Author Topic: Will BigStock earn a spot as one of the BIG FOUR with a push from Shutterstock? (Read 7903 times)

Lcjtripod · « **Reply #25 on:** October 03, 2009, 11:47 »

Quote from: Zeus on October 03, 2009, 09:53

I can't see how anything will change. Will SS buyers migrate to BigStock? I doubt it.

Who said anything about buyers migrating from ss?
How about NEW buyers coming from the advertising and promotion from SS?
SS is putting up the cash!

Why must nearly everyone think negative about nearly every site ever mentioned on this forum?

-Larry

Zeus · « **Reply #26 on:** October 03, 2009, 14:40 »

Quote from: Lcjtripod on October 03, 2009, 11:47

Quote from: Zeus on October 03, 2009, 09:53
I can't see how anything will change. Will SS buyers migrate to BigStock? I doubt it.

Who said anything about buyers migrating from ss?
How about NEW buyers coming from the advertising and promotion from SS?
SS is putting up the cash!

Why must nearly everyone think negative about nearly every site ever mentioned on this forum?

-Larry
I don't feel I made a negative comment just one based in reality. Okay so BigStock will advertise with their new found wealth, but will it make that much of a difference to our overall income. Someone will stop buying from StockXpert or maybe iStock and buy a few from BigStock. I guess if your images are on BigStock only you may see a slight rise in income but you'll see a corresponding drop elsewhere.

stockastic · « **Reply #27 on:** October 03, 2009, 14:58 »

It's a debate between optimists and realists

I have less than a year's experience and a small number of images. But my intuition is that if you could factor out all the tricky pricing plans, all the hype, all the wishful thinking and all the differences in quality and skill (impossible of course) the bottom line would be that long term return per image continues to declline.

[You may all jump in with your flames at this point.]

And now there seems to be a shakeout in progress, with smaller agencies being bought out. Again, my intuition is that the end result will be that the remaining agencies will eventually raise prices to buyers and lower commissions to contributors.

[Another flame opportunity here...]

Zeus · « **Reply #28 on:** October 03, 2009, 15:05 »

Quote from: stockastic on October 03, 2009, 14:58

It's a debate between optimists and realists

I have less than a year's experience and a small number of images. But my intuition is that if you could factor out all the tricky pricing plans, all the hype, all the wishful thinking and all the differences in quality and skill (impossible of course) the bottom line would be that long term return per image continues to declline.

[You may all jump in with your flames at this point.]

And now there seems to be a shakeout in progress, with smaller agencies being bought out. Again, my intuition is that the end result will be that the remaining agencies will eventually raise prices to buyers and lower commissions to contributors.

[Another flame opportunity here...]

You are correct, in my opinion, on both counts.

sharpshot · « **Reply #29 on:** October 03, 2009, 15:36 »

I care more about my total earnings. I have already made more in the first 9 months of this year than I did all of last year, so the sites must be doing something right. If they did cut commissions and raise prices too much and my earnings fell, I would remove my portfolio. There are lots of other ways to make money from photography, it would be nice to be able to try them. The sites need to treat us with some respect or they could see their content vanishing. I don't think they will risk it.

The sites merging will save them lots of money in running costs. That should keep them busy for a while before they try to squeeze more out of us.

leaf · « **Reply #30 on:** October 05, 2009, 07:54 »

i'm not so sure it will happen. I see a lot of improvement in Canstockphoto and Panthermedia the last couple months and would put my money on these two sites. It will take quite a bit for any site to break into the top 4 though.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #31 on:** October 05, 2009, 08:38 »

Quote from: Lcjtripod on October 03, 2009, 11:47

Quote from: Zeus on October 03, 2009, 09:53
I can't see how anything will change. Will SS buyers migrate to BigStock? I doubt it.

Who said anything about buyers migrating from ss?
How about NEW buyers coming from the advertising and promotion from SS?
SS is putting up the cash!

Why must nearly everyone think negative about nearly every site ever mentioned on this forum?

-Larry

How about this. SS bought a smaller site with virtually all the same photos. I agree that people won't be migrating away from the main site, this could attract new buyers or draw some from other agencies that offer similar plans and photos as BS.

What's the big marketing advantage?

The combined forces will offer a variety of pricing plans. The bigger union will reduce staffing costs, over time. Their marketing Dept. can sell two products with a variety of plans for potential buyers. But the big point is that SS will have a bigger market share in the Microstock business. They just bought a bigger slice of the pie.

I was three months from closing out all my photos at BS when this news came through. Now I'll wait. I'm optimistic that SS as the new owners can throw some effort into more marketing and bring in more buyers.

stockastic · « **Reply #32 on:** October 05, 2009, 10:17 »

My enthusiasm for microstock might return if I see agencies starting to offer something new and different in terms of products and services, instead of just more and more whiz-bang pricing plans .

Zeus · « **Reply #33 on:** October 05, 2009, 10:50 »

Quote from: stockastic on October 05, 2009, 10:17

My enthusiasm for microstock might return if I see agencies starting to offer something new and different in terms of products and services, instead of just more and more whiz-bang pricing plans .

I agree. Although trad agencies are suffering from all the turmoil I am finding they are still a much better bet overall. The good thing is I will never convince anyone of this.

PowerDroid · « **Reply #34 on:** October 05, 2009, 12:24 »

Companies don't buy competitors to keep them up and running, offering buyers a multitude of choices and keeping prices down. Look outside the microstock world for the proof. Typically when one company buys its competitor it is buying market share, expecting to absorb the customer base as it either gradually phases out the competing product lines or drops them immediately. Like just about everyone here, I hope BigStock is allowed to thrive, even grow with a new marketing push, but I'd be shocked to see this. Disagree? Find an example of one widget company buying another widget company and keeping both products on the shelves. If the product lines are complementary, the purchased product line may be integrated into the parent company's current offerings, but if they're redundant, the product deemed by the new owner to be the weakest in terms of sales and profits will get the axe.

gostwyck · « **Reply #35 on:** October 05, 2009, 12:37 »

Quote from: PowerDroid on October 05, 2009, 12:24

Companies don't buy competitors to keep them up and running, offering buyers a multitude of choices and keeping prices down.

Yes they do __ all the time.

There are hundreds of well-known examples ... Manfrotto bought out Gitzo in 1992, BMW owns Rolls Royce, Ford used to own Jaguar but then sold it to Tata, etc, etc.

stockastic · « **Reply #36 on:** October 05, 2009, 12:39 »

Quote from: PowerDroid on October 05, 2009, 12:24

but if they're redundant...

And what could be more redundant that another microstock selling all the same images?

PowerDroid · « **Reply #37 on:** October 05, 2009, 13:06 »

Quote from: gostwyck on October 05, 2009, 12:37

Quote from: PowerDroid on October 05, 2009, 12:24
Companies don't buy competitors to keep them up and running, offering buyers a multitude of choices and keeping prices down.

Yes they do __ all the time.

There are hundreds of well-known examples ... Manfrotto bought out Gitzo in 1992, BMW owns Rolls Royce, Ford used to own Jaguar but then sold it to Tata, etc, etc.

Read through to the end of my post. The examples you give are companies who bought another company offering a DIFFERENT type of product that complemented their own product lines. It's when there's redundancies that it simply does not make business sense for a parent company to offer multiple, extremely similar products to the same set of customers.

Zeus · « **Reply #38 on:** October 05, 2009, 13:09 »

Quote from: PowerDroid on October 05, 2009, 13:06

Quote from: gostwyck on October 05, 2009, 12:37
Quote from: PowerDroid on October 05, 2009, 12:24
Companies don't buy competitors to keep them up and running, offering buyers a multitude of choices and keeping prices down.

Yes they do __ all the time.

There are hundreds of well-known examples ... Manfrotto bought out Gitzo in 1992, BMW owns Rolls Royce, Ford used to own Jaguar but then sold it to Tata, etc, etc.

Read through to the end of my post. The examples you give are companies who bought another company offering a DIFFERENT type of product that complemented their own product lines. It's when there's redundancies that it simply does not make business sense for a parent company to offer multiple, extremely similar products to the same set of customers.

there is no right answer here, there are indeed agencies that offer competing lines that are owned by the same parent. They do just fine.

silksatsunrise · « **Reply #39 on:** November 03, 2009, 09:33 »

Quote from: Lcjtripod on October 03, 2009, 11:47

Quote from: Zeus on October 03, 2009, 09:53
I can't see how anything will change. Will SS buyers migrate to BigStock? I doubt it.

Who said anything about buyers migrating from ss?
How about NEW buyers coming from the advertising and promotion from SS?
SS is putting up the cash!

Why must nearly everyone think negative about nearly every site ever mentioned on this forum?

-Larry

No but with the current "TEST" at SS of shutting off OD sales availability and sending customers to BigStock we could see customers forced to BigStock to buy one ups and a few images.. Time will tell but this is not a good sign for SS submitters.

Lcjtripod · « **Reply #40 on:** November 03, 2009, 09:47 »

October has been my best month on BigStock out of the last 7 months.
BigStock has earned me more dollars and DL's than all of the other sites I am on for October.

SS has helped BigStock in a very positive way in my oppion.

-Larry

epantha · « **Reply #41 on:** November 03, 2009, 10:47 »

With close to 600 photos online at BigStock, have seen no increase in sales since acquired by SS. $:-\$

lisafx · « **Reply #42 on:** November 03, 2009, 10:52 »

Quote from: Lcjtripod on November 03, 2009, 09:47

SS has helped BigStock in a very positive way in my oppion.

Your sure wouldn't know it from my sales. October was my WMY on Bigstock. In fact, I have to go back to December of 07 to find a comparably low earnings number there, and I had 2k fewer images then.

Glad to hear somebody's doing well there

KB · « **Reply #43 on:** November 03, 2009, 11:39 »

Oct was my best month at BigStock since May, with 2x as many images sold as Sep. (RPD was down from $1.10 to $0.89, though, so earnings didn't see as high a bump.)

However, by revenue, BigStock increased from 3% of total earnings in Sep to 4% in Oct, so even with a large increase, they are still way, way down at #6. (StockXpert was #5, at 8%.) In my port, they have a long, long way to go to reach #4 (DT at 10% in Oct).

traveler1116 · « **Reply #44 on:** November 03, 2009, 11:41 »

Quote from: lisafx on November 03, 2009, 10:52

Quote from: Lcjtripod on November 03, 2009, 09:47

SS has helped BigStock in a very positive way in my oppion.

Your sure wouldn't know it from my sales. October was my WMY on Bigstock. In fact, I have to go back to December of 07 to find a comparably low earnings number there, and I had 2k fewer images then.

Glad to hear somebody's doing well there

+1 lowest sales in a very long time

gostwyck · « **Reply #45 on:** November 03, 2009, 12:44 »

Last month my earnings at BigStock were 20% less than I earned with them in March 2007.

Over the same timescale my earnings at IS have risen by nearly 4x and at FT (who back then were only marginally ahead of BigStock) they are more than 7x higher.

I don't see any point in uploading further images to BigStock unless there's some fairly drastic changes.

camera shy · « **Reply #46 on:** November 03, 2009, 14:41 »

Sales have stopped for me too, but also the review time is much longer than usual. I've had a batch awaiting review for a couple of weeks now so I've suspended uploading for the time being.

melastmohican · « **Reply #47 on:** November 03, 2009, 14:54 »

Is Pixmac considered to be in top 4 since they distribute images from FT and DT? I think BigStock will be storefront for SS collection

Pixart · « **Reply #48 on:** November 03, 2009, 14:58 »

BS has made 6.1% of my YTD total. I'm glad you are getting the sales there Larry, I'm sure not!

RacePhoto · « **Reply #49 on:** November 08, 2009, 11:22 »

Quote from: Lcjtripod on October 01, 2009, 13:58

Will BigStock earn a spot as one of the BIG FOUR with a big push from Shutterstock?

Where do you think BigStock will rank in the big 6 by December 31 of this year?

My guess is #4

Yours?

-Larry

No

Nothing will change this year in their ranking

Things just don't happen that fast. Reading the BigStock forums is a real laugh. "Oh I think I'm seeing better sales already since SS bought the site." Does anyone here think they have changed anything? It's a work in progress. Maybe in Jan something might change and then we'll see what the plan is for BigStock in the future. The new owners will also need to do some marketing and that takes time.

Anyone read the BigStock forum? Try this for an eye opener or a laugh. Also how much confidence do you have in a site that can't get the quote function to work right on their own forums? Very strange.

Subject: Who Else is Selling One a Month

http://www.bigstockphoto.com/bb/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3653&sid=0b38d4514bebb09f1bd60c1b3c6fec51