0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
They have wholly owned content, so I don't really see how the two different models can be compared? 100% seems good but how does this work in the long term if they keep growing their wholly owned content?I'm quite happy with Pond5, 50% and letting me set my own prices.
I am all for paying the creator for their work. But any business practices 101 course will tell you that 100% royalties is hard to maintain while at the same time damaging the overall business. Seriously, how do you help someone like this grow?
This is nuts. Why support a company that gives content away for free? Let them sink. The sooner the better.
It is an interesting concept for the business. The big dogs like Getty, where I am, do this all the time that is why I have a load of $1 sales for my HD and 4k content there. If the buyers spends x they give the x number of Dl's say at $3.00. With VB it is like Amazon Prime, you have to be a member to get the cheaper price, the good news for them is the 4k is not at a discount only HD, I could see them putting 4k at $150 and raising HD to $69 either way this is very interesting to watch on the business front. They are looking to grow the subscription base as that is how they make their money, nothing is free as you have to pay the $99.00 per year for access. Time will tell.
To get 42$ per hd clip at vb is much more than the 23.7$ from shutter stock it is simple math thats why i work at first priority with vb and put aside ss and p5. Those agencies must see that we are working with agencies who apriciate us and pays us high royalties. Only then maybe ss will wake up and start paying here contributors at least 50%. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
... that is why I have a load of $1 sales for my HD and 4k content there. ...
Is the other content wholly owned or is like their other sites where they paid the copyright holders some paltry sum (much less than an EL) to be able to sell the content in perpetuity without any further compensation?I have just had a thought. Who thinks they will soon be approaching the best selling people on the PPD side with an offer to licence their portfolios in the same way as graphicstock (their other site)? I think they are just using the set up to be able to chose only the people that sell to license to the sub site, so the quality of their subs offering will increase and PPD decrease until the opposite of the current situation is the case, best stuff on the subs side with no further compensation to contributors.