Yes, content taxes would very much undermine the sense of community v2 wants to have. v2 should be a free service, with opportunities for artists and v2 itself to generate some form of revenue.
If you are earning an app money, you should see a cut of that money. Regardless of video length. This isn’t a 9-5 so time standards should not be applied here.
It isn’t V2 being responsible for someone. It’s V2 giving a percentage based on views and traffic. Compensation. You’re talking as if they’re getting hand outs.
Just an idea but what if companies that had v2 accounts could pay to be more prominently featured on people’s feeds? Like if Taco Bell had a vine promoting a deal then they could pay based on frequency of appearance. But they have to ads in the form of vines?? Just an idea. But to ensure small businesses could advertise as well, maybe cap frequency of a major company’s ads at 1 every 40 vines?
That’s an interesting thought, and I think it could work if the ads follow the general look and feel of v2 posts (should we still refer to them as vines?). I think that if they follow the fun and playful theme of v2 then they will be much less obtrusive. That’s one of the problems with Instagram’s ads that make them so annoying, they have no guidelines on theme that make them all like tv commercials.
How is this a problem, if you feel like you’re in the little league oh well. You chose to post. How does an individuals feelings dictate how the app should be managed?
People can monetize differently if you understand like its not always through the company
Because individuals do, in the end, control an app’s evolution. In social networks like this, the users are what make up the app and will ultimately decide which direction it goes. Sure, the developers and company will control the app and it’s changes, but if the users don’t embrace what they create, then they have to adapt.
On the topic of creators being charged I think that would flop horribly- almost as horrible as running an ad banner on a vine. Creators AND viewers are not going to want to see that- it’s going to feel like a glorified YouTube. INSTEAD, why not let major companies advertise on your platform- for example if the company TIDE were to run a 6 second sponsored ad about tide pods or something. Merchandising will always bring in money and I’m sure there’s a way to privately contribute.
This could also foster actual creativity in advertisement creation, which could lead to people actually liking advertisments. Alternatively Instagram has a feature that says if a post is sponsored; V2 could do something similar.
Monetization efforts are going to depend on who the audience is - and the bigger question is who is the audience. I am Gen X (the old man that I am) and enjoyed Vine immensely when it was in existence, and some sort of revenue split is necessary to keep v2 growing, while stimulating creative content and growth. Rewarding exclusivity where original content is posted solely to v2 should be rewarded as well. Viewers could be compensated by creating “playlists” where content is curated for specific audiences much better than a general algorithm can.
I like it best when creators come up with a skit/video promoting a product or brand and making it funny. I don’t really like brands going out and having their own ads that don’t end up very effective or capture the consumer’s attention at all.
V2 should be a mediator between the brands that want to promote a product or a movie or something and the creator. Once it’s deemed that the creator has hit the point where they can enter a monetization deal, they can work with advertisers of their choosing and make funny skits or something. It’s always cool to see actors show up in creators’ funny videos and make it for the internet.
I agree with you 100% @jvy4, but I think creators should have the option to make sponsored videos that are entertaining, not leaving the audience feeling like their timeline is filled with spam. @dom is there any thing you’d like to add? Coming from the founder, this thread has a lot of crucial points that I think highly benefit the community.
@lama that’s exactly what I mean!
Has a lot of negative sides.
Would you want to become a big creator, knowing that you’ll have to pay?
It makes you lose ambition and motivation. Obviously, users join V2 knowing that it’s a free platform…
Ads. Ads. Ads. But, wait!
Not just ads but, hip ads.
V2 could target innovative and creative companies. This is an efficient way of marketing etc., since most V2 users are already into videos, why not make video ads? Not just video ads of some boring random company… but really creative ads, with awesome skits and a fun and amusing way of presenting the company/product. V2 automatically becomes a target for THOSE creative companies, and the other away around.
When did anyone mention Having to pay? Look at this- Purina pays V2 5,000$ For a advertisement on V2. V2 then finds a suitable artist (someone who is likely a dog oriented channel) and pays them a commission out of that 5,000$ to make the sponsored vine. V2 gets paid, artist gets paid, and the only “fee” they have to pay is the labor out in towards making the vine.
Right there, mate
Yeah I don’t agree with that at all, that would actually prevent me from wanting to gain publicity. Why would I want to be charged for content I work hard on to produce?
Precisely. A tax on making videos would completely undermine the commmunity values and artist trust that v2 hopes to foster.