This might be one of Oringers new projects he was talking about.

TERMS OF SERVICE
The following is a legally binding agreement between you and Shutterstock, Inc., the owner and operator of www.skillfeed.com (hereinafter 'Skillfeed').

http://skillfeed.com/#/tos


http://skillfeed.com/

We are building the world's largest library of video tutorials.
Join Us!

How much do I get paid for my work?
You get paid for every minute viewed. At the end of the month we go back and add up all the minutes viewed for each video. We then add up all the revenue we made during the month. We take 30% of our revenue and split it among all paid minutes (plus a 10% bonus for content uploaded before we are live). We then send you your payment via PayPal on the 15th of the month for the previous month.
How much does it cost to become a contributor?
Absolutely nothing. Our goal is to pay YOU!

But why would anyone pay for something that is literally FREE all over the internet. Youtube anyone?

I'm not sure if anyone would pay for a couple of video tutorials from random contributors.

First of all, most tutorials are available for free on various video sites. Secondly, there are tutorial dvd's from professional training companies (Gnomon Workshop, for instance).

thanks for sharing, nice to know what Jon is working on

Haven't you ever heard of Lynda.com?

There is definitely money to be made selling tutorials!

Haven't you ever heard of Lynda.com?

There is definitely money to be made selling tutorials!

I've used lynda.com and in general I think their tutorials are of very high quality, but I can't see crowdsourcing the sort of thing they have - and I can't see paying for random tutorials from random contributors given the mass of stuff already out there.

The lynda authors are "brands" for the most part - people folks already have come across in some other capacity and know their expertise. Plus they follow through with a whole series on a new release of a product, or all products in a suite. As an example, a few years ago, I came back to using Illustrator after a long break and I watched a series of stuff on the current release.

I don't know how Kelby is doing in competing with lynda.com, but I wasn't as impressed with their stable. But there's NAPP to promote Kelby's stuff, so perhaps they're making headway. So you have two big names in that area already slugging it out and Shutterstock thinks they can knock them off their perch somehow? Doesn't make any sense to me at all.

On top of which this variable "royalty pool" scheme that they're proposing to pay contributors is the same thing 123rf started with in 2005. It wasn't long before they had to make a minimum payment - why would you knock yourself out creating something for an unknown and variable payment?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I think this isn't an idea with legs.

Aren't other sites like tutsplus.com, which is part of the Envato network (Photodune, graphic river etc) basically the same as this? They offer some freebies but try and get people to sign up to a "Premium" service. And people can contribute tutorials to it - they have sometimes asked for it on the forums at ThemeForest.

It seems to have worked well for Envato.

I've used lynda.com and in general I think their tutorials are of very high quality, but I can't see crowdsourcing the sort of thing they have - and I can't see paying for random tutorials from random contributors given the mass of stuff already out there.

The lynda authors are "brands" for the most part - people folks already have come across in some other capacity and know their expertise. Plus they follow through with a whole series on a new release of a product, or all products in a suite. As an example, a few years ago, I came back to using Illustrator after a long break and I watched a series of stuff on the current release.

I don't know how Kelby is doing in competing with lynda.com, but I wasn't as impressed with their stable. But there's NAPP to promote Kelby's stuff, so perhaps they're making headway. So you have two big names in that area already slugging it out and Shutterstock thinks they can knock them off their perch somehow? Doesn't make any sense to me at all.

On top of which this variable "royalty pool" scheme that they're proposing to pay contributors is the same thing 123rf started with in 2005. It wasn't long before they had to make a minimum payment - why would you knock yourself out creating something for an unknown and variable payment?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I think this isn't an idea with legs.

Exactly. There's not a snowball's chance in hell that this is going to work. It never fails to amaze me how often major agencies come up with preposterous schemes that have no chance whatsoever of succeeding ... and invariably they fail within a few months. Add this one to the list. I can only think that Oringer is paying succour to one of his VP's 'big ideas'. Ridiculous.

Paying 'by the minute' might work for dodgy sex-lines ... but it's never going to work for tutorials (unless the 'presenter' has her t*ts out anyway).

Very smart.
There is a lot of potentials in distributing quality tutorials.

Ja ja, they are already on youtube, as pictures are on flicker.
But have you noticed how much crap you have to wade through before you get to something you can stand to watch.
Its about copyright and quality, just like pictures.
I think I will join.
First project will be how to make a new handle for an axe.

This startup sells video classes in crafts, mostly. A Wall Street Journal article said that the company is growing very fast and is already profitable and has not needed to use the $15 mil they raised in VC money.
http://www.craftsy.com/

Quote from: jsnover on December 27, 2012, 22:52

I've used lynda.com and in general I think their tutorials are of very high quality, but I can't see crowdsourcing the sort of thing they have - and I can't see paying for random tutorials from random contributors given the mass of stuff already out there.

The lynda authors are "brands" for the most part - people folks already have come across in some other capacity and know their expertise. Plus they follow through with a whole series on a new release of a product, or all products in a suite. As an example, a few years ago, I came back to using Illustrator after a long break and I watched a series of stuff on the current release.

I don't know how Kelby is doing in competing with lynda.com, but I wasn't as impressed with their stable. But there's NAPP to promote Kelby's stuff, so perhaps they're making headway. So you have two big names in that area already slugging it out and Shutterstock thinks they can knock them off their perch somehow? Doesn't make any sense to me at all.

On top of which this variable "royalty pool" scheme that they're proposing to pay contributors is the same thing 123rf started with in 2005. It wasn't long before they had to make a minimum payment - why would you knock yourself out creating something for an unknown and variable payment?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I think this isn't an idea with legs.

Exactly. There's not a snowball's chance in hell that this is going to work. It never fails to amaze me how often major agencies come up with preposterous schemes that have no chance whatsoever of succeeding ... and invariably they fail within a few months. Add this one to the list. I can only think that Oringer is paying succour to one of his VP's 'big ideas'. Ridiculous.

Paying 'by the minute' might work for dodgy sex-lines ... but it's never going to work for tutorials (unless the 'presenter' has her t*ts out anyway).

It's not just the model that won't work, it's the content.  I think it was on the SS forums a week or two ago where Rinderart was approached by SS to supply some of his video tutorials.  If you've ever seen them they are awful and don't teach you anything.  I use Lynda.com and have an account there and I would rather pay the subscription fee than have to sift through a bunch of horrible, meaningless videos to "hopefully" find one that works for me.  If SS is going after the kind of video tuts RA offers, Skillfeed won't get any traction from the getgo.

very good.

very good.

You went from Bullocks to very good. I am confused. Is Skillfeed a bad idea or very good.?

It's not just the model that won't work, it's the content.  I think it was on the SS forums a week or two ago where Rinderart was approached by SS to supply some of his video tutorials.  If you've ever seen them they are awful and don't teach you anything.  I use Lynda.com and have an account there and I would rather pay the subscription fee than have to sift through a bunch of horrible, meaningless videos to "hopefully" find one that works for me.  If SS is going after the kind of video tuts RA offers, Skillfeed won't get any traction from the getgo.

Seriously, approaching the self proclaimed "experts" on the SS forums to contribute content is a really bad idea. They need to ask people who actually know what they are doing, though they are probably out there shooting, not making videos.