Veer marketplace and %35 commission for contributors!

cidepix

« Reply #50 on: May 11, 2009, 19:33 »

#link

Quote from: lisafx on May 11, 2009, 12:12

But to go off in a rant like this thread started out because a site is offering about average what the other sites are offering seems rather odd.

What you guys don't seem to understand is an organized pressure from contributors COULD have resulted in a commissions increase. ( Call it "go off in a rant". No problem! ) But won't happen now, don't worry, after all the replies you have provided veer has a very good reason to keep the commissions low! Believe it or not, had you all "gone off in a rant" like I did on this thread you could have gotten a commission increase. (Probably)

Quote from: lisafx on May 11, 2009, 12:12

For all I know they could be a disgruntled former employee or work at a competing agency.

This was an attempt to get a better commission, and I only need to be a contributor to do this. I have nothing to do with veer. I have nothing to do with any website, apart from contributing. Again what is the point in revolting against IS or SS? They already have a gallery of millions of images and the probability they will give you an increase is much less than veer since veer is NEW ( you like it or not it is new, their microstock gallery is quite small, and still needs huge contribution from us)

If nobody contributes for %35 then you will automatically be given %50 or even more. To say otherwise is ridiculous. Why I don't say this about istock? Here is why: Already having millions of images makes them less vulnerable, Not only we would need to stop uploading, but also we would need to delete the entire istock collection to make similar impact. If you think it can be done for any established website, tell us how, so we can get a better commission.

Quote from: lisafx on May 11, 2009, 12:12

Having the right to complain means you also should expect there will be people who disagree with you.

They (you) sure have all the rights to disagree with me which I can always take. If you think they(you) just disagreed with me you are in an illusion lisafx

You just tried to teach me how I should have started the thread and you also gave me an example of the ideal thread. Further, just have a look at the reply below yours which I won't even take serious to provide an answer.

I disagree with you as well, but I don't go as far as teaching you how you should have responded to me.


	Ignore \| Logged

helix7

« Reply #51 on: May 11, 2009, 20:39 »

#link

Quote from: cidepix on May 10, 2009, 21:06

so what you are saying is, if we are already being screwed by the existing ones, we might as well get screwed by any new site and never try to change this vicious circle?...

Well it's your opinion that 35% means getting screwed. For most people in microstock, it's fair. Even istock exclusives don't get much more, and it's only those that are at the diamond level that get a higher rate than 35%. Yet people do quite well there, and few (if any) exclusives complain about the percentages.

Would I like to get paid more? Sure, who wouldn't. But your crusade against Veer is just totally misguided. I'm not sure why you think you can muscle them into a higher commission with some forum ranting, and they certainly aren't a new company as you say, so I also don't see how that would make any difference in this argument. And as mentioned countless times by myself and others, 35% isn't bad compared to many other microstock rates. So why you started your campaign for higher commissions with Veer is just bizarre.

Your "vicious circle" isn't going anywhere, and even if somehow you managed to convince Veer to raise rates you'd never succeed with any of the other companies, no matter how many people you managed to rally around your cause. Again, I'd love to make more money, as would everyone else in this business. Unfortunately, though, we're too far along in the establishment of standards and acceptable rates in microstock, and going back on those rates is just not going to happen. You might as well be arguing for 99% commissions, because this whole thing is about as silly as that would be.


	Logged

cidepix

« Reply #52 on: May 11, 2009, 21:13 »

#link

Quote from: helix7 on May 11, 2009, 20:39

Quote from: cidepix on May 10, 2009, 21:06

so what you are saying is, if we are already being screwed by the existing ones, we might as well get screwed by any new site and never try to change this vicious circle?...

Now, this is a good and well argumented response. I am not going to say I disagree because I don't. I agree with most things you just said!

Yes, veer is an established macro agency. I have veer in my favourites tab and they are the first place I will upload my images as It is obvious they are going to do well. But their microstock collection is still much smaller than IS or SS. That is why they are the subject of this thread.

I only have 2 questions to you and to all the guys if they would care to answer:

1- What would happen if nobody uploaded to veer? Would they sit down and contemplate what offerings need to be improved or would they just keep everything the same although no one uploads images?

2- What would happen if nobody uploaded to IS or SS? Would they sit down and contemplate as quick as veer would? Do they depend on new content as much? If the answer is yes! Then I am sorry, yes this thread should have been covering all agencies.

I like almost everything about veer and the reason I started this thread is, I would want them to be the perfect example of how an agency should be run.

I would be fine if they at least offered the possibility to make %50 if you were to go exclusive. That would be fair. If you are exclusive and put your trust in veer, you should make %50 and if you are a non-exclusive then probably %35 is fair.


« Last Edit: May 11, 2009, 21:15 by cidepix »	Ignore \| Logged

helix7

« Reply #53 on: May 11, 2009, 23:33 »

#link

Quote from: cidepix on May 11, 2009, 21:13

...I only have 2 questions to you and to all the guys if they would care to answer:

1- What would happen if nobody uploaded to veer? Would they sit down and contemplate what offerings need to be improved or would they just keep everything the same although no one uploads images?

2- What would happen if nobody uploaded to IS or SS? Would they sit down and contemplate as quick as veer would? Do they depend on new content as much? If the answer is yes! Then I am sorry, yes this thread should have been covering all agencies.

I like almost everything about veer and the reason I started this thread is, I would want them to be the perfect example of how an agency should be run...

If everyone stopped uploading to any agency as a way of making a statement about an issue or problem, then sure that agency would have to take notice and do something to get people uploading again. But that would never happen, the agencies know it, and so they will never be at all fearful of any kind of contributor uprising or strike. There will always be people willing to upload images, work for less money, work for no money, etc. Even if you could get everyone who is active in the forums or just reads these forums to boycott a certain agency, there are still tens of thousands of contributors out there who wouldn't even know that there was a movement taking place to affect change at an agency. There are just too many contributors, most of whom don't even bother to read these forums, and they'll always just keep uploading and making images regardless of what might be going on here.

And in the case of Veer, they never needed to ask people to upload images to get started. They had SnapVillage, and just ported all the images over from there. A boycott wouldn't have prevented them from getting started and having a wealth of images ready to sell when they opened the doors.

I get where you're coming from with the idea of a unified defiance in an effort to get agencies to change. I think it's just too idealistic in a business like this where there are so many contributors. This isn't a business that is dependent on 100 or even 1,000 individual workers to survive. Microstock rolls on even of 1,000 people stop uploading, because there will always be another 1,000 new people ready ad willing to work for less.


	Logged

null

« Reply #54 on: May 12, 2009, 01:00 »

#link

Quote from: whatalife on May 10, 2009, 13:52

Veer has been an innovator with BUYERs for YEARS.

A few very knowledgeable people, like yourself but also RT, stated that before. Many microstockers never heard of Veer, probably because they operated in another arena. Success in one area doesn't necessary mean success in another one. Veer certainly seems to have the market potential. So let's just wait and see.

The site isn't ready yet, it's rumorware for now. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as I said long ago, and as long as Veer Marketplace/Microstock isn't live there is no sense in discussing how and if they will transplant their indisputable success elsewhere into the Microstock arena. We don't even know yet what their content and acceptance policy will be.

I'm a fan of the Austrian philosopher Wittgenstein's adagio : Worüber man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen. (Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent).


	Ignore \| Logged

bittersweet

« Reply #55 on: May 12, 2009, 01:24 »

#link

Quote from: FlemishDreams on May 12, 2009, 01:00

Quote from: whatalife on May 10, 2009, 13:52

Veer has been an innovator with BUYERs for YEARS.

A few very knowledgeable people, like yourself but also RT, stated that before. Many microstockers never heard of Veer, probably because they operated in another arena. ...

and as long as Veer Marketplace/Microstock isn't live there is no sense in discussing how and if they will transplant their indisputable success elsewhere into the Microstock arena. We don't even know yet what their content and acceptance policy will be.

Just a guess, but they probably never heard of Veer because they are not designers. Since designers are actually the ones making the purchases, I'd think they'd be the more important factor in the equation and getting them the hardest obstacle to overcome.The ready pool of designer/buyers already on the site (remember, this site is not separate, it is completely integrated into the veer.com site) have it right in front of them in every search.

I'm not sure why some people keep saying it's not live, etc... the *contributor* site is not live, but the MP is live and I've been buying images there for a while now.

Anyway, like you say, nobody really knows, and the people getting the sales there right now aren't talking. Maybe they are the new "designer's dirty little secret" Wink


	Logged

helix7

« Reply #56 on: May 12, 2009, 07:44 »

#link

Quote from: whatalife on May 12, 2009, 01:24

Agreed. Veer is well-known and respected among designers, and for many, it's the macro site of choice (myself included). When this new microstock offering was announced, it was a big hit among many designers for two major reasons, one of which being that Veer is an established, respected company. The other being that this would simplify things a great deal for designers in their billing/invoicing. If you can purchase macro and micro from the same company seamlessly, that solves a lot of paperwork headaches for designers. As compared to Getty, where although you do have the microstock arm of the company (istock), they aren't tied together, and billing and tracking purchases to individual jobs/projects at istock is very clunky. Veer could potentially simplify that with the Marketplace.

Veer also has one of the most aggressive direct-mail marketing campaigns targeting designers and design studios. It's also one of the most creative, I think.

Veer isn't a company that will need to ramp up their microstock offering. They will hit the ground running with the Marketplace, and I think they will have a lot more momentum than Corbis had with SV.


	Logged

bittersweet

« Reply #57 on: May 12, 2009, 10:33 »

#link

I just went to Veer to lightbox some images for a project. An independent company is conducting a customer survey. Questions were about the overall interface, quality, etc, with a few sprinkled in about microstock (though they never used that term exactly). I tried to copy and paste the contents but it made Word blow up. Grin


	Logged

lisafx

Premium Member

« Reply #58 on: May 12, 2009, 13:24 »

#link

Quote from: cidepix on May 11, 2009, 19:33

I disagree with you as well, but I don't go as far as teaching you how you should have responded to me.

You are certainly a great source of amusement, Cidepix. Roll Eyes

Nobody's trying to teach you anything. Would be a complete waste of time.


« Last Edit: May 12, 2009, 13:35 by lisafx »	Ignore \| Logged

litifeta

« Reply #59 on: May 12, 2009, 17:28 »

#link

some stats


	Ignore \| Logged

leaf

Premium Member

« Reply #60 on: May 13, 2009, 01:30 »

#link

Quote from: litifeta on May 12, 2009, 17:28

some stats

Just wait till they get 20,000 microstockers checking their accounts every hour


	Ignore \| Logged

Milinz

« Reply #61 on: May 13, 2009, 16:33 »

#link

Lol!

I think for getty there is Gettyimages.com - not getty.com... So, shown stats are wrong ;-)

And... Main Veer marketplace competitor will be istockphoto.com who has statistics way higher than those shown... But, as circumstances stands I will take my chances with veer (if my images are good enough for them) despite all.