These numbers vary a lot as far as I’ve seen. In the public statement I linked above it says 2+ million purchased across the Market and Elements last year. And AJ might be 5-10% of this customer mass or something?
In this case, if there are 100,000 subscribers, it means 5-10.000 subscribers for AudioElements. (5-10%)
5-10% percent of the 2 million customers : 100-200,000 for AJ.
This is another super important topic that deserves a new thread, and yes it is certainly also one of the main problems. 25% of all the AJ tracks were approved just the last year. It would be interesting to see the stats for all the years and how it is rapidly increasing. Add in the additional over saturation with Elements and in total it’s quite alarming.
Edit: we have 482k + music tracks (still way to much), so a year ago it was 25% less.
That is true. I think there will always be people who do participate though because there is potential for those few involved to take a pay check. It’s the old “I’m alright Jack.” and “You gotta do what you gotta do” attitudes. Another classic is “You gotta swim with the tide”.
I hope I’m wrong about that and I do appreciate that you’re trying to change those attitudes.
I definitely agree with that, but without wishing to shirk my responsibilities, I think some of the onus has to be on Envato for irresponsibly offering up this crazy $16.50 deal. The competing subscription websites have prices upwards of 6 times this, for music only (which is still too cheap in my opinion). If Elements is a massive success, it threatens to dominate by massively slashing the overall revenue within the industry, but then dealing it out to a few of it’s “lucky” authors, so a small selected group thrives while the larger group diminishes. This is a pretty unscrupulous business tactic. Envato has to realise this.
And they keep aggressively poaching your customers, despite the fact that it is having a harmful effect on exclusive, non-Elements authors. Does your well-being matter? Aren’t you considered an important part of this community along with customers, Envato employees, and shareholders?
Actions speak volumes.
The statement, “to help customers get the job done, we want them to switch from ‘shopping’ to ‘making.’ This translates to a big focus on subscriptions,” is flowery, PR nonsense.
The company wants recurring revenue. They don’t want customers buying a WordPress theme this month, and a few AudioJungle tracks two or three months later.
They want as many customers as possible to be charged X amount every month of every year, now and into the future.
Microsoft does it, Adobe does it, Apple does it, Netflix does it, and the list of examples goes on and on.
Audio on Elements is having a harmful effect on AudioJungle marketplace sales, and this is only in the early stages of audio being available as part of the program.
Audio on Elements or any low-priced, unlimited download subscription program is devaluing your work and will commoditize music. As a music producer, you do not want this to happen.
The choice to participate in Elements or not is yours, authors. As @SteelSound has advised a number of times, it would be wise to resist.
I’m not sure your calculations are correct. After all, given the option of “all-you-can-eat”, it’s possible people who weren’t steady Audiojungle customers before might now avail themselves of all that is available for one ridiculously low price.
In terms of actual numbers, Elements is now getting 12+ million visits monthly, and you can be damned sure Envato wants to turn as many as possible of those (unique) visitors into $200 a year subscribers.
And surprise surprise! A large portion of Elements visitors come from referrals…from Envato Markets
It’s common sense people. I saw this all along because I am older and have been around the block. This is a horrible deal, you were manipulated into thinking “a new customer base” would buy the subscription, the prices are insanely cheap, and this model will destroy our livlihoods long term. RESIST. RESIST. RESIST. For the 10,000 tracks acting as last years “left over food” because they sound so lame…let those tracks stay in there. When people with money and pride need a real track to bring real value to a project, they will come to the market and buy a sync license.
Again and again: it is 100% on us, the music producer, to set our own rules of engagement and that should be this: If you need my track for your video project or TV spot, film, or show, please buy a sync license. This “all you can download” offering is INSANE and I really do know that everyone agrees with me, even those participating. Those agreeing to this deal have done so because of passive intimidation, fear, and greed.
They fear that they will lose their “privileges” by not bowing to the king.
They are being short term greedy because they know they are part of a select crew guaranteed to get a check.
They were intimidated because if they said “no I do not like this deal” …their tracks could suddenly not get displayed in search results as much as they used to.
This is my opinion, but I think my opinion is valid now that the top seller has removed 200 tracks from elements. Resist this subscription model and any other out there. They will fail you long term…They already failed the top seller short term. Some facts are trickling in about how damaging this competing product is to selling sync licenses.
This is VERY interesting. I’m not sure about this but these “referrals” can mean a lot of things. Since AudioJungle is technically not the same website as Elements, these could also be traffic generated by the banners.
Referral from Envato sites - 35%!
Well, now we now about the “insignificant number of clicks that go to Elements from markets”
That’s what I assumed most of these “referrals” to be:
Active cannibalization/theft of our customer base via the ubiquitous banners.
And let’s keep in mind: A lot of the so-called “direct” traffic well could have originated with people who followed the banners previously.
I guess the top authors can check their sales numbers and see if they are missing percents in a similiar landscape? They should have more reliable data than anyone.
Sound effects sales are obliterated, my sales are 1/3 of what they were in December. I just uploaded a new round of files (haven’t in awhile) to see how they’ll do. Makes me not want to even bother with it anymore as other aspects of my business are stronger.
In case your new round of files don’t perform too well, I would advise to not make definitive assumptions out of your numbers. I say this because Envato is (once again!) making different tests concerning the search engine. I guess those tests could interfere with any kind of analysis, at the moment (on our side).
My newer tracks have been going nowhere in quantities I’ve never experienced in the almost 5 years I’ve been active. My last 15 tracks - going back to December 26 - have sold a total of 18 licenses. The most any single track has sold is 6, while most of them sit at zero.
Regardless of any search tweaks currently being done - this is a very disturbing trend.
I was simply suggesting to a sound effects colleague that it might not be a good time to make analysis or draw conclusions about sales, at the moment (in case he didn’t know about the recent search results tests). I respect your opinion, but I stand by my advice.
Sorry if it came out like I was contradicting your comment. Just pointing out that sales on my new items have been worryingly disappointing.
Hi fellow guinea pigs (sarcasm),
I wasn’t active very much and didn’t follow the Forum very much the last month. I even ignored the Elements advertising becuase I missed what it means to us.
Now, when I uploaded a new track I began to read about Elements and had a look inside Elements. And I’m really shocked about this decision and how it works.
Is it junk what we’re producing and is Elements the bargain table for it?
I had a look on at least 20 Authors on Elements. They are all Elite and a few of them nearly Elite.
What does it mean? The rest can dump their stuff on the marketplace to get the crumbs?!
Please tell me that I’m wrong and I’m missing something. Thanks!
All the best to all of you, buddies!
EDIT: I’m talking about the AudioJungle part of Elements. Don’t know what’s going on with the other marketplaces there.
Thank you for the topic, @AurusAudio!
Interesting topic, and it’s very interseting that a top-author is creating such a topic. But @AurusAudio, if you find out this month that your combined revenue from Elements and Audiojungle is even greater, would it be so bad for you personally? I don’t think so. And it’s very interesting how it will be in reality. And if the combined revenue will tend to be greater, then every author should have this oportunity to participate both on AJ and on Elements.
Concearning Elements, I think Envato didn’t have any choice. Everybody is talking about that Elements is a bad idea, but Elements is not Envato’s idea, this idea with subscriptions has been implemented long before Envato by the competitors out there. Now Envato is trying to keep up, because otherwise the services with subscriptions will simply destroy Envato one day. And I think the problem is much deeper then it’s being talked about. The problem is really lots of author are ready to sell their music for a couple of cents. And after they did agree to work like that on other services, now all other authors simply have no choice. But it is a different topic.
So if coming of Elements is unavoidable phenomenon then what I think is really not fair is that only a few authors were invited to Elements. While the invited authors can hope to compensate their losses on AJ by the revenue from Elements, what should others do?
Yes, but not at the destructive, insulting price point of Elements.
If you take a look at the site considered to be Audiojungle’s main competitor, you’ll see they charge per month what Elements charges per YEAR. “purchase an annual plan for only $999 per year or go month-to-month for $199”
Elements is single-handedly devaluing stock music in general and destroying our livelihoods in particular.
Exactly the case, but really who exactly is at fault here? Is it Envato’s fault for devising a recurring revenue scheme where they can exploit willing authors and lower the pay out percentage AND not share any data with them whatsoever? No downloads data, no written licenses shared, no invoices or even dates a track was downloaded . What happened is you had all these willing authors dive in and say “sure, take half ownership of my assets and deal it at any price and under any terms you want.”
Assign “points” to my “item” and then develop a formula to pay out the various contributors.
But they agreed to it.
I keep asking why? but I have never heard one valid answer that makes logical and business sense.
Even the video people are here saying things like “Yeah, I mean $20 a track really is not that much money to begin with.”
I still just don’t get it. This is the worst deal I have ever seen anywhere and …well…people are taking it and “hoping”. Keep climbing a wall of hope.
If you really have any pride and want to contribute to our business long term just get out of elements or any other bogus subscription model out there, shut those markets down, and get back to selling sync licenses one project at a time. That’s a business. Not this subscription garbage.