Is it time to band together9380
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| It is time to become the antagonizers to combat Matterport’s unfair business practices? Just because we are not employees it should not mean that Matterport can treat us unfairly and steal our livelihood from us. We, the camera owners are the ones who pay Matterport. We are the clients! Without the support and payment of camera owners, Matterport could very well fair the fate of other companies who did not see the writing on the wall before it was too late. If we are to survive, we need to band together now! An unfair pricing structure is just the latest. Virtually overnight, the pricing structure for the same amount of space increased to approximately 3x-5x the price of classic accounts with no REAL added benefits. In fact, some of you may go as far as saying we are paying more for less. There is NO reason to believe that classic accounts will be grandfathered in as suggested, based on the company’s past poor decisions when it comes to being fair with camera owners. Business accounts are required to be paid annually ($3200-$7000 year). No monthly billing option discourages many from being able to grow their livelihood to the next level. Those of us who have too many scans and are now considered business level must come up with thousands of dollars just to stay in business...again...with no real added benefit to the camera owner. Last year, Matterport attempted to change their TOS allowing them to sell copyrighted product without asking permission from the photographer or from the current property owner. There was so much blow-back from us as UNORGANIZED agitators that they decided to reverse the TOS and perhaps ushered out a CEO. This stunt, however, demonstrates that Matterport has no credibility or loyalty to us camera owners even though we are the only ones who pay for this service. And from everything I can see, this plan is simply waiting to be sprung again. Stealing leads. It’s been documented that if a lead is submitted by someone looking for a service provider, Matterport’s own sales department will follow up with that lead trying to sell them cameras and service in the hope of luring the lead away from the service provider. In other documented cases, after uploading contact information on a client, the Matterport sales team will contact the clients trying to sell them cameras and the platform, once again luring the client away from US, the camera owner. We must band together as a united front and a unified voice to coordinate our resources and affect change. Someone knows someone who knows someone who is an influencer, a social media star, a tech review writer, a blogger, a lawyer, an industry insider, what ever it is. We can pool our resources and coordinate our message of their unfair practices to the masses. The internet can be a powerful ally. And it’s not just Matterport. This is simply the beginning of an emerging technology. All the up and coming companies dealing in this technology are looking to them for the template as the way to do business with us and succeed. If Matterport succeeds, WE ARE ALL IN TROUBLE. So what can we do? WE CAN NOT LIE! The good news is the actual truth provided by Matterport is enough to turn off anyone thinking about buying a camera, investing in or supporting this company. Reviews - All camera owners can write reviews about the Matterport platform explaining the realistic shortfalls of their most recent business decisions and the adverse effects it will have on service providers old and new. Facebook, Google Business, and any other platforms we can utilize to spread our message. We can approach their capital investors to explain the detriment of the changes Matterport is suggesting and the ways that will ultimately stymie revenue for an otherwise promising company. They won’t listen of course. So then we can spread our message throughout their other investment partners as a warning to potential companies seeking their help. Perhaps companies learning of their greed and direction will think twice before using them. Perhaps they will back out of the Matterport investment they have made… We can contract with other providers. If enough of us banded together to leave Matterport and supported GeoCV or something similiar instead, they would have the capital to make enhancements necessary to be on par with Matterport. We all know Matterport is on top, for the moment, but there are and will be other providers. Contact Matterport partners like Ricoh or Insta360. If they knew how many camera owners are unhappy with the company, maybe Ricoh will begin to partner with another vendor. And if not, we continue to leave online reviews and stories about Matterport’s ways on their channels. Perhaps they will listen or have some sort of influence. Most of us I assume work in the Real Estate sector. Yet another group to spread our message to about these unfair practices. And any other industry too. Insurance, hospitality, engineering, and commercial will need to hear our message as well. Manufactures of their camera parts. Employees, supply chains, and whatever else we can think of to make sure everyone knows how this company operates and treats the hand that feeds them. Perhaps that last line strikes a chord with you. Do WE want to bite the hand that feeds us? Ask yourself how much longer they are going to continue to feed you before they finally cut the cord or do something drastic enough that you have no choice but to move on. Matterport will continue to do whatever they want because they can do so without impunity. Is that how it is? Nothing in the last year and half has told me anything different. They will continue to do whatever they want if it lines theirs and their investors pockets. If Matterport were to go down at our hands… so what? There will be other companies to fill the void and we will become more powerful because of it. We can have a say. We can all be profitable including Matterport. Fair is fair. I suggest everyone remains anonymous at this point. We need to organize. I don’t know where this will go. I simply don’t know what else to do. 3D Hoffa |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN StandardMember Las Vegas |
VTLV private msg quote post Address this user | |
 This Piece Right Here! Perfectly explains our entire situation with Matterport Service Providers at a Crossroads. Thank You @3D_Hoffa |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
WallsCouldTalk private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I believe when investors begin to get cold feet and reconsider which platform to place their bets on, that is when we will see the shift. BELIEVE that investors that have their money on other prospects are watching waiting on Matterport to wobble from this decision. They WILL double down when they believe Matterport has reached its weakest point. When the tide shifts, we may witness a mass exodus from the platform before it sinks. From a strategic perspective, it looks as though Matterport is trying to force service providers to become so locked into the platform that they can't pull out. That kind of strategy has worked historically. But, we don't live in the same world anymore. Transparency, willful or not, has to be a part of every business structure. The fluidity in sharing inside information is to efficient now to expect shady behavior to remain in the shadows for long. The ability for people to rally together has never been faster or easier. Ask any politician that has gone down in flames overnight over something that would have never made it past the local papers. I GUARENTEE current and prospective investors are monitoring the situation. Matterport will make investors money whether they succeed or fail. They will see the tide shift before the market has time react. If they keep making these unpredictable decisions and make the investment more risky, it will erode investors confidence. The only ones that will be willing to take the ride will likely be hedging their bets with other platforms and double down once they see the writing on the wall. This kind of behavior takes a company from hero to zero at lightning speed. Our relationships with our clients are rock solid because we operate with rigid ethics. Our equipment is paid for and making money. We will certainly not be getting overextended on a platform with this kind of history. We will maintain a solid exit strategy. For now, we wait. | ||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Spread the word. We will need followers. When the time is right (hopefully soon), I will fire the first shot so to speak and alert everyone via this forum. I've been thinking about this for awhile now. Remember, no lies, no slander. We only need the truth thanks to Matterports policies. 3D Hoffa |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Interesting Facebook post from Adrian Wilcox on the MOUG Facebook page. Seems we are not alone... | ||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada |
Queen_City_3D private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I will rage only if/when Matterport actually does away with their classic plans. For now, though, there is no fire. Keep doing what you’re doing and be happy you are grandfathered in. In fact, as many have suggested, it might make sense for some of us to add a new plan IN ADDITION to our classic plans (to do our uploads in and then transfer to classic account for hosting) in which case we should actually be happy about the recent announcement. Again, if/when my classic plan goes away, I will be EXTREMELY upset. That isn’t the case right now though, so for me it’s business as usual. |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Standard Member Las Vegas |
VTLV private msg quote post Address this user | |
@3D_Hoffa - hit up @immersivespaces  @Queen_City_3D - I smelled smoke when the PRO2 lite pricing came about  I gotta get this hosting cost figured out. The Town Hall came off a bit peaceful with little rage about hosting costs and loosing clients. When I increase my hosting by 500 - 700% to my clients, I see them jumping ship or running to Matterport now for their own hosting. Matterport sales sold the camera as a Business in a Box to many of us to sell 360's with room for residual income from hosting. There's no room for hosting income and our Portfolio's go away with Grandfather. |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Queen_City_3D Yeah, I'm on classic too, as are most of us I would say. It's their disturbing pattern of policy making I take issue with. I'm most hung up with the fact that they will, maybe not today, but they will take every space you scanned from you for their own profit. It's inevitable. And we just sit here like sheep and take it. I'm afraid you're exactly what they are hoping for. Your decisions are respected and you can wait, but it may be too late. |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| It's pretty old stuff but the guy has a history... Does any of this sound familiar? Especially the first post on the second page. https://community.ebay.com/t5/eBay-Mobile-App-iOS/RJ-Pittman-Arrogant-or-delusional/gpm-p/24544837 |
||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
|
Convrts private msg quote post Address this user | |
| This is a troubling situation for all MSPs because yes, as @Queen_City_3D says, it might not hit us all financially in the same way initially but it's the lack of consultation, understanding and respect for current MSPs that is of huge concern to me when looking at a future which relies so heavily on this company. While I respect a lot of people finding ways of "making the best" of these changes by juggling plans etc, all of our business models will be disrupted by this without any consideration being given to that by those at Matterport. It's not the first time changes have been made with such disregard for those who have supported this business for many years and I can only guess that there must have been some decisions made in the Matterport boardroom that don't involve us being part of their long term business model. | ||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
|
GarySnyder private msg quote post Address this user | |
| What you’re all discussing here goes back at least 3 years as a proven topic of discussion. It has always been MP’s game plan to go direct to any potential user. Be it a commercial real estate company, builder or any company which MP can see an opportunity to sale a camera to and generate ongoing revenue from. The question you may ask is how does MP go about doing this. It’s thanks to every one of you who have a camera as you are supplying the hot leads to their global sales staff which every model you create. Their sales team merely review each week all the new models that MP are hosting. Their sales team will call your repeat customer and tell them why are you using a MSP when you can be shooting all your own VT’s at a fraction of the cost. Now for the part where I add gasoline to the fire of this thread. I had a very large commercial customer where I did 3 large jobs for them. These 3 models are part of their ongoing government business contract and are a key part of the marketing program for future contracts. In addition these 3 locations cannot be shot again and were unique and critical to their business. They had at least 3 more large jobs for me to do last year. These never materialized so I shutdown the models, within a day they called me to say that their models had gone dark and promised me that I would be doing the additional work. The additional jobs never metalized so I shut down the all 3 models again after 2 months. This time I never heard anything from them and they needed these models due to their unique nature for their marketing and government bids. I’m sure that MP has sold them a camera and additionally given them access to the 3 models which shot and shut down. Don’t forgot that MP owns all of our models and can do whatever they please, read the fine print in the T&C’s. This includes giving access to others models (if they’ve been shut down) and will become a large volume customer who has bought a camera or considering buying a camera and plans of keeping these models live for at least the next 5 years. What it all boils down to is no matter what any of you might think MP is not to be trusted. Didn’t forget a little over a year ago MP were offering scanning services in SF which competed with MSP’s in the bay area. |
||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN ForumFounder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by GarySnyder@3D_Hoffa Do you have recommendations for Matterport regarding Matterport New Pricing meets Matterport Service Providers? Quote: Originally Posted by Queen_City_3DQuote: Originally Posted by Queen_City_3D When you do the calculations for your own business, are you better offer with the combo of Matterport New Pricing AND Matterport Classic Pricing as proposed here: ✓ How to Succeed with Matterport Classic Pricing (for Users and Matterport) And, anything to add to this list? ✓ 10 Things Matterport Should do for Matterport Service Providers (Please) Quote: Originally Posted by VTLV While everyone was polite, if you look at nearly all the faces, there is no joy in Mudville ... quote=GarySnyder]Don’t forgot that MP owns all of our models and can do whatever they please, read the fine print in the T Can you share the text from the Matterport T&C that would enable Matterport to share your disabled Matterport Spaces with someone else? Best, Dan |
||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod I don't "specifically" take issue with the pricing change. Prices increase on products all the time although not at the drastic rate Matterport is imposing on us. I think that is expected when you add value and increment it at a reasonable percentage. However, that is not what happened in my eyes and it seems so in the eyes for a lot of others. The MOUG Facebook seems to be full of people that are upset. We need to figure out how to rally them all together. For me, the pricing change is just another straw on the camels back. Obviously I will stick with the classic pricing because it works better for me. But I have absolutely zero confidence in being "indefinitely" grandfathered in. And the pricing workarounds that are being suggested, and as Dee said, "technically" possible. How long do you really think that loop hole will last? Seriously? It will take them 2 seconds to take away the ability to move spaces between plans once things calm down a bit. Are we all this blind? Am I seeing things that are not there? These are not honest people that we have gotten into bed with. I've invested a lot of time and money into this product. And a lot of us are kinda of stuck. I know I am. I'm actually more concerned with Matterport as a whole and how they come out with these changes that can/will be detrimental to all of us. And then they act like they are doing us a favor. No one is really talking about the VAT and billing screw up. No one is really talking about the broken, workflow changing, piece of crap that workshop 3 is. That by the way we will all be force to change to very soon. And the phase out of the lite camera. We've kind of forgotten about all of that because of this latest dick move. WTF is going on? Please go check out the post on eBay about RJ Pitman that I linked to above. This seems like business as usual for this guy. I promise you, I'm not the hysterical/radical type. I've just never felt so screwed over by a company. Maybe I've lived a sheltered life but this company is messing with part of my income simply because they can. And I'm pissed. |
||
| Post 13 • IP flag post | ||
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @GarySnyder I am very sorry you have this perception of Matterport. It is a terrible thing to lose trust. I have now researched many of these rumors of Matterport selling around its MSPs but they never check out with the data. Matterport does not have such practices. It does not market just to photographers however, it does market to real estate agents, architects, insurance adjusters etc. and this may be interpreted as some slight. It does not mine photographer models for sales data. In fact, over 70% of the WW network of MSPs are photographers. The business depends on them. In the meantime, please let me know if there is anything I can do to help facilitate a better Matterport experience for you. As for the Terms of Service please refer to section 3.7. Matterport cannot and would not give your model away. 3.7. Licenses to Matterport. You hereby grant to Matterport the following non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable licenses in connection with all Subscription Levels for the Processing and Hosting Service: (a) Raw Sensor Data: (i) to host, reproduce, modify and create derivative works from the Raw Sensor Data to generate the Space Imagery, Fixed Digital Objects and Non-Fixed Digital Objects; and (ii) to use Raw Sensor Data for internal purposes such as product development, testing and troubleshooting; (b) Space Imagery, Fixed Digital Objects and Non-Fixed Digital Objects: (i) subject to Your direction, to host, reproduce, modify, distribute and display the Space Imagery, Fixed Digital Objects and Non-Fixed Digital Objects on the Matterport Cloud, in Matterport apps, and on third-party websites and Matterport-authorized third-party apps through links to the Matterport Cloud; (ii) to use Space Imagery, Fixed Digital Objects and Non-Fixed Digital Objects for Matterport’s or Matterport licensee’s internal purposes such as product development and commercialization, testing and troubleshooting; and (iii) to create derivative works from the Space Imagery, Fixed Digital Objects and Non-Fixed Digital Objects to create the Derived Imagery; (c) Derived Imagery: (i) subject to Your direction, to host, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, distribute and display the Derived Imagery on the Matterport Cloud and in Matterport apps; and (ii) subject to Your direction, including as provided in Section 2.6 of these Spaces Processing and Hosting Terms, to distribute, syndicate and display the Derived Imagery on third-party websites and in Matterport authorized third-party apps, through links to the Matterport Cloud; and (d) Matterport Cloud End Users: to permit end users with accounts on the Matterport Cloud to interact with Spaces in ways beyond viewing, including, without limitation, taking measurements within Spaces, annotating Spaces with Mattertag Content, saving favorite Spaces, and sharing links to Spaces with others. |
||
| Post 14 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Sorry, you left this piece out. Matterport reserves the right to revise any portion of this Agreement in its sole discretion at any time and without prior notice to You by updating this posting. Thus, You should visit this page periodically for changes. If You disagree with any changes to this Agreement, Your sole remedy is to discontinue Your use of the Matterport Cloud. Your continued use of the Matterport Cloud after a change has been posted constitutes Your acceptance of the change thereafter. |
||
| Post 15 • IP flag post | ||
|
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @3D_Hoffa To be fair, this is a very standard piece of SaaS licensing language. In fact, look, it's here: "GeoCV reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to change, modify, add or remove portions of these Terms, at any time. It is your responsibility to check these Terms periodically for changes. Your continued use of the GeoCV Service following the posting of changes will mean that you accept and agree to the changes. As long as you comply with these Terms, GeoCV grants you a personal, non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited privilege to use the GeoCV Service." |
||
| Post 16 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
Convrts private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Jwbuckl @Jwbuckl to be fair you guys have got previous here... yes it may be standard language but this is only a discussion because our service has been changed without consultation more than once .... |
||
| Post 17 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Convrts Correct. @Jwbuckl I think everyone here would agree that it is fair and that is standard language. We probably all have something similar on our sites as well. The difference is most of us have it there because it's standard jargon, and others... well, they have different uses for it. |
||
| Post 18 • IP flag post | ||
|
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Convrts I understand that many people were upset about the TOS change a while ago before it was changed back. I get it why some may not trust that Classic plans are grandfathered indefinitely when the company states so. I appreciate your candor and encourage you to stay communicative with the company. Folks are listening. | ||
| Post 19 • IP flag post | ||
|
CrankyNathan private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Jwbuckl I think part of it is just the feeling of instability you are giving to MSPs as they are stuck in your data-trap type ecosystem. Who knows what greedy move your company will pull next? Here's a thought - actually do something to show MSPs you are on their side. People have put money into this as part of their livelihoods, and there is a feeling of not having control that I think is upsetting. These are many of the people that Matterport has built its business on - maybe do something to show you give two craps. |
||
| Post 20 • IP flag post | ||
|
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @CrankyNathan What are you suggesting? | ||
| Post 21 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Jwbuckl What is he suggesting? This is a question that someone would ask if: a. They have zero ability to do anything about anything b. They have zero intention to do anything about anything This question undermines your credibility and only shows that you are a mouth piece trying to put out a fire. If "folks are listening" as you stated earlier, you would already know what to do. How about this? How about MSP representation at Matterport? Not paid employees, just representation. When ideas come down from the brain trust, we can vote on it. Don't bother. I know the answer. But if you really want to restore trust and faith, that would be a "suggestion". |
||
| Post 22 • IP flag post | ||
|
|
3D_Hoffa private msg quote post Address this user | |
Haha, while looking on Inman to see who I could contact there, this is on the front page. Hey Matterport, read this. There may be some "suggestions" in there. |
||
| Post 23 • IP flag post | ||
Paris |
RomainReparage private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Jwbuckl : i ll suggest to do a letter say that 'we've heard you' and let people open/dupplicate/upgrate new classic plans with an official term in t.o.s about not moving it. or increase by 5 the active models on the new plans and add a monthly payment for the business plans. i ll suggest to work hard on 3 innovations that could be in the top 5 featuring request for real since years and has everyone looking with smile for the future. | ||
| Post 24 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN StandardMember Atlanta, Georgia |
Scena private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @jwbuckl Here is a recent ad from Matterport where evidently, based on the MOUG FB forum, a price of .03 per square foot was originally quoted and there is a discount offer to buy the camera. This is targeted to Apartments.com users per the MOUG. Matterport Multi-family Ad a) Assuming the .03 sq ft was originally part of the ad (please confirm, if not .03 what is/was the price) how does this help the MSP ecosystem by driving the price down, commoditization. b) If MP is selling cameras to these potential clients (property managers), who MSPs have been educating and selling to for years, doesn't this undermine the entire MSP program? Once a camera is sold they are no longer our clients. c) Who does MP send out to these jobs? d) Do you think this data demonstrates "MP selling around MSPs"? e) Can MP put together a program that allows the MSPs to participate in these programs, assuming they are profitable? f) Can MP devote some money, or at least the same amount spent on this campaign, to Google Ads in all the markets which promote finding a pro ONLY, not selling cameras? Thanks for being here answering our questions. |
||
| Post 25 • IP flag post | ||
|
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
@Scena Thank you for your post. Let me do some digging and get some answers to your questions. As a check into this, I can share this (attached). In February, Matterport ran a survey of its MSPs and in the US, the average MSP reported making in the $.10-.15 bracket for residential and commercial spaces with relatively few below that price. Naturally, this all depends on the local market, offerings and how one markets themselves. I do not have data on multi-family specifically broken out from these numbers. |
||
| Post 26 • IP flag post | ||
|
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Scena I have found answers to your questions in order top to bottom. - there was never an ad with $.03 a sq ft in it for multi-family or other - no one I was checked with on the multi-family team knows of a deal as low as $.03. See chart in above post. - I understand that you see a conflict here but the fact remains that anyone can buy a camera and self-service. It is your excellent, valuable service that retains customers, not $300 off on a camera. - Matterport works with its MSP network for any work it may help facilitate from time to time - no. Matterport does not sell around its MSPs. In other words, it does not target your clients as sales prospects - it is - doing a better job promoting the MSP network is, in fact, something being discussed I hope this helped! |
||
| Post 27 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
  (Source) @Jwbuckl Above is a Matterport ad (source) showing Matterport selling tours for as low as 6 cents SQ FT in San Francisco two years ago. That means Matterport was selling tours for less than MSP market rate of $0.10 to $0.15 in February 2019. I could imagine the market rate for MSPs two years ago was higher than February 2019. This was a highly controversial - and short lived - trial (source), that created a fire-storm in the WGAN Forum. (related WGAN Forum discussion)  (Source) Here is an example of how Matterport pricing was emphasized which created pricing pressure on MSPs (such as Clients asking, "Why is Matterport offering at this price??" (Source)    [Matterport] just posted a statement [2:33 pm ET, Tuesday 18 July 2017](Source) Matterport defended the pricing in the above post (Source) This spin by Matterport only upset the Community more (source) and the Matterport trial was soon ended. However ... Matterport continues to compete with Matterport Service Providers in the Multi-Family space. ✓ Should Matterport be in the Business of Buying Scans from MSPs? While I could imagine that MSPs that get business from Matterport do not view this as competition, everyone else in that market that bought a Matterport Camera likely feels differently. Anything that encourages Matterport to drive price down, is not a good thing for photographers. I would feel differently if Matterport encouraged photography agencies to service multi-family opportunities. But, by Matterport doing this themselves, it not only drives the price down that MSPs get paid, but also likely discourages large photography agencies from entering the space to develop large accounts, knowing that they would be competing with Matterport (whom can always undersell by the nature of venture-backed companies that are focused on scale rather than profitability. The business model is simply different. I appreciate that Matterport has joined the WGAN Community as a Silver Member. And that Matterport is now actively engaging the WGAN Community – in the first-ever WGAN-TV Live at 5 that included two senior Matterport executives and Matterport team members now engaging in the WGAN Forum. And, I appreciate that you are seeking facts internally. And, that fact checking may be challenging given that some of this challenging-at-best history goes back two to three years (or more). Still, as you can see from the above - $0.06 SQ FT instead of $0.03 SQ FT - it gives us a sinking feeling when Matterport is competing with us. Nikon and Canon don't do that. Plus, when Matterport is in the business of buying scans from MSPs, it's in its best interest to pay the least amount to MSPs - not the most (which it should be). When Apple opened retail stores, it had the highest prices so as not to keep with retailers that were selling Apple product (and Apple thrived). If Matterport is going to continue buying Matterport scans from MSPs, perhaps Matterport could take the high ground and pay above market rate. Or, was Matterport charging clients $0.06 SF FT and paying Pros $0.10 to $0.15 SQ FT for those projects? We do want Matterport to participate in the WGAN Forum and WGAN-TV. It's refreshing for Matterport to engage with the WGAN Community. That said, you have your work cut out for you. Restoring trust after years of mistrust is challenging at best. Thanks, Dan |
||
| Post 28 • IP flag post | ||
|
San Francisco |
Jwbuckl private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DanSmigrod Thanks for sharing Dan. I don't think there is much to say about a short, two-year-old failed experiment. The single-family home business seems too fragmented to me to work for a program like this and at a scale and that makes everybody happy but who am I to say. But I can imagine situations where having a single "orchestrator" of MSPs is a necessity and not a luxury in order to win business...where a single MSP would never have a chance at winning business. Think of large corporates with properties over large geographies which, like with all there contracts, want a single contract, single price, single legal entity rolled up etc. Dealing with 10s or 100s of MSPs just isn't going to happen. Big REITs maybe? I would also imagine that with guaranteed volume comes down the price per sq ft, but then again there wouldn't be any marketing/downtime etc for the MSP plus no account fees since it would all go to the big corporate. Personally, I currently know of no such experiment at Matterport but RJ is pushing for big scale for all of us and if we are talking about growing with our MSPs from 1.5M spaces scanned now to 10M and then on to 100M I imagine we have to start talking about customer acquisition systems of very large scale. These systems are not despite our MSPs, they are with and for them. My two cents. |
||
| Post 29 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @Jwbuckl Quote: Originally Posted by Jwbuckl I am in agreement with "a single 'orchestrator' of MSPs" ... "a necessity and not a luxury in order to win business" ... "a necessity and not a luxury in order to win business." I outlined this exact vision on 26 October 2014 in this We Get Around blog post: ✓ Analysis: How the We Get Around Network of Matterport Pro 3D Camera Photographers Will Accelerate Adoption of Matterport 3D Showcase Cloud Processing and Hosting Back then, I thought that would be We Get Around Network serving as the "orchestra leader" for one order to service large clients. Today, I no longer believe that the "orchestra leader" is WGAN because that would be in conflict with my mission to help Photographers get the most money for their work. Nor do I believe that Matterport should be the "orchestra leader" ... There are plenty of photography agencies that know how to handle one order for large corporations such as hotels. I get it that Matterport needs to scale exponentially, and that is a great thing for all Service Providers. That said, if Matterport is in the role of "orchestra leader" ... large photography agencies will NOT want to enter the Matterport Space because they know that they will be competing with Matterport (who controls everything about the transaction) and is focused on scale - not profitability - that an agency needs to care about. Matterport announced a strategic alliance with Meero last year. And, while we haven't seen anything come of that relationship (yet), I could imagine that Matterport and Meero are teaming up for either co-"orchestra leader" or for Matterport to use Meero as the "orchestra leader". While on the face of it that sounds good, it's actually good only in the short term. I say that because if Matterport has a strategic marketing alliance with Matterport and proceeds it the direction discussed above, then it will "freeze" the market for other agencies that would have been willing to be "orchestra leaders." To say another way, working with Meero will provide scale; but with just one actor. Imagine if Matterport had 50 actors in that role and all Matterport leads sent to these agencies. Getting to 100,000,000 million Matterport tours from 1,500,000 is exponential growth that requires many orchestra leaders: not one. Look at it this way. News Corp. (Realtor.com) invested in Matterport. And, the first Content Delivery Network (CDN) in place was Realtor.com. Sounds good (in the short term); but that deal likely boxed out Matterport from reaching agreement with major players such as Zillow.com, Airbnb.com and more because they see Matterport + Realtor.com as competitive. Imagine if News Corp. (Realtor.com) was NOT an investor in Matterport. Then the playing field would be equal and Matterport would be in a much better place for exponential growth with multiple CDNs; not use one. Again, same with Matterport + Meero. Same different. We all want Matterport to succeed. Yes. It raises all boats. I do see a day when the demand for Matterport 3D Tours (and other 3D Tours) outpaces the supply of Matterport Service Provides. We could see that day sooner with exponential growth by treating all MLS services - or photography agencies - as the driving engines of growth; not either doing things internally as presently done with the Matterport multi-family group or with what is likely to happen with Matterport + Meero. If the big plans for MSPs is the "orchestrator" to be Matterport or a Matterport working closely (and potentially exclusively) with Meero, look for another challenging day with Matterport Service Providers because the company that we buy our Camera and Cloud plan will be seeking to pay MSPs the least amount rather than champion the most money for MSPs. For clarification, I am fine with Meero at arms length and treated equally as other photography agencies. Again, my challenge is when Meero has a deal with Matterport that, I am guessing, either precludes other players or gives an unfair advantage to Meero. In the short-run, that's great, but to achieve exponential growth, many agencies need to be "orchestra leaders": not just one. My two cents. Dan |
||
| Post 30 • IP flag post | ||
This topic is archived. Start new topic?