Lifetime Subscriptions

[James Mayfield]

This may seem odd from a free member but, how about a set amount for lifetime memberships?

This is economically feasible when you realize that alot of players who buy a premium will buy for a year or two most before the polish wears off. Some of us will keep playing long after but many bore with a game after unlimited access. Ye might also entice free players to join with gold perks for a lifetime price. It's daunting to realize that (although it is only $20) it is a yearly option. Keep the year option for 20 and add a lifetime option.

My two cents,

James Mayfield

[blakebowling]

I like it, I would probably buy it, although I have a feeling that this one won't happen, at least not anytime soon.

[BaldAdonis]

Someone suggested this before. There was a lot of discussion about the advantages of an immediate gain in capital versus the obligation to maintain the level of quality into the future, when the expected revenue sources are lower because of having permanent membership. Not sure what happened to it.

I think the economic trend away from lifetime subscriptions will only continue as long as you're alive. National Geographic used to offer a lifetime subscription (in the 50s) which would amount to about 2 years price now. Considering how quickly the average life expectancy is growing, allowing someone to use a service for their entire life with just a one time fee doesn't seem like it would pay off, unless a large majority of users decided to quit after buying it.

[cicero]

This suggestion duplicates the one made in the LIFE TIME MEMBERSHIP thread as BaldAdonis points out. Please continue discussion in that thread.

This duplicate locked.

Cicero