Looking for iSyndica Distribution Alternative

Today is the last day for the iSyndica syndication distribution service. Going out of business. I found it incredibly useful and very profitable immediately.

Firstly as as a distributor, as they advertised, upload once and sell to many. I was able to experiment with lots of sales sites. Hell, almost all of them. With files sizes at the low end around 150 megs and and the top end at 450 megs, it saved time, Having a one page visual reference of where the files went, and to whom, was neat.

Secondly, the metadata function was a timesaver as well with 60% of sites accepting it.

Finally, the online catalog. All the data was in one place and available online from any location. Cut and paste.

Are former users considering alternatives? I spoke with Seb @ iSyndica, and he did say clever users could reproduce, at least, it's distribution function. It was a first rate operation, so I doubt it will reproduced soon. They couldn't make it pay. Any ideas or leads?

The author of the picNiche toolbar is discussing the possibility of reproducing iSyndica himself. But beyond asking how many people are interested, I haven't seen much from him (that could be a good sign, that he's working on it).

Bob Davies of picNiche, is attempting to set up an isyndica type service. Sounds like he would welcome some contributors for feedback as he gets it going. To begin with it might be somewhat photo centric but could be worth keeping an eye on as he pulls it together for video clips.

link to thread on microstock group
http://www.microstockgroup.com/picniche-toolbar/isyndica-ends-service-on-10th-does-anyone-need-to-export-their-images-by-then/

Biggest expense problem is with videos not photos. With video files averaging over 400mb the storage requirement is huge. The fault with them was the limited amount of videos that they stored without buying expensive additional storage. I'm not sure it can work in a profit mode with storage. As a pass through service where storage is volatile or only saved for a short time period (1 week) it might work. The problem I had was with really very few video files I ran out of space (I had a higher service level also). I was trying to delete files after syndicating them but the model just had a few too many flaws in that part of the process. I think the secret is a pass-through and not a storage facility. The next version will have a much harder time getting agencies to buy in. They gave a lot of confidential information to them and then failed. Agencies will be a lot more careful next time. The idea is solid, the workings were flawed.

From my end, it's execution was pretty solid. I didn't find the expenses burdensome compared to the returns. It made me money. I just bought more storage. It was cheap compared to uploading and processing files endlessly. The finances are what did the business in as explained to be by a staffer there. It wasn't the storage costs at all. They WANTED you to store all you material there. As explained to me, customers were not "sticky" enough. They came, they uploaded, they erased files and went on. The subscriber base was not large and stable enough. The service had the income generation of a small business but staffing costs that didn't match it's income base. So the investors, after running the numbers forwards, pulled the plug. They debated for a year, cooking up various schemes including creating an alternate sales site. So unfortunately, it was the opposite of the above. The workings were solid, but the underlying idea as a business was flawed. They couldn't make enough money to keep it going with the number of subscribers they amassed. It was a class act, programing and service wise. I doubt very much another company will duplicate it soon. That's why I think some user based, jury rigged, back end might be the only realistic alternative.

Well maybe the reason sellers didn't stick was as I explained? For me the storage costs were too high for video so that's what I did, deleted, tried again and then gave up. Indeed the stats were very very thought out and good. If sellers didn't stick then there was a flaw in the business model. That will be the biggest thing a new company will have to figure out. If a business cannot hold customers or proforma shows a financial short fall the business model is flawed. The best business plan or business need cannot succeed with a positive proforma.

They threw the dice and lost. No flaw in business model - the just could charge enough or make the income stream wide enough. The best of us can see only so many variables, and these were really smart techies and investors. No model of any kind is that good. Storage costs were comparable to other cloud based systems. The storage costs were to high for you, but not for me. I presume you upload to POND5 alone. I upload to ALL the available sites. Doing that without the syndication service would have been just about impossible. Before iSyndica, I uploaded my 400 clip portfolio to Pond5 and it took me a month - stopping starting with all the normal glitches. If the business model was wrong, it was in that they over predicted subscriber base, it's growth and "loyalty".

I liked iSyndica and didn't think it was too expensive. Every file I uploaded there had no problems and they all transferred to 3 sites with no glitches. This week I have had an upload problem here and with another site. I will miss using them.

Yeah, it's too bad they couldn't make a go of it. They had an half million in money from investors, no competition and a first rate site. We most likely will not see their likes again. In the wake of their demise, I have decided to limit my uploads to my top 4 producing sites and generate a working data trail myself. Ho hum. So boring. Gotta do it.

The guys at iSyndica are no noobs. If the business was viable these guys would have made it brilliantely.

That said, just getting a http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/ from AWS or Rackspace, put a ftp server on it (or make a Python script http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib/) and then https://www.pond5.com/pt/community?thread=930657 would solve it brilliantly. The thing with the virtual instances is that you pay per hour. When done - kill the instance.