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.

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. 

Quote from: stockastic on March 06, 2012, 18:58

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.

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. 

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.