MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: 100% commission site VideoBlocks opened! I see a few major content producers.  (Read 32258 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #25 on: April 13, 2015, 06:08 »
+1
I don't know why there is so much negativity. It's fair to say the average price of a video on Pond5 is around $50 but we certainly don't get all of that...so to get the full sale price of $49 is an attractive proposition. I think some people are missing the point that VideoBlocks may actually be trying to do something constructive for the contributors with a different concept.

I don't think anyone is missing the point that VB may trying to do something constructive. Just like the tenths of previous attempts you see on the right side. But after 9 years in this business (to me is my sole source of income) I just don't run after every carrot put in front of my nose without thinking in the future.

All I need is an answer from VB regarding their business model and the long term sustainability, because I cannot see it.

If in the future they end up taking 50% of that $49, which I do know is on par with the average sale on P5, all it proves is that the current 100% offer is the mentioned carrot.

Even if they would, and the commission would then be on par with Pond5/SS, as long as they make sales, I don't see the problem. For me, it doesn't matter whether the sale is from SS, Pond5 or VB, the only thing that matters it that the best selling agency gives me better RPD than others.


« Reply #26 on: April 13, 2015, 06:12 »
+1
Simply it's a win-win-win situation.  VideoBlocks want to increase their paid subscribers who can download their own footages unlimited and also can purchase our footage at discount from other sites, we the contributors make more money per clip, and customers can buy the same clips at discount from other sites after they pay subscription fee.  Plain and simple, win-win-win.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2015, 06:15 by helloitsme »

« Reply #27 on: April 13, 2015, 06:17 »
0
And if the other agencies lower the price without increasing our royalty rate, we'll delete our clips from those sites, just like we said bye bye to iStock.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2015, 06:22 by helloitsme »

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #28 on: April 13, 2015, 06:22 »
0
@ Noedelhap

DPC was just another nail in the coffin. The real damage has been made years before through countless price wars, and people submitting to every suspicious agency that right from the start didn't give any kind of guarantee.

Currently, paying $1 or $10 is absolutely irrelevant for most designers if the service provided by a more expensive agency is better.

I also don't blindly trust any agency. Not even with two open eyes and ten cups of coffee drank. But it's by far easier to control the behavior of a couple agencies than a dozen.

As I said before, I have no problem with VB and would like to submit to them. I'm just having difficulty to see a future in this. And if even when an agency promises something we get crossed at the first opportunity, imagine what could happen when an agency doesn't clarify things right from the start!

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #29 on: April 13, 2015, 06:23 »
0
Simply it's a win-win-win situation.  VideoBlocks want to increase their paid subscribers who can download their own footages unlimited and also can purchase our footage at discount from other sites, we the contributors make more money per clip, and customers can buy the same clips at discount from other sites after they pay subscription fee.  Plain and simple, win-win-win.

That is an extremely simplistic statement and wishful thinking. Please re-read my initial message.

« Reply #30 on: April 13, 2015, 08:00 »
+1
I don't know why there is so much negativity. It's fair to say the average price of a video on Pond5 is around $50 but we certainly don't get all of that...so to get the full sale price of $49 is an attractive proposition. I think some people are missing the point that VideoBlocks may actually be trying to do something constructive for the contributors with a different concept.

I don't think anyone is missing the point that VB may trying to do something constructive. Just like the tenths of previous attempts you see on the right side. But after 9 years in this business (to me is my sole source of income) I just don't run after every carrot put in front of my nose without thinking in the future.

All I need is an answer from VB regarding their business model and the long term sustainability, because I cannot see it.

If in the future they end up taking 50% of that $49, which I do know is on par with the average sale on P5, all it proves is that the current 100% offer is the mentioned carrot.

Even if they would, and
the commission would then be on par with Pond5/SS, as long as they make sales, I don't see the problem. For me, it doesn't matter whether the sale is from SS, Pond5 or VB, the only thing that matters it that the best selling agency gives me better RPD than others.

You're missing the point. To me its what they do to pricing. Pricing is what will affect a competitive response from other agencies, who by the way charge today 50-70% more than VB. To me that's the real risk. Once SS or P5 are forced to respond, we ALL lose, thanks to VB.....now this is of course contingent on gaining enough market share to force these responses. But, assume that SS has to lower their prices to $49. What does that do to our commission? makes it like $14 instead of $23.

« Reply #31 on: April 13, 2015, 08:17 »
+1
Maybe I'm missing the point too I don't know but If I do a search on pond5 there are 1000's of clips for sale for $5. what? $5 people.... OK most of them are large web size but there are still 1000's of clips with amazing concepts and skill for sale at HD res for $10. This is a major  problem to cause a price war in the future. I bet people on P5 have to compete with each other on site so lowering the price to stupid levels....

Also with VB they will charge a $1.84 processing fee for HD and $7.46 for 4K. This can add up to a large daily sum. Maybe enough for them to be happy with and to keep the site above water. $49 seems to be pretty fair I think especially if the commission stays above %50. I think it's shutterstock who should up their own commission rates?

« Reply #32 on: April 13, 2015, 08:45 »
0
Quote from: Noedelhap link=topic=24840.msg415253#msg415253
[b
I don't blindly trust agencies and I'll be wary of any decision they make, even Shutterstock and Pond5 aren't sacred in my book.[/b]

+1000

« Reply #33 on: April 13, 2015, 09:03 »
+2
I got my 1st sale today! Anyone else? :)

« Reply #34 on: April 13, 2015, 11:06 »
0
I got my 1st sale today! Anyone else? :)

Congrats!

« Reply #35 on: April 13, 2015, 11:41 »
+1
Me to but -30% for US tax  >:(


« Reply #36 on: April 13, 2015, 16:43 »
0
Me to but -30% for US tax  >:(

Wow, but still got $33 for 1080P clip! 

« Reply #37 on: April 13, 2015, 23:13 »
0
Me to but -30% for US tax  >:(

:D Same, but nothing you can do about it, move on lol


I got my 1st sale today! Anyone else? :)

Congrats!
Thanks

« Reply #38 on: April 14, 2015, 01:14 »
0
VentureBeat weighs in with a great review of the new VideoBlocks marketplace where contributors keep 100% of the profit.

http://venturebeat.com/2015/04/13/videoblocks-stock-video-marketplace-is-now-open-to-the-public-and-creators-keep-100-of-the-proceeds/

« Reply #39 on: April 14, 2015, 03:37 »
+4
Actually there is another Idea behind it.
As in 2014, I was negotiation with them about them buying out my clips, for their unlimited use. That's their old way of working. We couldn't make the right agreements for both parties, as they were not sure if it will sell well enough for them, so the deal didn't get though.. But! By enabling all contributors to come, sell, get profit on their work and most importantly for VB - track how our clips are performing, this can enable them to select specific parts of our portfolios for buy out offers. And this really is win-win-win situation for them, their customers and us.

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #40 on: April 14, 2015, 03:56 »
0
Actually there is another Idea behind it.
As in 2014, I was negotiation with them about them buying out my clips, for their unlimited use. That's their old way of working. We couldn't make the right agreements for both parties, as they were not sure if it will sell well enough for them, so the deal didn't get though.. But! By enabling all contributors to come, sell, get profit on their work and most importantly for VB - track how our clips are performing, this can enable them to select specific parts of our portfolios for buy out offers. And this really is win-win-win situation for them, their customers and us.

That, I can understand and make some sense.

« Reply #41 on: April 14, 2015, 11:05 »
+1
New marketplace with ready buyer base is so sweet :) got my 2nd sale today, I really dont mind 1 sale a day  ;D bring it on lol

Uncle Pete

« Reply #42 on: April 14, 2015, 12:23 »
0
Excuse me, are you joking? 100,000 new images a week, RF always XXL, Downloads that never expire! $1 downloads and you say this?

Let me ask you a question: do you believe DPC (which I consider ten times more dangerous than any future scheme VideoBlocks might conceive) has destroyed the stock market after everyone pulled their port/opted out? Personally, I think not.

DPC allowed 500,000 use per image. SS followed to match competition and raised theirs from 250,000 impressions.

I will point out some humor in the situation: "Keep in mind that Dollar Photo Club is a members-only club with a limited membership. Membership is limited to ensure DPC is able to provide the best service to the most passionate stock image users. Interested parties must submit an application to the Dollar Photo Club Review Committee. After the application is received, a review is conducted and a determination is made."

Limited membership, really? Has anyone ever been refused? So I'd guess it's only limited to people who ask?  :)

Their website from time to time says this - "Over 33 million professional high quality royalty free stock photos - invitation only..." (which really says - If you can read these words, you are invited.)  >:(

What am I saying? Please don't support new agencies with vague or impossible promises, we don't need more market dilution and more people draining every drop of blood (income) out of every image, for pennies.

We don't need more or new agencies, we need less. And for people to only support those that are honest and open about how and who they sell to. If you aren't making money and a reasonable market percentage, dump the chumps! They are bleeding the market dry, at the artists expense.

Bailing out water, and admitting the ship has holes, isn't going to do as much as fixing the leaks, before it sinks! Plug the holes. That would be stop supporting the little irrelevant agencies. Don't encourage new entries by diluting your earnings and the value of your work. And drop any agency that's got invisible partners or runs their own cheap sub agencies on the side.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2015, 12:25 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #43 on: April 14, 2015, 15:26 »
+1
Like all of these new entrants, they offer good terms to start with, knowing fully that they have a clause in their contracts that says:
"This   Agreement    is   subject   to   change   by   us   in   our   sole   discretion   at   any   time.   "

When they change their pricing or commission structure, they also know that very few contributors will pull their content. What it 100% of $49 now will almost certainly change to a lower percentage of a lower $$ figure in the future.

For those earning a living from licensing content, it also makes no sense to offer your content to a site that makes most of its money through a model where contributors only get paid once - the really cheap subs model from their own content.

If you don't think the other agencies have responded, take another look at what SS is doing with video on Bigstock. Its exactly the same model.

Having more agencies in this market doesn't help contributors - the opposite has proven to be true.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #44 on: April 14, 2015, 15:52 »
+2
And I should have included, I am against the Me Too Agencies. Places like Stocksy or Canva and I'm sure there are others, have a new idea, or are doing something different, they deserve the respect and opportunity to succeed and open new markets or methods.

The ones that just have the same basic blueprint, sell for less, pay us less or make artists empty promises that they won't and can't keep? Ignore them and maybe they will go away?  :(

« Reply #45 on: April 14, 2015, 16:43 »
+1
Excuse me, are you joking? 100,000 new images a week, RF always XXL, Downloads that never expire! $1 downloads and you say this?

Let me ask you a question: do you believe DPC (which I consider ten times more dangerous than any future scheme VideoBlocks might conceive) has destroyed the stock market after everyone pulled their port/opted out? Personally, I think not.


DPC allowed 500,000 use per image. SS followed to match competition and raised theirs from 250,000 impressions.

I will point out some humor in the situation: "Keep in mind that Dollar Photo Club is a members-only club with a limited membership. Membership is limited to ensure DPC is able to provide the best service to the most passionate stock image users. Interested parties must submit an application to the Dollar Photo Club Review Committee. After the application is received, a review is conducted and a determination is made."

Limited membership, really? Has anyone ever been refused? So I'd guess it's only limited to people who ask?  :)

Their website from time to time says this - "Over 33 million professional high quality royalty free stock photos - invitation only..." (which really says - If you can read these words, you are invited.)  >:(

What am I saying? Please don't support new agencies with vague or impossible promises, we don't need more market dilution and more people draining every drop of blood (income) out of every image, for pennies.

We don't need more or new agencies, we need less. And for people to only support those that are honest and open about how and who they sell to. If you aren't making money and a reasonable market percentage, dump the chumps! They are bleeding the market dry, at the artists expense.

Bailing out water, and admitting the ship has holes, isn't going to do as much as fixing the leaks, before it sinks! Plug the holes. That would be stop supporting the little irrelevant agencies. Don't encourage new entries by diluting your earnings and the value of your work. And drop any agency that's got invisible partners or runs their own cheap sub agencies on the side.


So, those major stock video producers are making a big mistake?

http://www.videoblocks.com/portfolio/Wavebreak+Media

http://www.videoblocks.com/portfolio/hotelfoxtrot

http://www.videoblocks.com/portfolio/dubassy

« Reply #46 on: April 14, 2015, 17:36 »
+2
Im not the right person to answer the question above, but i suspect that these 3 are the peope with the less to lose in this game (if any) .
In a different tone im very happy for the people that sold clips there so fast,and i wish them to prove me wrong.
I truthfully,sincerely, hope so.
After all i just voice an opinion in a public forum and that opinion needs public criticism,meaning that the people who contribute there have a moral obligation to
inform us all about the bad, AND the good.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #47 on: April 14, 2015, 23:32 »
+1
What do they care? Could have a paid up front guaranteed contract? A major producer who works on huge volume, no concerns about where. You bait the trap with fresh cheese...

I think if they get people to contribute for 100% and it brings in many more new buyers for their agency owned material, everyone wins.

I'm just skeptical of someone making big promises, and 100% commissions, at this stage.


So, those major stock video producers are making a big mistake?

http://www.videoblocks.com/portfolio/Wavebreak+Media

http://www.videoblocks.com/portfolio/hotelfoxtrot

http://www.videoblocks.com/portfolio/dubassy


New sites that offer something different than the same old, Microstock RF license, are a better choice for individuals.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2015, 16:17 by Uncle Pete »


« Reply #49 on: April 16, 2015, 10:23 »
+2
I see many wondering who will want to buy a subscription when the marketplace has XX,000,000 files. I can tell you exactly who will. People like me that have clients with VERY limited budgets and people that also want access to After Effects templates, audio tracks, and backgrounds.

As a contributor it's easy to focus only on the aspect of their subscription offering that you produce, but that's not all that they offer.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
21 Replies
32163 Views
Last post April 20, 2015, 19:39
by Zach-VideoBlocks
25 Replies
6910 Views
Last post November 01, 2016, 13:24
by robsters
6 Replies
2687 Views
Last post June 17, 2017, 01:12
by emblem
9 Replies
3130 Views
Last post January 19, 2018, 23:05
by StockbyNumbers
5 Replies
1445 Views
Last post July 17, 2018, 00:55
by SpaceStockFootage

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results