Apr 23
Updates to the Rating/Review Process
by Lou in Features
1 Comment »

A few months ago, we added ratings and reviews to gig listings to help artists make more informed submissions. Since then, we’ve been getting great feedback on the process from both artists and promoters. Over the next few weeks, we’ll be making a couple of updates to the rating/review system based on that feedback. Here’s a look at what’s going to change:

We’re now allowing promoters time to finish their submission reviews before opening their listing for feedback.

When the reviews first launched, anyone who submitted could review the gig, even before they got a status update from the promoter. Starting today, gigs will not be open for reviews until after their Submission Tracker notification date (or 1 month after the submission deadline for gigs not using Submission Tracker). Artists who have questions about a submission and are unable to reach the promoter directly can get help from our Member Relations team at http://www.sonicbids.com/support.

And coming soon… Just launched

Easy way to Update Ratings/Reviews.

Previously there was no easy way to go back and revise a rating or review that’s been posted. Now you will be able to append an update to a previous review.

Easy way for promoters to reply.

Promoters can leave comments on their gig listing. In most cases, they’re replying to feedback left by an artist, but the way the review system was setup, it was hard to keep track of the conversation. Promoters are now able to reply directly to a specific review. Their reply will always be attached to the artist’s comment so it’s easier to read in context.

We’ll keep you in the loop right here on the Builder’s Blog when more changes go live. If you’ve got any feedback about these changes to the rating/review process let us know by posting here or drop me a line on Twitter.

One Response to “Updates to the Rating/Review Process”
 

As an artist’s representative I would like to make a comment to promoters who use Sonicbids to manage their submissions. Most artist who are using Sonicbids as a tool are aware of the submission fees, membership fee, etc and are more than willing to pay them. If we (artists/artist reps) make the investment and take the time to make a submission most of us have researched the venue as thoroughly as we can and would greatly appreciate more feedback when a submission is rejected. Given how much of an investment most of us make through Sonicbids as well as the investment in time, energy, artistry, etc. it would be helpful to know more specifically why an artist was not selected. I understand that promoters are very busy people but given that they are actively seeking submissions I think it is fair for artists to be provided significantly more detail than “…we decided to go with someone else” or “your genre doesn’t fit with our venue” (this one is particularly aggravating when the promoter listed “All Genres”. The artist has a responsbility to do their due diligence on the venues and keep their EPK up to date and be as professional and prepared as possible but promoters have an additional responsiblity to communicate more thoroughly with those artists they chose not to select. I can understand why so many bands leave derogatory comments about Sonicbids being a “scam”. I don’t agree with their assessment but it is rather frustrating when you get a standard rejection letter and you have been extremely thorough and selective on your submissions. Most artists can get that rejection through normal channels that don’t cost them a dime.

Micaela wrote on April 29th, 2009 at 4:22 pm

Leave a Reply

Comments are moderated to prevent spam and keep the conversation constructive.
Please allow some time for the comment to post