MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Sales have tanked big time  (Read 180499 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #275 on: October 21, 2011, 02:42 »
0
I had started uploading again, after they introduced photos+.  Now there's really no incentive.  It will make it a lot easier if I do decide to leave.  Are all the buyers moving to other sites or have exclusives been given another boost?  I've see a jump in sales with SS and DT have picked up the past few days.


Slovenian

« Reply #276 on: October 21, 2011, 03:57 »
0
In 2/3 of Oct I haven't even reached 1/2 of Sep sales :o

« Reply #277 on: October 21, 2011, 20:21 »
0
October is on track to be my worst month on istock in 5 years (since December 2006). That's pretty pathetic to say the least.

« Reply #278 on: October 21, 2011, 21:16 »
0
October is on track to be my worst month on istock in 5 years (since December 2006). That's pretty pathetic to say the least.
That is beyond crazy and shocking. And coming from one of the great microstock portfolios. December 2006 is less than a year after I started microstocking. I am literally shocked.

« Reply #279 on: October 22, 2011, 00:35 »
0
October is on track to be my worst month on istock in 5 years (since December 2006). That's pretty pathetic to say the least.
That is beyond crazy and shocking. And coming from one of the great microstock portfolios. December 2006 is less than a year after I started microstocking. I am literally shocked.

Istock needs to show an interest in providing reasonable stability for its stars. People need to be able to budget. Hopefully, the stuffed shirts running the show are not thinking that they've got the top earners over a barrel.

SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #280 on: October 22, 2011, 00:43 »
0
October is on track to be my worst month on istock in 5 years (since December 2006). That's pretty pathetic to say the least.
That is beyond crazy and shocking. And coming from one of the great microstock portfolios. December 2006 is less than a year after I started microstocking. I am literally shocked.

Istock needs to show an interest in providing reasonable stability for its stars. People need to be able to budget. Hopefully, the stuffed shirts running the show are not thinking that they've got the top earners over a barrel.

well put. I agree. it makes me really nervous when people like nico_blue and Sean are seeing numbers dropping.

« Reply #281 on: October 22, 2011, 01:20 »
0
I am a nobody but it does look worrying, I wonder what may be the reason for such "trend", how many variables do exist in stock or IS?

no constant or less uploading? best match changes? buyers bailing? more contributors? economic crisis? files in thinkstock? looking for cheaper pics (not exclusive ones)?

the real thing is that when contributors go really high, it must (dont know but I guess) be a lot hard to maintain the momentum but on the other hand, those files shouldnt never go back, is there any statistic regarding new pictures sales? (I do have always over 10 sales of the latest 20 on pictures that never sold before but I am not a high seller and dont have a picture there that was sold many times, I am talking about 70 sales per month)

Slovenian

« Reply #282 on: October 22, 2011, 02:42 »
0
October is on track to be my worst month on istock in 5 years (since December 2006). That's pretty pathetic to say the least.
That is beyond crazy and shocking. And coming from one of the great microstock portfolios. December 2006 is less than a year after I started microstocking. I am literally shocked.

Istock needs to show an interest in providing reasonable stability for its stars. People need to be able to budget. Hopefully, the stuffed shirts running the show are not thinking that they've got the top earners over a barrel.

well put. I agree. it makes me really nervous when people like nico_blue and Sean are seeing numbers dropping.


Why? Why just for the stars? It reminds me of the real world, you know 99% against 1%. Why do they need to make MS such a miserable place as well?
« Last Edit: October 22, 2011, 02:43 by Slovenian »

« Reply #283 on: October 22, 2011, 03:55 »
0
October is on track to be my worst month on istock in 5 years (since December 2006). That's pretty pathetic to say the least.
That is beyond crazy and shocking. And coming from one of the great microstock portfolios. December 2006 is less than a year after I started microstocking. I am literally shocked.

Istock needs to show an interest in providing reasonable stability for its stars. People need to be able to budget. Hopefully, the stuffed shirts running the show are not thinking that they've got the top earners over a barrel.

well put. I agree. it makes me really nervous when people like nico_blue and Sean are seeing numbers dropping.


Why? Why just for the stars? It reminds me of the real world, you know 99% against 1%. Why do they need to make MS such a miserable place as well?

Because the stars have committed themselves to iSTock in a way that lesser lights and independents haven't. It's their job and their livelihood. If the system is designed to give reasonably consistent returns for the top-dogs, it will probably do the same for everyone else I'm not suggesting a system where an elite few get different treatment from the rest - though, anecdotally, iStock already has that. 

Also, I don't want all the top, highly-skilled stars to be pushed ever closer to making a decision about competing with the rest of us over on all the other sites :)

Admittedly, any problems exclusives face from earnings instability are partly of their own making, in that they lacked the foresight to recognise the risk they were taking in trusting that the ilove-in would never end, while others made the effort to spread the risk despite the extra work and loss of privileges.

Slovenian

« Reply #284 on: October 22, 2011, 04:47 »
0

Also, I don't want all the top, highly-skilled stars to be pushed ever closer to making a decision about competing with the rest of us over on all the other sites :)


I do agree with that ;)

« Reply #285 on: October 22, 2011, 05:03 »
0
Nico has one of the most successful portfolios on istock ever. And like Sean, as far as I know, he does it all himself, he is not a stock factory.

Something is seriously wrong. The dramatic drop in traffic is the only explanation. Buyers must be migrating to other sites.

At some point istock has to address the pink elephant in the room and tell the contributors what their plans are and if the high volume market has been abandoned in favor of the high price, but niche V/A market.

Of course they can do with their company whatever they want, we are not shareholders in the business. But I think they should let us know the customer target group.

I have absolutely no problem, if they say that they want to specialize istock on the high end V/A market. Just tell us.

But to keep pretending you are a coffee shop even if most of your income is from wine...

Personally I thought the drop in traffic is the result of not uploading enough, but if Sean and Nico are down, then it is not all my fault. I also have a lot of files in good search positions, so I wasn t expecting such a large drop.

At the moment I am shooting video to learn more about it and add another income stream to my portfolio. Basically I am adding tea, to my coffeeshop. But it will take me at least 2 years to become a good videographer and understand the video market. It is more difficult than I thought.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2011, 05:33 by cobalt »

Slovenian

« Reply #286 on: October 22, 2011, 05:33 »
0
Something is seriously wrong. The dramatic drop in traffic is the only explanation. Buyers must be migrating to other sites.

At some point istock has to address the pink elephant in the room and tell the contributors what their plans are and if the high volume market has been abandoned in favor of the high price, but niche V/A market.

Of course they can do with their company whatever they want, we are not shareholders in the business. But I think they should let us know the customer target group.

I have absolutely no problem, if they say that they want to specialize istock on the high end V/A market. Just tell us.

But to keep pretending you are a coffee shop even if most of your income is from wine, is silly.


Not silly, very smart. Keeping you in the dark as long as it's obvious to everyone means keeping you a lot longer, offering exclusive material (meaning material other sites don't). Their tactics sure turn a lot of stomachs, but also brings them huge profits. Short term profits of course. I wish most of their traffic would to to the sites that pay 50%+, that of course won't make cuts immediately they become big.

Slovenian

« Reply #287 on: October 22, 2011, 05:34 »
0
Something is seriously wrong. The dramatic drop in traffic is the only explanation. Buyers must be migrating to other sites.

At some point istock has to address the pink elephant in the room and tell the contributors what their plans are and if the high volume market has been abandoned in favor of the high price, but niche V/A market.

Of course they can do with their company whatever they want, we are not shareholders in the business. But I think they should let us know the customer target group.

I have absolutely no problem, if they say that they want to specialize istock on the high end V/A market. Just tell us.

But to keep pretending you are a coffee shop even if most of your income is from wine, is silly.


Not silly, very smart. Keeping you in the dark as long as it's obvious to everyone means keeping you a lot longer, offering exclusive material (meaning material other sites don't). Their tactics sure turn a lot of stomachs, but also brings them huge profits. Short term profits of course 8but hey, that's the Wall St mentalitly that's getting us in trouble and recession). I wish most of their traffic would to to the sites that pay 50%+, that of course won't make cuts immediately they become big.

« Reply #288 on: October 22, 2011, 05:40 »
0
I like to do business with people who have a clear, ongoing, straightforward communication. Especially if you are doing international business.

I find it very hard to believe that "they are out to get me". I know most people here think, the exclusives are naive, we are not. We have met many people from the team, and they are all hard working, very dedicated people.

To me it looks like they are trying to integrate all the different Gettysites. Maybe some software/backend changes they need took much longer than necessary and that the marketing was postponed until it is all ready.  We keep getting these hints of "things to come".

But I still believe that good communication is essential for business.

« Reply #289 on: October 22, 2011, 06:48 »
0
I suppose how bothered they are will depend on whether traffic is migrating to other sites within the Getty empire or if it is going elsewhere. Shutterstock is up but I don't see that anywhere else and Fotolia seems to be well down. So where are these missing buyers? Are they still there, using up their budgets on the likes of Edstock and other wholly owned, high-priced content?

« Reply #290 on: October 22, 2011, 07:08 »
0
Usually customer traffic will flock to the next company with the strongest brand and reputation in the market. If  Mc Donalds becomes expensive then Burger King is next, not the small start up in your neighbourhood.

Others might withhold buying or spend less overall. That is if they want to stay with istock and buy a lot of V/a but their budget does not increase, they will buy a lot less (volume in downloads) although they are still spending the same amount of money per year.

The traffic however would drop if a large number of customers do this. One V/A sale must equal at least 5 "normal" downloads, if not more.

The traffic stats are an indicator of how much normal high volume "coffee" stock is being bought. istock itself might still be doing financially very well, if the "wine" business is up.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2011, 07:17 by cobalt »

« Reply #291 on: October 22, 2011, 07:25 »
0
the world economy being completely ****ed is potentially an issue which should not be overlooked. And now all of the talk seems to be about impending meltdown to come depending on what happens wrt the and the banking knock - on. It's a very nervous time.

Companies and govt depts everywhere are drastically reducing spending and there is a shortage of investment for new start ups. It's a very different world compared with even 3 years ago. IPOs, for example, are more or less a thing of the past.

So less money to spend in general. In theory if everyone shifts their spending downwards then macrostock buyers should be transitioning to midstock prices - but I wonder whether many of them are not missing out that stage and going directly to the bargain basements.

^ total speculation obviously

« Reply #292 on: October 22, 2011, 07:31 »
0

I find it very hard to believe that "they are out to get me". I know most people here think, the exclusives are naive, we are not. We have met many people from the team, and they are all hard working, very dedicated people.


---------------------------------------

I agree nobody is out to get you or anyone else.  I certainly don't think you or top tier exclusives are naive, and I certainly value your input.  I've also met a number of the istock management and I agree they are hard working and dedicated people.  I don't think that is the group of people that Slovenian is talking about.  I think he's talking about Getty and H&F and I don't think that that those people care about exclusives or independents one bit.

The one thing that is surprising to me is how long the original Istock staff is hanging onto their jobs.  I don't think most of them have much future with Istock/Getty.  As the content line blurs more and more, the need for dedicated Istock staff (marketing, accounting, and likely inspectors too) decreases and the impact of their salaries on the bottom line becomes more and more apparent. 

« Reply #293 on: October 22, 2011, 08:00 »
0
October is on track to be my worst month on istock in 5 years (since December 2006). That's pretty pathetic to say the least.

I just wanted to chime in and second what nico said here. I'm not nearly as big a fish and this last week has been abysmal. Some of the worst regular business days for sales I've had since 2007 at least (not including holiday weeks/days).

« Reply #294 on: October 22, 2011, 08:07 »
0
October is on track to be my worst month on istock in 5 years (since December 2006). That's pretty pathetic to say the least.

I just wanted to chime in and second what nico said here. I'm not nearly as big a fish and this last week has been abysmal. Some of the worst regular business days for sales I've had since 2007 at least (not including holiday weeks/days).

This is an amazing transition for me.  15 a day average to, well, yesterday, 3, day before 4, last few weeks 5-7 a day max.  That's a 50-75% drop in DL's.  Istock is my number three in workflow now behind SS and DT.

lisafx

« Reply #295 on: October 22, 2011, 08:45 »
0
It's really unsettling to find out that best sellers like Nico and Sean are experiencing such sales drops.  Usually the big ships are fairly steady, even when the smaller boats are rocked by waves.  When such big ships are affected it is one he11 of a storm!

I agree with Balderick.  It's in everyone's best interest for Istock to protect their top exclusives.  The fact that they aren't (can't) speaks volumes.

Slovenian

« Reply #296 on: October 22, 2011, 08:51 »
0

I find it very hard to believe that "they are out to get me". I know most people here think, the exclusives are naive, we are not. We have met many people from the team, and they are all hard working, very dedicated people.


---------------------------------------

I agree nobody is out to get you or anyone else.  I certainly don't think you or top tier exclusives are naive, and I certainly value your input.  I've also met a number of the istock management and I agree they are hard working and dedicated people.  I don't think that is the group of people that Slovenian is talking about.  I think he's talking about Getty and H&F and I don't think that that those people care about exclusives or independents one bit.

Exactly!

« Reply #297 on: October 22, 2011, 09:14 »
0
Of course, a lot of traffic is going to Thinkstock. I sell almost three times as many licenses there as I do at iStock and September looks like coming in stronger than ever. Maybe TS is now the coffee shop and only wine bar trade is at IS.

Overall (and I know some people will succeed in reaching the wrong conclusion from this) the actual number of licences I am selling per month from iS and TS combined is pretty much the same in November 2006, which was my best month ever for downloads. In cash terms the combined earnings are about 50% more than 2006 and August was only $2 shy of my best ever monthly total, which was in March 2010.
 September will be about 5% less than the BME.

I presume TS is also feeding a lot of money into Getty from old wholly-owned collections. So they may not care what is happening to ordinary priced sales at iStock.

« Reply #298 on: October 22, 2011, 09:20 »
0

I find it very hard to believe that "they are out to get me". I know most people here think, the exclusives are naive, we are not. We have met many people from the team, and they are all hard working, very dedicated people.


---------------------------------------

I agree nobody is out to get you or anyone else.  I certainly don't think you or top tier exclusives are naive, and I certainly value your input.  I've also met a number of the istock management and I agree they are hard working and dedicated people.  I don't think that is the group of people that Slovenian is talking about.  I think he's talking about Getty and H&F and I don't think that that those people care about exclusives or independents one bit.

The one thing that is surprising to me is how long the original Istock staff is hanging onto their jobs.  I don't think most of them have much future with Istock/Getty.  As the content line blurs more and more, the need for dedicated Istock staff (marketing, accounting, and likely inspectors too) decreases and the impact of their salaries on the bottom line becomes more and more apparent. 

I agree and I have not met a number of istock management, but I suppose they are nice people. Most contributors here are nice people. The people at Getty making all the decisions are probably nice people too. But this is business (remember?). Niceness doesn't have anything to do with it! I don't know why people seem to think that those two statements even belong in the same sentence. The people at Getty and H&F want their money. Period. And no, they don't care about anything but their own bottom line and their own interests.

Slovenian

« Reply #299 on: October 22, 2011, 10:07 »
0

I find it very hard to believe that "they are out to get me". I know most people here think, the exclusives are naive, we are not. We have met many people from the team, and they are all hard working, very dedicated people.


---------------------------------------

I agree nobody is out to get you or anyone else.  I certainly don't think you or top tier exclusives are naive, and I certainly value your input.  I've also met a number of the istock management and I agree they are hard working and dedicated people.  I don't think that is the group of people that Slovenian is talking about.  I think he's talking about Getty and H&F and I don't think that that those people care about exclusives or independents one bit.

The one thing that is surprising to me is how long the original Istock staff is hanging onto their jobs.  I don't think most of them have much future with Istock/Getty.  As the content line blurs more and more, the need for dedicated Istock staff (marketing, accounting, and likely inspectors too) decreases and the impact of their salaries on the bottom line becomes more and more apparent. 

I agree and I have not met a number of istock management, but I suppose they are nice people. Most contributors here are nice people. The people at Getty making all the decisions are probably nice people too. But this is business (remember?). Niceness doesn't have anything to do with it! I don't know why people seem to think that those two statements even belong in the same sentence. The people at Getty and H&F want their money. Period. And no, they don't care about anything but their own bottom line and their own interests.

Nice or not, their greedy capitalistic logic is not going to work long term, instead of milking the cow, they'll settle for huge short term profits, mess up the site completely and then sell it. IS will never recover if it keeps on going like this for a while. Unless they have some super strategy which is taking longer than expected to incorporate (I highly doubt that).

And of course I wish traffic would go up, why wouldn't I want to earn more? Unless it goes to sites that will pay me at least 3 times the royalties (50%+)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
16 Replies
6391 Views
Last post October 25, 2011, 01:02
by MicrostockExp
17 Replies
5991 Views
Last post September 18, 2012, 15:44
by tavi
2 Replies
5456 Views
Last post March 16, 2016, 06:25
by mirkic
17 Replies
5530 Views
Last post May 04, 2017, 16:38
by heywoody
28 Replies
13505 Views
Last post July 25, 2017, 01:34
by zorandim

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors