MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Pond5 => Topic started by: Mantis on November 17, 2014, 16:21
-
I was going to put this in the Pond 5 discussion about what they could improve but thought it might be better with a discussion around it. Since Pond 5 is a fair trade agency, and the fact that Bigstock and Istock are at the prenatal stages of destroying video in microstock, does it make strategic positioning sense for Pond 5 to offer video exclusivity? While it sounds good, how would the incentive work? Would they offer higher commission, say 60-70% and charge more per video to make up the extra payout? Would it be enough, given that they are the leader in video, to attract buyers away from other outlets? Or is convenience for the buyer more powerful than better selection? Would there be enough competitive content on P5 to even pull buyers away from other outlets? One thing that I see differently by offering exclusivity on P5 is that you set your own prices and are not at the mercy of the micros. That's precisely why I believe P5 exclusivity would attract more videographers that other exclusivity programs.
Thoughts?
-
You can already go there and be exclusive with the highest royalty rates and the highest pricing of videos if you choose.
-
You can already go there and be exclusive with the highest royalty rates and the highest pricing of videos if you choose.
Thats not the point.
Exclusivity means the videos are not elsewhere. You can still upload exclusively to P5 but buyers will know its not really exclusive
-
You can already go there and be exclusive with the highest royalty rates and the highest pricing of videos if you choose.
Thats not the point.
Exclusivity means the videos are not elsewhere. You can still upload exclusively to P5 but buyers will know its not really exclusive
I'm saying there is already enough incentive to go with Pond5 in response to the questions: "While it sounds good, how would the incentive work? Would they offer higher commission, say 60-70% and charge more per video to make up the extra payout?"
They already offer the highest rate and the ability to set your prices higher than any other site so they don't need to offer anything more there. I think buyers will go to the sites where the content is, if contributors decided to just put all their work on Pond5 at reasonable prices it would accomplish much of what exclusivity does. It might be better if they offered better search position or a way to just search for videos only on Pond5 though. Pond5 should be focusing on other things like inspecting some files instead of letting everything through and raising the minimum pricing.
Instead of waiting for Pond5 to change it would be more effective for us to change.
-
Doesn't Revostock do something like this by offering a higher percentage if the clip is exclusive to them. I guess if P5 was willing to go a higher percentage and your content is unique enough to warrant a price of $150 plus per clip, it might be worth it.
-
i would like to experiment with higher prices on pond5 and keep them only there for a year or so to see what happens.
But all I can do is write in the description field that these files are only available at pond5. or maybe I could make a lightbox with exclusive content.
but I think it would be useful if I could somehow visibly mark a file as an exclusive one,maybe with a star or a red frame so that it is easy to see.
however, I don't think exclusive content should be favored in the search and I wouldn't expect more than50%. i think the fact that I can set my own prices is value enough.
Maybe if enough artists are interested an option in the search filter for exclusive content would be useful.
but search results should be as always, only if a file gets lightboxed and bought should it rise in the search.
and of course,all totaly voluntarily, nobody should be forced to upload exclusive content. Not even series exclusivity, let the artists find their own system.
-
I always failed to understand why exclusivity should matter to buyers.
I mean, stock files are never exclusive, why should they care if a video (or photo) is available for sale only at one site or at other sites as well? If they really need unique content, assignment is the way to go
-
I always failed to understand why exclusivity should matter to buyers.
The only reason exclusivity would matter to buyers is if a site had a large enough supply of high quality, unique files, along with most of the other files available everywhere. That would make that site the preferred first place to look for buyers who value their time.
iStock has the largest (ha, almost the only) such collection, but they definitely do not have most of the non-exclusive content available on other sites. And hopefully that content is getting smaller by the day.
-
and the fact that Bigstock and Istock are at the prenatal stages of destroying video in microstock
I don't see how you can compare the two.
iStock's commission levels are without a doubt too low for independents to support. But iStock is still selling indie videos at prices above the average HD selling price at P5. So while I can certainly understand (and strongly support) indies removing their video files from IS, I can't agree that what iStock is doing is "destroying video in microstock".
BS, OTOH, is doing exactly that.
-
I always failed to understand why exclusivity should matter to buyers.
The only reason exclusivity would matter to buyers is if a site had a large enough supply of high quality, unique files, along with most of the other files available everywhere. That would make that site the preferred first place to look for buyers who value their time.
iStock has the largest (ha, almost the only) such collection, but they definitely do not have most of the non-exclusive content available on other sites. And hopefully that content is getting smaller by the day.
That is my take, too, KB. I do think that there would be a ceiling on what buyers are willing to pay, but this conceivably could be a win-win with the offering of way better revenue than any agency, and volume (assuming P5 can lure enough people in with some sort of exclusivity model). Just because P5 lets you set your own prices, as Ticktock mentions, isn't enough. P5 will not win with just a me too collection. Some key points:
1. P5 must attract enough unique artists that are willing to leave the other sites in enough volume to matter
2. Must craft what "additional incentive" means in a way that is real and the contributor feels the benefit
3. I'm not sure if partial exclusivity makes sense because some will use P5 as a dumping ground for their me too videos....up for discussion
Negatively speaking, challenges on search placement for exclusives may be a challenge. I would expect some sort of preferential placement to account for what I'd lose from being on several other sites. I'd also be concerned about how to attract so many videographers but they can start by contacting their existing contributor base, many of whom are on the other micros. That could be enough.
-
Files Exclusivity is not so bad.
Example: everyone wants to get into Stocksy !!
Microstock prices have dropped to have the same files on 20 sites competing with each other...
If a buyer needs a particular file will not mind paying a little more.
But... I think the exclusive content must be quality content.
-
I think it would be a good thing for Pond5 to have an exclusive collection but I think if they were interested in doing that, they would of done it by now. They seem to be like alamy and they have never tried exclusivity. It would make more sense for video clips than stills because it takes longer to upload to multiple sites and some of the microstock sites are selling very little and at commissions that make it not sustainable to contribute video clips to them.
-
It would certainly be great if Pond 5 can have a tick box for "exclusive ' videos when you upload and a search filter for exclusive content. Many of my videos are already exclusive there. But i must agree with tickstock : Instead of waiting for Pond5 to change it would be more effective for us to change.