MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Superhug 85% Royalty Deal from Microstock Man  (Read 1930 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« on: April 11, 2012, 21:30 »
0
Microstock Man (http://www.microstockman.com) now has a special deal for new contributors to Superhug. Instead of their already generous 75%, if you enter 'thp' in the 'referred by user' field (a bit archaic i know) then you will receive a whopping 85% of all sales! Yep, a bonus 10% royalty on all sales. Plus you have the ability to set your own prices. (I have mine set at $6 currently)

For more info see here http://www.microstockman.com/superhug-review/

Please note guys: The superhug site doesn't explicitly say what percentage you are on once you've signed up, but if in doubt that you've scored the 85% deal just email Ian at superhug for confirmation  :)

Hope thats helpful for any looking to support new sites.

Cheers

Tim
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 22:24 by THP »


Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #1 on: April 23, 2012, 18:43 »
0
Just bumping it up again.  :)

Ed

« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2012, 20:10 »
0
Just curious...are you happy getting $6 for an image license?

I'm just wondering because that's pretty low compared to what DT, iStock, Bigstock, etc. charges customers for their images.

« Reply #3 on: April 23, 2012, 20:33 »
0
Just curious...are you happy getting $6 for an image license?

I'm just wondering because that's pretty low compared to what DT, iStock, Bigstock, etc. charges customers for their images.

so we are better having a 2.3$ share for a XL 10 credits than selling it for 6$ and get 5.1$ ??

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #4 on: April 23, 2012, 20:49 »
0
Just curious...are you happy getting $6 for an image license?

I'm just wondering because that's pretty low compared to what DT, iStock, Bigstock, etc. charges customers for their images.

I agree with luissantos84 sentiments. I would much rather get $5.10 for every sale, than 10 subs or 15% of iStock's sale price.

I think I know where you are coming from, but in the end for me, it's not what the image sells for but what I earn from it that matters to me.

Plus, tomorrow I could decide to change all my Superhug files to $8 or $10 each, and still get 85% from them. Can't have that flexibility with other sites.

Appreciate your thought though (and sorry for delayed response, my power has been out for last hour and half!)

« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2012, 20:57 »
0
so we are better having a 2.3$ share for a XL 10 credits than selling it for 6$ and get 5.1$ ??

Obviously, $5.10 at the higher percentage is better, but undercutting on price is always a little disappointing. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either. If you are going to sell a lower volume of images, shouldn't you charge more or at least the same (or close to the same) as the higher volume sites? That way you make up for the lower volume with much higher commissions.

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #6 on: April 23, 2012, 21:16 »
0
I guess in a way that kind of is my strategy cthoman, but perhaps from a slightly different slant.

I am not comparing Superhug with the likes of IS, SS, DT as they aren't likely to compete in the same range as them for years, if ever.

In my thinking (not saying it's right, it's just my thinking) I guess I am comparing more to Depositphotos (large = 4 credits) , 123rf (large = 5 credits), PhotoDune (7 credits XL) and the list goes on. I would rather someone buy my similarly priced image from Superhug (which gives me $5.10) than from these and many other libraries which will give me far, far less.

So I consider the pricing to be the same, not undercutting really. As for volume, well again I can't compare them with SS or the like, or each image would have to sell for a couple of hundred dollars per sale to make up for the lack in volume on Superhug!

Hope that makes sense!
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 22:25 by THP »

« Reply #7 on: April 23, 2012, 21:52 »
0
I guess in a way that kind of is my strategy cthoman, but perhaps from a slightly different slant.

I am not comparing Superhug with the likes of IS, SS, DT as they aren't likely to compete in the same range as them for years, if ever.

In my thinking (not saying it's right, it's just my thinking) I guess I am comparing more to Depositphotos (large = 4 credits) , 123rf (large = 5 credits), PhotoDune (7 credits XL) and the list goes on. I would rather someone buy my similarly priced image from Superhug (which gives me $5.10) than from these and many other libraries which will give me far, far less.

So I consider the pricing to be the same, not undercutting really. As for volume, well again I can't compare them with SS or the like, or each image would have to sell for a couple of hundred to make up for the lack in volume on Superhug!

Hope that makes sense!

I guess my point was more about trying to get the most out of any agency. Especially if they let you set your prices or influence their development.

Let's say you get on average $.50 per download at SS. You'd need 1000 downloads to make $500.
Let's say you get on average $1 per download at IS. You'd need 500 downloads to make $500.

Then you add in a new player like Superhug, but you get $10 per download. You'd only need 50 downloads (less than two a day per month) to make the same, and you'd only need a hundred downloads a day to make twice as much. But since you get paid a higher royalty rate the files aren't really any more expensive (even though you get paid 10 to 20 times as much).

Then, there is thinking of the future. If you wanted to double your income to make $1000 at each of those agencies, you'd need 2000 downloads at SS, 1000 at IS, but only 100 at SH (as previously stated).

Obviously, this is all hypothetical (well, some of it is based on personal experiences), but it does show that the "elite" bar is not all that high for some of these smaller agencies to reach if they have the right plan.

« Reply #8 on: April 24, 2012, 00:34 »
0
Quote
Sales are infrequent at the moment
How infrequent are they?  I uploaded 1 image but it took time and I don't see the point in wasting time for little money.  The upload procedure wasn't straightforward, if they made it easy, like some of the other small sites have done, I might consider uploading my portfolio.

I'm also not convinced that a site can thrive with such a high commission.  FP cut theirs eventually, Zymmetrical closed and I can't think of any others that have done well paying over 70% commission.

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2012, 01:27 »
0
Quote
Sales are infrequent at the moment
How infrequent are they?  I uploaded 1 image but it took time and I don't see the point in wasting time for little money.  The upload procedure wasn't straightforward, if they made it easy, like some of the other small sites have done, I might consider uploading my portfolio.

I'm also not convinced that a site can thrive with such a high commission.  FP cut theirs eventually, Zymmetrical closed and I can't think of any others that have done well paying over 70% commission.

Really? The upload for me seemed as straightforward as it gets. I just FTP'd, and the rest happened automatically. Perhaps Jen or Ian at their end was assisting with my upload. If so, a quick email would get them helping you I am sure. They do need to fix their categories, as they are automatically assigned assuming you have a keyword that fits one of their categories, but it's too narrow at the moment. Eg: Animal wouldn't be recognised in the category "Animals".

I also have the same reservation about the high commission and the long term viability of it. I mentioned it to Ian (from Superhug) and he seems to think it wont be a problem. In the short term at least I am happy to give it a go.

As for how infrequent, I would put it at about AYCS or so. Seems maybe 1 a month for me at a guess (too early to tell exactly) but I notice a few other guys who have sold 4 or so images in a month or two it seems. As with Photodune, it seems their market is more geared toward computer/internet concepts so the guys with those seem to have made a few sales in a short space of time.

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2012, 01:29 »
0
I should just add, please don't feel I am pushing the Superhug wheelbarrow as I think it will be the next Shutterstock.

I simply managed to negotiate a good deal and wanted to put it out there. Take it or leave it. For now, I am happy to give them a go :)

« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2012, 10:29 »
0
so we are better having a 2.3$ share for a XL 10 credits than selling it for 6$ and get 5.1$ ??

Obviously, $5.10 at the higher percentage is better, but undercutting on price is always a little disappointing. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either. If you are going to sell a lower volume of images, shouldn't you charge more or at least the same (or close to the same) as the higher volume sites? That way you make up for the lower volume with much higher commissions.

I agree with you, basically we need need those agencies to increase prices once IS or other will never increase our share.. myself have done that in a few new agencies..

Microstock InsiderPhotoDune

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
19 Replies
4453 Views
Last post August 15, 2007, 18:37
by yingyang0
3 Replies
1602 Views
Last post August 15, 2007, 01:57
by ozbandit
8 Replies
1891 Views
Last post March 11, 2010, 13:55
by fotografer
24 Replies
4345 Views
Last post March 10, 2011, 19:56
by Jonathan Ross
65 Replies
10058 Views
Last post March 22, 2012, 09:37
by CD123

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors