pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: File was returned for revision  (Read 4629 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: February 19, 2017, 07:42 »
0

You don't have to answer, but spouting ideological BS about free markets isn't really relevant here. What we are discussing is what is in your best interests an agent in the market.

There is nothing ideological about what I say. I do engage my brain, thank you. And I make my own conclusions. But keep thinking I am stupid, uneducated and illiterate, this is to my advantage.

To your advantage how? What I think of you or you of me is irreverent outside of pointless internet arguments like this one.

The reason I used the word "ideological" is because that's how the
Quote from: niktol
All that "united we are, rah rah" talk
comment came across. It didn't address anything concrete about what was going on IStock beyond not wanting to act in a way anyone else was on principle.

As I say, you don't need to justify yourself or your actions to me and you really don't seem to be addressing anything about the situation beyond your previous statement that as long as they keep paying you you will keep uploading, irrespective of what they ask for in return.

Don't feel you have to respond if you don't want to, if that is your position I do understand where you are coming from. I am just saying that isn't what I am choosing to do.

Man, I really don't want to fight with you. I think you are a cool dude (or dudette?) but I don't see a point for you to get angry at me.  In all fairness you are the one who started with the "Stand up for something or you'll fall for anything" exhortative statement, so I just responded in kind. I do understand where you are coming from too, and I will keep a close eye on that 2c business, but the jury is still out, at least for me.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2017, 07:46 by niktol »


« Reply #26 on: February 19, 2017, 07:52 »
0

You don't have to answer, but spouting ideological BS about free markets isn't really relevant here. What we are discussing is what is in your best interests an agent in the market.

There is nothing ideological about what I say. I do engage my brain, thank you. And I make my own conclusions. But keep thinking I am stupid, uneducated and illiterate, this is to my advantage.

To your advantage how? What I think of you or you of me is irreverent outside of pointless internet arguments like this one.

The reason I used the word "ideological" is because that's how the
Quote from: niktol
All that "united we are, rah rah" talk
comment came across. It didn't address anything concrete about what was going on IStock beyond not wanting to act in a way anyone else was on principle.

As I say, you don't need to justify yourself or your actions to me and you really don't seem to be addressing anything about the situation beyond your previous statement that as long as they keep paying you you will keep uploading, irrespective of what they ask for in return.

Don't feel you have to respond if you don't want to, if that is your position I do understand where you are coming from. I am just saying that isn't what I am choosing to do.

Man, I really don't want to fight with you. I think you are a cool dude (or dudette?) but I don't see a point for you to get angry at me.  In all fairness you are the one who started with the "Stand up for something or you'll fall for anything" exhortative statement, so I just responded in kind. I do understand where you are coming from too, and I will keep a close eye on that 2c business, but the jury is still out, at least for me.
Fair enough I get it. I am honestly not angry, not at you at least! I am sorry if it came off that way. I only mean to attack the point, not you. I really don't think you are stupid.

It will be interesting to see what the impact of the changes at IStock are and how other agencies will react.

« Reply #27 on: February 19, 2017, 08:07 »
+2

It will be interesting to see what the impact of the changes at IStock are and how other agencies will react.

I don't have a crystal ball, but I think in 5 years or so (maybe earlier, maybe later) the photostock market will no longer provide a sustainable income for individuals. Teams with some serious business analytics and IT capabilities will easily outperform them and then each other thus dropping the price to a bare minimum which has not been reached yet. It's a natural course of things and each of us has a next to zero impact on the path to the inevitable end. I am aggressively looking for options and that's how I am addressing the issue.

« Reply #28 on: February 19, 2017, 08:28 »
+1
I don't know. People have been saying that for the last ten years, ever since micro started really. And especially since about 2010. It could happen at some point, but I don't see anything that points to it happening now any more than at any other time in that period.

In fact I have seen RPDs rise everywhere except for IStock, Bigstock and Depositphotos, all agencies that have been failing in that time and all agencies I stopped working with for this reason. I have managed to increase my income many times over in that same period (with a couple of bumps along the way).

What I have seen is a saturation of the market. IMHO every company/ customer that needs a subscription service now has one. Whenever I see a significant rise in DLs on one subs program I see a decrease elsewhere. That is why these changes on IStock scare me. They will be aggressively undercutting other sites, it's what they do, and taking our customers from higher paying programs onto theirs.




« Reply #29 on: February 19, 2017, 10:38 »
0
I don't know. People have been saying that for the last ten years, ever since micro started really. And especially since about 2010. It could happen at some point, but I don't see anything that points to it happening now any more than at any other time in that period.

In fact I have seen RPDs rise everywhere except for IStock, Bigstock and Depositphotos, all agencies that have been failing in that time and all agencies I stopped working with for this reason. I have managed to increase my income many times over in that same period (with a couple of bumps along the way).

What I have seen is a saturation of the market. IMHO every company/ customer that needs a subscription service now has one. Whenever I see a significant rise in DLs on one subs program I see a decrease elsewhere. That is why these changes on IStock scare me. They will be aggressively undercutting other sites, it's what they do, and taking our customers from higher paying programs onto theirs.

You might be right on every point.

However, the reasons I rarely make fast decisions that seem to be obvious in this business are these:
-I was wrong on many occasions when interpreting events and data that seemed to me to have clear and intuitively obvious consequences or causes.
-Many people are often wrong (including people on this board) when interpreting events and data that seem to them to have clear and intuitively obvious consequences or causes.
-The only thing that seem to have served me very well is empirical observations and data I collected over years. They give surprising counter-intuitive and valuable results sometimes, but they take time to collect.

The attempt to undercut other agencies coming from a comparatively big player is of course a red flag that may or may not have serious repercussions for us in the future. In all honesty I have not figured out what that means for us yet. Many smaller agencies that attempted to undercut the big players as a business strategy are long gone now, so that approach may not work for IS either. IS does show signs of decline unlike SS or Fotolia, so things may work out quite naturally so to speak (as in "death by natural causes").

But I hear you.

« Reply #30 on: February 19, 2017, 11:54 »
+1
Your approach is very similar to my own, in this case there a are a few factors that have made me act straight away, and for me it isn't even border line.

First is my previous experiences with IStock and Getty. They have always pushed the boundaries to fleece contributors as much as possible. If they have 2c as a minimum they will be hitting that minimum. As I said on a previous thread, they are already paying out license sales at this level even under the existing system. This drop in return per download is beyond anything ever attempted by any agency. Literally almost 20X less than Shutterstock pays. I cannot run my business making 5% of what I do now.

Second I think that optics very much matter. It sends a message to other agencies that we are prepared to accept less. They are running businesses. If I was a Shutterstock shareholder I'd be asking why they are paying out 38c/dl when they could be paying 2c and still getting content.

Third and possibly most importantly is that it could well be too late to act by the time I have enough data to base a decision on. Once other agencies follow suit there will be no rolling back the clock.

« Reply #31 on: February 19, 2017, 14:15 »
+1
What are this messages, that you 2 are exchanging relevant to the topic?

« Reply #32 on: February 19, 2017, 14:47 »
0
Fully half the posts on this thread, including yours referenced the 2c sales before our conversation (see posts 2 and 3). The changes at istock are the main thing going on in the micro world right now. Of course it is going to be debated on a thread about uploading to istock.

« Reply #33 on: February 19, 2017, 14:50 »
0
What are this messages, that you 2 are exchanging relevant to the topic?

They are not. We just had a friendly exchange on a tangential subject. Feel free to ignore. As to your original post, replace the binomial name with the common name (e.g. "Buteo jamaicensis" with "chickenhawk"), "wildlife" with "bird", and see if it helps.

« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2017, 04:25 »
0
Keywords: Do I have to revise ALL keywords in order to get accepted? Do I have to cancel all keywords which do not fit?

« Reply #35 on: February 21, 2017, 12:28 »
0
I have some files in revise status on ESP what does it mean? what i have to do? someone can help me please?  :-[

ShadySue

« Reply #36 on: February 21, 2017, 13:50 »
0
What are this messages, that you 2 are exchanging relevant to the topic?

They are not. We just had a friendly exchange on a tangential subject. Feel free to ignore. As to your original post, replace the binomial name with the common name (e.g. "Buteo jamaicensis" with "chickenhawk"), "wildlife" with "bird", and see if it helps.

Never heard of chickenhawk, but I know Red-tailed Hawk. Whatever, that's not the point. The scientific name is searchable by everyone, even outwith the site-supported languages. I would imagine that's a keyword phrase which disappeared, as previously on iStock the CV supported the scientific names of more or less all common UK and North American birds at least.
It may be that even though you can't actually keyword with the scientific binomial, it will still be searchable, mapping invisibly. Things like that have happened unannounced in the past. I'm not saying that is the case, it's just a slight possibility.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
2997 Views
Last post December 23, 2009, 05:34
by lucato
29 Replies
7723 Views
Last post August 31, 2014, 14:06
by Cesar
11 Replies
2201 Views
Last post July 19, 2013, 12:01
by Cricket
1 Replies
2441 Views
Last post January 16, 2014, 08:35
by Ron
8 Replies
2016 Views
Last post May 05, 2017, 04:17
by dragonblade

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors