Thank you for answer. Can you please at least shed some light what percentage of your earnings generated from Elements? If it is not top secret information.
the intermediary has become the seller: yes, but it makes no difference to the model that Envato is the seller or the author is the seller. It’s still the Envato website where Envato handle payments and the like, with items provided by authors and customer who pay money to download these items. Nothing has really changed the fundamentals, even if it’s worded differently.
and compensation is no longer determined by INDIVIDUAL transactions: Kind of. There’s one payment made for the subscription to Envato, yes, but how much you make is 100% determined by individual transactions. How many times a buyer downloads one of your items compared to how many times they downloaded somebody elses items.
distributing compensation from the COLLECTIVE revenue: but that’s not really all that different from the marketplace. Take every penny Envato have earned over a year and stick it in a pot… it’s then a ‘collective’ revenue. Envato then distribute that revenue based on number of sales, item price and revenue split. That’s exactly the same on Elements, just that the calculation for doing so is based on how many items a subscriber downloads, which essentially dictates the ‘item price’. It’s more complicated, yes, and the amount you get per download fluctuates based on subscriber behaviour but it’s not like everyone is being distributed an equal share of the pot. Some people are going to make large sums of money and some people are going to make small sums of money, based on the popularity of their work… and that doesn’t sound anything like communism!
CENTRAL AUTHORITY: every company is their own central authority unless they’re a co-op or something, so you can’t really tag that on as proof that elements is communism incarnate! It’s like saying Best Buy are like the military because their works wear uniforms.
Thank you for such detailed answer, and i highly appreciate how you explain customers needs. But let me point on one thing. I also want to have freedom to install Windows or Cubase or whatever on every of my PC - my, my wife, my son and daughter, my home or studio, BUT software companies value their product, and only few of them allow more than one installation. So my thought here - not every feel of freedom equal to good. Persons freedom ends where other person freedom begins, i believe. So i am still afraid you need to cancel broadcast usage of music on Elements, because of our freedom to protect our earnings. I do not believe you consulted with many authors on this issue, more than this i remember you explained that Elements more about single user, youtube and no way broadcasting. It is sad to see how our needs and fears ignored.
At the same time, viewing this situation from a customers point is good thing. I also hate complicated licenses, i also hate to read long textes of rules, explanations and limitations. Sadly, i am not invited to Elements to have my real opinion from real earnings from this platform. Let’see how other persons, who were invited, will react
This is because buyers do not understand the broadcast license terms correctly, especially regarding the audience size. The first tier broadcast license should be the rarest. Envato should focus on making those terms clearer, and maximize those high tier sales!
The fact that you are willing to trade that off to offer a “sense of freedom” to buyers shows how understanding you are of the value we authors put in these broadcast licenses.
It also makes little sense. So you want to offer non-broadcast buyers the sense of freedom to be able to broadcast our music? uh…what?
The broadcast licenses are not a marketing gimmick you can use to incite any potential buyers with. These licenses are a specific contract for specific professional buyers.
Advertising Elements as the coolest service that even has broadcast use included, is total marketing BS. It also perpetuate the myth of do whatever you want with the music, there is no accountability!
Your willingness to go ahead with this plan is a real shame. Once again, you have failed to hear your community. This is a terrible mistake!
Music producers who have been invited to Elements (or not), PLEASE be so kind to your future self and speak up if you silently disagree with broadcast use in elements.
@jamesgiroux Thank you for your feedback, we really appreciate it.
In my humble opinion broadcast audience should be maximum 1mln. This would guarantee the “freedom” of buyers because - like you said - the highest broadcast licenses are only very little percentage of all sales. In my case it’s around 0,25% (1 per 400 sales), maybe little higher.
EDIT: I’ve checked it and my all three biggest licenses in this year are approx. 1% :
broadcast & film: 0,26%
Very close to your numbers, may be a little better, but not drastic difference
I have sold 207 music tracks and 7 are broadcast licenses, so around 3,4 % still a low number and I guess this number changes with every author and with how much you sell, but still is low % of broadcast licenses sold really an argument not to have it as a separate business model? Buyer behaviour change slowly and many are not aware of how broadcast licenses work, not even authors are fully aware.
I think most of the concerns are around the broadcast or no broadcast. I still think there should be NO broadcast licenses given through Elements. Thats surely less confusing for the customers also?
Everybody seems fixated on just not wanting Broadcast use within elements…I think the whole concept across all licenses will, over time, erode the value of the marketplace, especially for authors…I’m not seeing anything but weak platitudes from the Envato team to be honest.
This is the first time that I’ve felt like the small income I make from the site is threatened. It might take a while for buyers to get savvy and switch to Elements for even cheaper music but it will happen if it is an option, why wouldn’t it?
Why can’t they set up Elements with only new material or maybe even borderline rejected material? That way the two catalogues on offer are different and remain different to access. Have it as a second tier of Audiojungle with it’s own distinct flavour. Let an author select which marketplace of the two their new music is submitted to…seems like a perfectly reasonable solution to me
I have been skeptical of Elements and selling unlimited music downloads as part of a low-cost subscription program. However, I also thought I should reserve judgment until I heard an explanation from Envato as to their reasons for implementing it.
Now that I have heard an explanation, I am disheartened.
I would like the freedom to own a 2018 BMW, but I drive a 2007 Dodge truck because I cannot afford a 2018 BMW. BMW does not offer a subscription program where I can enjoy the sense of freedom to drive something I cannot afford.
Elements users will now license tracks for broadcast use for pennies and continue to charge their customers the same rate as before, pocketing the money that would have otherwise fairly paid the author who created the work.
I understand why Envato sees Elements as an important move, but this will ultimately be bad for composers. This devalues music.
Plain and simple, there is a supply of royalty free music that exceeds demand and this is a way to exploit that imbalance.
This program will benefit Envato and Envato customers at the expense of authors.
I am an AudioJungle contributor, but my primary job is video production and I purchase a lot more licenses here than I sell. I am a customer who would save money and trouble by subscribing to Elements and I am opposed to it because of the potential for this type of music licensing to harm creative professionals.
Charging customers for music on a per use basis is a good, fair system for all involved. This method of licensing music is not broken and does not need to be improved. Music and Sound Effects are NOT too expensive here.
It is in my best interest as a customer to buy from authors in a way that supports their ability to earn a fair rate from their work. I depend on their music to make my job easier.
Hi @Revturkey specially when elements are been advertised directly on Audiojungle. Why wouldn’t customers switch from Audiojungle to elements.
Hi @jamesgiroux thank you for your answer. What kind of future for Market and Audiojungle do you believe?
If Envato are advertising Elements directly on Market and Audiojungle it is very likely to customers to switch to Elements and only a very small % of authors that were invited to Elements may benefit with that switch, even those may not.
The rest of authors will be left in Audiojungle with the amount of customers that choose not to switch.
@jamesgiroux Do you see this very real and legitimate problem?
I have read posts from video producers that are angry because they are receiving AdRev claims, not because of the claim itself, but because the true cost of how cheap the music they have sourced for the project is revealed to their client. The same thing will happen with broadcast licenses through Elements, but the loss of author and Envato money is of course bigger.
Couldn’t have said it better.
This is a joke, right? Read the comments in this thread to get the right “author feedback”.
Talking to Envato is like talking to a teenager. “Stop playing computer games and do your homework!” “NO!” “Brush your teeth!” “Nah!”. They refuse to do what’s good for them. In the long term, they might not only loose authors, they also bringing music licensing a step further to the bottom.
Haha, that comment made my day!
@jamesgiroux With adding broadcast licenses to Elements you are giving away too much. I can understand that people ask for a subscription model for audio and it makes sense for let’s say small and big youtubers, but including broadcast use is too much. Those customers who buy broadcast licenses HAVE the budget to pay at least 100$ for a single license. By adding it to the subscription model, these customers will go for elements if they find something good over there, but I guarantee you, they will ask themselves “Why are they offering this at such an ridiculous small price?”, “Well OK, let’s shop.”
This has something to do with self respect. We authors value our time and money we have spend in our skills and gear. You Envato just seem to exploit that.
Broadcast use on Elements is unacceptable.
Hi James, Please do not be so dismissive of the broadcast licenses
“it’s crucial to understand the upper tier broadcast licenses only represent a very small percentage of purchases on AJ, and the 10 Million tier makes up the smallest % of author earnings out of them all.”
This is happening because Envato does not even visually display the 5 prices. They are hidden in the drop down menu. I really believe that.
I suppose every author has their own experience, but yes while most of my transactions are the standard license, I can tell you that when those broadcast licenses hit, they are substantial boosts in revenue. I made $710 last month but $222 of that came from 3 broadcast sales at my tier 2 $99 price which once was $38. People are buying my stuff at $49 which also is higher than what used to be the $38 1 million audience size broadcast license.
Many of us have had experiences where a customer comes on the market and buys 10 to 20 Music Broadcast and Film Licenses for a large ad campaign for 1 track. Sounds strange but it has happened a couple of times. This triggers an inquiry to get more information. Hence, we have the need to see who the client is? what brand is using the track? get links to the spots, and so on. That in turn sets the table for thousands (or perhaps tens of thousands) more in performance royalties. So when you say “However, it’s crucial to understand the upper tier broadcast licenses only represent a very small percentage of purchases on AJ, and the 10 Million tier makes up the smallest % of author earnings out of them all.” Please know that in 2018 eventually my “performance royalty” earnings (From my PRO) will potentially triple or quadruple all money Envato is going to pay me in 2018, BECAUSE OF A BROADCAST LICENSE purchased here for a very large advertising campaign. We MUST know who is buying every Film and Broadcast License so we can do everything we can to collect those performance royalties.
I have to echo everyone’s comments about “freedom from having to explain” and “making licensing easy”.
Sorry, but life and business is not always “easy” nor does it offer truckloads of “freedom”. Exactly, many of us own sophisticated audio software and virtual intrument libraries and we sure would love to install them on 20 computers and share them with friends and family. I’d love to have the freedom to get all the KONTAKT sound libraries from others and have the “freedom” to not pay for every virtual instrument on the market because it’s “complicated” to buy the licenses for these vsts.
“Most subscribers only download no more than a dozen or so items per month, and a significant proportion of subscribers don’t even download anything in a given subscription period” - This behavior will change drastically if music and SFX has unlimited downloads status. You are opening the door for a TV show production company to come in here and source music for an entire season of new episodes (For example 15 episodes of a reality TV show that would require hundreds of music cues) They could get all the music they need for $16.50 a month and broadcast it. So while trying to calm our fears by stating that most folks only download 10 items a month…Just you wait and see what happens once music and sound effects are added. Those files will be downloaded relentlessly.
Music files are VERY DIFFERENT from all other files. They have a broader usage. People are not downloading video clips and photos in high volume because it would just waste space on their drives and not get used for anything other than the project they need to produce. Music works very differently. I am sure all envato customers would Love to have even just PZ’s and Soundrolls catalogs just sitting there on their drives for $16.50 ready to be “freely used” for any project that crosses their desk.
Thank you for the response. It is encouraging to see that our concerns are being monitored. I’m more of an outsider than most, as I do not make most of my income from Music but from sound effects.
One could easily argue the opposite in regards to broadcast licenses. If they are such a small percentage of sales anyway they could be excluded from Elements.
The reasoning you provided for including them - giving buyers freedom. I do not think this is a strong or compelling argument point. It is a buyers responsibility to make sure they understand the license they need to purchase and then do so. If you want to make it easier for buyers, implement ways that make it more clear to understand licenses.
If the buyer has all this freedom for such a low cost, sure you may be able to entice more visitors to become buyers or subscribers in this case. What most author’s may be concerned about here isn’t what happens overnight or even over a year or more… its that by giving buyers this freedom, the perceived value of the creation/item goes down.
The problem from my point of view is: You only see this market from a (rather narrow) ‘Envato perspective’ and don’t take into consideration the long-term impact that the availability of broadcast licenses in a cheap subscription model will have on the market as a whole.
I think I get it. There’s the music-hungry YouTube crowd and you want to tap deeper into this potentially huge market by offering an all-you-can-eat buffet with a don’t-ever-worry license. That’s understandable from your perspective. Not necessarily good for us though, since this might get those YouTubers even more used to the idea that they don’t have to pay for music at all. But still: Would you win them over as clients without a subscription model? Well, who can say…
What I’m really worried about is the professional high-class big-budget clients. Those might not make up a substantial part of our income here at audiojungle right now - but they do elsewhere! And they will get the message you’re sending out.
Sure, you’re just one voice in this vast music licensing universe - but still. My fear is that they’ll soon start putting even more pressure on the high-class music libraries they’re buying music from and they’ll use your example (along with others) as leverage to get music for less money. And this is a spiral downwards with no end in sight. (BTW: There’s already libraries out there who basically give away music for free to TV production companies - but at least they’re making them file cue sheets so that library AND composer can get paid via backend royalties.)
You want high-class content from professional composers on Audiojungle and Elements? Start actively promoting broadcast licenses on Audiojungle (don’t hide them in the dropdown menu) and motivate your clients to file cue sheets for broadcast usage.
But including broadcast licenses in Elements without at least holding clients accountable for filing cue sheets - that’s just madness.
I’d like to add that this is also because of an ongoing pattern of misunderstanding due to the fact that the differences between “1 million” and “10 million” licenses are poorly defined and explained.
For example, if one looks at the TOTAL number of daily viewers for US cable networks, only the top 2 even manage to break 1 million. However, the REACH - the total number of POSSIBLE viewers - of all these major cable outlets is in the tens of millions. Additionally , all major US broadcast markets have reaches well above 1 million.
But due to the unclear language of the license terms, we sell far more of the smaller licenses when larger ones are more appropriate. And there is no meaningful enforcement by Envato to remedy this issue - just one more example of the devaluation of stock music.
@jamesgiroux You say that authors already are making more money combined with Elements, that is all great and lets hope that will continue as long as possible. But is it allowed to be so ambitious (or naive…) and hope that also the AJ marketplace could grow from some Elements customers who occasionally jump to the regular marketplace to spend more money?
If so there really should be some clear benefits for Elements users to also be attracted to the AJ marketplace. Exclusive tracks from authors they are fan of and broadcast use are at least 2 super important factors I can think of that would make certain Elements users spend some money on AJ as well.
When browsing video items at Elements there is currently no link to the authors profile at videohive, why is that? The only way I can check out the authors videohive profile is to manually go to videohive and paste the author name, not exactly a seamless integration. A link is all that is needed for a gateway to the authors exclusive content.