Fullscreen CEO Replies to George's Nonsense with Freedom.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kamran Sankey said:
Very glad somebody voiced this.

I believe all MCNs live in an equilibrium. I do not see my fellow networkers as rivals but as peers I can learn from.
In fact I can safely say I am great friends with more than half of today's MCN owners.

This has flat out caused most of us a headache for multiple reasons based on rumoured and/or false statements. I can see how this is a potentially great way to haul in partners/subnetworks but these partners are in-fact being hauled in from fellow networkers as they are being mass-poached due to target statements that the Fullscreen CEO has mentioned in the first paragraph.
Click to expand...

True, true. this is the reason for most of my hate.

2-3 previously very happy partners now coming to us saying we have nulled their contract and annoyed them by not making them managed.
Via messages from Freedom recruiters who have been fed false info and havn't even bothered to actually read our contract..
 
To be honest, it doesn't seem like they really WERE happy if they are so easily convinced by an exterior network's offerings.

I used to be a partner at Fullscreen, and if another network approached me with ANY deals, I would always say I'm sticking to Fullscreen because of the stability of knowing exactly on an "I've-seen-it"-basis level what they offer. Any partner of a network should be proud to be signed to the network and had they really been happy, they wouldn't have gone out of their way to tell you that they are annoyed.

Sure, what Freedom! offers as a no lock-in has two sides; on one hand you can leave whenever you want (which is something people might want to do in the future considering YouTube's quite sweeping, sudden changes sometimes), but it also leaves the question open of why they would want to leave. My point is that every argument has two sides to it and technically we could debate over whether or not one network is truly "better" than the other but truth is it will always be up to the individual content creator to decide.

Back on topic of our thoughts pertaining the actual ACTION taken by George S. (not the content of his action flaming on a different network):

I feel like he didn't have to make it sound the way he did. Accusing Vanous of being "creepy", appealing to a crowd of "10 year olds", really doesn't make you look like the tougher man. George S. should know that Fullscreen IS the bigger company here (that's just a fact), and if they do indeed offer better things, then maybe their support team would be more helpful (rather than focusing on adsales). What Freedom does is not exactly the opposite, but it is EXTREMELY community-driven on a partner-help-partner basis with loads of interactivity between partners involved. I feel like most people who have complained to Fullscreen have actually complained about the support team (or lack thereof) and their replies to the messages and NOT about their RevShare, or the other benefits that Fullscreen offers.

Just to be clear, my position on this IS slightly biased, as I am Head of Designs at Freedom!, but I tried to make this nice and easy. The only reason I actually AM involved in Freedom! is simply because of their forums and their openness to reward people on the forums according to how much they helped (I personally opened a design request thread, which attracted loads of attention). As said: I do not vouch FOR one or the other; I just think it's wrong to hate on the guy making the update videos and actually taking time to inform his partners personally rather than having two guys do a Twitter QA live session with stuff you can find on the F.A.Q. anyway.

Again, I'm NOT a representative of Freedom!, these views ARE solely mine, I simply post on their forums as a designer (and I would do the same at Fullscreen if they would have open forums) and have no financial or personal benefit binding to them.

P.S. Sorry for slightly confusing answers, I hope it's still somewhat understandable.
 
Yes, I am. My current channel was with AwesomenessTV before I unlinked and went with Freedom!
 
kitteh said:
Yes, I am. My current channel was with AwesomenessTV before I unlinked and went with Freedom!
Click to expand...
Okay, because freedom has failed to notify you of this… You have an insane amount of copyrighted music on your channel including a Rihanna remix And the sound of the inception movie... You know? The one with Leonardo DiCaprio... But that's all covered under fair use? Right…. To be blunt: it's channels like yours that will cause freedom to be copyright striked to death.

The fact that George has just claimed that he reviews every single uploaded video through some program called "heartbeat," it's quite interesting to me that he failed to catch all of your videos. If the music industry decided to come down on your channel, he would have no way to combat the copyright strikes infringed.
 
After reading all of this and people attacking Goerge I want to say a couple of things.


I am active on YouTube for 3 years now and have been partnered with RPM, Machinima, AdSense and Curse. And I can tell you that no network does what they promise it’s always up to the partner to take care of himself and make his channel grow and make money. So for people to say that a network is good or bad does not exist.


And now after YouTube changes this monetizing things and implemented affiliate and managed partner’s makes my point even more clear to the fact that networks don’t care for their partners and all they care about is money and themselves and nothing else. Because every network out their just backed off and made very partner an affiliate partner and gave managed partners to people that made like videos that were considered safe. So again not giving a s**t about their partners and not cared for the contract that they signed. So again for people blame Freedom or other networks cared for their partners is b******t.


And now to the point I just don’t understand why people here are attacking Goerge (Freedom) because he is trying to give partners a managed status instead of blaming their own networks for just leaving them in dust and making everyone an affiliate partners and just saying a big ‘’f**k you’’ to their partners and just leaving all their partners just on their own. And just ignoring the fact that when you signed a contract with them they just told you all the good stuff you could get with partnering with them and just locked you in a contract for years. And now they just change things without asking you and just leave you locked in a long term contract.


So again I am not pro any network at the moment but for Goerge (Freedom) to try and help partners to be managed again and giving younger people a chance and getting all this attacked is not fair I think. Like I said people need to get and blame their own networks for making everyone an affiliate channel for no reason. If they really cared for their partners as they promoted themselves when they approached you to be with them they would not have made everyone a affiliate partner for no reason at all.


And by the way when you join Freedom you agree a no lock in contact so if for some reason you don’t like what they do you can always leave. I am saying this because people that are saying that George is laying or something you can always leave so. If he offered you a contract for 2 years and locked you in you could argued it and stuff but you can leave when you want. Again not prompting Freedom or something but wanted to point it out to people that are saying that Goerge may be laying or something.
 
kitteh said:
To be honest, it doesn't seem like they really WERE happy if they are so easily convinced by an exterior network's offerings.
Click to expand...

This is not true in the slightest due to the YouTube rumor mill occuring right now. The community in general has exploded on the affiliate/managed issue and even big YouTubers are spreading false information and not really understanding the implications of demanding that a network make you a managed channel. Freedom is capitalizing on the lack of knowledge to draw in partners with the promise of managed status. The YouTube channels have spun themselves into a frenzy over it all on their own.

The ethics of storming competing networks partners with claims of legal outs in their contract and false promises are questionable at best, fraudulent at worst. They are misleading people into thinking that this is ok and it's not. Offering 60% is not ok. Offering every channel managed is dangerous for the channels partnered.

Curse wanted to do an every partner is managed thing, until they had their meeting with YouTube. Putting their network and their partners at risk wasn't worth it. Considering that the Curse Network is most likely just breaking even, kinda a loss leader for the rest of their sites, I tend to put a lot of trust there. They have no reason to lie about it, because their income comes primarily from other sources.

To partner with Freedom is to put your channel at risk of losing custom thumbnails, live streaming and the ability to upload videos for 3 months at a time.
 
I do not know much about this freedom network but I advise anyone to do their research before joining any network. Not every network operator actually knows what they are doing.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top