Feld making negative changes.

ML512 wrote:

The rumored plan was that Feld would take the production of all digital assets (video and photo) in-house from the races. Eliminating media, teams, sponsors, and...

The rumored plan was that Feld would take the production of all digital assets (video and photo) in-house from the races. Eliminating media, teams, sponsors, and riders from contracting or assigning their own people to gather the assets needed for their marketing, news features, reporting, social media, vlogs etc.

This would, in turn, make media, teams, sponsors, riders, etc have to pay licensing fees or per asset fees to the series to have access to some sort of media library or server to use these.

For media, this would potentially remove a revenue source that helps cover the costs of photographers or reporters going to the races, reducing or completely eliminating their ability to cover the sport. For teams and riders, this would just create one more payment they have to give the series after paying entry fees, license fees, potential marketing fees (in the case of OEMs), etc.

The media is upset and worried that they will lose potential revenue needed to offset travel costs and people's time to cover the sport, along with being stuck with a limited range of assets and time limits in which they can use them. Further damaging their ability to cover the sport in their own unique ways, which are needed to differentiate from each other, to capture an audience. Along with potentially just putting people out of jobs, along with controlling the narrative we can tell.

OEMs or series sponsors are upset with the idea because, as many have put it to me "we already spend so much money with the series, and now we'd have to give them more just so we can market that we did well at their races?"

There are a few more layers to it on how it would affect teams. If a gear brand, say Thor or FXR, pays a team say $80,000 per season, part of what they receive from the team is assets from the races to market those riders. Now said team might be able to contract a photographer at a reasonable rate because they shoot for 15 brands and balance the costs vs what each brand or team requests. Under the rumored program, every brand, team, etc would have to pay for assets. So if a brand is now paying extra/elevated costs to get assets of the team riders at the race, because the team now has a license where they can only use the assets for their own channels, the gear brand has spent more money out of their budget. This could cause them to reduce how much they spend with teams, as their total budget has to be used in a wider range of ways. This goes for any type of brand in the sport.

Spudinki45 wrote:

Im assuming this will also mean the end of most  content we value including:Pit BitsLawrence X Tom Journet Race VlogsDeegan Race VlogsAlign Media High End PhotographySean...

Im assuming this will also mean the end of most  content we value including:

• Pit Bits
• Lawrence X Tom Journet Race Vlogs
• Deegan Race Vlogs
• Align Media High End Photography
• Sean Ogden B-Roll Race Footage (imo the highest quality raw footage we have)
• Press Day Raw Footage

• Most Instagram posts with race updates and behind the scenes content like pictures of riders from Track Walk
  
  yes Feld employees could theoretically provide some but it will be no where the same quality and personality because each photographer is unique and had their own creative touch — see Lawrence blogs by Tom Journet and the stuff align media puts out 

  Again Feld is fucking disgraceful. This is probably the worst, most deplorable decision they have made in years even worse than banning rider merchandise.

Gmyersdork wrote:

ML512, Michael Charge a monthly subscription, pay your entry for credentials,  report back to your subscribers that actually care what motodrive, i mean vitalmx provides. Lose all...

ML512, Michael 

Charge a monthly subscription, pay your entry for credentials,  report back to your subscribers that actually care what motodrive, i mean vitalmx provides. Lose all the losers on the way. I like it.

Motonews?

ML512 wrote:

As many have proved before, pay models rarely work.

yak651 wrote:

I don’t see a problem with Feld charging a fee for credentials similar to the entry fee for the riders. Maybe that would weed out some...

I don’t see a problem with Feld charging a fee for credentials similar to the entry fee for the riders. Maybe that would weed out some of the less serious people crowding the floor 

yak651 wrote:

I don’t see a problem with Feld charging a fee for credentials similar to the entry fee for the riders. Maybe that would weed out some...

I don’t see a problem with Feld charging a fee for credentials similar to the entry fee for the riders. Maybe that would weed out some of the less serious people crowding the floor 

Gmyersdork wrote:

ML512, Michael Charge a monthly subscription, pay your entry for credentials,  report back to your subscribers that actually care what motodrive, i mean vitalmx provides. Lose all...

ML512, Michael 

Charge a monthly subscription, pay your entry for credentials,  report back to your subscribers that actually care what motodrive, i mean vitalmx provides. Lose all the losers on the way. I like it.

Motonews?

Gmyersdork wrote:

ML512, Michael Charge a monthly subscription, pay your entry for credentials,  report back to your subscribers that actually care what motodrive, i mean vitalmx provides. Lose all...

ML512, Michael 

Charge a monthly subscription, pay your entry for credentials,  report back to your subscribers that actually care what motodrive, i mean vitalmx provides. Lose all the losers on the way. I like it.

Motonews?

Gmyersdork wrote:

Wrong, both work and the paying advertisers won't be trying to sell me an HIV drug, they'll be advertising trucks, trailers, bikes, gear n stuff

Gmyersdork wrote:

Wrong, both work and the paying advertisers won't be trying to sell me an HIV drug, they'll be advertising trucks, trailers, bikes, gear n stuff

jaun wrote:

You sell to advertisers based on viewer, amount of people looking at your site, you make it pay to play and the amount of people drop...

You sell to advertisers based on viewer, amount of people looking at your site, you make it pay to play and the amount of people drop of significantly.

Less eyes less or no advertising revenue.

Gmyersdork wrote:

Wrong, both work and the paying advertisers won't be trying to sell me an HIV drug, they'll be advertising trucks, trailers, bikes, gear n stuff

jaun wrote:

You sell to advertisers based on viewer, amount of people looking at your site, you make it pay to play and the amount of people drop...

You sell to advertisers based on viewer, amount of people looking at your site, you make it pay to play and the amount of people drop of significantly.

Less eyes less or no advertising revenue.

jaun wrote:

I would imagine the 1.1m viewers would drop to less than 100,000 paid subscribers...

FreshTopEnd wrote:

It'll be interesting to see what this about; curious what is now perceived as over the line that they feel needs to be nipped in the...

It'll be interesting to see what this about; curious what is now perceived as over the line that they feel needs to be nipped in the bud.

Feld always has had control who gets credentialed (as does MX Sports), and it's aways, even before Feld bought SX, been more limited than the access to shoot outdoors.  It's not easy to get on the floor at SX, and the floor has been restricted in terms of where shooters can go for a long time.

Pretty sure that both the SX promoter and MXSports have for some time provided in credentials a requirement to relinquish copyrights and acknowledge that promoter controls the photographer's work product at the races - certainly was the case when I got credentials 10 years ago.  SX has been more aggressive about policing that, but it was generally pretty loose as long as the work product was going to editorial or industry sponsors; the red line had been selling the images to the general public (for example, offering up posters, etc., from current season races).

Is monetizing YouTube/TikTok etc. driving this? 

mikeyjones wrote:

Truth be known all it would take to ruin feld and this sport would be the energy drink companies pulling all the money they put in...

Truth be known all it would take to ruin feld and this sport would be the energy drink companies pulling all the money they put in ...

Buckland wrote:

Every energy drink brand could vanish tomorrow and Feld would STILL make money on the SX series.I hate the idea of the promoter controlling all media...

Every energy drink brand could vanish tomorrow and Feld would STILL make money on the SX series.

I hate the idea of the promoter controlling all media and the narratives. As stated earlier in the thread, the UFC implemented this model and it's terrible. Every once in a while a legitimate question will slip through that fans care about and the response from Dana White will literally be "Who f'ing cares!?" with zero follow-ups or push back. Imagine asking why rider A was penalized a race win for missing a track marker and the response is "who cares!? just watch the race."

Soul Indigo wrote:

UFC and Feld are brothers from another mother. 

They are only going to come closer together. 

Gmyersdork wrote:

ML512, Michael Charge a monthly subscription, pay your entry for credentials,  report back to your subscribers that actually care what motodrive, i mean vitalmx provides. Lose all...

ML512, Michael 

Charge a monthly subscription, pay your entry for credentials,  report back to your subscribers that actually care what motodrive, i mean vitalmx provides. Lose all the losers on the way. I like it.

Motonews?

ML512 wrote:

As many have proved before, pay models rarely work.

8tensolutions wrote:

All "rumors and leaks".  Still know nothing and the thread is 7 pages lol

Gimmea2Smoke wrote:

until ML actually tells us what FELD is proposing, we're all just pissin' in the wind. 

ML512 wrote:

The rumored plan was that Feld would take the production of all digital assets (video and photo) in-house from the races. Eliminating media, teams, sponsors, and...

The rumored plan was that Feld would take the production of all digital assets (video and photo) in-house from the races. Eliminating media, teams, sponsors, and riders from contracting or assigning their own people to gather the assets needed for their marketing, news features, reporting, social media, vlogs etc.

This would, in turn, make media, teams, sponsors, riders, etc have to pay licensing fees or per asset fees to the series to have access to some sort of media library or server to use these.

For media, this would potentially remove a revenue source that helps cover the costs of photographers or reporters going to the races, reducing or completely eliminating their ability to cover the sport. For teams and riders, this would just create one more payment they have to give the series after paying entry fees, license fees, potential marketing fees (in the case of OEMs), etc.

The media is upset and worried that they will lose potential revenue needed to offset travel costs and people's time to cover the sport, along with being stuck with a limited range of assets and time limits in which they can use them. Further damaging their ability to cover the sport in their own unique ways, which are needed to differentiate from each other, to capture an audience. Along with potentially just putting people out of jobs, along with controlling the narrative we can tell.

OEMs or series sponsors are upset with the idea because, as many have put it to me "we already spend so much money with the series, and now we'd have to give them more just so we can market that we did well at their races?"

There are a few more layers to it on how it would affect teams. If a gear brand, say Thor or FXR, pays a team say $80,000 per season, part of what they receive from the team is assets from the races to market those riders. Now said team might be able to contract a photographer at a reasonable rate because they shoot for 15 brands and balance the costs vs what each brand or team requests. Under the rumored program, every brand, team, etc would have to pay for assets. So if a brand is now paying extra/elevated costs to get assets of the team riders at the race, because the team now has a license where they can only use the assets for their own channels, the gear brand has spent more money out of their budget. This could cause them to reduce how much they spend with teams, as their total budget has to be used in a wider range of ways. This goes for any type of brand in the sport.

TheMilkman wrote:

I think Feld is trying to get rid of some of the “journalists” that have fewer followers/subscribers than the average fan. I doubt they boot out...

I think Feld is trying to get rid of some of the “journalists” that have fewer followers/subscribers than the average fan. I doubt they boot out the legit journalists and photographers.

However it was interesting to hear that Feld wants to own all of their content they create at the stadium. That will certainly be a step backwards for fan entertainment. Hopefully it doesn’t change the amount of Press Day videos and interviews we get because I look forward to those every week. 

yak651 wrote:

lol, legit journalist…what qualifications are required to be a legit moto journalist??

8tensolutions wrote:

All "rumors and leaks".  Still know nothing and the thread is 7 pages lol

ML512 wrote:

I left a pretty detailed answer on the last page.

8tensolutions wrote:

I saw the post, and not saying it is not a valid concern, but you still referred to them as leaks and rumors….so nothing specific or...

I saw the post, and not saying it is not a valid concern, but you still referred to them as leaks and rumors….so nothing specific or real yet. 

The Moth wrote:

So why exactly do you need an official statement?  All you’d say then is that it’s their business and they can do what they want. 

Gimmea2Smoke wrote:

until ML actually tells us what FELD is proposing, we're all just pissin' in the wind. 

ML512 wrote:

The rumored plan was that Feld would take the production of all digital assets (video and photo) in-house from the races. Eliminating media, teams, sponsors, and...

The rumored plan was that Feld would take the production of all digital assets (video and photo) in-house from the races. Eliminating media, teams, sponsors, and riders from contracting or assigning their own people to gather the assets needed for their marketing, news features, reporting, social media, vlogs etc.

This would, in turn, make media, teams, sponsors, riders, etc have to pay licensing fees or per asset fees to the series to have access to some sort of media library or server to use these.

For media, this would potentially remove a revenue source that helps cover the costs of photographers or reporters going to the races, reducing or completely eliminating their ability to cover the sport. For teams and riders, this would just create one more payment they have to give the series after paying entry fees, license fees, potential marketing fees (in the case of OEMs), etc.

The media is upset and worried that they will lose potential revenue needed to offset travel costs and people's time to cover the sport, along with being stuck with a limited range of assets and time limits in which they can use them. Further damaging their ability to cover the sport in their own unique ways, which are needed to differentiate from each other, to capture an audience. Along with potentially just putting people out of jobs, along with controlling the narrative we can tell.

OEMs or series sponsors are upset with the idea because, as many have put it to me "we already spend so much money with the series, and now we'd have to give them more just so we can market that we did well at their races?"

There are a few more layers to it on how it would affect teams. If a gear brand, say Thor or FXR, pays a team say $80,000 per season, part of what they receive from the team is assets from the races to market those riders. Now said team might be able to contract a photographer at a reasonable rate because they shoot for 15 brands and balance the costs vs what each brand or team requests. Under the rumored program, every brand, team, etc would have to pay for assets. So if a brand is now paying extra/elevated costs to get assets of the team riders at the race, because the team now has a license where they can only use the assets for their own channels, the gear brand has spent more money out of their budget. This could cause them to reduce how much they spend with teams, as their total budget has to be used in a wider range of ways. This goes for any type of brand in the sport.

ML512 wrote:

The rumored plan was that Feld would take the production of all digital assets (video and photo) in-house from the races. Eliminating media, teams, sponsors, and...

The rumored plan was that Feld would take the production of all digital assets (video and photo) in-house from the races. Eliminating media, teams, sponsors, and riders from contracting or assigning their own people to gather the assets needed for their marketing, news features, reporting, social media, vlogs etc.

This would, in turn, make media, teams, sponsors, riders, etc have to pay licensing fees or per asset fees to the series to have access to some sort of media library or server to use these.

For media, this would potentially remove a revenue source that helps cover the costs of photographers or reporters going to the races, reducing or completely eliminating their ability to cover the sport. For teams and riders, this would just create one more payment they have to give the series after paying entry fees, license fees, potential marketing fees (in the case of OEMs), etc.

The media is upset and worried that they will lose potential revenue needed to offset travel costs and people's time to cover the sport, along with being stuck with a limited range of assets and time limits in which they can use them. Further damaging their ability to cover the sport in their own unique ways, which are needed to differentiate from each other, to capture an audience. Along with potentially just putting people out of jobs, along with controlling the narrative we can tell.

OEMs or series sponsors are upset with the idea because, as many have put it to me "we already spend so much money with the series, and now we'd have to give them more just so we can market that we did well at their races?"

There are a few more layers to it on how it would affect teams. If a gear brand, say Thor or FXR, pays a team say $80,000 per season, part of what they receive from the team is assets from the races to market those riders. Now said team might be able to contract a photographer at a reasonable rate because they shoot for 15 brands and balance the costs vs what each brand or team requests. Under the rumored program, every brand, team, etc would have to pay for assets. So if a brand is now paying extra/elevated costs to get assets of the team riders at the race, because the team now has a license where they can only use the assets for their own channels, the gear brand has spent more money out of their budget. This could cause them to reduce how much they spend with teams, as their total budget has to be used in a wider range of ways. This goes for any type of brand in the sport.