- December 30, 2012 at 11:15 am #8080
Look Michael maybe it is sometimes a bit hard for me to explain things properly here because I am not a native English speaker 🙂
Personally I never look back or to competitors around me. I have no reason for doing that. I work with exclusive libraries and my tracks are running every single day in TV all over Europe. I have quality software, quality instruments and quality vst`s in my studio and I can write music. So there`s nothing to worry about 🙂
This is a production music forum and people learn from each other. I like your contributions to all kinds of topics a lot and sometimes I write also contributions to a topic when I feel for it.
The PPC discussion started as a simple forum contribution from Art. He was just telling us that he doesn`t like the idea of ppc. Other people were making this topic big and giant and you were one of those.
PPC is simply not good. Point. It`s funny to see in which directions things can go. I respect the pro ppc dudes as well and it`s maybe a typical patriotical thing to name the owners of AS and to say how nice and helpful they are but does that really matters ?
To pay per click to get heard and seen first in the list or searching engine is a very weird business model in a prod. music lib, at least for me. Of course it`s easier to be with a track under the first 10 when a customer searches for something if the catalogue of a library is maybe up to 30.000 cues 🙂
Maybe I simply have a wrong understanding about the whole topic. I also don`t work with non-exclusive re-titlers. So I leave the discussion to others now 🙂
WildmanDecember 30, 2012 at 11:34 am #8081
MichaelL The problem with #tag’s analysis is that he/she assumes AudioSparx and DeWolfe serve the same clientele. AudioSparx clients aren’t just looking for music, they are looking for music with a perpetual license. They aren’t going to run to DeWolfe because it’s “such a pleasure to listen to their catalog.” Likewise, the editor, whose employer is paying a hefty annual blanket fee to DeWolfe, isn’t likely to buy music from AudioSparx.
I was talking about the reasons why you spend more or less time on a library site, not something else. But Michael, we do actually agree on this. I said sales should be only driven by quality and price point. Different budgets different clientele.
My main problem is that you can’t change the game’s rules while the game has already begun, without offering – at least – the chance for the players to opt out.
In my opinion PPC is not acceptable. Why should I be forced to honour an agreement placed when the rules where different?December 30, 2012 at 11:39 am #8082
I agree with your post completely about improving our own game. I attempted to post something similar but it did not go through. You said it better anyway. Whether it’s a sample library, a high-end mic preamp, or in my case adding a real bass to my guitar-based tracks, these things can make a huge difference. Of course there are many other factors. I just keep learning by reading here at MLR, listening to great tracks of others, then trying to apply it to my own.December 30, 2012 at 11:56 am #8083
Other people were making this topic big and giant and you were one of those.
Actually, quite the opposite. PPC doesn’t matter to me one way or the other. It’s not something I’d be likely to use. I think there are better ways to spend money.
I am a sucker, however, when it comes to the logic of an argument. The biggest argument against PPC seems to be about whether or not it’s fair, that is whether it makes the “playing field uneven.”
It just strikes me that those arguments go against logic and reality. First, as I said, there is no such thing as an even playing field. Even if everyone has an equal chance at having their music heard that’s where the equal playing field ends. There is always going to be someone better or worse, if that even matters. Second, does it really matter if someone’s cue gets heard first if it’s “trashy,” to borrow your word. If the client can’t tell the difference between good and bad, and/or is too lazy to listen to more tracks, there’s not much we can do about that.
Every time we work longer, invest more, and polish our metadata, update our bio, change our photo…aren’t we trying to tilt the playing field in our direction? What about writers who pay someone to keyword for them? So, the big deal for me is that I don’t see the logical difference between any of the things that we ALL do to be competitive vs. PPC, which is just one more spin of the roulette wheel.
Do you understand now? I wasn’t arguing for or against PPC. I was questioning the logic of demonizing this particular method of competition vs. everything else that we ALL routinely do to compete.
Much ad-do about nothing IMO.
_MichaelDecember 30, 2012 at 12:55 pm #8086
In my opinion PPC is not acceptable. Why should I be forced to honour an agreement placed when the rules where different?
I’m not sure what you mean #tag. [removed by moderator – might be inflammatory]
You’re not forced to participate in PPC. It doesn’t cost you anything. I think that client psychology is beyond our control. There is only so much one can do to polish crap into gold, and I don’t think PPC will do the trick.
If, as you suggest, the buyer will move on after hearing 5 or 10 crappy versions of Jingle Bells, the AudioSparx client is more likely to move on to MusicLoops or Shockwave, rather than DeWolfe, because they want a RF license. In the case of MusicLoops (don’t know about Shockwave), the field is smaller, and Mark IS selective, so maybe the buyer will find something better, and still get a RF license.
But…what if my version of Jingle Bells is next in line, or 5th in line, AND the client buys it? I’ve got a sale AND a new client, who may represent repeat business.
One thing that I’ve heard over and over is “my music doesn’t sell at AudioSparx, BUT it sells elsewhere. I want to remove my music.” One potential, but simple, explanation is customers who shop AudioSparx, but buy elsewhere. So what happens, if you remove your music? You lose some potential sales AND exposure to the buyers who shop elsewhere, and could become repeat customers. (of course if you re-title all of your tracks and use pseudonyms for every library that doesn’t apply).
Ultimately, the customers aren’t AudioSparx customers, they are YOUR customers. No matter where they first hear your music, if they like what you do, they will find you.
There are a ton of useless and/or here today gone tomorrow libraries that I would never sign up with. But with 250,000 clients, AudioSparx isn’t one of them. That kind of exposure is priceless.
I think removing racks from AS because of PPC would be shooting oneself in the foot.
_MichaelDecember 30, 2012 at 1:39 pm #8089
I think this has been discussed enough and will close the topic.
Let’s leave it at this. I stand by my original contention that PPC does not serve AS or it’s composers well. MichaelL and some others do not agree.
The topic ‘Audiosparx and Pay Per Click (PPC)’ is closed to new replies.