[SiteWolf]

this will be an ongoing issue....only the mega sites can afford to remain free and even they aren't sure they should...

The reason they can even consider it is strictly based on being able to get enough of a return from advertising...which they can only do with huge amounts of traffic. You may or may not remember that a number of years ago (more than 5 but I believe during JS time) CBS and another mega site or two announce they were going to a pay to play model......only to bail on that idea within weeks when sites like Yahoo and ESPN saw a huge increase in traffic from those refusing to pay.

that is, unless and until someone can find a way to provide solid fantasy games with a model that doesn't necessarily cost users a lotta money........ ...who may have been playing with that idea for the last, oh, decade....

Herein lies the rub. It costs money to get all those stats and run a site like that....STATS LLC doesn't barter and (as we know here all too well) there's only so far a site can go if there's no money to pay a staff.

So, if the money doesn't come directly from users by way of memberships, subscriptions, etc, then it still has to come in indirectly.

Raising the questions....what are members really willing to do for the services they're looking for? Would the combination model I've been wanting here work on that type of scale? That model being to utilize a combination of direct fees, sponsorships, advertising, and indirect fees (meaning some will pay their way, some will earn their way, some will do some of both, and eventually traffic will earn the rest).

None of which directly helps you guys right now, but I dropped my two cents anyway.

Now, if pool play is really the only issue with Yahoo right now? Perhaps that is a niche JS could consider filling.