Author Topic: StockXpert Images on Photos.com (Read 110237 times)

tan510jomast · « **Reply #50 on:** July 26, 2008, 21:12 »

Hi Steve,
as jsnover said, we do appreciate your visit here as always.
As a recent contributor in micro I have really nothing to lose,
except to bail out when it seems bad.
But for many here, I am sure it's not that simple , esp those who have done well with being able to opt out.
Now, that choice is not so straight forward. And time is not on our side either. August is only next week.

Phil · « **Reply #51 on:** July 26, 2008, 22:05 »

certainly blurs the difference between micro and macro. el licence on subs / macro price on ppd all on micro images.

Phil

cphoto · « **Reply #52 on:** July 27, 2008, 00:09 »

An EL for a sub price that would be totally unacceptable, but I'm sure that StockXpert/Photos.com teams will make some changes to the existing licensing agreements before going live.

StockXpert has always been good at listening to us.

grp_photo · « **Reply #53 on:** July 27, 2008, 02:48 »

Quote from: lisafx on July 25, 2008, 18:14

Istock exclusivity might be the one good option remaining for the folks who don't want to sell via the low paying subscriptions on the other sites.

There is another solution Fotolia-Exclusivity i thought of this before but discharged it in respect to StockXpert. But now as things changed so radically at StockXpert its a good option i'm gold at Fotolia so i can charge 5credits for the smallest resolution and can option out from subs i think i will go this route.

Most of my efforts anyway goes to macro-agencies it's much harder but i can't accept this downward-spiral the micros are going.

As it goes to StockXpert i will delete my exclusive stuff i had with them and also the better pictures and no more photo-uploads only vectors.
The deal for Vectors at photos.com is great but the deal for photos is the worst i can think about it.

Phil · « **Reply #54 on:** July 27, 2008, 05:56 »

Quote from: cphoto on July 27, 2008, 00:09

An EL for a sub price that would be totally unacceptable, but I'm sure that StockXpert/Photos.com teams will make some changes to the existing licensing agreements before going live.

StockXpert has always been good at listening to us.

that they have

sharpshot · « **Reply #55 on:** July 27, 2008, 06:33 »

And they have just 5 days to listen to us and make changes this time. I wish they gave us more time. It wouldn't be nice to come back from a 2 week holiday to see people buying EL's at subs prices. We need at least 30 days to look at big changes like this.

tan510jomast · « **Reply #56 on:** July 27, 2008, 06:57 »

Quote from: clearviewstock on July 27, 2008, 05:56

Quote from: cphoto on July 27, 2008, 00:09
An EL for a sub price that would be totally unacceptable, but I'm sure that StockXpert/Photos.com teams will make some changes to the existing licensing agreements before going live.

StockXpert has always been good at listening to us.

that they have

i have more or less deleted my L, S and XS from my miniscule portfolio,
or at least , anything that i don't want to be just subs .
images that i have with other sites that could earn more.

as clearviewstock say, StockXpert has always been good at listening.
and this far, even for me as a newcomer to micro, that they have.

as for Fotolia ,lisafx, mine was dead in the water from the word go.
and unlike yourself ,being new, i didn't have enough portfolio size nor time to gather anything to get even "rust"

, never mind "gold" at Fotolia.
but it's good to know that for some like yourself, there is an option still.

vonkara · « **Reply #57 on:** July 27, 2008, 07:38 »

At the same time I didn't have any EL's in the last year at StockXpert. Most of my pictures are available in XL and XXL. Unless all the downloads are in L and under, it can be a good thing... All this new buyers can't take my pics in XL and XXL size for 0.30$ like the ones from StockXpert.

Karimala · « **Reply #58 on:** July 27, 2008, 08:07 »

I'm a little confused.

Will Photos.com be in addition to StockXpert with different pricing schemes, or are the two sites merging into one mega site?

vonkara · « **Reply #59 on:** July 27, 2008, 08:58 »

Quote from: Karimala on July 27, 2008, 08:07

I'm a little confused.

Will Photos.com be in addition to StockXpert with different pricing schemes, or are the two sites merging into one mega site?

Photo.com buyers will be able to purchase on StockXpert at different pricing schemes

grp_photo · « **Reply #60 on:** July 27, 2008, 10:40 »

Quote from: tan510jomast on July 27, 2008, 06:57

i have more or less deleted my L, S and XS from my miniscule portfolio,

We will download L-sizes from your XL-Images as sub without any restrictions (EL-Usage).

rene · « **Reply #61 on:** July 27, 2008, 11:13 »

Quote from: tan510jomast on July 27, 2008, 06:57

i have more or less deleted my L, S and XS from my miniscule portfolio,
or at least , anything that i don't want to be just subs .
images that i have with other sites that could earn more.

I don't understand your logic. I'm tempted by the opposite solution :
delete all my portfolio, then downsize all images to minimum size (800x600)
then resubmit.
So small images cannot (I hope) be used for prints, t-shirts...
I can live with $0.30 subscriptions for 800x600 files.

sharpshot · « **Reply #62 on:** July 27, 2008, 11:14 »

Quote from: Karimala on July 27, 2008, 08:07

I'm a little confused.

Will Photos.com be in addition to StockXpert with different pricing schemes, or are the two sites merging into one mega site?

Photos.com is a separate site, part of Jupiter. It looks like photos.com subscription buyers will be able to purchase our images up to 'L' size and use them like they have an extended license and all we will get is 30 cents a download. We wont be able to opt out.

Read all the posts here and see what you think.

http://www.stockxpert.com/forum.phtml?f=showtopic&n=15291

DanP68 · « **Reply #63 on:** July 27, 2008, 11:45 »

Very troubling indeed. I'd hate to say it, but unless Steve can give us better news soon, I may have to pull out of StockXpert too. I'm not selling EL's for 30 cents for anyone. I tend to think Cphoto is right and this will be resolved positively, but I think StockXpert knows how we feel. It's in their court.

jsnover · « **Reply #64 on:** July 27, 2008, 13:06 »

Quote from: cphoto on July 27, 2008, 00:09

An EL for a sub price that would be totally unacceptable, but I'm sure that StockXpert/Photos.com teams will make some changes to the existing licensing agreements before going live.

StockXpert has always been good at listening to us.

In the past that's certainly been the case - the most recent example being an increase in the subscription commission from the proposed 25 cents and including an opt out.

This latest move wasn't presented the way the earlier subscription proposal was - with a "here's what we're thinking, what do you think?". This is presented as a done deal, I assume because it's coming from Jupiter, not from StockXpert.

When I consider that my EL income from SS alone this month is just about the same as my total earnings from StockXpert it makes it much easier (though painful) to say I'll just delete my StockXpert portfolio if they go through with this as planned. It's less about the StockXpert income than it is about protecting the EL income from other sites - SS, IS and FT. If Jupiter is trying to stem erosion of their business by trying to steal business from SS by undercutting them on price, I don't want to be part of that. I've made a ton more from SS and can't see how helping Jupiter take them down would help me in any way.

I expect those who have no regular monthly income from stock yet won't care, but for those of us who have already built up a portfolio and regular sales across multiple sites, I think we need to look at the bigger picture.

I obviously can only speculate, but I don't see this as opening up a new pool of buyers for us as much as Jupiter trying to avoid loss of subscribers to other micro sites who have a great (and much larger) pool of fresh images. Their prices undercut subscription prices at all the other micros we sell on. Right now they're offering 30 cents a download commission, but (a) that can change at any time and (b) that's below the price that we get anywhere else (if you look at DT's new commission and the higher prices FT and SS offer to those who've sold more).

I suspect Jupiter thinks we can just be herded into this - "just give this a try and see". No thanks guys.

grp_photo · « **Reply #65 on:** July 27, 2008, 13:45 »

I agree!
It's the same with Fotolias Introduction with subs. It's not about new customers (or how the say different customers with different needs) it's all about stealing away existing customers from other sites by undercutting their pricelevel. The agency might win a bigger share of the overall market but the contributors loose overall income in the end.
I was a big fan of StockXpert but i'm not going to support this!

grp_photo · « **Reply #66 on:** July 27, 2008, 13:58 »

Another note i can remember the days where photos.com had a higher trafficrank than istock (must be 2004 or 2005). Unfortunately Alexa now only shows the graph of a maximum of one year. Nevertheless you can clearly see the downward trend of photos.com. Jupiter just tries to rescue the rest of an outdated site and businessmodel on the expense of the microstock-contributors.

astrocady · « **Reply #67 on:** July 27, 2008, 17:13 »

Well, I had just started uploading on StockXpert -- did a test of fpt a couple of days ago and uploaded 7 images. I was going to upload my entire, record-setting portfolio of 90 images this evening, but after reading all this, I think I'll wait.

louoates · « **Reply #68 on:** July 27, 2008, 17:56 »

CAUTION, PESSIMISM AHEAD:

We ain't seen nothing yet.

I still believe that we are moving into a largely commodity business and the sites are just reacting to the price competition. I see rates going even lower what with ever-morphing sub programs. Look for more free introductory offers that will further reduce commissions.

If your IS portfolio hasn't yet been affected by subs hang onto your hats. IS is not about to be undercut. With the seemingly unending flood of images, contributors, and new sites coming on-line economics will dictate lower prices.

If new images were oil, gasoline would be down to a buck a gallon in no time.

sharpshot · « **Reply #69 on:** July 27, 2008, 18:26 »

It isn't all bad. Pay per download prices are going up, not down. The only really successful subscription microstock site has been putting prices up, not down. The subscription site that pays me the lowest commission is also my lowest earner and they no longer get my new uploads.

DT are raising their subscription prices and we have been able to persuade FT to improve their commissions.

The sites that charge more are doing better than those that have tried to undercut the market. istock have higher prices than most but they are still the No.1 site. Albumo undercut the market and that was a complete failure.

cdwheatley · « **Reply #70 on:** July 27, 2008, 20:26 »

I hope the EL for 30 cents is something they will change? Nobody benefits if everyone pulls their port. It would be interesting to see a show of hands for how many contributers favor this move. Not many I suppose. Subs are bad enough.

madelaide · « **Reply #71 on:** July 27, 2008, 21:12 »

Quote from: jsnover on July 27, 2008, 13:06

When I consider that my EL income from SS alone this month is just about the same as my total earnings from StockXpert it makes it much easier (though painful) to say I'll just delete my StockXpert portfolio if they go through with this as planned. It's less about the StockXpert income than it is about protecting the EL income from other sites - SS, IS and FT.

I agree with your concern. Not that I sell many ELs, but I have had some (none in StockXpert), and I would be really annoyed to know that someone had this right for so little. Again, for me it's less about how little I get but about how cheap images cost in subs model, even more in this liberal license terms. Microstock prices are already too cheap to make them even cheaper.

I am already disappointed by the change of route in StockXpert itself - now forcing me to accept subs. I've always been grateful to StockXpert to let contributors decide if they want their work sold at subs or not. Although contrary to my preference, I waited a few months before opting out, but then subs became so prevailing. With the price model at Photos.com, it seems it can only get worse.

Regards,
Adelaide

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #72 on:** July 27, 2008, 22:26 »

Quote from: louoates on July 27, 2008, 17:56

CAUTION, PESSIMISM AHEAD:
If your IS portfolio hasn't yet been affected by subs hang onto your hats. IS is not about to be undercut. With the seemingly unending flood of images, contributors, and new sites coming on-line economics will dictate lower prices.

Nah, we already did "lower prices".

Pixart · « **Reply #73 on:** July 27, 2008, 23:02 »

I read the StockXpert thread and this one and it seems that contributors are threatening to leave StockXpert over this. I wonder how many would follow through. I'll start a poll in another thread.

rene · « **Reply #74 on:** July 28, 2008, 02:02 »

Quote from: Pixart on July 27, 2008, 23:02

I read the StockXpert thread and this one and it seems that contributors are threatening to leave StockXpert over this.

Yep, and not the worst.
I remember when Lumax3D (gold man) removed his portfolio from StockXpert I was a big mess. Same designers were in trouble and have to buy his images at another site.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: StockXpert Images on Photos.com (Read 110237 times)

tan510jomast

Phil

cphoto

grp_photo

Phil

sharpshot

tan510jomast

vonkara

Karimala

vonkara

grp_photo

rene

sharpshot

DanP68

jsnover

grp_photo

grp_photo

astrocady

louoates

sharpshot

cdwheatley

madelaide

Sean Locke Photography

Pixart

rene

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors