Long post on an array of points here, just a heads up...
This is part of why I don’t have a broker. It’s a trade off, as I understand having a broker can help get your videos out to more stations/outlets quicker, but since I deal directly with media outlets, there's no middle man. I get 100% of the revenue.
I would like to discuss how much videos are worth. Prior to about five years ago, when social media was younger and phone technology poorer, storm videos were much harder to come across. Go back to prior to 2010ish and I’d say compelling tornado videos were downright rare, unless you had connections to a storm chaser/reporter/videographer.
I don’t think storm videos are worth as much as they once were. It's easier than ever to get close to storms, more and more people get closer each year and with social media, even John Doe who captures a tornado on his tractor can share his footage with the world in just minutes.
On the flip side, I do think that many chasers are taken advantage of by brokers, and/or low-balled by news stations or simply talked into giving away footage for free.
Having worked in the asset collection segment of The Weather Channel via social media, I learned that the amount of free footage given away is staggering. Intentional or not, that
drives down the price of what may actually be very compelling, valuable footage. In the midst of a storm, if someone has really compelling video, the station will pay up (hundreds of dollars, even for a 30 second clip) I also worked at two smaller, local TV stations and most of the smaller markets have little to no budget to purchase these assets. It's the bigger stations and obviously major networks who have the funds to pay. (A lot of times the big networks will purchase the rights to storm footage and cascade it down the pipeline, assuming there are no restrictions in the licensing agreements)
I think the best approach is a compromise. Don’t ask too much for video, or you will get turned down. Even after making several hundred dollars on Dodge City footage via TWC, I literally got laughed at by an unnamed TWC meteorologist for asking for $200 for a 30-second video of the Chapman tornado the next day. Why? the influx of video coming in couldn’t justify the price and even though I was a recent employee, a seasoned chaser and sold similar footage for more than twice the price just the day prior.
Know the value of what you have. That’s why candid conversations like the one
@Dan Robinson started here are important. There are some times in which you have really great footage that no one is willing to pay you the appropriate amount for. In that case, post it to social media, YouTube, etc., but make sure you have a prominent watermark on the footage.
If you're not a veteran chaser or don't have tight connections to major news outlets, maybe you take $100 for a video every now and then, rather than shoot 10 videos without making a penny. However, if you're selling every video for $100, then you're probably getting taken advantage of, unless your videos really aren't that compelling. Again, it's a judgment call. If you sell footage and become a household name with media outlets, you can negotiate much more aggressively. It does take experience to know what you’re getting into. Don't expect to make big dollars right away, just as if you were an amateur photographer, people aren't going to pay top dollar for your wedding photos on the first day of your business. Build your portfolio and prove that you have the ability to shoot really remarkable storm footage if you want to make a large profit.
If you have truly unique storm footage, then it’s a different story. Most of my chasing revenue has come from chasing during the off-season, now that I think about it. Selling footage from lesser known summer tornadoes in the northern Plains is arguably easier than selling footage of an Oklahoma tornado in May. There is so much competition that it's usually not easy to make a quick sale, unless you have connections or a broker.
This is just my perspective and maybe it's skewed a bit, since my goal of chasing is not solely to make a profit. If I channeled 100% of my energy and resources into selling storm footage, then I would undoubtedly be more aggressive in terms of trying to make money.
Realize that the news cycle is 24/7 now. Stations need to fill time, but remember that so much footage is out there on social media these days. Yes, stations will pay for compelling footage, but with hours of coverage to fill, they’re not going to simply pay up $1000 for every single storm video. As a company, eventually, that’s not a profitable approach. Yes, 10+ years ago, when the news cycle was less continuous and little or no social media, stations could justify paying big bucks for compelling footage, but now it’s just not the same. Plus you have drones, allowing for people to get closer to disasters than ever before, and with better technology, some stations themselves can send out meteorologists, reporters or freelancers to get footage that might have seemed priceless and rare to a non-chaser a decade ago. The landscape is changing. Inflation is probably not keeping up with how the value for storm videos may be falling, due to reasons mentioned before. The falling price can be offset by higher quality footage (4K) or getting super close, but that makes it that much harder.
There are also cases in which I think it's perfectly okay to give away footage for free. I always let the National Weather Service use and share my photos and videos, as long as it's for non-profit use, such as education, storm summaries and/or research.
If I post a relatively low resolution photo of a storm from my phone on Twitter and a local TV station wants to share it, guess what? Sometimes I will say, go ahead. If the photo really isn't worth much, it would be silly not to. As long as you have a watermark and you're getting credit, I don't see the issue. Now, if you have a larger outlet trying to do the same, especially The Weather Channel, then the answer is no. The reason they are reaching out is that they know you have something of value, but they want to get it for free. I will usually politely respond by encouraging them to contact me via e-mail or DM if they wish to discuss licensing options.
I do think that we should also discuss YouTube ad revenue in more detail.
I‘m personally skeptical of YouTube’s ad revenue value, unless you’re a chaser with a reputation for compelling/viral footage on YouTube. Maybe my opinion is skewed by lackluster results from uploading storm videos to the platform.
I’ve been uploading Plains chase video since 2014 and it’s rare that I even get 1,000 clicks on a tornado video. Maybe I need to use tags better? Maybe I should be spamming the link over social media? I don't have many followers either, but it usually takes a viral video, big name recognition or aggressive advertising to build a large following. The only footage I've had that went semi-viral was Pilger, but that still has under 20,000 views as of this post. Even my Dodge City close range tornado footage didn’t do anywhere near as well as I would have expected. The reason is that the web is over-saturated with storm footage now. What can set you apart is if you're one of the few chasers on a storm, or you got insanely close when most others were not able to.
Also, YouTube has had its own fair share of issues with demonetization.
I personally don’t want ads on my videos on YouTube. If I was consistently getting 10s of thousands of clicks or more, then maybe my attitude would change. It’s the same reason why I don’t have ads on my website. If you're well-known for storm footage, it's a completely different story.
Again, my perspective may be a bit skewed. While I do like making money, it's not one of the main reasons why I document storms at this point in my life.
