In case you're wondering what I mean, I mean, should the brokerages only allow vendors to work or sell a particular specialty in order to spread out the support for figure s a little more?

By that I mean like they only do props, or morph's or textures. Specialty areas. 

Brokerages could commission vendors to produce specific items in order to ensure that their range is broad enough. Vendors should not be forced. Just my opinion.

Yeah, listen Clarkie, now you're talking!!!
I think all vendors shoud be forced to make Roxie stuff!!!
Then there would be lots more Roxie stuff!!!

Later,
Roxie - Girl With Blade

Brokerages could commission vendors to produce specific items in order to ensure that their range is broad enough. Vendors should not be forced. Just my opinion.

Forced is probably a poor word choice. But I'm thinking like they only allow so many vendors to make one type of content.  For example say you're making stuff for V4, then you're not allowed to make stuff for M4. And vice versa. But you do get a choice in what type of content you make.

I have heard some bad ideas in these forums...this one tops the charts LOL

di·ver·si·fy

dəˈvərsəˌfī,dīˈvərsəˌfī/

verb

verb: diversify; 3rd person present: diversifies; past tense: diversified; past participle: diversified; gerund or present participle: diversifying

1. make or become more diverse or varied.

"the trilobites diversified into a great number of species"

• (of a company) enlarge or vary its range of products or field of operation.

"the company expanded rapidly and diversified into computers"

synonyms: branch out, expand, extend operations More"farmers looking for ways to diversify"

vary, bring variety to;

modify, alter, change, transform;

expand, enlarge

"a plan aimed at diversifying the economy"

• enlarge or vary the range of products or the field of operation of (a company).

"the rise of the diversified corporation"

I'm not really sure what purpose that would serve, other than to make content creators feel like they are trapped creatively.  Just to clarify, by the way, "diversify" means to spread out, so I think you mean "consolidate" rather.

Personally, if I were pigeon-holed into making only one type of content, or creating for one figure, I wouldn't do this anymore.  I appreciate the concept you are getting at, but I don't think it is a good idea nor one that is likely to happen.

I think the only way it would work is if the content creators were staff with a salary and not depending on sales for income. I know that brokerages do try to prevent glut of x where they can but they do are dependent on the income from sales so they are not going to turn away that 100th little black dress just because there already is one. Let's face it though, people who create content for a living are pretty independent and are just not very good at being told what they must do.

I'm not going to be forced into making a product that's going to sell only 10 pieces. It's actually an absurd idea, like communism (must make more Lada or nothing at all) ;)

This forum is moving into standup comedy.

I'm not going to be forced into making a product that's going to sell only 10 pieces. It's actually an absurd idea, like communism (must make more Lada or nothing at all) ;)

Well, to be honest, you might only sell 10 pieces anyway. Nothing's guaranteed. But the idea wasn't necessarily to pigeon hole or confine anyone, but  to spread out support, particularly for male figures for example.

I think having 90 + bustiers for V4 is just perfect !

There is nothing to stop a brokerage from encouraging a vendor to make stuff. A brokerage might even go so far as to say they wont accept any more submissions for a product area because the market is saturated. 

The market tends to sort it out, even if it means a bunch of vendors make very little because the pie is just too small. 

 In case you're wondering what I mean, I mean, should the brokerages only allow vendors to work or sell a particular specialty in order to spread out the support for figure s a little more?

By that I mean like they only do props, or morph's or textures. Specialty areas. 

Then you would have the same results that we got with men's clothing.  If the vendor isn't truly interested in making the product, they make crappy products. Remember, with the vendors, it is all about them, not the end-user.  You are also assuming that the vendors have the skills to move from one area to another.  Anyone can make a piece of hookerware with just a few hours of study & a copy of Hexagon, for instance.  Making more complex clothing takes more work and skill.  I don't think a large number of the vendors are up to it, quite frankly.

I have a number of items that vendors made just to shut up people asking for male clothing, the lack of quality between their female clothing and male clothing was very, very obvious.  Then they bitched that the customers weren't interested in buying poorly made products at a 10 to 50 percent markup. 

I do think brokerages should encourage vendors to branch out a bit, but not forced. Like shoes for instance - shoes don't do well with conversion programs.

Clothing (with the exception of shoes) has been divorced from figures for a while now.  DS has autofit & Poser has a variety of options from Wardrobe Wizard, Xdresser or the Fitting room depending on your version of Poser.

What would be better is not vaulting content (I would hope after my dropping $600+ 'Rosity would reconsider vaulting) - I picked up less than a 1/3 of what I want to buy.  My skills have increased over the past decade and I can use now what I couldn't use back then - not to mention that I can update those older figures and I am not hobbled by a 32-bit computer (Love my 8-core MacPro). 

As an example, I have content made for M3 from DAZ that is head and shoulders above anything that has been made for the past 5 or 6 years, for ANY male figure.  Things like Sade, BAM3, M304 haven't been bettered by anything from the M4 or genesis era.  Then there are other products like the Casablanca Suit for M3 - better than what is currently available.

The key is letting go of a Poser 4 workflow and leveraging the power of your program of choice.

 3D is all about having fun, spending an evening doing what you like to do.
Playing in Blender and Poser, this came out after an evening of pure personal enjoyment.

8.100 poly's for the figure
4.800 for the outfit, (still some details to add, and corrections to make, but bed time now).
The outfit is UV_Mapped but all materials are procedurals.

Night all.

So let me get this straight. Under this paradigm Smith Micro would have to choose between Rex and Roxie, and provide nothing but the figure itself. This to you is a good idea?  

Of course,with large sticks all vendors should be forced to abandon any creative freedoms or personal choice and made to create whatever the market demands...

this sounds like a really bad idea....

You've spent enough time making your own content by now to know that it's not a speedy process. Vendors aren't going to support a figure unless they see the potential of making serious returns on their investment. Trying to force vendors into creating content for figures that most people don't use, will just cause vendors to take the content they want to make to a different broker.

The only way this idea could work is if the broker hired a team of artists and paid them an hourly salary (which averages about $25 - $30/hr in this industry - and that's being conservative), or contracted various vendors to make specific items. That would get expensive for the broker very quickly, because this content is not cheap when it's being commissioned, and there is no guarantee that it will sell enough to make back the investment plus a return.

So yeah, bad idea. Sorry Clark. I can appreciate the spirit of the idea though.

A better approach would be to monitor the types of content that is being submitted, like someone above said. Put a cap on how many bra/panty sets are submitted. But even then the broker is limiting its own sales, so that's not a very good idea either. A higher quality bar would be nice to see, but that also means charging more. And I agree - vaulting or deleting items is not a good idea. Especially since the item stays in the database anyway for access by people who have bought it. It's pretty irritating to be honest as there have been things in the past I would have bought had they not dropped out of the store, I just couldn't get them at the time I added them to my wishlist. I don't even bother adding things to wishlists now. But I don't buy much of anything anymore anyway since I can make pretty much anything I want or need. Except scripts and utilities that make content creation easier. Rarely I'll buy something I need for a project that I don't have time or patience to make it myself.

It costs the broker next to nothing to run with an item. If it sells, great, if not, no big deal. Having a hundred types of hooker wear for V4 is of no issue to the broker, it's competition between the vendors.

Vendors (content creators) make what they want to make.

The only place a broker MIGHT have is to put out some information occasionally about what they have in store and potential shortfalls. For example, some normal daywear for M4 that doesn't look like he has balloons for shoulders. It would then be up to the content creators to fill that gap IF THEY WANT TO. No guarantee of sales, no commissions, just a sales point saying it was an area that was open for more material.

It costs the broker next to nothing to run with an item. If it sells, great, if not, no big deal. Having a hundred types of hooker wear for V4 is of no issue to the broker, it's competition between the vendors.

True, but it could cost them sales in the long run if the bulk of what the customers see on every page is hooker wear for V4. And I think M4's clothes look like that because his shoulders look like that.

I think really, if you want to see more content available for other figures then you just have to take the time and make more content for those other figures. Then put it up for sale and see how well it does. Then you might get a better idea of why most vendors don't make content for that figure. Or you might get surprised and find a market that pays well that a lot of vendors are ignoring due to assumptions. But you won't really know until you try.

True enough Shane. Was just suggesting a more active role a sales point might have. As to the plethora of hooker wear, that's an issue around search function and site structure (assuming they carry something other than hooker wear... but that gets back to creators making what they can/want to).

back in the V3,V4 "about the time V4 was released "days I got about $200 worth of stuff cloths,hair,textures,morphs etc etc.

have yet needed to buy any thing new. its always the same incomplete boring stuff in the stores.

I swear look at walmart ,sears ,victoria secrets ,jc pennys ,daz poser stores ... redundant.

venders have about as much imagination as andy warhol.

there's a very few venders that put something cool out from time to time.

I swear some where in the definition of Artist there's the words imagination ,original etc etc.

no where is the word redundant .

Putting a cap on how many Bra/Pany sets get into the store wouldn't improve anything, it would costs sales cause they'd just go elsewhere to buy it.

Bra/Panty sets are so popular because that's what people want, therefore capping submissions on it would be counter-productive.  The only reason Bra/Panty sets can overwhelm the store is because it's not designed right, meaning it's not successful in promoting the less popular stuff if it's gotten to the point where people think there's too many Bra/Panty sets.  It's no different in real life, cause if I want, say, a new pair of jeans, I have to walk past panties, bras, lingerie, swimsuits, and all of it is modeled by manequins with the most incredible pointy nipples, so by the time I find the jeans, after seeing all that, I'm not really in the ideal situation to try them on if you know what I mean.

But at the end of the tunnel, there is at least one rack with men's jeans hanging on it!

It's fine by me but at the same time annoying, it just makes me frustrated imagining what will be filling all the bras and panties - and I'd rather see that than see them just hanging there like that.  So even out there in real life, it's no different to what happens on the Renderosity store, cause it's the sexy stuff that dominate the store and galleries just as the lingerie dominates the clothes stores.

It costs the broker next to nothing to run with an item. If it sells, great, if not, no big deal. Having a hundred types of hooker wear for V4 is of no issue to the broker, it's competition between the vendors.

True, but it could cost them sales in the long run if the bulk of what the customers see on every page is hooker wear for V4. And I think M4's clothes look like that because his shoulders look like that.

I think really, if you want to see more content available for other figures then you just have to take the time and make more content for those other figures. Then put it up for sale and see how well it does. Then you might get a better idea of why most vendors don't make content for that figure. Or you might get surprised and find a market that pays well that a lot of vendors are ignoring due to assumptions. But you won't really know until you try.

Part of the problem with this thread is my poor wording of the original post.  When I suggested  that vendors  be "encouraged" to diversify, I wasn't suggesting a limitation be placed on their creativity. But I also agree, who needs 134 types of bra and panty sets or sexy schoolgirl costumes? To be fair, Genesis, as far as the DAZ figures goes, pretty much makes the argument moot anyway, except along gender lines, which is more along where I was leaning. Also, in my mind at least, I was wondering what the effect  would be among sales if, vendors were limited to specific categories and genres. I'm just saying that if you have 20 vendors creating sci-fi props and clothings versus 50, those 20 stand to make more money if there's less competition. And if DAZ had filled it's quota of 20 vendors doing sci-fi clothing, you could always try RDNA, or Renderosity, or Hivewire, etc.

I suppose brokerages could offer incentives to content creators to make stuff other than more-of-the-same-V4-slutwear. They could offer a higher percentage split to vendors who make stuff for an under-supported figure or an under-supported genre, like, say, realistic men's everyday clothing, or clothing for SM figures. But I don't think the brokerages care too much one way or the other, as long as anything is selling they are scoring.

Wouldn't incentives for diversification be a better approach.  "We will give a higher commission for such and such content so that we can have a larger cross section of content".  If that is an issue to begin with.  Interesting question though.

Wouldn't incentives for diversification be a better approach.  "We will give a higher commission for such and such content so that we can have a larger cross section of content".

At least this idea makes sense: commissions inversely proportional to content availability.

You are forgetting that if a type of product is not necessary, it will be the "market" (the buyers) who take it out, if there are 1000 bra, and they sell well, why we must put a rule to limit that type of product.

I love different products, but market is a market, people buy things they want, and if they want them, why we have to limit them? People  spend their money the way they like, and creator make the product they want to do, why you have to limit them?

I have to add that  there is already a limitation, the clearence, if a product doesn't sell in 90 days, it is deleted.

EClark1894 : tired of being crucified yet ?

anyways you all .all EClark1894 is saying is how do we get a bigger variety of junk in the stores.

whitch a bigger variety would be cool.

sure I like hot girls in lingerie ,who don't ,but variety is the spice of life.

so let him off the cross.

Diversity is a good thing with content, a lot of the problem with getting that is the inherent risk to the creator will skyrocket when doing something different. It's pretty much a gamble with something new whereas making more of what has a proven sales performance is like backing the low odds horse. Also creating something different can take a lot more time than creating a variant of something you have done before

Which means as a creator I could make a swimsuit for V4, Swimsuits sell well and V4 is well supported and high takeup can be anticipated if the item is of high enough quality. If I spend a week crafting the item I should see a return that is worthwhile for my time.

If I decide to create something much more niche for a lesser known figure the risk goes up of the product being a flop quite dramatically.

I agree with Boni providing better incentives would be a much more effective way of encouraging content creators to diversify. It can't be forced it's like saying to a romance novelist, you know what we already have taken 4 romance novels this month go and write as a sci-fi horror. The writer is more likely to either find a new publisher or not write anything when being strong handed in this way.

So while they shouldn't be "Forced" there is no reason they couldn't be encouraged. But that would depend on the market place being proactive.

 i'm not saying abonden V4.I'm just asking .
A)could you make male characters and female characters .2 different meshes but name the parts the same and the close work with all ? 
B)could you make males and females characters  with a unimesh and the close work with all ? 

if A or B is yes ,then why isn't it working that way ?
the way the daz ,poser universe works has always been odd to me anyways.

 i'm not saying abonden V4.I'm just asking .
A)could you make male characters and female characters .2 different meshes but name the parts the same and the close work with all ? 
B)could you make males and females characters  with a unimesh and the close work with all ? 

if A or B is yes ,then why isn't it working that way ?
the way the daz ,poser universe works has always been odd to me anyways.

I'm not meaning to antagonise anyone, but is that not what the genesis figures do?

I really don't know does genesis characters do that ?

but I was asking if poser characters would ? 

 In case you're wondering what I mean, I mean, should the brokerages only allow vendors to work or sell a particular specialty in order to spread out the support for figure s a little more?

By that I mean like they only do props, or morph's or textures. Specialty areas. 

I think it would be some what difficult or even counter productive to do something like that. I think most vendors make things that they them self find inspiring, but also being able to sell it plays a part. But if a vendor is stuck at just making for some models or areas, and then suddenly gets a good idea for something they would like to make and then can't do it, it would be bad for them and the customers, but also Renderosity because it might be a good product. But i understand what you mean, but think that a more suited way to solve it would be a collaboration between Renderosity and the vendors, in the sense that. If they would like more male or fantasy content for instant. They could encourage that through increasing the split % for the vendors on those type of products. So they could start by making a poll to see what type of content people are most interested in and then based on that maybe for 6 month or a year increase the split for vendors on such content. Whether that would work or not, i don't know.

I can only add to what has already been said....

No!!! 

If Dawn,Rex Roxie ,poxie whatever  blah, blah, blah are left to languish  in a desolate wasteland of obscurity, with no vendor support, then so be it.

The market has spoken

Wolf Wrote:
"Roxie ,poxie whatever  blah, blah, blah"

That's it, mock the only girl in the Runtime who'll do anything she can to protect the Poser Runtime from intruder figures!

While you're on here mocking her, she's out there, culling Vickies, ensuring that today is yet another day when yet another Vickie loses her head.
Honestly, Wolf, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Sorry, eclark, but you're trying to address the wrong side of the equation.  You need to address the brokerage houses, NOT the vendors.  It is the brokerage house which controls what content goes in the store, not the vendors.  You, as a creator, can make stuff all day long, but if the brokerages won't put the products IN the store, well, then your potential customers will just never see it.

Everyone wants to beat up on vendors, but they are simply striking out at the wrong side of the equation.

Let's take this product as an example:  http://www.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/i13-sexy-14/110170/

There's 4 "vendors" on that product - and I use the quotes because RenderFX is really just Renderosity taking another chunk of money off a product.  Not a real vendor, just RO being more greedy that it already is.

So, here's how it breaks down:

Product is listed on sale at $6.74

RO takes 50% right off the top just for putting it in the store. $3.37 left for the vendors to split

And the RO RenderFX takes another 10% off the top. $2.69 left for the vendors to split.

So, the 3 remaining vendors get to split that $2.69 - assuming an even split, that's a whopping $0.89 for each of them.

It's not the vendors who are making a chunk of change on ANYTHING in the brokerage houses.

It is the brokerage house that controls what goes in the store, not the VENDORS.  So, quit beating up on the vendors and try to start a conversation with the blocking agent if you want to see diversity of products.

 Ha-ha-, correct, and if I would be that last vendor, I would have to declare that as a second income, and loose another 50%

So, from the intial 6.74 stays???  => A whopping 0.445 for each sale for each creator.....

And for that we get?

A forum that is bananas.
A freestuf section that went oranges

Now, where can I buy a Porche??

if ya own ya own brokerage house like renderosity.
they cost about $2000 or $3000 up front then the banks gets about 33% so renderositys getting 17%.
Credit Cards get there part also. 

ya could put anything ya want for as long as you want on ya own store

Now, where can I buy a Porche??

http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/918/918-spyder-weissachpackage/ 

buy me one to ;) 

EClark1894 : tired of being crucified yet ?

anyways you all .all EClark1894 is saying is how do we get a bigger variety of junk in the stores.

whitch a bigger variety would be cool.

sure I like hot girls in lingerie ,who don't ,but variety is the spice of life.

so let him off the cross.

Aww, let them knock themselves out. I don't really give a damn. Not hurting me any.

Poor Clarkie, he's not exactly had a good month:

• First his Mac started playing up.
• Then his leg joints wouldn't work.
• Then his skirt wouldn't fit.
• Not a single person has congratulated him on his new 'Catgirl Roxie' project yet.
• He got totally misunderstood in this thread.
• As if all that wasn't enough, his popcorn has gone soft as well, a whole batch gone to waste due to not getting the fairground finished.

Chin-up, Clarkie!

catgirl outfit sounds like a Rokket project.

where is EClark1894  catgirl outfit thread ?

 
It's in that "What are you working on?" thread.

Actually it's my second attempt at Catgirl Roxie. I tried earlier but gave up.

 In case you're wondering what I mean, I mean, should the brokerages only allow vendors to work or sell a particular specialty in order to spread out the support for figure s a little more?

By that I mean like they only do props, or morph's or textures. Specialty areas. 

Brokerages, being private organizations/businesses, should be free to restrict the products that they offer however they see fit. However, it would be somewhat unethical for a brokerage to forbid certain product types if they had not reserved that right in their vendor agreements, beforehand.  (For a stable business and a stable collection of contributing vendors, it's always best to dictate terms "up front", so that vendors know what sorts of products are acceptable.)

Just about every successful business manages its vendors just as well as it manages its products, sales and customers. It's a "rule..."

Brokerages, who rely on third-party products for their livelihood, that do not manage their suppliers appropriately are doomed to be forever at the mercy of their suppliers.

I bolded that for a reason - It's an important, indispensable, rule of businesses that are reliant on third-party products. NO business can dare to ignore this rule and still remain in control of itself. None. None of them... zero.. zilch... nada. Failure to manage your supply chain means that you will soon be in a soup-line and sleeping under a bridge! If you do not have control over your own business, since you don't manage your vendors well, then who has control over your business? There's only one correct answer.

To that effect: Incentives, marketing programs, product "pushes", seasonal promotions, collaborative efforts, these are all the hallmark of a well-run brokerage. And, if you have a well-run brokerage, you can leverage the cooperation of your vendors very, very, easily. Very easily. In some cases, the largest and most successful of these sorts of businesses actually have vendors paying them for the privilege of selling their products through them and participating in specialized marketing programs. (These are called "shelf fees" and "promotional fees", respectively.) I have worked with several multi-million dollar brokerages over the course of years of cooperative business arrangements and I know of what I speak. :)