Oh, the Irony of it All!

Yesterday I posted an article defending the online providers of genealogy information. While some of these genealogy data providers first appear to be expensive, I pointed out that use of these online sites is still far cheaper than traveling to the original locations or to major repositories or libraries in Washington, D.C., Salt Lake City, or elsewhere. You can read the article at http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2008/05/i-have-a-compla.html.

I posted that article late last night and then immediately went to bed. Upon arising this morning, guess what was the first message in my in-box?

The message was from Ancestry.com and started out with:

"Dear Richard,

"Your Ancestry.com membership is coming up for renewal in a couple of weeks. We'd like to take this opportunity to tell you about some of the great things coming soon on Ancestry.com and to highlight some valuable recent additions."

The message went on for several paragraphs and ended with the following:

"As a reminder, on June 12, 2008, we will automatically renew your World Deluxe Membership for $299.40

"Thank you for your continued membership with Ancestry.com.

"Many happy discoveries,
"The Ancestry.com Membership Team"

Was someone at Ancestry.com watching this newsletter's site and deciding that this was a perfect time to send a renewal notice? "He can't say 'No' right now!"

The letter also gives instructions on how to cancel the renewal. I won't do that; I am renewing.

Comments

[Penny in Texas]

Ah! "Murphy's Law" meets genealogy guru? Sometimes life's quirks are very amusing ... or at least wryly so.

I agree with you that it would be unrealistic to expect all genealogy information to be provided free (it never was before the internet, either). I, too, will renew (yet again) my subscriptions to Ancestry and to Footnote, etc. as they come up.

However, even at the risk of falling into the abyss of negative nabobism:
When TGN uses its considerable profits to hire programmers who show evidence of having a basic understanding of genealogy searches and who also seem to grasp the general concept of If-Then statements in search parameters ... I will feel my annual subscription fee has bought a service that has increased substantially.

It's slightly ludicrous for a search that includes the paramenter of "death date = 1897 in Tennessee" to return as a high probability someone who is on a 1930 census in Oregon.

I have high hopes that Footnote's (and a couple of other pay to view services) amazing growth will put a LOT of pressure on TGN to improve. Have you seen Ancestry's latest beta search? It virtually eliminates the ability to search for all persons with a certain surname in a given county on a particular census since it doesn't allow for specific first and last name. The results return everyone with the name whether given or surname. Add that to the already nonsensical (and as yet to be addressed) problems of returns that ignore the input parameters ... and it's a mess.

There's considerable room for improvement, even at what some, including me, would call the bargain price of $1/day.

Penny

[Linda]

Penny,

Ah...you are a paying hopeful complainer. I was at that stage last year.

You stated: "When TGN uses its considerable profits to hire programmers who show evidence of having a basic understanding of genealogy searches and who also seem to grasp the general concept of If-Then statements in search parameters ... I will feel my annual subscription fee has bought a service that has increased substantially."

Let's not blame the poor programmers. They may contribute to but are not responsible for the design of the search interface or the decisions to release. TGN management heads should have rolled a long time ago!

I held out hope things would improve and gave myself to April of this year when my Ancestry subscription expired to decide whether to show my discontent through cancellation of my 10+ year subscription. I did cancel in April. While there is certainly a withdrawl period, I have done just fine without Ancestry. I had already been going to more accurate and/or valuable sources than Ancestry. Even at a $1 a day, I'd be throwing my money away. There are lots of great online sources out there both pay and non-pay. I'll only go back to Ancestry when they figure out how to improve their quality and add data that would be valuable to my research that I can't get elsewhere. I don't hold out much hope for FTM 2008 either. I'm sticking with FTM v. 16 until Legacy releases 7.0 to try and compare with FTM v. 16.

Linda

[Donna]

When Ancestry was fairly new, they ran a short time special - 5 years for I think it was about $125.00 which I bought. My 5 yr subscription ran out about 2 1/2 years ago and you know where the prices are today.

I guess not too many people took advantage of this deal because, if I called Amazon with a question, the rep always gasped when they saw I had a 5 yr paid in full plan for everything they offered.

As a senior citizen on a fixed income today, I cannot afford everything they offer now, but still get at least the US subscription even if I have to hock everything I own. THAT FIVE YEARS -- WHAT A SWEET DEAL WHILE IT LASTED!!!!!!

[Penny in Texas]

Linda! No need to wait any longer - go get Legacy; v7 has been released. My version 7 arrived in the mail just today (I bought v6 back in January with v7 thrown in for the price) and the only regret I have is that I didn't switch sooner! Great program with excellent support.

I have to say I was a bit dubious when Footnote first arrived on the scene. (Do I really want to subscribe to another pay-site? ... I thought.) But I love it and they improve the place daily. What do you think of Genealogy Bank?

[Penny in Texas]

oops! I might have got my cart in front of what pulls it re my comment on Legacy 7 being released. Evidently v7 is not available on Millenia's website yet ... but it certainly should be there very soon, since those of us who pre-paid for it are now receiving CDs in the mail.

[Linda Johnston]

I have not subscribed to Ancestry for a number of years. I believe that they promised to use their "vast resources" to recreate the 1890 census, for many years BEFORE THAT. Has that promise ever been fulfilled? I would imagine that, if they had, the announcement would have been welcomed with much excitement and would result in a number of new subscribers, including me.

Networking with "cousins" has proved to be a very valuable "free" resource. As I discover new relatives, I share the material I have gathered (all of it sourced), with them, and request that they do the same. Currently, I have more material than I can enter on various lines. For example, after exchanging a few emails with a "new cousin", I was the recipient of a file, compiled by a group of cousins, with a number of "certified genealogists" in it, which started with my husband's greatgrandmother, and went back for 13 generations. It was a line that I had not planned on researching for some time, as I'm still working on our maternal and paternal lines, directly. Since I am not one to refuse such a generous gift, I sent the information I had on the succeeding five generations. We live in an area where a number of this line spent their entire lives. So, I am now armed with information that has me and my digital camera prowling a number of local cemeteries, taking photos of tombstones. No, this part isn't "free", but it doesn't require a large expenditure of cash, either. So, for those of you, who are physically able and live in rural areas, this might be a frugal genealogist's contribution that would save others from long drives and the accompanying expenses.

[Andrew]

I am sure that everyone would be interested in a detailed comparison between the various pay sites, and I can think of no one better to do that then Dick.

[David Frazier]

And here I thought that I was the only one who thought Ancestry's search engine was written by someone without a clue and I agree that it is manangement's fault. As a retired computer programmer I can tell you that even an inexperienced programmer could write better code than that used by Ancestry. After several years of paying for their service and being ignored about being inundated with search results that had no relevance I finally gave up on them. If they ever come to their senses I'll be back with check in hand. Until then Vaya con Dios Ancestry.

[Rose]

It seems to me that a lot of these so-called genealogy service sites offer the "opportunity" for me to post vast amounts of the family information that I've spent years collecting. They then charge others a sizable fee to access the information that I've provided at no cost to them.

AM I WRONG ABOUT THIS?

[Laura]

Once upon a time I was using Ancestry.com and finding a host of obituaries in their historical newspaper collection. Eventually I had so many windows open that my computer locked up. I rebooted.

When I went back into Ancestry.com, I could no longer find the obituaries that I had just found the day before. It was very frustrating.

At length, I learned that when I put a surname in the search criteria, I got no results. When I took the same surname out of the surname field, and put it in the keyword field, I finally found my lost obituaries.

I contacted support at ancestry to report the problem. They wrote back, and appluaded me for finding a work around.

Often searches don't work the way IIIIIIIIII think they should, but this one was a blatent problem that should have been easily fixed. If a surname in the keyword field can find the obituary, why can't a surname in the surname field find the obituary? It's a travesty!! Perhaps it has been fixed by now.

[theKiwi]

Well you're not wrong in that they will charge others to access your information. That's their business model - you and I may not agree with it, but it "seems" to be working for them.

But you also have the opportunity to to post your data somewhere else for others to find and access without having to pay Ancestry for it.

You could post it to the World Connect at Rootsweb.com. That is free to you and free to others to view.

I've been running my own genealogy sites since about 1999 on a web server in my basement that is under my control.

But this too isn't without expense - when I started I was paying $90 a month for a dialup account with a fixed IP number so that the server could be found. Since mid-2000 it's been on a DSL line that currently is costing me $90 a month for the fastest DSL service available in my area with 5 IP numbers. It's running about 15 different domains for genealogy, personal sites, and sites given to neices and nephews as birthday presents.

Then of course there's the hours and brainpower that go into keeping it all updated and sites tweaked etc etc etc.

But noone forces you to post your tree to ancestry.com.

Roger

[Susan Daily]

Subscribers of various genealogy lists on Yahoo or Rootsweb are aware that when there are Ancestry subscription specials, those of us "in the know" alert the other emailers on our favorite lists. Keep in mind that when the year at that special price ends, all you have to do is indicate to a customer service representative on the telephone that you would not like to renew unless you are offered to do so at that same special price. Donna, I wish you had tried that 2-1/2 years ago. Currently, I am paying half of what Dick will be paying for the same complete World membership. Obviously, it makes it easier for me to afford the subscription, and I use my savings to subscribe to Footnote. So my suggestion is to occasionally search the Rootsweb mailing lists for the keywords "Ancestry.com subscription special 2008" or something similar.

For others who are interested in more savings, do be sure to check out what genealogy databases your local public library system offers online from home for free. I canceled my GenealogyBank subscription after Missouri started offering it online. That saved me $75.

[Rose, I sent a reply to your same comment on the previous thread -- do be sure to read it.]

[Helen]

I was a very early member of Ancestry and after all I had paid in and had found only two census records - my fa & grn'fa in 1930 - I stopped my subscription. If one has been a long time researcher, has block walls, no need to waste money on paid genealogy sites. Helen

[Dae Powell]

"Genealogy-by-database produces pedigrees closely akin to those woeful paint-by-number puppy dogs." ~~ from a noted FASG. (or is that redundant?)

Happy Dae.
http://www.ShoeStringGenealogy.com

[Donna]

I currently am subscribed to Ancestry but will give it up when the time comes to renew. I have not used it much lately but there is no new content on it that is useful to me. I agree the search results are horrible and have complained about them but to no avail. It seems to be they are less interested in satisfying their costumers than collecting the fee, so it will be goodbye in the fall to them.

[Teresa]

I've only used Ancestry, none of the other sites mentioned. Is there a site or article that can tell me the differences in the various companies ? Thanks!

[Pam]

I like ancestry.com. I have found more information there than at any other site. I had a subscription to genealogy.com (now cancelled) and now I subscribe to Footnote and GenealogyBank also. With Ancestry, you can do a wild card search, which you can't do with Footnote (or at least I haven't figured it out) and genealogybank.com will give strange results with a wild card search. Ancestry's newspaper search isn't that good but I am happy with most of the other database searches. I think that Footnote has some positives about its new search engine but it still needs work. I do find it annoying that I put part of my family tree on ancestry.com at a time when it appeared to be free and then later they started charging other people to use it. I wanted to share information that I have found but I am not doing the work so Ancestry can charge someone. It is also annoying that Ancestry has so many errors in its census indexes. I have done several hundred corrections to the indexes to help myself and others find the correct names. The fact that you can do a correction is a big positive. I have found errors on Family Search and there is no way to correct them that I know about.

[Elaine]

If anyone would like a great deal on the U.S. Deluxe version of Ancestry.com, check out nothingbutsoftware.com Do a search for Family Tree Maker. They are selling Version 16 for $27. Included with that software is 6 months of Ancestry.com (U.S. Deluxe). It needs to be installed before January 2009. Just be sure to cancel the day before your subscription comes up, otherwise they will renew you at full price. A couple of weeks ago, this same deal was on for a couple of days for $9.95 (that's one year for $20)--but that deal is off for now. You just have to watch for the lower prices! Personally, I have found lots of great information on Ancestry, with at least 25 newspaper articles on my grandfather I never knew.

[Louise]

Dick, I see that there are many subjects in the above posts and the ones attached to your original article re "your opinion" that are ideas for you to address in future issues of your newsletter.

Above: I'd love to see an indepth article on these wild pricing variances by Ancestry and how to find them and when and why etc. Also, I'd like to hear from (on this site) Ancestry's answer to all of us who have/had problems with them. What are they going to do about the problems and when?

Another idea not covered so far is the fact that Footnote seems to be every place. Is the same info that is on Footnote also on other paid sites??? If not what is there? Why not all in the same place? How do people like Footnote? Their search engine, their customer service, etc.?

I like one bloggers suggestion about an article (or articles) comparing the various paid and free web sites.

[Linda]

Elaine said: "Just be sure to cancel the day before your subscription comes up, otherwise they will renew you at full price."

In April, I cancelled my annual Ancestry.com subscription I had allowed automatic renewal for 10+ years. I was very nervous about making sure my cancellation with Ancestry went through. I'd heard the horror stories. I read the terms and it had to be cancelled TWO days before it expired. To be safe, I cancelled two weeks before my expiration date. They don't give refunds for unused time BUT the subscription really doesn't expire until the expiration date regardless if you cancel two days or several days before the expiration date. I assume it is the same way for trial subscriptions.

MORE IMPORTANTLY when you cancel, make sure you have a confirmation number. I thought it was great to avoid the potentially long wait time with customer service by cancelling online. I tried and didn't get a cancellation page confirmation like you do with other types of online cancellations. Being nervous, I called customer service and they confirmed it didn't go through and cancelled it over the phone giving me a confirmation number and emailed me the confirmation of cancellation. They gave no explanation why their online cancellation page didn't work. This was the very first cancellation process of any service provider that has ever failed for me. It was my last confirmation that Ancestry doesn't have it's act together!

[Judy Rebbeck Watten]

Enjoyable article and comments. There are so many useful sites now, subscription and free, that it's hard to keep up. One of the useful ones is genesreunited.com Always worth checking as there are new names there every day.

[Maggie]

From Ancestry.com's home page:

6,972,661 PEOPLE ADDED TO FAMILY TREES (THIS WEEK!!!)
I still wonder how many people seeking military records have put their own first and last names into the search engine that says
"Start your FREE family tree.
Enter a few simple facts about your family.
We'll use what you enter to try and find more.
Your First Name
Your Last Name
Your Gender"

On many of the Ancestry web pages, this is all that is viewable on a wide screen laptop or monitor. Sure, they have a right to use all the marketing ideas they want; but it still appears that you are supposed to start your search by giving them your name and sex -- then their computer will start trying to add to your family, based on names you enter -- whether they are from your family or not.

I hope all web groups warn their new members to read the entire pages at Ancestry, and seek other options BEFORE buying into this "ploy." They make it sound as if they have millions of real family tree info just this week -- I would really like to know how much truth there is in that statement -- and are they assuming that living people have really given them a tree they can advertise as available information?
Maggie

[David T. Robertson]

The problem with pay for info companies is not that they charge but that for most of us they are the only game in town. A Monopoly. Footnote is not putting census records on the web because Ancestry has already done that. There is no competition and as a result they can charge whatever they want. I remember how hard it has been in the past for genealogical societies to publish records. Today, the government is just handing them over to a for profit company. In your post today, you point out that Microsoft has given up its digital library since they could not compete with Google Books. Another monopoly has formed. Our government is suppose to protect us from Monopolies and instead they appear to be encouraging them.

[Dick Eastman]

---> Footnote is not putting census records on the web because Ancestry has already done that.

Footnote.com has the 1860 U.S. census on the web. I don't know their future plans for adding more, if any.

HeritageQuest Online has all the U.S. census records on the web.

FamilySearch.org has the 1880 U.S. census on the web and is working on adding more.

I don't think that constitutes a monopoly for Ancestry.com. Other companies are also free to add U.S. census records if they wish.

- Dick Eastman