Over 400 Polaris partners transferred to RPM without notification. Only 37 partners are left.

I don't see what the big deal is-if those channels didn't have it expressly written into their contracts that that they were to be a managed channel with instant monetization guaranteed, then this is simply a shift over to an affiliate CMS account. In this case, they are not with RPM, but still with Polaris-all the partner managers and services stay the same-they were just shifted over to the Maker 3 CPM, which happens to be the same CMS account that RPM uses-which is why socialblade says that they are with RPM. If they changed the ID on socialblade to Maker/Polaris/RPM (which it rightfully is), then no one would be making a big deal out of this.

On a side, note, when you factor in that managed channels all share the blame for violations along with the network, there's no way that I'd want my channel on managed status. I don't trust other channels to stay clean and I don't want to be penalized for their errors. Any managed channel in a network that is grouping the vast majority of their users into a managed CMS is going to be in for a very rude awakening.
 
A ton of networks have made some switches, I myself had my channel downgraded from Managed to Affiliated. And I can guess 90 percent of you guys have too. It's not fair but it's our faults for joining the networks we are with.[DOUBLEPOST=1387664115,1387663630][/DOUBLEPOST]
Wreckless Eating said:
On a side, note, when you factor in that managed channels all share the blame for violations along with the network, there's no way that I'd want my channel on managed status. I don't trust other channels to stay clean and I don't want to be penalized for their errors. Any managed channel in a network that is grouping the vast majority of their users into a managed CMS is going to be in for a very rude awakening.
Click to expand...

If you are affiliated, wouldn't you be better off to just stay partnered directly with YouTube?
 
PressRecord said:
If you are affiliated, wouldn't you be better off to just stay partnered directly with YouTube?
Click to expand...

In my case, no. I won't see a difference in how things work because we have so many videos in the scheduled uploader at any given time, but I'm not willing to give up the perks or the additional revenue due to ad sales, which could easily become larger once the revenue cap is introduced next month. I'm also at the point where my network is willing to invest money directly into my channel, so I'd be giving up an awful lot due to a change that doesn't affect me in any way.

So a question for you. Would you want to stay on managed status knowing that even if you stay clean, strikes racked up by other managed channels can lead to a loss of annotations, custom thumbnails, the ability to change your channel art, in-video programming and the ability to upload new videos? Those penalties apply to all mananged channels in the CMS, not just the ones who received the strikes.
 
Wreckless Eating said:
In my case, no. I won't see a difference in how things work because we have so many videos in the scheduled uploader at any given time, but I'm not willing to give up the perks or the additional revenue due to ad sales, which could easily become larger once the revenue cap is introduced next month. I'm also at the point where my network is willing to invest money directly into my channel, so I'd be giving up an awful lot due to a change that doesn't affect me in any way.

So a question for you. Would you want to stay on managed status knowing that even if you stay clean, strikes racked up by other managed channels can lead to a loss of annotations, custom thumbnails, the ability to change your channel art, in-video programming and the ability to upload new videos? Those penalties apply to all mananged channels in the CMS, not just the ones who received the strikes.
Click to expand...

This is honestly the first I am hearing of this. My girlfriend and I both have a managed channel at the moment and they haven't stated any of this. Looks like someone is getting an email, but no to answer your question that doesn't sound fair. Thank you for the heads up!
 
:hilarious2: But to clear a few things up, I'd say Maker #3 is RPM/Polaris affiliates and sb just hasn't changed the name to that yet.

And if the channels were just moved from one content owner to the other, that is not against the TOS for MCNs.
 
Not really suprised by the move. Had expected it from MakerStudio sooner.

Whoever said that it won`t change anything should rethink that Polaris had some really high paid Ad Campaign because of YouTuber like PewDiePie for everyone in the Polaris Network. Everyone who got moved now will for sure see an significant profit drop.

Sidenote:

Also those Channels aren`t able anymore to use any of the Online Widgets that Polaris had provided them so far.

Back on topic:

Those that got moved had already predicated something like this over the last couple of weeks even they hadn`t talked about it straight from the beginning. I can now understand why some YouTuber like AngryJoeShow and others had thought about just stop using YouTube or switch the Network over the last couple of Weeks over and over again.

The Team at MakerStudio seem to be aware of that otherwise I am sure that switch wouldn`t had been done on the last day before the Studio close down over the Christmas Holidays.

Good luck to everyone who got switched...[DOUBLEPOST=1387687662,1387686569][/DOUBLEPOST]Well at least MakerStudio is not trying to cover up anything or do they?

itsnotourfaultpruq8.jpg


actuallyitisnbkor.jpg


Ok everyone knows that Socialblade reports are right in this case so this leads to...

stillnotourfaulteocvk.jpg

Give a another Day and they probably might report that it`s Obamas fault....​
 
Last edited:
Wreckless Eating said:
I don't see what the big deal is-if those channels didn't have it expressly written into their contracts that that they were to be a managed channel with instant monetization guaranteed, then this is simply a shift over to an affiliate CMS account. In this case, they are not with RPM, but still with Polaris-all the partner managers and services stay the same-they were just shifted over to the Maker 3 CPM, which happens to be the same CMS account that RPM uses-which is why socialblade says that they are with RPM. If they changed the ID on socialblade to Maker/Polaris/RPM (which it rightfully is), then no one would be making a big deal out of this.

On a side, note, when you factor in that managed channels all share the blame for violations along with the network, there's no way that I'd want my channel on managed status. I don't trust other channels to stay clean and I don't want to be penalized for their errors. Any managed channel in a network that is grouping the vast majority of their users into a managed CMS is going to be in for a very rude awakening.
Click to expand...


I tend to agree with your second point quite a bit actually and have for a while. That said, it doesn't need to be written into the contract to have potential legal implications. There are quite a few elements of the YouTube interaction that would be considered "part of the deal". For example, if YouTube increased it's cut from 45% to 80%. This is such a sizable change that it could very easily invalidate contracts. The concept of instant monetization versus a review is something that has been used in recruiting rhetoric for so long and at this point is just considered to be part of the package. They have a pretty big fight ahead of them, but it's by no means an open and shut case in favor of the networks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top