BentPixels?

Nobody seems to understand it's a 50% GROSS revenue, all the networks saying 60/70/80% are the net revenues,

50% gross is around 80% net
 
Gambit said:
Nobody seems to understand it's a 50% GROSS revenue, all the networks saying 60/70/80% are the net revenues,

50% gross is around 80% net
Click to expand...
The thing is Gambit, that isn't correct.

It's 50% of a networks gross revenue which they will receive. Which is 50% of the 55% that a network receives from YouTube after they take their cut (45%).

Now take other MCNs, for example Zoomin.tv:
They offer 80% of that 55% revenue.

All MCN's, except for Vevo, take their cut after the 55%.
 
Last edited:
markkaz said:
Is this what you are saying?

50% Bent Pixels
45% Google
05% Creator
Click to expand...


No, he's saying it's

50% Creator
45% YouTube
5% Bent Pixels

Which would be approximately a 91% revenue share. He's also wrong. Nobody offers a revenue share based on the number before YouTube has been paid. The Gross Vs. Net Revenue share issue has to do with whether the network removes outside costs before applying the percentage (wages, building maintenance, hosting costs, etc.). Or in the case of something like TGN who has been long suspected to have paid BBTV a portion before applying their revenue share with the partner.
 
Dananuh said:
The thing is Gambit, that isn't correct.

It's 50% of a networks gross revenue which they will receive. Which is 50% of the 55% that a network receives from YouTube after they take their cut (45%).

Now take other MCNs, for example Zoomin.tv:
They offer 80% of that 55% revenue.

All MCN's, except for Vevo, take their cut after the 55%.

@Gabriel can explain.
Click to expand...
Please do not bring me into this, thank you!
 
From what I remember of Vultra from a former forum member, they advertised a 80/20 contract, which was the net amount after Bent Pixels took a cut. After both Bent Pixels, and Vultra took their cuts, it equalled a 50/50 split. It indeed mirrors the TGN/BBTV model.
 
Dananuh said:
Fine by me, just thought you could clarify things with Gambit and all.
Click to expand...
If you so wish.

Bent Pixels switched from 50% 'gross' agreement to 80% net royalties for about 20 days in January, it was switched back to 50% gross shortly after those 20-ish days due to people not reading the agreement. The 80% agreement worked as follows, 80% of the net royalties shall go to partner. However , -5% was for payment processing, -10% for accounting and preparation for each monthly payment and a few other fees which made it 50% in the end. It was scrapped because no one read the agreement or terms and then complained. They went back to our simple, clear and easy to understand agreement.

All in all, the 80% net royalties agreement was enforced at the beginning of January and discontinued near the end of January of this year.

Re to gross: everyone should know Google is entitled to around 50% of each partner channel, regardless of size, type of partner or with an MCN. It didn't sound like he was saying the partner receives 50% before Google, though.
 
Gabriel said:
The 80% agreement worked as follows, 80% of the net royalties shall go to partner. However , -5% was for payment processing, -10% for accounting and preparation for each monthly payment and a few other fees which made it 50% in the end.
Click to expand...

Fullscreen had the same crap. You reach an agreement (by email) and then when you get the Contract, there were at least two similar fees.

In my opinion, that is dishonest. When you say 80/20 (in this example, not mine), 80 percent is my revenue for my time, effort and expense and 20 is their cut for the same.

I'm not allowed to discuss particulars in regards to my agreement so let's just say that I choose to not do business with dishonest terms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top