Velvet's closer team management lets agencies hire, assign and supervise chat staff with permissions that are enforced by the platform. Closers reply and sell PPV in the chats assigned to them, and can never touch account settings, payout details or channel connections.
The default permission set grants exactly one capability: sending a message. Selling paid content, sending tip links, mass messaging, tagging fans, seeing revenue, managing content and viewing analytics all start switched off and are granted one at a time.
On top of the global capabilities, each permission can be withheld on a specific channel, so a closer allowed to sell in Velvet chat can be blocked from selling on Telegram. The rule is deny-wins by construction: a per-channel entry can never grant something the global flag withholds.
Revoking a closer clears them from the conversations they were assigned to, in the database, as part of the revocation. There is no window in which access is revoked in one place and still live in another.
A closer's access is scoped to assigned chats: they can read the thread, reply as the creator, and send priced PPV messages. That is the entire surface.
Deleting content, changing account or connection settings, and viewing payout information are impossible for the closer role: blocked server-side, not hidden in the UI. Offboarding a closer is one unassignment, effective immediately.
Assign closers to specific creators and specific conversations, rotate coverage across time zones, and rebalance workloads as volume shifts.
Fan notes and conversation history carry across handoffs, so fans experience one consistent voice even when three people share the shift calendar.
A closer signs in as themselves, and the fan sees the creator. Velvet holds both truths at once by keeping the real sender on the message row and substituting the creator identity only at the moment a payload is serialised for a fan audience.
The audience is decided on the server from who is asking, never from a flag the client sends, and every fan-facing emitter routes through the same module: message lists, realtime delivery, guest chat, presence, read receipts and typing indicators. Missing one of them would reopen the leak, which is why it is one tested place rather than a convention.
Closer seats are counted against your plan allowance, and the unlimited tiers are modelled as a ceiling no real roster reaches rather than as an absent limit. That keeps seat maths the same shape on every plan instead of forking into a special case that goes untested.
Because a seat is tied to an accepted invitation for a specific creator profile, the count reflects people who can actually act. A pending invitation, a revoked member or a suspended tenant does not occupy anything.
Every PPV sale and tipped conversation is attributed to the closer who worked it, feeding per-closer revenue reports automatically.
Pay commissions on ledger-backed numbers instead of screenshots, and spot your strongest closers by segment, creator and time slot.
Fan-facing serialisation rewrites every message from a closer or the assistant to the creator identity, in one place that every fan-facing surface routes through. The database keeps the true author on the row, so creator, agency and admin views still show exactly who wrote what.
Seeing revenue is its own capability and is off by default. Payout configuration, account settings and channel connections are not closer capabilities at all, so they are not a switch somebody could accidentally leave on.
A sale attributed to a closer carries the commission as its own ledger entry against that closer, computed from the creator share after the platform fee. The number both sides read is the same row, which is why the conversation is about the rate rather than about the total.
Reply in the chats assigned to them and sell PPV content within those chats. They cannot access account settings, connections, payouts, or any chat they have not been assigned.
No. Deletion and destructive actions are outside the closer role entirely. If content needs to be removed, that action belongs to the creator or an agency role with the right access.
Sales closed in a closer's assigned chats are attributed to them in the earnings analytics, based on ledger transactions. You define the commission terms; Velvet gives you the audited numbers.
Send messages in the conversations assigned to them. Every other capability, including selling paid content, is off until somebody grants it explicitly.
Yes. Channel restrictions withhold a capability on a named channel while leaving it in place elsewhere. They only ever subtract, so a channel entry cannot hand somebody a power the global setting refuses.
Twelve on Starter, thirty on Growth, and no practical ceiling on Scale. Seats are counted per accepted invitation to a creator profile, so pending and revoked invitations do not consume any.
They are detached from that closer as part of the revocation itself, in the same database change. There is no interval where a removed closer still holds a live assignment.