MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: PhotoDune August Stats and Update  (Read 12197 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #25 on: September 03, 2011, 03:55 »
0
Thanks Jarel and Collis for clarification - your quick and plain answers are highly appreciated

So I will resubmit the 3 pictures rejected with a note (they were submitted just a few days ago), and then submit all the rest as usual without any special procedure
« Last Edit: September 03, 2011, 03:58 by microstockphoto.co.uk »


« Reply #26 on: September 03, 2011, 05:49 »
0
Hello Microstockgrouper's  :)

I thought I'd stop in and report on how PhotoDune is going. I wrote up some stuff for our own PD forums and thought MSG might like to see it too!

In previous threads there has been a lot of questions raised over our pricing and rates, and as I've mentioned we're planning to re-evaluate both after a few months of being live
. In the meantime, here's how PhotoDune is going!


So, I believe in them, my friend who is selling web templates there told me that Evanto is veeery correctly and honest agency...
Their the biggest opportunity is to be friendly to their contributors, so probably after few months they will make some changes for us non-exclusives (some kind of commison levels or something)

« Reply #27 on: September 03, 2011, 11:32 »
0
Friendly to contributors is very nice, but it's not enough. Not to say that being Getty-like to contributors is OK, but that a marketing plan, decent prices, reasonable royalty structure and a solidly functioning site are critical.

I'll keep an eye on PhotoDune to see how things evolve, but at the moment I don't think it makes sense for me. 25% on a low price, low volume site with insanely low EL prices just doesn't add up.

« Reply #28 on: September 03, 2011, 20:07 »
0
Quote
Friendly to contributors is very nice, but it's not enough. Not to say that being Getty-like to contributors is OK, but that a marketing plan, decent prices, reasonable royalty structure and a solidly functioning site are critical.

I'll keep an eye on PhotoDune to see how things evolve, but at the moment I don't think it makes sense for me. 25% on a low price, low volume site with insanely low EL prices just doesn't add up.

+1

« Reply #29 on: September 04, 2011, 07:52 »
0
Friendly to contributors is very nice, but it's not enough. Not to say that being Getty-like to contributors is OK, but that a marketing plan, decent prices, reasonable royalty structure and a solidly functioning site are critical.

I'll keep an eye on PhotoDune to see how things evolve, but at the moment I don't think it makes sense for me. 25% on a low price, low volume site with insanely low EL prices just doesn't add up.

To be fair istock have been around for years and they still don't have a solidly functioning site. Teething problems always happen in every new site. I must admit I did upload a few a few weeks back. I'm a bit nerdy when it comes to new sites and always love to see how the process is, plus I did think that PD may be a worthwhile site to upload to, it could well be for those with large ports, but since reading all the comments like this and in other threads, I soon changed my mind and apart from the handful of images there, I'm just not motivated to upload the rest.

I know the decision is so much easier for someone who has a few hundred images as opposed to a few thousand, the temptation to dump ur port on every site ur hopeful of, to earn more from the work u've already done is naturally a big one. But the fact is PD started a new site at 25% commission, which is surely an indicator of how they regard us and what to expect in the future. Some guys in a board room somewhere actually came to the decision of the commissions and agreed on 25%, they didn't have to decide on that figure but undoubtedly they looked at what others were giving and thought hey why not. And I don't believe that the philosophy of pricing Els so low in order to increase the frequency of sales is a good idea, the lowest is $5, so the contributor gets $1.25 for an Extended License sale. If the other agencies one day feel that PD is becoming competition, they will have no choice but to drop their EL prices, which means I will lose out cos that's where my work is.

Microbius

« Reply #30 on: September 04, 2011, 10:11 »
0
Quote
Friendly to contributors is very nice, but it's not enough. Not to say that being Getty-like to contributors is OK, but that a marketing plan, decent prices, reasonable royalty structure and a solidly functioning site are critical.

I'll keep an eye on PhotoDune to see how things evolve, but at the moment I don't think it makes sense for me. 25% on a low price, low volume site with insanely low EL prices just doesn't add up.

+1
It does make you think how genuine the complaints about not being able to leave IStock are. I mean here's a site offering terms that are terrible, and it's not like you have to lose any existing income by not joining them.
They also seem pretty responsive, yet we aren't able to collectively say "no, not until you offer better terms".

« Reply #31 on: September 04, 2011, 10:40 »
0
It does make you think how genuine the complaints about not being able to leave IStock are. I mean here's a site offering terms that are terrible, and it's not like you have to lose any existing income by not joining them.
They also seem pretty responsive, yet we aren't able to collectively say "no, not until you offer better terms".

There's a huge difference between not joining a site and leaving one into which you've put a lot of time and content.  Even ignoring that investment of time and energy, there's all the valuable search placement you're giving up.  Images that sell have a value that newer content will struggle to match.  And then there's all the content that wouldn't get accepted today, because of policy changes or current expectations regarding resolution or quality.  It's the same reason that leaving a site feels irreversible.  Even if you could change your mind, how much of your portfolio would get accepted the second time around, and how much would it earn relative to what it's doing now?

So I leave iStock and Fotolia a little at a time, first removing non- and poor sellers, and eventually the stuff that makes money.  I want to optimize my return on the effort I've already expended.  And as for PhotoDune (getting back on track), I was invited during the closed beta and decided to give them a shot.  The effort was low, compensation was adequate, and I'm more concerned with the dollar total than individual earnings.  I'm already used to lots of little royalties, as long as there are enough of them.  And so far PhotoDune has done awfully well, far better than any site since the original bunch I joined back in 2005 and 2006. 

RT


« Reply #32 on: September 04, 2011, 10:48 »
0
I still can't get enthusiastic about 25% and I'm sure if we all upload, sales wont seem so good.  I've seen it happen with other sites, people mention good sales, everyone uploads and then all you see is complaints about low sales.  They called it dilution of sales with Lucky Oliver but at least they had good EL prices and reasonable commissions.

Good accurate points, I wasn't invited to upload during the beta stages, now because of the points you've highlighted I can't see it worth my efforts to upload when they do open up to everyone because I'd be concerned my images would get lost amongst the crowd. From somebody in my position search placement is everything, an early start on a site can make a huge difference, once they flood the site with millions of images anything decent will get lost.

« Reply #33 on: September 04, 2011, 11:26 »
0
People complain about 0.28 subs, yet they are happy to accept 1.25 for an EL.
A Level-5 sub on DT earns more (1.26) than an EL on Photodune :P
If I were a major agency, I would shaft you people all day long, 24/7/365, you are so greedy that you just don't deserve a better treatment. 
I guess the idea is: "if I get a download on Photodune, I steal a download that another contributor would get on another site". :P Of course you might steal your own download but here is a thought: do a projection how much money you will lose in 1 year when IS and DT adjust their royalties to Photodune's levels, even if it hurts your brain.

CD123

« Reply #34 on: September 04, 2011, 13:33 »
0
Totally agree with all the voices shouting about the low percentage and how it is a sign of approval to screw contributors even further by all in future.

However, I then look at my impressive record at Crestock:
10 sales in a year - 9 subscriptions selling all for 0.25 each (even the last 2 which where vectors!!!!)
1 Credit sale for a massive 0.60
Total: $2.85 from 345 port (one of my smallest because if their high rejection rate) after a year.............

Now I just wondered (not subtracting anything thing from the strong principle arguments against it above) how will PhotoDune be worse than this in my case?  ???

Not arguing that people should join, just looking at a very practical situation in my case, which might be similar for quite a lot of others and playing a bit of devil's advocate.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2011, 13:40 by CD123 »

« Reply #35 on: September 04, 2011, 14:12 »
0
So I leave iStock and Fotolia a little at a time, first removing non- and poor sellers, and eventually the stuff that makes money.  I want to optimize my return on the effort I've already expended.  (...) The effort was low, compensation was adequate, and I'm more concerned with the dollar total than individual earnings.  

Wow, you think that Photodune is a better deal than IS. I'd rather earn 5-7 USD for an XXXL than 2.25, or 30 USD for an EL than 1.25.
It seems that you either skipped maths at school or you're smoking something really bad.

And so far PhotoDune has done awfully well, far better than any site since the original bunch I joined back in 2005 and 2006.  

Some of the new sites tried to offer good commisions with a decent pricing.
Imagine that in one town there are two dealers selling the same product. Dealer 1 buys that product from the supplier for 10 USD and sells for 20 USD. Dealer 2 sells the same product for 8 USD and pays 1.50 USD to the same supplier. Which of the dealers will thrive?
And who is the biggest idiot in all that? Of course the supplier digging his own grave by delivering goods to dealer 2.

*insults edited out*
By the time Photodune grows to be a meaningful agency, some new guys will come on the stage and will undercut Photodune's prices and roaylties by 50-60%  :P
 
« Last Edit: September 04, 2011, 14:17 by Snufkin »

« Reply #36 on: September 04, 2011, 14:21 »
0
Wow, you think that Photodune is a better deal than IS. I'd rather earn 5-7 USD for an XXXL than 2.25, or 30 USD for an EL than 1.25.
It seems that you either skipped maths at school or you're smoking something really bad.

Yes, I think PhotoDune's a better deal.  For one thing, I'm getting a higher royalty than iStock ever gave me.  And for another, PhotoDune hasn't tried to screw me out of the royalty I agreed to when I joined.  That's ignoring the easier upload process and the lack of limits.  For me, that all adds up to a better deal.

And not that it matters, but I was a math wiz in high school and minored in it in college.  I've also learned that the moment you insult someone you're trying to convince, you've lost any leverage your arguments might have had.

« Reply #37 on: September 04, 2011, 14:39 »
0
Yes, I think PhotoDune's a better deal.  For one thing, I'm getting a higher royalty than iStock ever gave me. 

Now you say that a higher royalty rate is better, whereas above you wrote: "I'm more concerned with the dollar total than individual earnings. ".
So, you'd rather earn less but with a higher royalty rate. OK, now for yourself please do a projection how much money you will lose in one year when DT adjusts their pricing and royalty structure to Photodune's levels.

« Reply #38 on: September 04, 2011, 15:20 »
0
So, you'd rather earn less but with a higher royalty rate. OK, now for yourself please do a projection how much money you will lose in one year when DT adjusts their pricing and royalty structure to Photodune's levels.

Nothing of the kind.  I accept that a new agency won't earn me as much; I'm placing a bet that their higher royalty will lead to better earnings in time, or at least enough income to justify the incremental effort of uploading.  It's not an either/or situation.  I withdraw from iStock not because they don't earn; they're still my #2 earner, although I don't know for how much longer.  I do it because they broke faith with me, and that is something I will not tolerate.

I also don't assume, as you clearly do, that it's a race to the bottom.  It may turn out that way, but it's not a matter of when Dreamstime and others reduce their rates but if.  Not every business will choose to increase their margins by screwing their suppliers.  I'll favor those who balance their and their suppliers' interests and walk away from those who don't.  And if we reach a point where there are no ethical players left, I'll find some other way to spend my time.

« Reply #39 on: September 04, 2011, 15:57 »
0
Nothing of the kind.  I accept that a new agency won't earn me as much; I'm placing a bet that their higher royalty will lead to better earnings in time, or at least enough income to justify the incremental effort of uploading. 
Well, 25% is hardly high royalty. It is more than IS, but many agencies offer much higher royalties.
25% from a new agency, with that pricing is simply ridiculous.

It's not an either/or situation.  I withdraw from iStock not because they don't earn; they're still my #2 earner, although I don't know for how much longer.  I do it because they broke faith with me, and that is something I will not tolerate.

I hate what they have been doing during the last year, but I actually appreciate that they raise prices. If they lose customers because of that - I don't care, it gives the fairer sites better chances to compete. With Photodune's it's the other way around, they are undercutting everybody. That indeed is unsustainable.

I also don't assume, as you clearly do, that it's a race to the bottom.  It may turn out that way, but it's not a matter of when Dreamstime and others reduce their rates but if.  Not every business will choose to increase their margins by screwing their suppliers. 

Well, that has been the trend so far, hasn't it? Don't you think it's better not to provoke them?
If the agencies see that their suppliers are happy with much lower commissions, why not adjust them?
If they adjust them to the level with which you are comfortable elsewhere, would it be 'screwing'?

C'mon disorderly, 1.25 for ELs makes getty or FT look like generous uncles, do you really need that?
Why not refrain from uploading and ask for a reasonable deal?
Without content this site is worthless and eventually they would have to offer better terms.

CD123

« Reply #40 on: September 04, 2011, 16:06 »
0
Nothing of the kind.  I accept that a new agency won't earn me as much; I'm placing a bet that their higher royalty will lead to better earnings in time, or at least enough income to justify the incremental effort of uploading. 
Well, 25% is hardly high royalty. It is more than IS, but many agencies offer much higher royalties.
25% from a new agency, with that pricing is simply ridiculous.

It's not an either/or situation.  I withdraw from iStock not because they don't earn; they're still my #2 earner, although I don't know for how much longer.  I do it because they broke faith with me, and that is something I will not tolerate.

I hate what they have been doing during the last year, but I actually appreciate that they raise prices. If they lose customers because of that - I don't care, it gives the fairer sites better chances to compete. With Photodune's it's the other way around, they are undercutting everybody. That indeed is unsustainable.

I also don't assume, as you clearly do, that it's a race to the bottom.  It may turn out that way, but it's not a matter of when Dreamstime and others reduce their rates but if.  Not every business will choose to increase their margins by screwing their suppliers. 

Well, that has been the trend so far, hasn't it? Don't you think it's better not to provoke them?
If the agencies see that their suppliers are happy with much lower commissions, why not adjust them?
If they adjust them to the level with which you are comfortable elsewhere, would it be 'screwing'?

C'mon disorderly, 1.25 for ELs makes getty or FT look like generous uncles, do you really need that?
Why not refrain from uploading and ask for a reasonable deal?
Without content this site is worthless and eventually they would have to offer better terms.

Should get a chat room (or boxing ring) where you 2 can sort this out....... ::)

« Reply #41 on: September 04, 2011, 16:07 »
0

Well, 25% is hardly high royalty. It is more than IS, but many agencies offer much higher royalties.
25% from a new agency, with that pricing is simply ridiculous.

I hope that PhotoDune will do quite opposite...  Maybe bigger royalties after initial 25% is the best solution for rapid growing... ;)

velocicarpo

« Reply #42 on: September 04, 2011, 16:24 »
0
I just cannot believe People are trying to defend Photodune here. There is no excuse for them to try to screw us like that nor is there any excuse for contributors to screw themselves...

« Reply #43 on: September 04, 2011, 16:26 »
0
Should get a chat room (or boxing ring) where you 2 can sort this out....... ::)

No need.  I'm done.

« Reply #44 on: September 04, 2011, 16:27 »
0
Totally agree with all the voices shouting about the low percentage and how it is a sign of approval to screw contributors even further by all in future.

However, I then look at my impressive record at Crestock:
10 sales in a year - 9 subscriptions selling all for 0.25 each (even the last 2 which where vectors!!!!)
1 Credit sale for a massive 0.60
Total: $2.85 from 345 port (one of my smallest because if their high rejection rate) after a year.............

Now I just wondered (not subtracting anything thing from the strong principle arguments against it above) how will PhotoDune be worse than this in my case?  ???

Not arguing that people should join, just looking at a very practical situation in my case, which might be similar for quite a lot of others and playing a bit of devil's advocate.
Crestock is one of the worst sites for sales and the $0.25 was too low for me.  It takes a lot for me to remove my portfolio but they managed it.  Almost any site would look good compared to them.

« Reply #45 on: September 04, 2011, 16:31 »
0
I won't be uploading there at the current rates.  They are severely undercutting the competition.  Sure, the commission rates are slightly higher than IS, but much lower than other sites.  We get 50% at 123rf.  PDs image prices are just too low, especially the ELs.  It's just advancing the race to the bottom. 

lisafx

« Reply #46 on: September 04, 2011, 16:55 »
0
What's with all the personal attacks and insults directed at other contributors on MSG lately?   

Here's a thought - if anyone doesn't want to join a particular agency - they don't have to.  Simple.

Nobody here can control whether contributors do or don't join a particular agency, or do or don't quit another one. Doesn't the very term "independent" that we call ourselves imply we can make our own individual choices?

Making peace with that realization will add years to your life.  :)

CD123

« Reply #47 on: September 04, 2011, 17:10 »
0
I am going to put my head also now here into the honests nest:

Why do you think China has the fastest economy growth rate for years in the world? Because they where prepared to work for cheaper than any one else. Why where they prepared to do that? Because they have/had a lot of poor people, prepared to work for less. Not all businesses moved their factories to China, because the quality of the products where probably not as good, because they use cheap labour.

The situation is not much different here. Larger, more established contributors will not want to submit to PhotoDune, as they have large sites with big sales every month to feed them and can look down on feeble income from smaller/newer sites or sites with lower commissions and withhold their portfolios to prove a principle point.

Smaller, newer or not as strong contributors will submit to them, as they can not afford to miss out on, the crummy income offered to them.

Larger sites will not necessarily follow trend, as they know it might cost them their more established contributors which may mean an end to their wealth (as these contributors are the cause they are successful at present).

Personally I think this is all a huge storm in a teacup. PhotoDune will not have a strong start, as they will probably not pull many top contributors. The crumbs they offer might be of some comfort to some contributors. If they grow bigger, they will be under pressure to extend their range to include better images and will be wise to up their commission at that stage to draw stronger contributors or they will die a slow painful death like many before them and leave the poor even poorer, as most would not have been able to make first payout (but that is life screw the poor).

That is just my 5c worth..
« Last Edit: September 04, 2011, 17:13 by CD123 »

« Reply #48 on: September 04, 2011, 17:16 »
0
^^^That doesn't make much sense as some of the largest contributors here are submitting to Photodune.  Some of the smaller contributors aren't interested.

CD123

« Reply #49 on: September 04, 2011, 17:17 »
0
What's with all the personal attacks and insults directed at other contributors on MSG lately?   

Here's a thought - if anyone doesn't want to join a particular agency - they don't have to.  Simple.

Nobody here can control whether contributors do or don't join a particular agency, or do or don't quit another one. Doesn't the very term "independent" that we call ourselves imply we can make our own individual choices?

Making peace with that realization will add years to your life.  :)

Agree. The constant personal attacks is really in bad taste and a sign of immaturity. Maybe it is time to see a few member restrictions or bans to put an end to it.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1255 Views
Last post September 16, 2007, 17:58
by michaeldb
0 Replies
888 Views
Last post September 25, 2007, 13:52
by Istock News
4 Replies
1386 Views
Last post August 06, 2009, 19:05
by PixelBytes
13 Replies
3870 Views
Last post November 16, 2011, 22:21
by collis
August PP stats

Started by tavi « 1 2  All » iStockPhoto.com

33 Replies
2745 Views
Last post September 23, 2012, 09:54
by fritz

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors