MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Pond5 subscription program to start  (Read 6980 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2016, 17:35 »
+1
Looks interesting.  Surprised Know Your Onions hasn't lambasted them for this yet :)

« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2016, 17:44 »
+3
First wait TWO months and more to review your footage.  8)

« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2016, 17:46 »
+1
Looks interesting.  Surprised Know Your Onions hasn't lambasted them for this yet :)


Ha ha... you right my friend.  ;)

"The new product will be launched along with a large marketing campaign, a new direct sales team and a website rebranding."
God help us all! They didn't fix the basics, yet heading towards more complicated matters.... we will pray!  8)

BUT For this one I raise the glass or two. It was about the time for him to * GO!
http://www.microstockdiaries.com/tom-bennett-out-of-pond5.html
« Last Edit: January 18, 2016, 18:13 by KnowYourOnions »

ACS

« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2016, 18:10 »
+2
So my unsold (lets say) 300 videos will bring me 150 $ per month. Right? 🙄

« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2016, 18:34 »
+7
No actual info on what it pays, aside from the minimum.  I'm not sells my videos to net $.50 each, I'll tell you that.

KB

« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2016, 19:58 »
+14
Congrats to Pond5 for coming up with an innovative, unique way to kill video microstock. I don't think it will take longer than a year or two for us to look back and see this as the pivotal change that ruined things.

Forgive my pessimism if I prove to be incorrect (which I would definitely love to be).

« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2016, 21:36 »
+1
Congrats to Pond5 for coming up with an innovative, unique way to kill video microstock. I don't think it will take longer than a year or two for us to look back and see this as the pivotal change that ruined things.

Forgive my pessimism if I prove to be incorrect (which I would definitely love to be).

I think the VB model is far more damaging than what P5 is planning

KB

« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2016, 23:42 »
+2
Congrats to Pond5 for coming up with an innovative, unique way to kill video microstock. I don't think it will take longer than a year or two for us to look back and see this as the pivotal change that ruined things.

Forgive my pessimism if I prove to be incorrect (which I would definitely love to be).

I think the VB model is far more damaging than what P5 is planning
Why, what am I missing?

In the VB model, the two libraries are entirely separate. The files available in the unlimited library aren't available anywhere else (AFAIK). In the P5 model, the files will remain for sale in the "marketplace" (as well as, most likely, on other sites). Of course we don't know pricing yet, so perhaps P5's unlimited sub price will be so high that it won't be that bad. But it seems to me that whenever you have a file being provided at a virtually "free" price (sort of), it devalues that file elsewhere, as well as all similars from that artist and others.

The only damaging part of VB is their pricing of HD files, but I don't see that it's any more damaging than the scores or hundreds of P5 contributors who sell their HD files for $10 or $20, or 4K files for $30 or $40.

« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2016, 01:28 »
+3
Unfortunately i agree too and furthermore i believe (and i REALLY hope to be proven wrong) that the subs model will further drive p5 marketplaces down.
How this will go down will depend on the size and quality of the subs library,but given the fact that a lot of people might endorse the subs program due to the stable monthly income i have reasons to be very pessimistic.

« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2016, 05:26 »
+1
I don't see a big  problem because we don't have to give clips to the subs program.  It will work like VB, if you have something that isn't in the subs program, people will pay for it.  Anyone without any unique content is screwed but that's going to happen anyway.

« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2016, 05:35 »
+2
I don't see a big  problem because we don't have to give clips to the subs program.  It will work like VB, if you have something that isn't in the subs program, people will pay for it.  Anyone without any unique content is screwed but that's going to happen anyway.

VB's prices may be low (for HD) but they are the same for all clips in the marketplace, so everyone is competing on the same terms more or less.
At p5 one can sell 4K for 30usd if he wishes,which is already happening ,big time,and the cheap subs program will propably, "suggest",that they need to price as low as possible.

Given the 4K--> downconverted hd price search bug at pond5,this could be a recipe for disaster.
But it will depend on the quality (and size and versatility) of the subs marketplace.If it's really aimed for those who need a few "mediocre" clips for a mediocre/cheap project then it wont be so bad.Until i see the marketplace i cant tell.

« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2016, 05:41 »
0
There's also people charging $200+ for clips on P5, don't think that's going to change.  It works with stills, SS have been pushing their higher prices up over the years while keeping a cheap subs offer going.

« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2016, 06:06 »
+3
What high prices has exactly been ss pushing lately?Dont tell me about the occasional 40 ,85 or even the 115usd hd sale because my rpd (which is low enough as it is) there is getting lower and lower every month.

P.S This topic is about video not stills.

« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2016, 06:38 »
0
Do I understand this correctly - any file included gets paid 50 cents a month, as a base royalty, irrespective of if it gets downloaded?

That is a very interesting idea, nonody else is paying us money just to have files available. Can I include photos?

How do I sign up?

As long as I can opt in files on an individual basis, this looks like a very fair offer to me.

« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2016, 07:03 »
+2
You have to be invited to participate.Doesn't hurt to ask them i guess.

    -----DISCLAIMER-----------

WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR (based on a rather cryptic forum discussion so dont lash out on me for speaking out):

In an early discussion over at the p5 forums i think the subs price was divided between  2 tiers a low one and a high one.
Both roughly under 8 usd ,one was like 3-4,but take this with a grain of salt,i can't even remember how long ago this was discussed let alone the pricing details,plus things might have changed,so i speculate based on what i know.

Also the selection of clips to be used for the subs is (i think) handled by the p5 stuff (perhaps this explains the 2+ months curation period?) so if anyone thinks he will give them 500 junk clips that aren't selling to make a profit is in for a shock,since a specific selection will make it in the program.
You can only opt clips out not in.I dont know if this selection has happened noone is speaking openly so we dont know how many clips are in or if they are quality clips.Also all clips to be selected are new clips i think August 2015 and on.

Other than that no one knows for sure or isn't telling.
I believe (given the VERY little i know) that everyone participating is slowly digging his own grave,but to be honest i understand one's decision.

At least -if p5 wants to impose a vb model- they pay the contributors for these,so why aren't the usual trolls cheering?

stockVid

« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2016, 07:29 »
+4
I think it's too early to judge. P5 has always been an honest company. I'm giving them a chance to see what happens.

« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2016, 07:30 »
0
I was thinking of photos mostly. I havent uploaded many photos on pond5, because they dont really sell photos. But if there is base payment, just to keep images up, I wouldnt mind uploading what I have.

For videos, it makes sense if they take a hand picked selection. There is no point in paying a flat fee for everything.

It is a very different approach, renting the content instead of buying the rights outright.

« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2016, 07:43 »
+1

Of course they are a honest company that's why we're having this discussion.
Well as honest as a company can be, that is.

« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2016, 08:06 »
+1
They have always been fair with us, so I am really curious what they are coming up with.

« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2016, 08:23 »
+1
They have always been fair with us, so I am really curious what they are coming up with.

Does average 2 months waiting for reviewing files count as being fair to the artists?  ::)

« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2016, 09:45 »
+4
How many times have they had this problem? And compared to the dramas at other agencies, this is a simple nuisance that i am sure they will want to correct.

Otherwise, they are just handing Shutterstock the total lead on all editorial content forever.

« Reply #22 on: January 19, 2016, 10:06 »
+2
I used to think they were great but it seems strange that they lost control of the review queue at a time of year when most sites have faster reviews and they deactivated lots of SFX portfolios and made it impossible for some people like me to verify them.  So they have a slightly tarnished reputation with me at the moment.  They could fix these two things easily but have shown no inclination to do so as yet.  Hence the disappearance of my last site referral link in my signature, I used to have 3, now they're all gone.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2016, 10:08 by sharpshot »

« Reply #23 on: January 19, 2016, 10:14 »
+2
No matter how you slice it, the end game is a means to cheaper content and lower royalties. And the go to logic will be volume.  VB has an edge just because of the 100% commish.  But P5 will most likely retain the 50% cut so if they want to complete with VB they will have to offer a subscription of about the same price, meaning we would get 50% of the $49....ASSUMING this is the way it works.  I suspect we would lose the ability to price our own content on the SUB model because P5 would need to retain control over the value proposition offered to customers. Otherwise subscription prices will be all over the place and if they offer my work at 50% less, I would price it 50% more, so they will almost definitely have controlled pricing on the sub side. So I don't see this as good.  If they pay you .50 cents a month for 100 of your videos, great, you make $50 a month, but stand to lose far more. You end up much closer to the Dissolve model where they force price content to $49 if on other sites like VB and then pay you 30%. 


« Reply #24 on: January 19, 2016, 10:45 »
+1
Until we have real data on what they offer, we can of course speculate what will happen.

But what I find interesting is that up until this idea was floated only super high quality studios with very large portfolios had the option to negotiate for rental fees or upfront payment. If pond5 really makes us individual offers for a steady stream of money, that would be something really new for the average single artist.

To get reliable money without risk, is a very interesting new direction. It all depends how they can make it work.

And maybe it doesnt really work for customers, clients and pond5.

Overall, it is good to have new options like vb and maybe this rental model.  It is all much better than just one place dominating everything. the world is big enough to handle multiple buying solutions and different marketplaces.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
191 Replies
36367 Views
Last post May 22, 2008, 06:07
by rene
22 Replies
12219 Views
Last post October 27, 2012, 07:40
by Poncke
49 Replies
9326 Views
Last post March 05, 2016, 04:12
by KnowYourOnions
45 Replies
20521 Views
Last post May 18, 2016, 03:10
by increasingdifficulty
8 Replies
5368 Views
Last post May 25, 2016, 00:57
by BlackJack

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results