Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2012, 21:08

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors


« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print

Topic: If you think iStock treats contributors like crap...  

(Read 817 times)
disorderly


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« on: April 14, 2011, 21:27 »

You might want to read this:

  http://igdaboard.wordpress.com/2011/04/14/important-advisory-about-amazon’s-appstore-distribution-terms-2/

It concerns Amazon's new app store for Android, and in particular their rather unique approach to pricing and royalties.

"'Cheer up', they said.  'It could always be worse.'  So I cheered up.  And you know, they were right.  It got worse."


Ignore | Logged


DepositPhotos.com
stockastic


« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2011, 22:29 »

Like stock photographers, developers of smart phone apps currently have no way to sell direct. 


Ignore | Logged


cthoman



« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2011, 00:10 »

Like stock photographers, developers of smart phone apps currently have no way to sell direct. 

There are lots of ways to sell direct in stock, it's pretty low entry costs, there are lots of threads about it and many of us are doing it.


Ignore | Logged


bhr

iStock Gauge
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2011, 06:29 »

Like stock photographers, developers of smart phone apps currently have no way to sell direct.  

Android developers can sell direct. Android users are not locked into downloading and installing apps only from the Android marketplace or the Amazon app store.

But if you were an app developer would you prefer to sell a few copies direct to Android users or to potentially sell many more by developing for IOS and being on the Apple app store ? An end user is far more likely to find your product if it is in a store and there is also the perception that content at a store has been vetted to some degree (if only by user review). That's why what Amazon is doing is probably very important for Android as a platform.

It's definitely analagous. I would be far more likely to buy content to use commercially from an agent than direct from someone claiming to be the photographer. An agent potentially provides a layer of validation and authority.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2011, 08:59 by bunhill »

Ignore | Logged


stockastic


« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2011, 09:04 »

I've heard that Google is tightening up on Droid apps.  iPhone and Windows Phone 7 are tightly controlled platforms.  So while some independent sales are still possible,  the great majority of developems would have no possibility of making a profit that way. They couldn't price their apps high enough, given the small number of potential buyers they could reach.

Because of the risk of malware, most people wouldn't buy phone apps from unknown sources.

So the situation is really very comparable I think.  In both cases the issues are sellers needing  ways to connect with buyers, and buyers needing ways to verify the quality of products before purchase.

Rejections are also a big issue.  A developer can spend months on an iPhone app only to have Apple say "mmmm.... no.  We just don't like it."


Ignore | Logged


Envateo Photo ToolsMicrostock Insider
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Istock TOP 1000 contributors
iStockPhoto.com
Vonkara 23 6569 Last post April 12, 2009, 05:57
by vlad_the_imp
Istock contributors charts -What's your rank- « 1 2 »
iStockPhoto.com
Vonkara 49 13710 Last post September 09, 2009, 01:47
by RacePhoto
Strap crap !
Cameras / Lenses
Magnum 4 903 Last post August 01, 2009, 15:52
by Magnum
istock has roughly 85k contributors
iStockPhoto.com
VB inc 18 2605 Last post March 13, 2010, 21:16
by FD
Istock contributors independent union
iStockPhoto.com
andersontomas40 2 563 Last post September 10, 2010, 03:28
by RT

TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc