Ratings by Earnings?

[Tbone]

Hi Art,

Do you think it would be possible to have a section where we rate the libraries purely on how much revenue they’ve generated for us?

You could have just 2 categories per library: license fee split and back end, thereby making a total income but with us able to see where it’s come from.

Would be really interesting to see this.

[Art Munson]

Do you think it would be possible to have a section where we rate the libraries purely on how much revenue they’ve generated for us?

Thinking…

[ChuckMott]

I get the “thinking ” part….the variables involved in one library earning more then another. maybe rank by track. Otherwise, i.e. say you , for whatever reason have 3x the tracks placed in a particular library…..

[Art Munson]

Not seeing, at least yet, a practical way to do this.

[Tbone]

Number of tracks is a good point, but easy to address: just divide earnings by your total tracks with them.

Though thinking about it, it might still be interesting to see overall earnings regardless.

You could make it simpler by just having people name their top three earners… but it’s not so in depth and fun.

What do you reckon?

[Advice]

Although it would be interesting to see earnings/track averages on libraries (I think it would be better for the RF model), it goes hand in hand with people making judgments about libraries in general. People’s experienced vary SO much according to the type of music they write, the (perceived by the end user community) quality of the tracks, etc.

We see it all the time. One person gets tons of placements with Library A and none with Library B, while someone else has the opposite experience.

There are reasons why I never liked ratings of any kind at all. Too many variables and faulty conclusions drawn.

[Desire_Inspires]

I am not really fond of ratings either. I like to read responses and stories about libraries here. I get more info from the way the story is told. Numbers themselves do not truly provide meaningful info for me. The “report” aspect of this site is what makes it so great.

[Advice]

I have to agree with you D_I… With numbers, you don’t know what’s really behind them. When I read accounts of people’s experiences I get a sense of both who the person is (most of the time) and what their experience was. Sometimes someone says negative things about a library but I can tell by the tone and attitude in their posts, that there is more to the story. Some people will always blame “the other guy” when they are not successful. Numerical ratings mask all that.

Someone can bitch how little money they made from a library but what do we know about their tracks? Is it cheap crap on an old Casio keyboard? Did they put in reasonable effort tagging their tracks (where applicable)? I remember someone posted all sorts of nasties about a particular RF library years back. One of the principals of the library chimed in and posted how that person had almost no track tags or description entered!

Personally, I like MLR better as a discussion forum vehicle and not a place for ratings. The tag line, “Music creators rating the music libraries” bothers me. I’d prefer “Music creators discussing…” or “Music creators sharing information…”

Just my 2 cents
😀

[Tbone]

Sure, there’s no need to get rid of all the discussion at all. That’s not what I’m suggesting. This would be a small addition in some place, like the polls.

The flipside of this coin is that you also get libraries where everyone says how nice they are and how well it’s going, but then you find out that actually no one has made anything from that library. That’s an interesting example too.

I think there could be some way of incorporating a small section somewhere to do with earnings.

As a generalized example: if a composer has the same 200 varied tracks, tags and descriptions in libraries A, B and C, wouldn’t it be interesting to see how they do in each one?

[Desire_Inspires]

As a generalized example: if a composer has the same 200 varied tracks, tags and descriptions in libraries A, B and C, wouldn’t it be interesting to see how they do in each one?

Not necessarily. Comparing myself to other composers really does not add value. A lot of background info gets missed just glossing over numbers. There are just too many variables to consider.

The stories tell me more than numbers would. Numbers can be used to manipulate information. I can make better determinations from listening to someone’s story and then listening to their music.

Like they say, YMMV.

[Tbone]

Yea, for me the stories are useful, and so are the numbers. This whole idea for me was about incorporating peoples’ numbers more.

Don’t mind much either way. Up to Art.

I’m also keen to avoid what I posted above: “this library’s so great etc etc” but in fact no one’s made anything.

Lastly, it seems a couple have interpreted this idea as putting ratings on all the library entries and changing the site in a big way. I’m suggesting a small sub section like the polls where those who want to can comment on earnings for libraries. This would take nothing away from you but there are I’m sure others who would find it useful. As you said yourself, YMMV

[Art Munson]

I’m suggesting a small sub section like the polls where those who want to can comment on earnings for libraries.

That would be a problem. I want to keep any specific references of earnings, to a particular library, within each listing of that library.

Also, using a poll will not work as the software I’m using can only ask one question at a time and I have to define the choices for answers.

[Tbone]

There’s usually a way if you wanted. You could password restrict that area, and you could have people send in their top 3 libraries through a form. Anyway, it was just an idea.

A really simple thing which might be fun is to have a poll just asking, “which do you make more from: exclusive or non exclusive libraries?”

[Art Munson]

There’s usually a way if you wanted.

Absolutely, there is always a way. But then you most likely get into custom programming. I have learned that can be a can of worms as WordPress updates.

[Author]

Posts