Hi @Contact, It’s quite a bummer that we seem to be winning the ‘slowest development’ badge - that was never our intention!
But I’m excited to tell you that the Folders for good organization feature (which we’re calling ‘Projects’) is currently in code review. This means we’re aiming to roll it out soon, hopefully within the next month, though I can’t make any promises just yet (especially with our new ‘badge’).
It will be the first (and a huge) step towards our Agency Account idea, and we really hope you’ll like the result
We’ll keep posting updates here, but thank you very much for your interest and comments, they always keep us fit
My suggestion is this: As Web Developer I think it will help me a lot if there is an access level, it means you will allow us to provide access per widget to our clients but you will charge us for every access level restriction per widget to our clients.
I want to thank all the participants of this thread on the forum - everyone who wrote posts or just read and to say thank you. Indeed, everyone has been waiting for the implementation of an agency account for a long time. But the truth is that until the beginning of 2024, we did not tackle this task - all our resources were focused on transferring all users to the new dashboard and closing the old one.
However, I have good news for you. The goal of expanding functionality for agencies has been set as the highest priority in 2024!
And the results are not long in coming - in a few days, there will be a release of a new feature - the ability to create projects and distribute widgets among them. Next, the development department will take on the implementation of the possibility of inviting Team Members. The design for this task has already been approved.
I would be grateful for feedback on the released features.
In addition, we currently want to better understand the agency segment to develop a further development plan. Please help us with this.
We are currently considering the implementation of an agency account with 2 main models:
The agency pays for the service. They select the required plan based on widgets and may also pay a small fee for each client they invite.
The agency invites a client, who then pays for their own plan. The agency earns 30% of all their payments without paying anything themselves. Additionally, they have access to a license for demonstration and testing purposes.
We would like to hear your thoughts on these models.
Which option do you find more promising for your situation?
Please explain in detail why you prefer this option. If possible, describe a case where this would apply to you.
Your insights are crucial for us to choose the right model and to quickly develop the necessary functionalities for agencies. We greatly appreciate your time and valuable insights.
I like the second option because it seems as if once the client has their own plan, I would be able to transfer the widget ownership to them. And, it doesn’t cost me more to set up a client.
The second solution is not a plan for agencies but is a normal revenue share. So I would rule it out if you’re thinking of doing something for agencies.
The former is also not exactly what an agency needs.
What we already do as an agency is create widgets and distribute them on client sites.
Some of this widget should be accessible directly to the customer to allow him to update the content independently.
So what an agency (and not a simple freelancer) needs is the possibility of:
• create a customer profile
• match this customer profile with one or more existing widgets that the customer must be able to manage
• give access to the management of these via a domain of the agency and not of Elfsight (the whitelabel is crucial for an agency).
Such a solution would allow us to sell thousands of widgets.
I’d prefer the option to choose between the two but if I had to pick one I’d go with the first option. Most people don’t want to manage any part of their website.
Hello Andrei , first of all, thank you for your open contribution, that’s what I love about Elfsight, I feel like I’m being taken along as a partner here.
I’m really looking forward to simplifying the path for my customers through an agency license. The Elfsight collection is a huge added value for customers, but the big problem is that my target group (90% beginners) are totally overwhelmed by the options and how do people usually react?
Customers don’t trade.
It would be a dream if individual widgets could be made available to my customers and then through the support and education in the work in marketing or affiliate marketing, my customers would then learn to use other widgets to support them.
But it’s a process, and being able to use the widgets more flexibly as an agency is just great.
To answer your question,
I think it would be good if both options were possible. The most important thing is that we partners can access our customers’ accounts more easily without always having to exchange sensitive data. At IONOS I work in a PartnerNet where my customers can register free of charge. Then contact is established and I combine this with a free service as soon as products are ordered from me. So I hope I was able to describe my idea well, thank you for your work and see you in the next tutorial
cheers Dirk
Widget should be accessible directly to the customer to allow him to update the content independently.
Betto has explained it perfectly. Everything he has desribed is exactly what we need.
Ideally, I would like both options because they both serve different purposes and also different types of clients. All of the features mentioned with sub-accounts and permission levels are great. As an agency user, I just want to make sure that the ability to allocate a certain number of views to a sub-account. Also an easy 1-click upgrade on the user side when they run out of views or the ability to choose “pay overage” from a white-labeled sub-account dashboard will minimize friction for both the agency and the sub-accounts.
Thanks for the level of communication and the level of priority that you’re giving this. Knowing that our feedback is being heard give me a lot of confidence in the direction of the platform.
I look forward to the future developments this year.
My agency provides continuous support to the vast majority of our clients, so option 1 is the best model for us. I think Option 2 is only good for agencies that do initial builds and hand off control of the site to the client without additional support.
Thanks for raising this and to all the great feedback and ideas here. Nothing like an active community to bring out the thought process. On some other platforms that I used for my clients, they offer both options, so as an agency you get to choose which way you want to collect revenue - directly from your client or from the supplier. Just sayin’… might be worthwhile thinking about management this way?
Second. We have set clients up on their own accounts and transferred our builds to them, but we have also lost some clients that way due to their tech capabilities and confusion. This would be seamless.
Thank you very much for your participation and for sharing your ideas and vision on developing features for agencies in our service!
I’m excited to share that the first agency feature of this year has been released. Now, you can create Projects and distribute widgets among them. This feature is available starting from the Pro plans. Consider this feature as the foundation for further agency functions. For instance, sharing widgets with clients will be done through project sharing.
I encourage everyone to check out this new functionality and leave feedback in the Projects thread.
Our next feature for agencies will be Team Members. The design has been approved, and developers have started working on the functionality to invite team members to your Workspace, meaning you’ll be sharing your entire Workspace.
An interesting point is about roles. In the first iteration, invited Members will have full capabilities without restrictions. We’d love to hear your feedback on what restrictions are needed for your Team Members. It would be great if you could share your thoughts in the Members thread.
Also, I’d like to clarify that the monetization terms for the newly released features are not final and may change in the future.
I have a few clarifying questions about your suggestions, which I’ll detail in the next post.
The most important thing is that we partners can access our customers’ accounts more easily without always having to exchange sensitive data.
In this proposal, are you referring to working with the second option? That is, you invited a client via a referral link, they created an account, subscribed, and created their own widgets, and you want to access their widgets? Is there anything else you need to do in your customer’s account besides creating and editing widgets?
Also an easy 1-click upgrade on the user side when they run out of views or the ability to choose “pay overage” from a white-labeled sub-account dashboard will minimize friction for both the agency and the sub-accounts.
Are you also referring to the second method of operation here - where the user subscribes to widgets in their own account? However, in this case, they would receive the same emails about the end of Views, and they could easily upgrade their plan within their own account. Or were you considering a different scenario?
Second. We have set clients up on their own accounts and transferred our builds to them, but we have also lost some clients that way due to their tech capabilities and confusion. This would be seamless.
Did I understand correctly that you need the ability to transfer a widget into your client’s account? What, in your opinion, could we do to reduce such client losses for you?
Your feedback and involvement are greatly appreciated!
