Rapidshare's bogus free download

[LuckyJohn_2000]

Is anyone else fed up with Rapidshare? Their whiney "Please stop flooding our download servers" sounds bogus to me -- I think they're counting on user frustration to increase their paid subscribers.

I do appreciate all the good stuff posted in the forums, but lately I'm reluctant to start downloading any multi-part files housed on Rapidshare.

John

 

[Top_to_Bottom]

My rapids ran out, but I had a really fast free download from them. (Over 550KB).

 

[ERICOOL85]

i hate free rapidshare too
it sucks biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig time

 

[joeb86]

used to use rapidshare but the changes annoyed me, i use hotfile now, speeds arnt as great but fewer deleted files.

 

[jeansGuyOZ]

What's their issue? It's their right who to charge, how much to charge and for what, but if they offer a free service they shouldn't complain at people using it.

 

[Stoic]

used to use rapidshare but the changes annoyed me, i use hotfile now, speeds arnt as great but fewer deleted files.

Hotfile is deleting files very fast now too.

Anywayz about RS, I don't think they'll last very long. If no one buys Rapids from them, they wont be able to maintain the speed of their servers.

 

[jeansGuyOZ]

I don't know how these file share sites work their business, but if I were running one i would do it this way:
Have NO free downloads, but have a base rate that's really low. Limit the maximum download speed, enough so that lots of them will find it frustratingly slow.

Then have higher levels of membership, with higher maximum download speeds and a guarantee that downloads for higher level members take precedence over lower level, and stick to that promise, to make sure that those who choose to pay more are satisfied that they get a higher level of service.

No need to stop there, you could have as many tiers of membership as you like, if the market is there.

 

[XMan101]

I don't know how these file share sites work their business, but if I were running one i would do it this way:
Have NO free downloads, but have a base rate that's really low. Limit the maximum download speed, enough so that lots of them will find it frustratingly slow.

Then have higher levels of membership, with higher maximum download speeds and a guarantee that downloads for higher level members take precedence over lower level, and stick to that promise, to make sure that those who choose to pay more are satisfied that they get a higher level of service.

No need to stop there, you could have as many tiers of membership as you like, if the market is there.

I couldn't see your business lasting or getting very big.

The idea of a file sharing site is to transfer items that are too big for most e-mail accounts. Not everyone is a big downloader and some only occasionally use it to download stuff like family photos from relatives etc. They ain't going to pay for such occasional downloads so nobody would buy an account if the people they're aiming at are not likely to be able to get the files.

A free download has always got to be an option. If you didn't have one there will always be another who will offer it - and that's you busted

 

[Stoic]

I don't know how these file share sites work their business, but if I were running one i would do it this way:
Have NO free downloads, but have a base rate that's really low. Limit the maximum download speed, enough so that lots of them will find it frustratingly slow.

Ermm.. Isn't that one called F!lesm0nstr :?