webinar.net Reviews & Product Details

I like the options on switching the functionality, and how there are so many different options for presentations!

If you're wanting to have your presentation focus on a panels video webcams, that can be a little tricky. Although the majority of the platform is very customizable, you are unable to enlarge the webcams.

My company primarily used webinar.net for webinars and client presentations. The reporting and on-demand recording functions are great in comparison to other platforms.

The data they provide about the webinars

Nothing, in particular, to be quite frank

Great and engaging webinar experiences

I thought it was pretty straight forward, also the on demand, and the value offered on the mainpage

I had problems with volunteers that didn't have band width , buffering :(

Solving the no in person issue, I like the on demand , and the do-over ability, easy to edit

The platform integrates the use of phone and webcam seamlessly. Very easy to connect using multiple options for easy delivery.

The back-end of the platform does not allow you to see playback of content.

Allows you to connect and engage with a diverse audience and easy for attendees to navigate.

I appreciate that Webinar.net was simple to customize with our logo and event branding. The numerous widgets for chat, quick links, etc., helped customize each session. It also integrated well with our virtual platform provider, Swoogo. We used Webinar.net for our first virtual event, and our sessions ran very smoothly on the Webinar.net platform. Our speakers found the backend easy to use, answer attendee questions, and communicate with other speakers. The team appreciated the ability to respond to all or individual attendees to provide tech support without disrupting the session.

The set-up process was time-consuming, although we did have about 20 sessions to build out. It also took our team some time to learn and use the platform. The video upload process was also a bit slow. We used Webinar.net for all pre-recorded sessions. We could not host focus group discussions through Webinar.net due to the limited capabilities. The other significant downside was we needed to purchase multiple licenses to run concurrent sessions. For an event that offers up to five concurrent sessions, this was a high added cost.

As a small business that hosts healthcare tradeshows, the COVID-19 pandemic greatly impacted us and our ability to host live, in-person events. Webinar.net allowed us to continue offering high-quality education to our attendees through a streamlined virtual platform. We tested several platforms before selecting Webinar.net. Webinar.net offers the best frontend and backend experience for virtual sessions.

It works. Our attendees liked it. They have enough aspects/features to their platform to make visitors feel like they are at a summit vs. just a bunch of webinars. The support received was also quite strong.

It could have been the "template" we picked given very short notice in light of the developing pandemic, but the interactivity between attendees wasn't fostered as much was viewed as a weakness.

We got an amazing number of registrants and net-new prospects to the platform. Not sure if that was due per se to Webinar.net, but employing a virtual platform really did wonders for us.

That it was compatible with Swoogo, our delegate management system

That you cannot use iPad or mobile phones to watch streams properly and cannot use Safari and only google chrome or Firefox. Also the ability to manipulate video boxes should be easier, there should be an option to make moderator video bigger and the panellist smaller. Also hate the video arrow bottom right of the video screen to enlarge it, so many speakers would not drag this! Lastly, Firewalls of companies had a hard time connecting as it is always mostly blocked from their firewall.

Seeing if we still want to use you this May and if it will work, we had lots of problems of being kicked out last time mid-conference, suddenly it kept unmuting the AV production team.

The only thing we liked was how the Audience view looked during live taping of the webinar. The audience was able to view presenters while accessing other webinar feaures.

Price per event is very expensive. Nickle and dime you for every feature, including obtaining recording. Lack of technical support pre and post webinar is an issue. Editing content in the back end is very challenging. You need a seperate webinar platform (Zoom) to host breakout rooms. It takes a long time to get techincal support response.

A platform where our audience can view presenters while having branding visible and the audience can get event materials.

I didn't like the platform, period. Appreciate the attempt made but lack of attendees is proof the technology wasn't well received.

It wasn't easily accessible for volunteers and constituents to access. Why didn't we use other platforms that everyone is more familiar? For example, Facebook live or zoom? Technology capabilities are not easily accessible to many. Too tech savvy oriented and not easy for our audience to use or access.

The ease of accessibility by our constituents is vital to our mission.