Author Topic: down the toilet (Read 80191 times)

Bauman · « **Reply #125 on:** January 25, 2017, 13:03 »

Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2017, 10:58

if the new images added are crap, why would that affect your sales if your images are great? in fact your image should stand out even more now and generate more sales

Because all the images (good and crap) remain less time on the first page in the "new search" ... and you know how important it is to sell immediately on Shutterstock or Adobe.

My best sellers in the past have sold many times in the first month. If an image does not sell at the beginning rarely become a best seller.

Microstockphoto · « **Reply #126 on:** January 25, 2017, 15:53 »

images take time to settle in and start selling, seeing it happen over and over.

anyway, back on topic, worst day ever yesterday with about 7 downlaods. really not good at all

droidworker · « **Reply #127 on:** January 25, 2017, 16:02 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 24, 2017, 14:18

Quote from: droidworker on January 24, 2017, 14:05
I have a bad luck. My worst month ever, sales drop -60%.

December or January?

January, december is average.

dpimborough · « **Reply #128 on:** January 25, 2017, 17:30 »

Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2017, 10:58

if the new images added are crap, why would that affect your sales if your images are great? in fact your image should stand out even more now and generate more sales

As a buyer (and I am) why would you ask me to dig through 30 feet of chit to find a gold nugget?

The crap buries the good stuff faster than penguin poop in a snow storm.

The appalling keywords being used just add to the pile of dung being layered over the top of the dung heap.

It's boring, terrible quality and totally pointless

sgoodwin4813 · « **Reply #129 on:** January 25, 2017, 18:32 »

Quote from: Sammy the Cat on January 25, 2017, 17:30

faster than penguin poop in a snow storm

Love it - LOL

angelawaye · « **Reply #130 on:** January 25, 2017, 21:57 »

As a buyer, why don't you go somewhere else? Is it the price that keeps you there? I'm trying Macro and wondering how the buyer thinks ...

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #131 on:** January 26, 2017, 00:11 »

Quote from: Sammy the Cat on January 25, 2017, 17:30

Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2017, 10:58
if the new images added are crap, why would that affect your sales if your images are great? in fact your image should stand out even more now and generate more sales

As a buyer (and I am) why would you ask me to dig through 30 feet of chit to find a gold nugget?

The crap buries the good stuff faster than penguin poop in a snow storm.

The appalling keywords being used just add to the pile of dung being layered over the top of the dung heap.

It's boring, terrible quality and totally pointless

You buy the dung before you get to the good stuff, you just take what you see first? That's why sales are down for good stuff? Keywords for dung are better and buyers buy that before they get to the good stuff?

How do you eventually find what you want? That's where we want to be.

dpimborough · « **Reply #132 on:** January 26, 2017, 05:08 »

Quote from: angelawaye on January 25, 2017, 21:57

As a buyer, why don't you go somewhere else? Is it the price that keeps you there? I'm trying Macro and wondering how the buyer thinks ...

Dear Angela I was responding to Microstockphotos post but to answer your question I use several agencies so I have a choice not to go trawling through the mess that some agencies have created for themselves

As to agencies costs to be honest the price is so low now price is no longer even relevant when you can pick decent images for less than the price of a fair trade latte

dpimborough · « **Reply #133 on:** January 26, 2017, 05:12 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 26, 2017, 00:11

Quote from: Sammy the Cat on January 25, 2017, 17:30
Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2017, 10:58
if the new images added are crap, why would that affect your sales if your images are great? in fact your image should stand out even more now and generate more sales

As a buyer (and I am) why would you ask me to dig through 30 feet of chit to find a gold nugget?

The crap buries the good stuff faster than penguin poop in a snow storm.

The appalling keywords being used just add to the pile of dung being layered over the top of the dung heap.

It's boring, terrible quality and totally pointless

You buy the dung before you get to the good stuff, you just take what you see first? That's why sales are down for good stuff? Keywords for dung are better and buyers buy that before they get to the good stuff?

How do you eventually find what you want? That's where we want to be.

By being as detailed as possible in keyword searches and using categories (where available) and perserverence though some agencies appear better positioned with their best match results which helps.

But SS best match tends to throw up the same old stuff from one or two particular image producers page after page after page.

And no buyer would just take what they see first unless it's a quick article write up and they just want a fire and forget image.

Minsc · « **Reply #134 on:** January 26, 2017, 12:30 »

The ELs and mid-size SODs keep rolling in. It's like SS heard me that it's going to fall behind FT and it's making a last desperate effort to catch up. What was a lousy month is starting to turn into an decent month.

kuriouskat · « **Reply #135 on:** January 26, 2017, 14:38 »

Quote from: Minsc on January 26, 2017, 12:30

The ELs and mid-size SODs keep rolling in. It's like SS heard me that it's going to fall behind FT and it's making a last desperate effort to catch up. What was a lousy month is starting to turn into an decent month.

Wish I could say the same

I've gone from a daily average of 70-80 to 30 on a good day. Today, is just 15 lousy subs.

I will quit if I get a zero day, but maybe that's what they are aiming for? If they p**s off all the .38c contributors they can save money. Great business plan to throw older contributors under the bus.

derek · « **Reply #136 on:** January 26, 2017, 15:05 »

Quote from: KuriousKat on January 26, 2017, 14:38

Quote from: Minsc on January 26, 2017, 12:30
The ELs and mid-size SODs keep rolling in. It's like SS heard me that it's going to fall behind FT and it's making a last desperate effort to catch up. What was a lousy month is starting to turn into an decent month.

Wish I could say the same I've gone from a daily average of 70-80 to 30 on a good day. Today, is just 15 lousy subs.

I will quit if I get a zero day, but maybe that's what they are aiming for? If they p**s off all the .38c contributors they can save money. Great business plan to throw older contributors under the bus.

Yes and the same here from a daily 150-200 to a lousy 50-60. dont ask me if I intend to upload. This is almost a carbon copy of what Istock did some years back and it didnt end well.

Microstockphoto · « **Reply #137 on:** January 26, 2017, 15:21 »

9 subs

Microstockphoto · « **Reply #138 on:** January 26, 2017, 15:23 »

if the pile of crap that is added has appalling keywords, they are even more likely not to be found or bought, so more chance for my beautiful well keyworded images.

Fairplay · « **Reply #139 on:** January 26, 2017, 18:07 »

Quote from: derek on January 26, 2017, 15:05

"Yes and the same here from a daily 150-200 to a lousy 50-60. dont ask me if I intend to upload. This is almost a carbon copy of what Istock did some years back and it didnt end well."

About the same numbers here!

They are playing their greedy game and don't care losing old contributors! But they are losing buyers too! From 2017 our company stopped buying content from SS because of their new policy against contributors and their disasterous search engine!
I hope other SS buyers start buying from other more contributor friendly and fair agencies!

angelawaye · « **Reply #140 on:** January 26, 2017, 21:37 »

Fairplay, can I ask which agency your company started to use? Very curious ... Stocksy?

derek · « **Reply #141 on:** January 27, 2017, 02:03 »

Quote from: Fairplay on January 26, 2017, 18:07

Quote from: derek on January 26, 2017, 15:05

"Yes and the same here from a daily 150-200 to a lousy 50-60. dont ask me if I intend to upload. This is almost a carbon copy of what Istock did some years back and it didnt end well."

About the same numbers here!
They are playing their greedy game and don't care losing old contributors! But they are losing buyers too! From 2017 our company stopped buying content from SS because of their new policy against contributors and their disasterous search engine!
I hope other SS buyers start buying from other more contributor friendly and fair agencies!

Deleting very old files might help. This I was told by somebody. Last night I deleted 70 really old files and somehow this morning the sales result was better not great but better. This is the second time I have tried this and somehow ( dont ask why) but it seems to have a slight effect.
I am going to try it out once more later but have in mind this is very old files and they dont sell anyway and since I am not uploading anymore it might work?

dpimborough · « **Reply #142 on:** January 27, 2017, 06:38 »

Quote from: derek on January 26, 2017, 15:05

Deleting very old files might help. This I was told by somebody. Last night I deleted 70 really old files and somehow this morning the sales result was better not great but better. This is the second time I have tried this and somehow ( dont ask why) but it seems to have a slight effect.
I am going to try it out once more later but have in mind this is very old files and they dont sell anyway and since I am not uploading anymore it might work?

The problem with that is you can never re-submit those deleted files as they will be rejected for already being on Shutterstock.

derek · « **Reply #143 on:** January 27, 2017, 07:19 »

Quote from: Sammy the Cat on January 27, 2017, 06:38

Quote from: derek on January 26, 2017, 15:05

Deleting very old files might help. This I was told by somebody. Last night I deleted 70 really old files and somehow this morning the sales result was better not great but better. This is the second time I have tried this and somehow ( dont ask why) but it seems to have a slight effect.
I am going to try it out once more later but have in mind this is very old files and they dont sell anyway and since I am not uploading anymore it might work?

The problem with that is you can never re-submit those deleted files as they will be rejected for already being on Shutterstock.

I know it don't matter it needs a clean out anyway. Got a feeling that in order for the portfolio to surface properly you have to do away with really old files.

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #144 on:** January 27, 2017, 08:07 »

Quote from: derek on January 27, 2017, 07:19

I know it don't matter it needs a clean out anyway. Got a feeling that in order for the portfolio to surface properly you have to do away with really old files.

Now can this feeling of yours be backed up by actual data or search position changes?

Fairplay · « **Reply #145 on:** January 27, 2017, 11:16 »

Quote from: angelawaye on January 26, 2017, 21:37

Fairplay, can I ask which agency your company started to use? Very curious ... Stocksy?

Pond5 & StockFresh

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #146 on:** January 27, 2017, 13:18 »

Quote from: Sammy the Cat on January 26, 2017, 05:12

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 26, 2017, 00:11
Quote from: Sammy the Cat on January 25, 2017, 17:30
Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2017, 10:58
if the new images added are crap, why would that affect your sales if your images are great? in fact your image should stand out even more now and generate more sales

As a buyer (and I am) why would you ask me to dig through 30 feet of chit to find a gold nugget?

The crap buries the good stuff faster than penguin poop in a snow storm.

The appalling keywords being used just add to the pile of dung being layered over the top of the dung heap.

It's boring, terrible quality and totally pointless

You buy the dung before you get to the good stuff, you just take what you see first? That's why sales are down for good stuff? Keywords for dung are better and buyers buy that before they get to the good stuff?

How do you eventually find what you want? That's where we want to be.

By being as detailed as possible in keyword searches and using categories (where available) and perserverence though some agencies appear better positioned with their best match results which helps.

But SS best match tends to throw up the same old stuff from one or two particular image producers page after page after page.

And no buyer would just take what they see first unless it's a quick article write up and they just want a fire and forget image.

So you go someplace else? Which means SS should actually care about the mess they created.

I'm surprised they haven't figured out that they are losing buyers with the terrible search. And I'd agree, place like Alamy has diversity search, not all one person in a row, except when there is only one person that matches.

If we know this, and buyers know, why can't SS figure it out?

Good to hear that buyers don't just buy the first thing they see. Means the spammers don't get any advantage after all.

obj owl · « **Reply #147 on:** January 27, 2017, 14:37 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 27, 2017, 13:18

Quote from: Sammy the Cat on January 26, 2017, 05:12
Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 26, 2017, 00:11
Quote from: Sammy the Cat on January 25, 2017, 17:30
Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2017, 10:58
if the new images added are crap, why would that affect your sales if your images are great? in fact your image should stand out even more now and generate more sales

As a buyer (and I am) why would you ask me to dig through 30 feet of chit to find a gold nugget?

The crap buries the good stuff faster than penguin poop in a snow storm.

The appalling keywords being used just add to the pile of dung being layered over the top of the dung heap.

It's boring, terrible quality and totally pointless

You buy the dung before you get to the good stuff, you just take what you see first? That's why sales are down for good stuff? Keywords for dung are better and buyers buy that before they get to the good stuff?

How do you eventually find what you want? That's where we want to be.

By being as detailed as possible in keyword searches and using categories (where available) and perserverence though some agencies appear better positioned with their best match results which helps.

But SS best match tends to throw up the same old stuff from one or two particular image producers page after page after page.

And no buyer would just take what they see first unless it's a quick article write up and they just want a fire and forget image.

So you go someplace else? Which means SS should actually care about the mess they created.

I'm surprised they haven't figured out that they are losing buyers with the terrible search. And I'd agree, place like Alamy has diversity search, not all one person in a row, except when there is only one person that matches.

If we know this, and buyers know, why can't SS figure it out?

Good to hear that buyers don't just buy the first thing they see. Means the spammers don't get any advantage after all.

You have to remember that Shutterstock is now two different places. In one, for the increasing number of Enterprise Customers, they offer a personal service by the Enterprise Team who will even do the searches for them. The other is nothing more than vending machine.

derek · « **Reply #148 on:** January 27, 2017, 14:59 »

Quote from: Fairplay on January 26, 2017, 18:07

Quote from: derek on January 26, 2017, 15:05

"Yes and the same here from a daily 150-200 to a lousy 50-60. dont ask me if I intend to upload. This is almost a carbon copy of what Istock did some years back and it didnt end well."

About the same numbers here!
They are playing their greedy game and don't care losing old contributors! But they are losing buyers too! From 2017 our company stopped buying content from SS because of their new policy against contributors and their disasterous search engine!
I hope other SS buyers start buying from other more contributor friendly and fair agencies!

Yes whatever I can't see many old contributors uploading under these conditions since any uploads are bound to join the invisibles.

Josephine · « **Reply #149 on:** January 27, 2017, 15:27 »

this is the secret of success: What else can you say about Microstock Toilets?

https://www.shutterstock.com/search/similar/558729838

these 100 bulps are from one and the same contributor:

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/PictureStudio?search_source=base_gallery&page=2

every image has hundreds of variations....

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: down the toilet (Read 80191 times)

Bauman

Microstockphoto

droidworker

dpimborough

sgoodwin4813

angelawaye

YadaYadaYada

dpimborough

dpimborough

Minsc

kuriouskat

derek

Microstockphoto

Microstockphoto

Fairplay

angelawaye

derek

dpimborough

derek

increasingdifficulty

Fairplay

YadaYadaYada

obj owl

derek

Josephine

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors