I made $14 in January with 167 files.

Quote from: ChasingMoments on February 03, 2008, 12:16

Quote from: thijsone on January 28, 2008, 12:25

I'm really new at crestock, but i am a bit worried.. no dl's at all. and very very few views...

well, given that its prices are higher than almost elsewhere, I'd stick around for a while, upload in your spare time when you don't have anything to upload anywhere else, wait and see what happens, give it some time to cycle through a season or two... and then either get out or stay

I myself just joined not too long ago, and i'll give it a few months. After which it'll be either all or nothing. Cuz uploading to so many sites is just not worth the time and effort...

ChasingMoments

I like the way your thinking. Perhaps I'll try uploading the 140 or so images that have been approved elsewhere that I haven't at CS since I stopped uploading after only 4 approvals months ago. If they are charging higher prices, perhaps some of that will ultimately be passed on with comission raises in the future after their marketing efforts start to payoff.

Plus ... I've been fortunate enough to travel to Sweden once

Jag Heter Mark

Well, here's the thing... when I am saying that they charge more than other sites - I'm not too excited about. Why? Because buyers will tend to gravitate from more expensive sites to sites where they can get the same image, even at a higher resolution, for cheaper - and, price-wise, in terms of what buyers are getting for their $$ crestock is one of the least competitive ones. Buyers leaving --> fewer sales.  Photogs are thinking in a one-sided way - they say - YAY, sites that charge more are great - but! this is a free market, and in a free market, demand is also important.... and the demand is for cheaper, higher resolution images. Thus, who's going to win? The sites that are charging less for the same images...

Unless you are a mature, established site, with established clientele, stable, solid reputation, loyal contributors and so on and so forth. IS is one of them - solid, steady, predictable approach; consistent strategy, no wobbling left & right & trying a bunch o'things out. SS is another one - also solid, steady, predictable, consistent strategy. DT is probably in the same boat. Newcomers, younger, less established sites like crestock need to be competitive  - how? In a saturated market where they have no chance of creating a unique gallery and where all the photogs recycle the same portfolios - how do you survive and thrive? By charging less - then you can compete for your usual, per-credit buyer.

I really wish I could see some stats on the percentage of different sites' incomes that come from "per credit" buyers and that come from subscriptions.... oh well, on to watching the GAME...!!!

This is all extremely interesting to me! I've heard a lot of different theories about stock buyer behavior

I guess we can't assume that ALL buyers are this or that... Most likely, some buyers are purely "heavy weight" buyers that need hundreds of images at a time and use only subscription; others are "per credit" buyers that shop around for the exactly right image they are looking for; and yet others are cost-conscious buyers that have done their research (all it takes is look around all the sites once) and who KNOW which site offers best deals and go to that site, and if that site doesn't offer what they need, they move on to the next most cost-effective site. And of course there are some buyers in between. For any sort of meaningful discussion about anything, including the future of stock industry in general, we need to know which portion of all the buyers each buyer type makes up. If most buyers are "sub" buyers - huh! Then per-credit $ is least important to both buyers and sellers, unless photogs unite and boycott sub-sites. HUGE collective action problem; will never happen. If the market is split more evenly, then "each" type of buyer matters, and stock industry becomes "politics" & sites will try to innovate to draw buyers to their side. Say, canstock & 123 don't sell individual credits, they are probably trying to fill the niche bw expensive subs & per-credit sales...

...i can probably write a whole academic article on market direction & buyer behavior & get it published ) data availability might be a problem though, but if there's a stock site willing to hire me for data analysis )) i'm available...

This is all extremely interesting to me! I've heard a lot of different theories about stock buyer behavior

I guess we can't assume that ALL buyers are this or that... Most likely, some buyers are purely "heavy weight" buyers that need hundreds of images at a time and use only subscription; others are "per credit" buyers that shop around for the exactly right image they are looking for; and yet others are cost-conscious buyers that have done their research (all it takes is look around all the sites once) and who KNOW which site offers best deals and go to that site, and if that site doesn't offer what they need, they move on to the next most cost-effective site. And of course there are some buyers in between. For any sort of meaningful discussion about anything, including the future of stock industry in general, we need to know which portion of all the buyers each buyer type makes up. If most buyers are "sub" buyers - huh! Then per-credit $ is least important to both buyers and sellers, unless photogs unite and boycott sub-sites. HUGE collective action problem; will never happen. If the market is split more evenly, then "each" type of buyer matters, and stock industry becomes "politics" & sites will try to innovate to draw buyers to their side. Say, canstock & 123 don't sell individual credits, they are probably trying to fill the niche bw expensive subs & per-credit sales...

...i can probably write a whole academic article on market direction & buyer behavior & get it published ) data availability might be a problem though, but if there's a stock site willing to hire me for data analysis )) i'm available...

LOL ... and I could assist as I do Market & Competitive Analysis by profession ...

Mrk

Quote from: mwp1969 on February 04, 2008, 17:10

Quote from: ChasingMoments on February 03, 2008, 20:57

This is all extremely interesting to me! I've heard a lot of different theories about stock buyer behavior

I guess we can't assume that ALL buyers are this or that... Most likely, some buyers are purely "heavy weight" buyers that need hundreds of images at a time and use only subscription; others are "per credit" buyers that shop around for the exactly right image they are looking for; and yet others are cost-conscious buyers that have done their research (all it takes is look around all the sites once) and who KNOW which site offers best deals and go to that site, and if that site doesn't offer what they need, they move on to the next most cost-effective site. And of course there are some buyers in between. For any sort of meaningful discussion about anything, including the future of stock industry in general, we need to know which portion of all the buyers each buyer type makes up. If most buyers are "sub" buyers - huh! Then per-credit $ is least important to both buyers and sellers, unless photogs unite and boycott sub-sites. HUGE collective action problem; will never happen. If the market is split more evenly, then "each" type of buyer matters, and stock industry becomes "politics" & sites will try to innovate to draw buyers to their side. Say, canstock & 123 don't sell individual credits, they are probably trying to fill the niche bw expensive subs & per-credit sales...

...i can probably write a whole academic article on market direction & buyer behavior & get it published ) data availability might be a problem though, but if there's a stock site willing to hire me for data analysis )) i'm available...

LOL ... and I could assist as I do Market & Competitive Analysis by profession ...

LOL ! So, what do you think? Do I have a point? And being in "market and competitive analysis" - what are you doing here? Shouldn't you know all the secrets & where all the agencies are heading and so and and so forth? How'bout you give us your take on things? )

ChassingMoments

You make me laugh   While I cannot go into the details of my day job, I have very much become interested in the world of stock photography. As I am able to reach certain insights and conclusions over time form my observations and homework, I promise to share them on the various forums. While I am still very much a "noobie" when it comes to stock photography ... I do know how to analyze markets, competition, and competiting products very well

I do believe you have a very valid point   There are two (and perhaps 3) distinct types of end account users of our images.

#1 The first type of buyer, like you said there are the "heavy weight" buyers who will most likely have multiple subscription accounts from those companies that offer subscription and / or have major corporate accounts with Macro Sites. Either way they have big bucks to spend on subscriptions, or high $$$ photographs or licensing

#2 The casual user who sees an image that he or she likes but lacks the knowledge to know that the same image is available on another sight for $1 as opposed to the $15 that he or she is currently contemplating paying

#3 The hybrid user is savvy enough to do some moderate price comparisons and is likely to be registered at multiple credit type of accounts and might shop around for the best deal as they know enough to know they see similar if not the same image across multiple sites.

As microstock players well know ... its a numbers game. All of your images that sell 1 or 2x add up across multiple accounts and sites. Combine them with your best sellers across multiple sites and you can create a nice little revenue stream for yourself given enough time, effort, and patience.

All for now ...

Mrk

I've now had 15 sales and 14 of them were 25c sub sales.