new ones who will come along, and the extra features that are being added, including the monthly meetings and the CEO interviews. There's nothing wrong with being a passive member. They can learn just as much as the most prolific contributors, perhaps more. However, what seems to be lost in some of these comments, are that even the biggest contributors to this site have limited experience and knowledge compared to the ENTIRE Strawman.com community.
Some of us might be considered subject matter experts (SMEs) in a particular sector or industry or aspect of investing, or if not an expert then suitably experienced to be able to add value to a discussion, but we can all benefit from the wisdom of others, not only in our own specific areas of interest but certainly in areas in which we are less experienced. Which is all to say that I believe I get at least as much as I give here, and usually more.
The value of this site is NOT just the contributors, it is also the platform. Without the platform - i.e. the website itself - we don't have anything at all - and that's the point. The platform has cost a lot of money to build and maintain, and will continue to cost money to develop and maintain, and this evolution of the site is a necessary step to enable the site to continue. The costs have to be paid for. And at the heart of it, this is Andrew's business as well, and I personally don't think this Premium launch is going to even pay his costs incurred to date - I think it's likely to take some years before he's able to even breakeven on his investment so far.
There were always different options available to achieve that aim, however at the end of the day, as his site, this is entirely Andrew's decision, and it's one I wholeheartedly support. It won't be for everyone, but then, what is? I believe the pricepoint he's settled on has merit also - it's high enough to weed out those who don't see value in the concept - and low enough to be affordable for any serious investors who are managing their own investments and want to increase their own knowledge base and have full access to an incredible source of ideas and analysis on a wide variety of companies and funds. I did not expect this decision to be universally embraced, but some of the negative posts here are a little surprising. We've all had a good run here for the past 3 or 4 years, for nothing. I would hope that the vast majority of those who choose NOT to become Premium members are truly grateful for that opportunity that we've all had, as clearly those of us who HAVE decided to pay the relatively low cost of upgrading to premium are. In terms of money, divide the annual price by 12, and then divide that number by your average brokerage fee on your average trade. For instance, if the cost is $990/year, that's $82.50/month, which is about the brokerage on 4 trades - at $19.95 each. Hardly expensive when you think about it. As I've said previously, if you're confident that you are going to recoup the annual cost in extra money made through investing, then it's a no-brainer really, isn't it? That's how I choose to think about it anyway.