Hello Zach.
Will videoblocks be the seller?
I am asking because I am worried about who is going to pay VAT for EU-non-business-buyers.

Zach, I just read the licence terms, but it seems you dont accept editorial content? Is that correct?

Off topic: why does this threads have link rot buttons instead of agree / disagree ?

Zach, I just read the licence terms, but it seems you dont accept editorial content? Is that correct?

Forgot to mention: On the same page I linked to above, they mention that if you don't include a release with a submission that they believe should have one, they will either reject it or accept it as editorial. So I believe they do accept some editorial content.

Quote from: Mantis on February 13, 2015, 09:03

I am interested. In addition to the above, what kind of content are you looking for. I have everyday run of the mill stuff and animations.  Are you looking for 5-30 second clips? Also, at $49 you'd be cutting SS by almost twice.  Are you concerned that this will start a price war? I mean, look art Bigstock. They are giving away videos.

One more thing.  There are a couple of new players here: Dissolve, Motion Elements, and Revostock.  I am on all three, none really generate any income for me, although I only have 450 video clips.  What is your USP? I have to look at this from the lens of Pond5 who does generate income. $49 is a fair price and comparable to what I price my clips at, but I need more sales because micro stock photos is killing me. 

I suspect there is a fee (no I haven't checked out the site, Im leaving to work).  Can you elaborate? How can you possible give contributors 100% if there is not a membership fee? And if there is a membership fee you need to build that into your calculator.

A lot of your questions are answered on their webpage, when you do get a chance to look at it:
https://contribute.videoblocks.com/faq/content-submission-requirements

Apparently there is a membership fee that people are already paying (I think; that isn't quite clear to me). But as I wrote above, that does mean that the agency in this case has no incentive to sell our clips at the quoted prices, and could (in theory) promote them heavily and often. I'm not at all saying they'd do that, just that the CLA allows it.

Revostock may be new to you, but they were one of the first sites to sell stock videos on the web, starting in 2006.

Thanks, KB. Yea, I am new to RS...a year or so new. But regarding VB I find it hard to believe that we would be successful at that game.  You are right about the lack of promotional motivation if it's just a membership fee-based outlet.  I am done with membership sites for awhile. 500PX I paid and closed my account due to a couple of factors. FAA has seen the last of my money, too.....no sales.  There has to be motivation to promote content.

The VideoBlocks vs. Shutterstock "earnings calculator" is cute, but really, do you think that someone who sells 50 videos on SS in a typical month would also sell 50 videos on VideoBlocks? That would be great, but I'm doubtful it's likely.

Out of the gate, it's probably not realistic that we'll match Shutterstock in terms of sales volume. But over time, traffic will grow and sales should increase.

I'm not one to read CLAs closely (shame on me, I know), but clause 2.5 worries me:
2.5 Promotions. We may, from time to time, run promotions for Members and we may include your Content as part of such promotions.  You agree and acknowledge that  such promotions may affect the amount of Revenue you receive for specific Content.

The language is intentionally broad, but truthfully, we won't go crazy here. Our goal is to be the most contributor-friendly agency there is, so we will never do anything to jeopardize our relationships. We know how you guys generally feel about Bigstock and others, and it's certainly not a feeling we want to be emulated. We don't have a full sense of what our promotions/discounts may look like in the future, but we will always keep the contributor's best interests in mind when making decisions.

We actually have a huge incentive to drive sales for you. The higher the sales volume, the more incentive there is for you guys to keep uploading, and the bigger and more diverse the library becomes for buyers. And the more appealing the library is to buyers, the more likely they'll be to become members - so there is a financial incentive for us as well. Driving sales is the key to making this whole thing work.

To confirm a couple comments:
- Yes, we accept editorial content (but of course we prefer releases whenever possible)
- It is free to join as a contributor. The fee I was referring to is a membership fee for buyers.

I think that covers all the main comments/questions, but let me know otherwise. Thanks for the help and discussion KB and others!

Hello Zach.
Will videoblocks be the seller?
I am asking because I am worried about who is going to pay VAT for EU-non-business-buyers.

Has this question been answered anywhere? It is now an important question for contributors in the EU as since January 2015 we have to register and account for VAT sales to all individual customers if we are effectively selling direct to the customer. Most stock agencies don't reveal the buyer's name to the contributor, the agency is effectively the seller and the agency deals with VAT accounting. Is this the case with Videoblocks? If Videoblocks does not deal with the VAT, it kills the possibility of me signing up as a contributor.

Zach, I know you want to keep it simple but I feel your pricing for HD footage is too cheap. It of course matters what percentage we receive but  $49 to the customer for all footage is too low. I would need to see some option for higher pricing. At this point I would pass on your company.

This kind of advertising has to be explained to contributors as to how their clips will really be commissioned. 100% of $49 is already going to hurt the video market, but what about subscription downloads as per the ad? How will commissions like this be treated?

Quote from: Mantis on March 02, 2015, 14:26

This kind of advertising has to be explained to contributors as to how their clips will really be commissioned. 100% of $49 is already going to hurt the video market, but what about subscription downloads as per the ad? How will commissions like this be treated?

From the OP above:
3. Everything you upload is published to the marketplace only. Your files won't end up in our subscription library.

Thanks, KB. I am getting so knee-jerky these days and lack full trust in anything these agencies claim.  Thanks for pointing that out.

Quote from: KB on March 02, 2015, 14:41

Quote from: Mantis on March 02, 2015, 14:26

This kind of advertising has to be explained to contributors as to how their clips will really be commissioned. 100% of $49 is already going to hurt the video market, but what about subscription downloads as per the ad? How will commissions like this be treated?

From the OP above:
3. Everything you upload is published to the marketplace only. Your files won't end up in our subscription library.

Thanks, KB. I am getting so knee-jerky these days and lack full trust in anything these agencies claim.  Thanks for pointing that out.

Yes, for us contributors it seems it's a case of "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me 100 times ...".

Not that anyone cares what i think  but I have been a VideoBlocks subscription customer for the past 2 years. Not only do they provide excellent service to the buyer, but there are some people that I highly respect (Luke and Marika Neumann for example) that have supplied footage to VideoBlocks. At the level at which the Neumanns and others operate, I highly doubt that they would work with any company/website that wasn't on the up-and-up.

I personally can't wait for the for the marketplace!

Just my two cents.