pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: One Image Pricing Strategy for Photo Contributors to maximize revenues  (Read 4565 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

johngriffin

« on: August 25, 2009, 00:59 »
0
http://blog.cutcaster.com/2009/08/25/one-image-pricing-strategy-for-photo-contributors-to-maximize-revenues/

What strategy do you employ across the sites you work with in terms of pricing?  Here is one photo pricing strategy.


« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2009, 01:37 »
0
John,
With CC, I always check "CC algorithm" when submitting photos. Can you tell us how is that price determined?

Another question, recently I got a bid from a buyer for one of my pictures. Is the price quoted the full price that the buyer is going to pay, or the contributors part only?

Thank you,
Denis

Xalanx

« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2009, 01:52 »
0
That would probably have earned my attention if I had any sales. But except one sale since 2009-04-02, there is utter silence regarding this aspect, at CC.

« Reply #3 on: August 25, 2009, 02:14 »
0
I read the blog and in my opinion the contributor may not be thinking right and the method will not maximize revenue and could damage overall revenue from other sites.

By taking the aggregate price from other sites to find a median selling price is a good approach to start with, but why then go on to cut that price, this will devalue the contributors product and lose them potential good revenue?

Using a median price will mean that the buyer could find the image for a few cents different at other sites but only slight differences, but if the contributors reduces their prices because of higher commission and buyers find that they can get the contributors images much cheaper at CC, yes they may purchase them from CC giving the contributor short term gains, but this overall dilutes the contributors revenue pool, by transfering the contributors sales from the bigger sites to the smaller ones puts pressure on the larger sites which will lead to commission cuts later, so could in the longer term damage the contributors overall revenue and make it harder to trade.

I would suggest one of two options, first do the different site calculation and price at the median price, sales will be slower but the return greater when you have a payout, the second is to look at how other contributors are pricing on CC and calculate the 'CC median price' and use this for your images at CC which will fit with the websites pricing structure and what the buyers will come to expect and not undercut the contributors images on other sites or fellow artisits images.

I have not looked at CutCaster do they suggest prices based on image sales, they should have enough sales data now to help guide contributor to price for the website's 'customers price range' and be suggesting price points to maximise potential.

David (just some logical thoughts, maybe 'BS' but maybe not)  ;)    
« Last Edit: August 25, 2009, 02:26 by Adeptris »

« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2009, 02:55 »
0
Some of the other sites pay 20%-35% but they have lots of buyers and generate lots of income for their contributors.  Some of the smaller sites pay 50%-70%.  Why not mention them?  They are more comparable to cutcaster at the moment.

Recently featurepics have forced me to cut my price by 50% and reduced their commission from 70% to 50% but sales haven't improved and I now make less than 50% of my previous earnings.  I don't see how that is an improvement, I would rather receive a decent commission for the few sales I get there.  Cutting the price seems to have reduced sales, not increased them.  Perhaps buyers are not concerned at these low prices?  I use a few sites that sell at higher prices than the average micros and have more sales than cutcaster, it is also obvious that istock charge more than several sites but they are selling lots more.  The buyers obviously want much more than just a low price.


« Reply #6 on: August 26, 2009, 17:38 »
0
Not to play the devils advocate here (my photos on Cutcaster are priced with the algorithm), but I do take a little off the top for pricing my footage at Pond5 compared to the other sites I upload to and nearly every month Pond5 is my best earning video site.  Pond5 has the highest RPV (V=Video) than any other site, so there could be some logic behind the blog post depending on how much the person is lowering the price..but thats just my own observation from my videos.

Also, wanted to point out that Dreamstime recently lowered commissions even though they posted how great they are doing and how everything is increasing, so lowering commissions may not always have to do with a site having fewer sales.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2009, 17:42 by snaprender »

« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2009, 01:47 »
0
One more important thing?

The difference between midstock and microstock licenses...

Why lower prices and why to sell images for midstock license with a microstock prices?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2009, 07:01 by borg »


m@m

« Reply #9 on: August 31, 2009, 19:41 »
0
That would probably have earned my attention if I had any sales. But except one sale since 2009-04-02, there is utter silence regarding this aspect, at CC.

Same here but 2009-05...starting to feel like it's all lost with this venture...
« Last Edit: August 31, 2009, 21:22 by m@m »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
4380 Views
Last post January 12, 2008, 15:21
by vonkara
2 Replies
1826 Views
Last post June 10, 2014, 03:25
by Harvepino
2 Replies
1210 Views
Last post September 30, 2017, 02:06
by increasingdifficulty
0 Replies
825 Views
Last post August 09, 2018, 10:20
by Sean Locke Photography
5 Replies
893 Views
Last post April 05, 2019, 11:09
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results