pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: The wave is breaking  (Read 5964 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: March 06, 2012, 15:34 »
0
The new little agencies are a waste of time. They do nothing but dilute the market and force prices and commissions AND sales down at the established places. Parasites covers it just fine for me.

I would agree if agencies have done the CUTS because of that, I believe we are pretty sure that wasnt the case, basically contributors are only looking for more income outside top5, of course I am not saying joining everyone that does a slightly movement, we all do microstock for a few time and we have our own demands lower or higher it doesnt matter but at some point we understand if a small/new agency is worth our time or not..

even if there arent bigs sales on stockfresh, glstock or agencies over 50% we need to support them, sure everybody decides whats best/suitable for themselves but I am sure they arent the ones "screwing" stock in any aspect, we cannot blame contributors for top agencies calls
« Last Edit: March 06, 2012, 15:36 by luissantos84 »


« Reply #51 on: March 06, 2012, 15:58 »
0
The new little agencies are a waste of time. They do nothing but dilute the market and force prices and commissions AND sales down at the established places. Parasites covers it just fine for me.

What's a new little agency? Aren't they all fairly new. Most of them not so little anymore though. I still have a domain I bought in 2001. I must be a dinosaur. I did update my dinosaur the other day. He is still looking good for a ten year old. He's evolved a lot. ;D

lisafx

« Reply #52 on: March 06, 2012, 18:29 »
0
While I agree with much of what Racephoto says, it leads to the conclusion that we don't need any new agencies. In fact we DO need those new agencies in order to prevent the existing ones from becoming a small group of monopolies. That would eventually make the business model unsustainable for most contributors.

Most of those low earners will eventually fail but a very few will thrive and rise up to the middle and top tiers. I wish I knew which ones!

Really well summed up Les.  Agree with you completely :)

« Reply #53 on: March 06, 2012, 18:58 »
0
We don't need any more new agencies unless they manage to differentiate themselves in some way - reach a new market, or pay better commissions, or specialize in some way.   

Why contribute to more "me too" players that are just trying to lure buyers from the big agencies by selling our images even cheaper and paying us less?  Oh yeah, they have nice new web sites and post friendly personal messages on MSG.  In the end they're the ones who'll be making money from a new business, while we make less for what we're already doing. 

« Reply #54 on: March 06, 2012, 19:03 »
0
We don't need any more new agencies unless they manage to differentiate themselves in some way - reach a new market, or pay better commissions, or specialize in some way.  

Why contribute to more "me too" players that are just trying to lure buyers from the big agencies by selling our images even cheaper and paying us less?  Oh yeah, they have nice new web sites and post friendly personal messages on MSG.  In the end they're the ones who'll be making money from a new business, while we make less for what we're already doing.  

what are the new players you are talking about? I dont know any agency paying you less than IS (royalties %)

wut

« Reply #55 on: March 06, 2012, 19:20 »
0
We don't need any more new agencies unless they manage to differentiate themselves in some way - reach a new market, or pay better commissions, or specialize in some way.  

Why contribute to more "me too" players that are just trying to lure buyers from the big agencies by selling our images even cheaper and paying us less?  Oh yeah, they have nice new web sites and post friendly personal messages on MSG.  In the end they're the ones who'll be making money from a new business, while we make less for what we're already doing.  

what are the new players you are talking about? I dont know any agency paying you less than IS (royalties %)

I'm starting to get an allergic reaction because so many ppl are talking solely about royalty %? What does it matter? You get over 5$ even if you're at 15% at IS for a XXXL, while you get 1,2$ at 123RF. And the vast majority of contributors will get even less from Jan 2013 on. You get 3$ at PD, I don't even know what you get at DP, since I only get sub sales and every once and a while a credit sale, that was never larger than M. CS pays 1,25$ for an XL (again 21 mpix), they're just as pathetic as 123RF. I don't contribute to any other mid/low tier agency, but I've seen more than enough from them. Low volume, even lower royalties. As we can see they get up to 50% of what IS pays, but usually they pay just around 20%. Or even way less compared to a higher level DT file. SS pays approx half of what IS does for ODs and about the same for SODs (depends on the level you're at, at a certain agency), but the volume is higher, so is the bottom line for most contributors.

I don't know about you, but those small agencies don't do anything good for us, on the contrary, they're just lowering our earnings, since we're selling there at a lower price, if they didn't exist, buyers would come to the top 4 and pay a more fair, higher price. They're also not affecting the big agency and their policies in any way, since they're insignificant, they take a few percent of the market at best.

« Reply #56 on: March 06, 2012, 19:42 »
0
Of the handful of sales I've made at PD, the most recent netted me 33 cents.   On-demand sales at subscription prices - it's the best of both worlds  :D

Uncle Pete

  • Evidence please...

« Reply #57 on: March 08, 2012, 01:21 »
0
To each their own, I don't think this is a one size fits all situation. That's what I was getting at. For some only one agency is best, exclusive, good percentages, work towards one goal. For some two, because they are the two worth the time and effort reward for investment. And for the rest, as many as you can get your images on to make as much as possible. Because every sale add to the total and becomes like a trickling spring and 1000 tributaries become a mighty river.

New is the weeds that pop up every other month as "hey did you hear about this new agency XYZ, what do you think of them."

Old in Internet time is actually about four years, yes. What's that? Before 2009 for Microstock sites.  ;D

I'd love to see someone come up with something new an revolutionary, instead of We sell for less. When the big agencies have 17 million images on one and the other is comprised of 18 agencies it gobbled up. What does some new place with 1.2 million images (or less) have to offer to a buyer, except, the same images? It's not selection?

Something different would be fantastic. More of the cookie cutter sites with the same images, same pricing, same contributors, same styles, all just copies, is boring and doomed.

The specialty sites seem to have died, I'm not so sure that someone can't come up with a dedicated site for one area, and can make a go of it, with catering to a specific market. Hypothetical. Food Photos Are Us. Only selling food images, the best of the best, so someone doing a search for red apple doesn't get a field with a tree on the horizon, key worded as "red apple tree" A new site could do something the old ones can't and that if force only accurate appropriate relevant keywords. That would make it a KILLER for buyers who are tired of best match bingo.

PhotoDuneMicrostock Insider

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Google Wave

Started by digiology Off Topic

7 Replies
1964 Views
Last post May 30, 2009, 22:23
by null
52 Replies
9979 Views
Last post September 25, 2009, 14:53
by lisafx
7 Replies
1939 Views
Last post December 09, 2009, 02:35
by alfonsodetomas
16 Replies
1702 Views
Last post June 30, 2012, 22:44
by stockmarketer
5 Replies
700 Views
Last post April 18, 2013, 15:31
by Sean Locke Photography

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors