Answering about my sales after ADP were inroduced - it is now well balanced. Number of sales decreased a bit, but my earning increased. Analyzing my clients, most of them are production houses with good budget for video projects, where audio prices is only a tiny fraction of this budget. So if someone found a track, wich suitable for production, they will pay every resonable price. So i personally believe something around 29-49$ for track is ok for such companies.
That’s awesome LumenMedia! I am so glad that everyone is reporting more revenue from raising their prices.
This “good news” however, is in direct conflict and is the exact opposite of what Envato seems to be trying to do with Elements which is attract more customers (who seemingly don’t have any real money to spend) with an all you can download for peanuts price.
Can anyone report more revenue with a price drop? Or with a “no change”? I’d be willing to bet that no one is making more money by lowering their prices or leaving them unchanged.
This is a great idea.
The more I think about it, the more terrible this whole Elements thing sounds to my ears.
I was really, really encouraged by the implementation of ADP and, after having excelent results after a shy raise of %25, I was now considering pushing it a bit higher and see how it turned out. Now Elements seems like an enormous step backwards. Once the new model reaches most authors, why would anyone buy a $25 (or higher) track when you can simply subscribe for $16,5 (!?!?!?), download that very same track and eventually a few more for the road, and then simply unsubscribe until the next project.
I must be missing something. Seriously, I still can’t find a single positive aspect for us authors in this move.
You nailed it wormwood! That is EXACTLY what will happen, eventually. All this talk about adding more customers and luring them in when they visit, and trying to create “recurring revenue”, and making license “simple” and “free” and don’t worry you don’t even have to tell anyone how you will use the license and we have no policing mechanism to even get you to “add 2nd licenses” or prevent you from sharing non watermarked files with friends so they can make youtube videos or even go to air with the track . Are they not listening to Promosapien for example? He indicated “I am a video editor as my main gig and I am happy to buy the individual sync licenses as currently priced” because I assume he knows his clients have money to spend. WHY WHY WHY would we say “it’s gonna get cheaper folks!!!” In fact, the price of music is going to plummet down so fast and so hard it’s going to shatter the entire market.
Don’t participate in music on elements if you are listening.
I am not the foremost authority on this business and do not claim to be, but I will offer my opinion. If this is long-winded, I apologize in advance.
I think that low-cost subscription-based programs that give subscribers unlimited music downloads and allow downloaders to use the music for most purposes, including broadcast, sound great if you are a customer. So, from that standpoint, Envato has an appealing product to offer.
For this kind of program to make sense for anyone on the sales side of the equation (Envato and authors), there has to be a very large number of subscribers. Is that a safe assumption?
However, I think (again, I’m not an expert) that Envato (who earns 50% of each subscription with the remaining 50% split between stock photo authors, web template authors, audio authors, etc.) can gain greater benefits from this model than those that will be providing the music for it.
I think this model has the potential to set things back here for audio authors, and will make earning proper compensation for their work more difficult, ultimately. Maybe not immediately, but eventually, once the buying public becomes accustomed to paying just $16.50 per month and having access to unlimited music downloads and permission to use those tracks on broadcast advertisements, shows, etc.
It IS Envato’s website. They are trying to be successful. I understand this, and as a loyal customer for nine years, I do want them to succeed. I think it is unfortunate, though, if their success comes at a high cost to those who create the music that is sold here. So far, I have not been convinced by anyone from Envato that the inclusion of audio in Elements as it has currently been presented doesn’t carry a very significant risk of devaluing the work of audio authors.
I think what passionate authors like @SteelSound are trying to convey is that authors are not opposed to Envato succeeding. We all want that. What we would ideally like is to be partners in that success, not victims of it.
Thank you all for your comments and feedback. We’ve been reviewing what you have posted here as well as conversations we have had privately. We’ve told audio authors on Elements privately and are posting similarly here on this thread.
We’ve reviewed all of the factors here and taking on board the latest input from authors, we will be changing the license terms and excluding broadcast use from Elements.
We want Elements to be valuable to subscribers and authors and will continue to explore ways to do that through the subscription options we have available. This means that in future, broadcast use may be included for Elements subscribers, potentially as part of a different subscription plan.
We’ll monitor the feedback and expressed needs of customers in relation to broadcast licensing following the launch and decide on any future changes at that time.
We still believe Elements will offer great value for customers and hope this change reinforces the fact that we’re still committed to the success of authors on Market too.
Thank you again for your passion and commitment to Envato we look forward to hearing what you publish next.
We're removing Envato Credits from Market
Thank you so much for listening to the community! You will not regret it.
Amazing!! Thank you for listening to authors
This is a great decision from you. Thank you for taking onboard our comments. Respect to you for that.
That’s awesome! Thank you for listening!
James, this is a great news! Envato has just earned a huge respect from the AudioJungle community. We appreciate time you have spent on listening to our arguments. I am really proud of being a part of Envato and its community.
He will have to buy broadcast & film licenses via AudioJungle. In this case nothing changes. Films are excluded from Elements.
Yes, we are all worried about changes. But we were saying the same about stocks few years ago. “Track for 19$? An insane, this will destroy our branch”. In fact it didn’t destroy but it stimulated the industry.
Subscription model is something we can’t stop. We don’t know if it will be profitable for all of us, probably not. Some of us will do better, some not. It was the same with stock music years ago. There is a huge number of amateur vloggers and video creators who need a lot of tracks for their videos and stock model isn’t the best for them. If Envato will not go to the subscription model, other markets will make it. And you know what? They made it already.
The only thing we can do as a community is to create the most profitable (for both sides) subscription model along with Envato. That’s why excluding broadcast licenses from Elements is so important.
Wise decision from you Envato! And great news for this community!
I applaud this now huge company for still listening to their authors. This is bold of you, Envato, and certainly part of what makes you great!
Now, I still think Elements is bad news for us, but I know there’s no going back on this. That won’t keep me from rejoicing at this news.
Hi James thats great news I subscribe what authors are posting here thank you for listening to the community!
I can’t believe you actually listened, this is really great. Thank you, this reminds me of the old days when Envato and authors collaborated much more. It’s a great decision for everyone.
This non broadcast agreement is a big deal, and it will have after affects spreading to other stock music sites as well, probably inspiring more music producers to stand up for themselves.
When we are done celebrating this I think we should have a fruitful discussion about private versus company use, pros and cons of having different pricing. I have not yet read any good explanations why there shouldn´t be different pricing for companies. As long as private/company price options are implemented for all Elements assets, Elements would still keep its simplicity I think.
This is good news and thank you for listening to all of us.
Here is one more very important consideration: It’s obvious that audio jungle’s core client is a small and medium sized production/ design/ advertising/ post production/ audio post studio and marketing firm. Very Big companies do creep in here too, indirectly, through the supplier (post house via an editor searching for a track). These companies certainly have the money and are willing to pay the $20 to $75 for every sync license they need for the tutorials, youtube explainers, low budget ads and commercials and so on. Basically videos like this:
we (as in the entire music licensing industry) just have to find a way to get the client to send over the $20 to $100 INDIVIDUAL sync license (or even more) to make these kinds of videos.
The subscription model still threatens this type of “every day” “bread and butter” license sold.
Think about it…The editor/ post house of this video will soon be presented with two choices:
- Pay $20 to $100 for 1 sync license to use the track on this project
- Pay $16.50 for a month subscription, download this tune, but also be able to grab many more tunes along the way.
It’s pretty obvious that a smart buyer would opt for choice 2.
So while we have a decent victory to celebrate as authors, the future of the individual sync license being sold to our core customers is still highly threatened.
Once music on elements goes live, it will start to feel like every sale made on the normal audio jungle market is a client doing us a favor by sticking a few bucks in our pocket. It will feel like voluntary charity.
Every time I ring up a sale at $49 since ADP, I feel grateful…I feel like some people out there are just out there being nice and just not really putting too much concern into the extra $20 to $30 cost.
Elements and subscription models will gradually erode these individual purchases away. And once again, I hate to say it, but WE, the music producers are 100% responsible for this, because we are the one’s who allow it to happen by agreeing to participate. We just keep saying “sure, you can pay me less.” When does the insanity stop?
I am trying to stay positive and optimistic. Maybe it will come down to all music files getting unique identifiers attached to the master sound recording, and then some Big Data system by google/ youtube will generate a report that a sync occurred and then governments and lawmakers (Congress and Parliaments) will set a minimum rate for the sync and then we get paid a sync royalty by our PRO?
The question still looms: How will we get paid fairly moving forward? now that we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the individual sync license.
Personally, I will resist participation in the subscription model for as long as I can. I still have customers out there being nice to me and paying me that sync fee. We really want to protect that as long as we can because it will be more profitable than pooled subscription money.