Author Topic: dissolve retaliates against contributor and penalizes clips in search rankings (Read 22390 times)

unnonimus · « **Reply #25 on:** May 27, 2016, 11:56 »

"No, I would suggest you had your account closed because you are calling out individual people by name and unbelievably saying they are bad employees on a public forum because they don't agree with you. "

It is clear that this is not a matter of people agreeing or disagreeing, but instead a matter of punishing, penalizing, and retaliating against me because they don't like the fact that I complained, and almost all of their behavior occurred over the course of a year, I am only writing in the forum at the end of the relationship in the final days. My forum posting has nothing to do with their poor behavior over the course of the year.

They chose to not resolve this matter, and I have the right to speak about it to whomever I want to, whenever I want to.

unnonimus · « **Reply #26 on:** May 27, 2016, 12:00 »

"It will definitely benefit SEO to have longer (accurate) descriptions"

no it doesn't. I have been doing web development since 1994. I have done SEO since webcrawler and the first search engines. there is no such thing that all companies can get free traffic from SEO on search engines from potential buyers the majority of organic search engine traffic goes to the big players like amazon, and almost nothing goes to smaller companies like dissolve.

over 2 decades of web design, I have discovered that 95% to 99% of my traffic was search engines crawling my site, and sales for search engines never accounted for more than 10% of my business. SEO is a pipe dream for naïve web developers and cannot sustain any business.

only 1 web site can be at the top of search results for any given search, and with 15 stock footage companies, and your videos on all 15 sites with the same metadata, dissolve will not be at that top spot, and their SEO attempt will fail miserably.

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #27 on:** May 27, 2016, 13:07 »

Search engines work absolutely NOTHING like they used to even 10 years ago. And it's just as much about the internal search engines, or even more so. Many sites weigh descriptions higher than, or just as high, as keywords, so if a certain word isn't there, you will rank at the bottom.

Yes, having identical descriptions is not ideal for Google, but I'm always surprised when I see what people who find my clips search for, so those extra sentences can certainly be useful if they are relevant.

If you are an SEO mastermind surely there is 100 times more money in that field so why even worry about not being able to sell footage at a small, "bad" site?

cathyslife · « **Reply #28 on:** May 27, 2016, 15:24 »

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on May 27, 2016, 13:07

snip
If you are an SEO mastermind surely there is 100 times more money in that field so why even worry about not being able to sell footage at a small, "bad" site?

Agree wholeheartedly.

douglas · « **Reply #29 on:** May 27, 2016, 15:34 »

I also spend some of my consulting time working on SEO and know that much of what is written on this site on the subject is nonsense and, as increasingdifficulty rightly points out, internal search on a stock site has little to do with Google search (or, at least, I think, that was the point).

However, the ‘if you’re so smart do SEO instead’ argument is unfair and so wide of the mark. I make several hundred times a day more on web consultancy than I do on a bad day for photography but I do photography because I love it and what comes out of Photoshop at the end of the process is mine, all mine, not a compromise with many stakeholders. Unnonimus is not going to receive a call-up to the diplomatic corps of his or her country but I can empathise with the pain of having personal expression rejected for reasons other than quality.

loop · « **Reply #30 on:** May 27, 2016, 17:42 »

Quote from: Minsc on May 24, 2016, 14:14

I would try to look at things from a different perspective. Only because I've seen both sides, as a contributors as someone who worked for a company that hosted data.

You have 20,000 clips. That's terabytes upon terabytes of data. The way they look at it is that the amount of money it cost to host all your video files are not justified by your monthly earnings, or their cut of those earnings. In some cases, it's better to not have someone as a contributor because they feel like they're losing money on the account.

I know it's tough, but that's how things work. They recommended the title changes because they WANT your files to sell better so they can justify your account. If your files don't sell, they could be losing money on your account due to the cost of storage and bandwidth. It's not a good situation for anyone.

If they "lose money" for hosting "too many" good quality files... it's they who are underperforming. Not surprising, actually I don't know any buyer that uses (or even know) this site.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #31 on:** May 27, 2016, 19:15 »

I'm curious what kind of titles or descriptions unnonimus has written for his files. Can you show us an example of your metadata, so we can judge it ourselves?

ccbcc · « **Reply #32 on:** June 03, 2016, 09:22 »

Gotta say, I really like the people working at Dissolve. They make time to reply to my questions, they listen to my criticism on issues such as VB price levelling. And even though they wouldn't make an exception for me, they did listen and explained their views in a friendly way.
Fine by me, it's their business, and they can run it the way they want it.

For me sales are very good, behind SS but fighting for 2nd place with P5. YMMV.