Moderator Control Panel ]

1939 Register

Share your thoughts with your fellow family historians – and the Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine team – here

Re: 1939 Register

Postby ksouthall » Wed Oct 28, 2015 12:00 am

AdrianB38 wrote:
philippereynolds wrote:I didn't pay extra to view the 1911 census, as my ancestry subs covered it....


Then you're not comparing like with like. We were talking about the initial release of the 1911, when Brightsolid (i.e. FMP's parent) had exclusive rights and specific costing. If you wait long enough, then I'm sure Ancestry will get the 1939 under its current subs.


Adrian is right. Ancestry did not have access to the 1911 Census until some time after it had originally released by BrightSolid who initially released it with redacted information.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: 1939 Register

Postby ksouthall » Wed Oct 28, 2015 12:15 am

Regarding the pricing, the email I received states the following:

As a valued subscriber, we will be sending an exclusive code to you soon which will entitle you to 25% off our 5 household bundle.

According to my maths, this brings the cost down to £3.75 per household.

I'm assuming that people need to have been subscribers to FMP for a certain amount of time, probably at least a year, in order to be eligible for this discount.

Regarding the comment about Guy being instrumental in getting the project off the ground, as I recall, Guy started an online petition to persuade the government to allow the data to be released. My understanding is that Guy does not have any affiliation to FindMyPast.

If this is not the case, I'm sure Guy will let me know.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: 1939 Register

Postby Guy » Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:56 am

philippereynolds wrote:I didn't pay extra to view the 1911 census, as my ancestry subs covered it.
I get the feeling you have a vested interest in all this, Guy. I've just been on the findmypast Facebook page and it seems you are copying and pasting replies between boards. The admin over there even thanks you for your help in getting the project off the ground. Can I sense a certain level of bias?


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum


So you are comparing the initial release of a resource to the subsequent release 5 years after the initial release. Ancestry did not spend millions of pounds to scan, transcribe and index the 1911 census; they dropped out of the bidding for it and left that to Findmypast who invested heavily in it as they have done for the 1939 National Registration.
What you are doing is equivalent to comparing a new car to a 5 year old car and complaining the new car costs more.

You also claim you had no warning but if you look at the terms and conditions of FMP (which of course you read before taking out a subscription you will see
“If we launch a major new collection, on rare occasions this may be charged for separately.”
In other words you were warned though I expect like others you did not bother reading the terms of the site you were signing up to

Perhaps I do have an interest in the 1939 National Registration.

It is not surprising seeing as I laid out considerably more than the £6.95 FMP are charging for a household back in 2008 when I prepared my challenge to get the 1939 National Register open to public access; but that is beside the point.

I am saddened genealogists value a resource such as this less than a couple of pints in their local pub.
I can tell you there have been times in this last twenty four hours that I have thought why did I bother at all!

I think back to how it was before internet access to records how we were pleased to be offered any crumb from the depositories and archives that held the records, how we would travel hundreds of miles to view one record because the holder refused to transcribe a few lines.
Then I compare it to today where we have access to millions of records at our fingertips and the current generation of genealogists moan when they are asked to contribute to the costs of making them available.

That is why I support companies, magazines and individuals who provide records and support for the genealogical community.

Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Guy
 
Posts: 364
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:56 pm

Re: 1939 Register

Postby AdrianB38 » Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:11 am

I also support providers and I have often struggled to see how companies can pay for the digitisation of stuff. Ironically I value FMP's electoral registers far more than the 1939 Register and they went up recently with hardly any comments from the community. OK the technical platform leaves a lot to be desired as it doesn't seem to work on Firefox but for thousands of soldiers, the Absent Voters Lists that went up at the same time are virtually priceless as they are the only way to link the person to their Army details. And yet it seems so many don't know about them.

I would have paid something for the Electoral Registers and Absent Voters Lists - but the 1939 Register? Not really - I appreciate the cost arguments but cost and value are different concepts. Its value simply isn't that much to my research.

Sent from my GT-I8190N
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2495
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: 1939 Register

Postby AntonyM » Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:47 am

I think Guy should be congratulated for the work he has done in getting this , and other, records released.

FMP have every right to charge for access, given the heavy investment they have made.

On the negative side - they have handled the publicity and launch very badly. They have been constantly trailing this for close to a year under the FMP "brand" , and at no point ( that I can remember) have they ever stated that they would be charging extra for it. At WDYTYA Live in the spring they point blank refused to answer any questions about charging or inclusion in subscriptions.....(I asked them specifically).

Many professional/experienced researchers knew all along that this charging model would be used and are not upset or surprised, but many others targeted by the advertising made incorrect assumptions and are now very disappointed.

The real difference in this record set is that needing to look at it in most circumstances is much more discretionary than was the 1911 census. Most researchers tend to be older, and if they don't remember 1939 then their parents certainly would - my mother is in her late 80s but can tell me where she was living in 1939 and who else was living with them. Then there is the redaction of those under 100, which will make it less useful for tracing more recent generations.

Personally I will probably use it in a very limited way where it is the only way I can see of solving a specific problem, but I won't be browsing through it because of curiosity about my own family.
AntonyM
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 3:12 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: 1939 Register

Postby AdrianB38 » Wed Oct 28, 2015 10:40 am

AntonyM wrote:I think Guy should be congratulated for the work he has done in getting this , and other, records released.

FMP have every right to charge for access, given the heavy investment they have made.

On the negative side - they have handled the publicity and launch very badly ...

Absolutely agree with you. FMP's communication's strategy has yet again been an utter liability to the company. I agreed totally with their refusal to give tighter dates than "by the end of the year". But they should have been trailing the launch with "The expense is such that ..."
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2495
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: 1939 Register

Postby Mick Loney » Wed Oct 28, 2015 3:01 pm

I too am disappointed. I received the aforementioned e-mail, and naturally stopped reading when I got to the CEO's signature, at what I thought was the end of the e-mail. At that point, there had been no mention of an extra payment over and above my yearly subscription. To hide the pricing structure beyond the end of the e-mail seems a bit underhand to me. It was only when I saw this discussion that I realised I was going to have to pay more, thanks but no thanks FMP.

For the little I'd get out of it, it ain't worth the money you are asking!


Sent from my iPad using WDYTYA Forum
Mick Loney
 
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:39 am

Re: 1939 Register

Postby ksouthall » Wed Oct 28, 2015 5:21 pm

I will probably pay for the discounted 5 household bundle. However I will be very choosy about which branches of my family I look for first.

The alternative to FindMyPast charging for this information would be for the government or TNA to release it at presumably great cost to the UK taxpayer. So I'd be paying for it indirectly anyway!

Hopefully lots of overseas FMP subscribers will be interested enough to pay for the information as I think we are lucky to be able to get more and more family history resources online.

Although seeing original records is preferable, not all family historians have the time and money to trawl around all the relevant local archives. I, for one, don't currently have the time and find online sources a cheaper alternative at present. (Think of the savings in transport and accommodation costs.)
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: 1939 Register

Postby ianbee » Wed Oct 28, 2015 6:46 pm

ksouthall wrote:Although seeing original records is preferable, not all family historians have the time and money to trawl around all the relevant local archives. I, for one, don't currently have the time and find online sources a cheaper alternative at present. (Think of the savings in transport and accommodation costs.)


I agree with you Katherine, but it is worth noting that if you are going to the National Archives then you will be able to see the National Register on the computers there (without paying!)

The findmypast blog on how we will be able to search the register is interesting - for example, it will be possible to search for someone by date of birth.
https://blog.findmypast.co.uk/how-to-se ... 17472.html

Ian
ianbee
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:51 pm

Re: 1939 Register

Postby ksouthall » Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:00 pm

ianbee wrote:I agree with you Katherine, but it is worth noting that if you are going to the National Archives then you will be able to see the National Register on the computers there (without paying!)

Ian


True Ian. However I'd spend about £20.00 in train fare so it works out about the same, without having to spend a day at TNA.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1891
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

PreviousNext

Return to Genealogy chat


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests