I'm relatively interested on videoblocks but there are things that don't add-up to me.

If I understand it right videoblocks profit solely on the subscription service and the fees paid by their customers. They do not earn a dime from the deals made in the marketplace since we keep 100% of the sales.

But what will happen when the sales from the marketplace outgrow the ones from the subscription plan and customers loose their interest in paying the subscription fees since they only have a fraction of all they need, compared to the marketplace? Won't costumers start asking for single downloads options, or to have the videos from the marketplace included on the Unlimited Library?

Will we then have our videos moved to the Unlimited Library section, or will videoblocks start charging a commission on our $49 sales?

At this moment I'm already seeing 57k videos on the Unlimited Library and 137k on the marketplace. What will happen when the Unlimited Library becomes obsolete and no longer appealing to buyers? Won't videoblocks risk losing the busines unless they do what I mentioned earlier?

Can someone clarify me how this work today, or the risks we may be facing in the near future?

Some major stock video producers on VideoBlocks already.

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

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

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

Aside from number of videos, I didn't see a lot that impressed me in there.

I hope im wrong in this -in which case i will contribute there asap- but it seems like this whole marketplace deal is to drive massive traffic to their already established pool,where the prices -last time i looked- are ridiculously low there and some clips had hundreds if not thousands of downloads already.
Otherwise it makes no sense whatsoever why the full commission.They may sell some stuff from the marketplace but i don't think that's their goal at all.
I think time will tell eventually.

(...) it seems like this whole marketplace deal is to drive massive traffic to their already established pool (...)
(...) Otherwise it makes no sense whatsoever why the full commission.They may sell some stuff from the marketplace but i don't think that's their goal at all. (...)

I think that is, apparently, their main goal. But intentional or not, I think this has the potential to become the biggest trap we have seen for stock artists with serious consequences to the stock footage market!

As I questioned earlier, but still not responded by the people from videoblocks, what will happen when their Unlimited Library gets, lets say, 100k clips and the Marketplace 1 or 2 million?

Who's the costumer that will be willing to pay a subscription fee for the Unlimited Library, which very soon will be obsolete and of limited usefulness, only to buy almost all of their clips from the Marketplace where they will have an extra expense by paying per download?

Won't clients be upset to pay for a service that doesn't bring them much value, and then to pay an extra for each content they do in fact need?

At that point videoblocks will surely either integrate the marketplace in the subscription pool, or start charging a commission on each $49 sale.

They won't be ale to raise the prices for the marketplace downloads from $49 to, let's say, $69 in order to get a cut on the sale without getting a very hostile reaction from the clients. So they will get a cut on that $49. How much is what we'll see.

If anyone from videoblocks could answer this I think it would be very useful, because at this point this is looking too good to be true.

So, you guys prefer the agencies that pay you 30% after all rather than 100%?  Give them a chance.  You can easily delete your clips if you want.  People find a way to complain at anything!!

It would be nice if VB did chime in here and clarify. However, whatever they say "applies today" does not "apply tomorrow" in most stock circumstances. I think that might be more along the lines of what SPA is saying.  What some of us are doing is being forward looking. The strategy might be great today but what's the VB strategy under the circumstances SPA rightfully states? To me that is a huge unanswered question. Mainly because at $49, which at 100% is already close to what some of us get on P5 at 50% can easily be reduced when VB reaches an inevitable crossroads decision. Say they claim "unsustainability" and have to take $20 from each sale. This is a monstrous, VERY LIKELY (and horrible) scenario that I would love to hear VB chime in to clarify.

Like I've mentioned before, the big deal to me is that VB gains significant market share, then clobbers the contributor with the above scenario. The RISK is that they take enough market share that it impacts sales at other good paying sites while contributors now get less at VB. Even if I were at VB and pulled my port, I am completely impacted because of the market traction they steal from other agencies. They become the cheap place to go for video, like the Dollar Photo Club for video (like Big Stock is doing). If they get enough content from videographers who either don't care or don't do their homework, we're sunk.  I mean, $49 for a video vs. $79 on SS or P5 is simply competing on price. What happens then? SS will have to lower their selling price and P5 will be forced to enact some scheme to control pricing & reduce commissions.

This is no poke at you, helloitsme, just that I think there is one very "critical to quality" question that deserves some framework explanation from VB before we all jump in as contributors.

So, you guys prefer the agencies that pay you 30% after all rather than 100%?  Give them a chance.  You can easily delete your clips if you want.  People find a way to complain at anything!!

You need to be really careful.
Once you've uploaded content anywhere, you really have very little control over what they do with it, even if you delete them from the main site or close your account.
I was bitten this way back in 35mm days, and of course, misappropriation of submitted files is so much easier in the digital age.

Sure, I'm probably over-cautious now; but if something looks too good to be true, it probably is. We all have a duty to ourselves to do 'due diligence'. Ask ALL the questions, question the answers, make sure it rings true.
E.g. Stocktal. They sent shills over here, couldn't answer the questions, and where are they now?

How do we know that all 'our' full size files we find on scam sites haven't been sold to them by agencies people uploaded to, thinking they were genuine start-ups?

I think a lot of valid questions have been asked above me, with regards to what future scenarios could arise. However, for the moment, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. If the current models outgrows itself and management starts to make questionable decisions,  I'll pull my files. I doubt they will be able to steal a significant amount of market share from SS or Pond5 in the near future.

So, you are willing to take a risk on an agency that you recognize haven't answered valid questions in this topic and others (I would add vital questions) that could severely damage the market and endanger your portfolio, when you do not even believe they will have great relevance in the near future....

Video is still a very controlled market. Keep it that way supporting only agencies that leave you absolutely no doubt about their intentions, strategy and capacity to finance themselves without having to resort to dubious actions in order to survive.

Hmm...
Polite reminder that those agencies were once beginners too!
Sadly there seems to be a trend going around Top and Mid tier agencies not to answer any question.

Nothing wrong to give new folks a chance.

Time will tell! 
 

Quote from: Noedelhap on April 12, 2015, 19:01

(...) for the moment, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
(...)If the current models outgrows itself and management starts to make questionable decisions,  I'll pull my files.
(...) I doubt they will be able to steal a significant amount of market share from SS or Pond5 in the near future.

And this is exactly what I am talking about.

So, you are willing to take a risk on an agency that you recognize haven't answered valid questions in this topic and others (I would add vital questions) that could severely damage the market and endanger your portfolio, when you do not even believe they will have great relevance in the near future... Oooook...

Anyway, if in they do get a significant amount of market share and one of the worst scenarios arises, you believe that by then pulling out the portfolio will make a difference...

Let me tell you that I've seen tenths of boycotts and pulling of portfolios from several agencies. In some cases agencies being the target for these actions more than once. But not only they are still around and strong but the damage they've done endured to this day. Once a price has dropped, they will never go up.

And once an agency becomes very relevant to you your income, contrary to what you say, you will not pull your portfolio. Even if you do, 99% of the other contributors won't, making your action irrelevant. This is what I've been seeing since 2006 with the consequences we are facing today.

Video is still a very controlled market. Keep it that way supporting only agencies that leave you absolutely no doubt about their intentions, strategy and capacity to finance themselves without having to resort to dubious actions in order to survive.

The right side of this page is full of these cases. Almost all never got relevant but helped damage the photography market in senseless price wars, dilution of portfolio, and loosing of control of the artists portfolio.

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 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.

If you  go back and read all the recent VB threads here including this one from the beginning you will come to the (sad) conclusion that this "different concept" has never been described or proposed officially.It is wishful thinking from our part and nothing else,and i cant blame us.

It is something that we all hope it exists and actually someone or some people with that frame of mind actually said that major internet personas such as neumann wouldnt be crazy to upload there as well and that the VB model reminded them of the walmart model or something
and of course VB spokesman came in at just about the right time and said in his deep sensous voive  "yes, bingo, thats pretty much it kiddo"  and we all lost it and went to upload our stuff there.

Well then sorry for sounding negative but this is almost way too surreal to take seriously so i will sound like a comedian then (a mediocre one).

Hmm...
Polite reminder that those agencies were once beginners too!
Sadly there seems to be a trend going around Top and Mid tier agencies not to answer any question.

Nothing wrong to give new folks a chance.

Time will tell! 

VB is not a beginner though.
They have been around for years,they just operate in a different business model,they hire people to create content to which they have exclusive rights to sell in bulk or per download.
Nothing wrong with that,its just that now they try to steal a piece of the shrinking pie of the other stock agencies (again nothing wrong with that) ,but they havent proposed a model for doing that,that makes sense for THEM.
They will pay contributors full commission,but thats impossible financially and ethically (i dont trust anyone in this business,economy,and universe, who wants to make money from my work ESPECIALLY when he proposes a win-win scenario)

How will they cover expenses if suddenly 2 million files find their way there in 6 months time?Do we know anything about them?Can they expand to cover this amount of work?
Apparently no because these things dont make sense,and thats why i believe that their major concern is to "steal" traffic from ss and p5 and the rest.
After all the 3 major producers of video someone posted earlier have uploaded 25-30% of the total clips on the marketplace.Thats major traffic by itself.

Quote from: Noedelhap on April 12, 2015, 19:01

(...) for the moment, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
(...)If the current models outgrows itself and management starts to make questionable decisions,  I'll pull my files.
(...) I doubt they will be able to steal a significant amount of market share from SS or Pond5 in the near future.

And this is exactly what I am talking about.

So, you are willing to take a risk on an agency that you recognize haven't answered valid questions in this topic and others (I would add vital questions) that could severely damage the market and endanger your portfolio, when you do not even believe they will have great relevance in the near future... Oooook...

Of course we'll have to monitor it closely to make sure that we won't be trapped, but so far they have been very open and they have answered most, if not all questions.  (Except for the ones above, but let's be patient.)

Anyway, if in they do get a significant amount of market share and one of the worst scenarios arises, you believe that by then pulling out the portfolio will make a difference...

Let me tell you that I've seen tenths of boycotts and pulling of portfolios from several agencies. In some cases agencies being the target for these actions more than once. But not only they are still around and strong but the damage they've done endured to this day. Once a price has dropped, they will never go up.

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.

And once an agency becomes very relevant to you your income, contrary to what you say, you will not pull your portfolio. Even if you do, 99% of the other contributors won't, making your action irrelevant. This is what I've been seeing since 2006 with the consequences we are facing today.

True, once the income becomes relevant, it will be a decision based on money as well. But for now it's hard to predict what will happen. Any agency might at some point in the future do something you won't like, but does that keep you from submitting? Who would've thought 5 years ago that iStock would eff up so badly today? There's no way you could have known. Perhaps VideoBlocks will make a change 2 years from now that shakes up the microstock world, perhaps not. It's pure speculation.

Video is still a very controlled market. Keep it that way supporting only agencies that leave you absolutely no doubt about their intentions, strategy and capacity to finance themselves without having to resort to dubious actions in order to survive.

The right side of this page is full of these cases. Almost all never got relevant but helped damage the photography market in senseless price wars, dilution of portfolio, and loosing of control of the artists portfolio.

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.