pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Pond 5 review changes  (Read 34635 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #200 on: May 14, 2016, 02:04 »
0

What I dont understand is why so many people place expensive content into the program. But it is their choice.

The pond 5 people hand picked and chose the files that went into the program, the artists didn't select specific files, they opted in and gave permission but it was pond 5 curators that went and picked the clips.
This is correct: P5 have chosen not only the best clips, but also a selection that covers quite well all different subjects.
I don't see why on earth customers should buy anymore clips anywhere else but in the membership area. Not only P5 customers, but also SS and FT will move there.
In other words the new value for clips in the market is the cost of clips on the bloody membership area, around $6


« Reply #201 on: May 14, 2016, 02:12 »
+1
Wouldnt everyone involved, including pond5, make more money, if they called it the " 6 Dollar Membership" program and every download was counted?

Like the Dollar Photo Club?

But I guess if files are being downloaded 30 times a day, but pond5 pays the artist 50 cents a month, then they make a crazy amount of money.


« Reply #202 on: May 14, 2016, 03:37 »
+2
Wouldnt everyone involved, including pond5, make more money, if they called it the " 6 Dollar Membership" program and every download was counted?

Like the Dollar Photo Club?

But I guess if files are being downloaded 30 times a day, but pond5 pays the artist 50 cents a month, then they make a crazy amount of money.
I am sure that most files get downloaded much, much more than 30 times a day, basically the whole volume of footage sales is going into the bloody membership zone.
The Videoblock idea was already a threat to the industry, but they were not well organised and the clips in their membership area were frankly really poor.
This time is different: p5 ha chosen 300,000 quality clips covering most subjects, rents them for peanuts and a lot of artist fell unto the trap.
I really do not see why anyone should buy any clips from the marketplace in p5. The only way for other agencies to reply is to lower the price of footage to $5 for a clip

« Reply #203 on: May 14, 2016, 04:07 »
0
It needs people who supply this madness.

Usually people only offer low quality files for cheap prices. The only reason to offer quality files for pennies is if you get extremly high volume sales, like some people do on envato.

Then you have a business model like the original micro market for photos, where those of us who got in early, made an unbelievable amount of money.

But now there is an oversupply situation and the quality photos are moving back to macrostock agencies or specialized collections like stocksy with a walled garden approach.

It looks like pond5 is trying to crash the video market really, really early in the game, if they place quality files in the 6 dollar price bin, while renting the content for 50 cents a month.

Maybe they are hoping to win back all the customers they lost to other places, I dont know.

A rental concept for low quality clips, I can see that working as a win win for all involved. Reliable money is reliable money.

But with only 4,5 million videos in the whole market, I dont understand why artists would give up on individual download income at 50% for good quality files.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2016, 04:50 by cobalt »

« Reply #204 on: May 14, 2016, 04:52 »
+1
It needs people who supply this madness.

Usually people only offer low quality files for cheap prices. The only reason to offer quality files for pennies is if you get extremly high volume sales, like some people do on envato.

Then you have a business model like the original micro market for photos, where those of us who got in early, made a crazy amount of money.

But now there is an oversupply situation and the quality photos are moving back to macrostock agencies or specialized collections like stocksy with a walled garden approach.

It looks like pond5 is trying to crash the video market really, really early in the game, if they place quality files in the 6 dollar price bin, while renting the content for 50 cents a month.

Maybe they are hoping to win back all the customers they lost to other places, I dont know.

A rental concept for low quality clips, I can see that working as a win win for all involved. Reliable money is reliable money.

But with only 4,5 million videos in the whole market, I dont understand why artists would give up on individual download income at 50% for good quality files.
Basically p5 got a new management.made up by people that don;t really know this industry.
When a new mgmt arrives they try to do something big to impress the shareholders, even if it is something very stupid.

What is happening is that they are driving all previous p5 sales to this bloody membership area.
In the MA basically no royalties are paid, only the ridiculous half dollar per clip per mont one off.
The thing is that before p5 was getting an average of $ 35 per clip sold ($70 minus $35 for the artist), in the bloody membership they only get an average of $6 per clip sold. So their income per previously existing customer is 6 times smaller than before.
In order to maintain the same income they need to multiply their volume of sales of clip six times, therefore by attracting customers from other agencies, and remember that this entire huge volume of sales does not generate any income for artists.
In reality they are stealing a lot of customers from other agencies, that is why everyone is complaining of lower sales for video clips not only at p5

« Reply #205 on: May 14, 2016, 05:03 »
0
Well, their calculation will also include normal royalties from content the customer buys that is not in the membership program.

We dont know how many additional clips the customers are buying.
This is probably what the test phase is for.

At the moment customers can only download 10 clips a month (unless someone got a special deal...)

I am not sure they really need 6 times more customers to make it work. If enough casual pond5 buyers can committ themselves to the membership program, then it might be financially viable at a much earlier stage.

All the people that buy 2-5 clips every 3-6 months, just get them committed to a reliable 50 dollars a month and you can create a very visble rising subscription customer numbers, although the customer is not spending more than before.

The difference is, that pond5 now gets nearly all those 50 dollars, instead of sharing 50%.

A customer who spends an irregular 600 dollars a year on pond5, probably looking for the cheaper files, can now with the same money buy many more clips, but pond5 doesnt have to share with the artist.

SquirrelPower

« Reply #206 on: May 14, 2016, 06:51 »
+1

In reality they are stealing a lot of customers from other agencies, that is why everyone is complaining of lower sales for video clips not only at p5
[/quote]

You make some good points and sales are in fact down somewhat at other agencies this spring.  Hard to believe at first since they only have 200,000 clips in membership area but if they hand picked the best of every genre then maybe it's having more impact on the industry that was previously expected. 

Some said the same of Videoblocks when they launched but the way to get sales there is to have unique content that they don't have in their membership area, it's not easy to do but if you can do it sales will happen.  I am guessing same would be the case at Pond.

I think by the time this is all over we will see some agencies collapse.

« Reply #207 on: May 14, 2016, 07:41 »
+2
I might be wrong, but I believe they are 300,000, not 200,000.
Videoblock was never a real threat because their content in the membership area was really poor, but in the case of p5 they have picked the best from their marketplace and most of the artists fell into the trap.
Yes, this is going to kill the footage market.
The only way to react from SS and FT is to lower the price of clip to $5-6, thus creating a price war.
P5 will be the first to die, because they rely solely on video, while the other two can last longer with their income from still images.
Once p5 will be dead and buried, finally out of the way, maybe they can try to slowly somehow drive prices a bit upwards

« Reply #208 on: May 14, 2016, 09:43 »
0
The membership is made up of 200,000 clips -  you can do a simple blank search for footage and filter by membership to find the figure, 199,797 to be exact.

My sales have tanked at Pond5, starting in January this year. I used to have super solid sales there selling multiple $299 clips a week and now that's completely dried up. I'm sure the membership program is having an affect but my hunch is other factors at play and customers have moved elsewhere. I have about 450 clips in the membership program all of which were my cheapo one, nothing that was priced high. If nothing improves in the next 4 to 6 weeks I'll hand in my notice and withdraw from the program.

« Reply #209 on: May 14, 2016, 09:54 »
+2
The membership is made up of 200,000 clips -  you can do a simple blank search for footage and filter by membership to find the figure, 199,797 to be exact.

My sales have tanked at Pond5, starting in January this year. I used to have super solid sales there selling multiple $299 clips a week and now that's completely dried up. I'm sure the membership program is having an affect but my hunch is other factors at play and customers have moved elsewhere. I have about 450 clips in the membership program all of which were my cheapo one, nothing that was priced high. If nothing improves in the next 4 to 6 weeks I'll hand in my notice and withdraw from the program.
Is it at all possible to withdraw from the program, I mean to stop the devil using your clips in the membership?
If that is the case it is very, very good news.
I am sure that most of the artists who have fallen into the trap will see how they have been taken for fools and get out of the scheme

« Reply #210 on: May 14, 2016, 18:20 »
0
Meanwhile, here in my bizarre world, a reviewer just approved one of my photos and increased the price from $5 to $10 dollars and said they thought I'd make more take home pay that way.

Don't get me wrong, I know photos don't sell much on P5, but I'm still tickled that the reviewer took the time to do it.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2095 Views
Last post January 09, 2014, 09:33
by Mantis
11 Replies
11138 Views
Last post June 18, 2014, 10:12
by PeterChigmaroff
0 Replies
2002 Views
Last post August 27, 2014, 12:41
by kentannenbaum
Pond 5 #4

Started by Rinderart Shutterstock.com

9 Replies
2730 Views
Last post December 15, 2015, 15:12
by everest
1 Replies
1265 Views
Last post February 28, 2016, 14:02
by ChrisGardinerPhotography

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results