MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 40,000...  (Read 14428 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: April 10, 2007, 16:17 »
0
I am surprised by the behavior exhibited by a few members in this and another thread.


Me too. Especially the bagging anyone gets when they question the motives of DT.

Sharply_done and others need to recognise the difference between "their opinion" and "facts".

you need to recognise you have a right to express your opinion, but I couldn't care less what you think.

The facts, however, are undeniable.


« Reply #51 on: April 10, 2007, 16:25 »
0
This is not my house. I'm only a guest the way I see it. When I'm in this house,
I'll either follow the rules or be asked to leave.  (Came close a few times). You only think
you have the right to express your opinion, it's only at the express permission of
the owner of this forum, and his moderators if in fact you do.

....I know, cause I run a micro stock forum too.

« Reply #52 on: April 10, 2007, 16:52 »
0
i think it would be safe to say that people have the right to express their opinion (almost no matter what it is) as long as it is in a non-abusive non insulting way.

This thread however is getting border line and if it takes a dive for the worse will be locked... I keep hoping for the better though.

« Reply #53 on: April 10, 2007, 18:22 »
0
Have you seen his average monthly uploads?  That equates to 28.5 images per day.

According to the file numbers of iofoto's portfolio (2037002-20463xx) all pictures in their portfolio where uploaded between ~March 1 and ~March 5-10 ... That's a total of at least 3.500 uploads in ~5-10 days. Not sure about your math, but for me that equals to at least ~350 uploads/day. Wow. So much for the equal limits for everyone. :)

Edit 11-04-2007: Ooops, I didn't know that you can actually upload an unlimited number of files per day via FTP and the limits kick in only when finishing these uploads. Sorry for my misunderstanding, please accept my excuses!
« Last Edit: April 11, 2007, 05:10 by lathspell »

« Reply #54 on: April 10, 2007, 20:36 »
0
Yes and given the fact that they hold $ millions and millions on something like 25000 contributors which they will never pay out, since these images will never reach the $100, it is easy to see who is funding this site. And it ain't the major contributors.

Just got off the phone with CNN Money. They are very interested.

« Reply #55 on: April 10, 2007, 20:52 »
0
Hmm. Now it's starting to get disturbing how some are getting special treatment.  ??? ???
I hope you work something out with CNN Money litifeta. This should not go unnoticed.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2007, 20:54 by Kngkyle »

« Reply #56 on: April 11, 2007, 00:53 »
0
Like was mentioned before, If I upload 500 images today via ftp they will get consecutive numbers.  If i push them through to review at 50 images / day it will take me 10 days and they will still have the consecutive numbers.

I don't really think dreamstime is making 'millions' or even thousands on contributors who are not reaching payout.  Of those 25000 contributors I am sure there are many thousand - perhaps half, which don't have a simgle image.  Another few thousands who have 10 images on the site but no sales.  If they have 10,000 contributors who are 'never' going to reach a payout that means those contributors probably don't have much in their account - less than $10 which means $10,000.  Not much $$ in the real scheme of things.  If those contributors DID have a significant amount of $$ in their account - say like $50 or $75 then they would obviously make enough to actually GET  a payout.  It seems quite a few people are hung up about the millions of $$ that microstock companies are hoarding because people haven't reached a payout.  I don't really think it is significant.  In contrast - take a look at the macro agencies who require several hundred to get a payout.

« Reply #57 on: April 11, 2007, 01:38 »
0
If you have 25000 contributors and they all have $50 (average of 0 and 100) then that is 1,250,000.  Interest a 5%pa is about $50,000.  Even if everyone has $99, that is only $100k so it is not millions per year.

« Reply #58 on: April 11, 2007, 03:20 »
0
Yes they are doing a great job.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2007, 03:25 by litifeta »

« Reply #59 on: April 11, 2007, 03:44 »
0
Hello everyone,

I received several notifications about this thread from members who feel this is a blatant attack.

As ever before we monitor independent forums activity and we try to add our input. Being independent can bring an extra amount of criticism that can help us to correct problems or flaws. Managing a huge site means there are compromises to be made. This applies to funds, budgets, features, marketing, advertising, manpower, support etc. Everything must be in a perfect balance in order to allow the business to be viable and support itself. Without the business part there will be no community at all. We are independent, we don't have any venture capital and we're proud to say that we are free to make the best decisions for our community. It is also for ourselves? Of course it is, but if you follow our strategy throughout the last 3 years you will see that the primary target were the customers: photographers and buyers. If they earn, the agency also earns.

Now, positive criticism means just that, not rude posts or flames. If this forum is moderated or unmoderated is not really relevant. You may launch accusations without any proof, it's your decision, but one simply cannot use that kind of language.

To reply to such rude statements would be a waste of time, time that would be otherwise focused on honest users. It will mean that we encourage such statements. So, until some proper apologies are posted, please consider my post as a clarification to honest users who may be misleaded by these arguments and not a reply to these flames.

I'll try to clarify all questions posted. If I miss any, please let me know.

1. 40,000 files in pending line - it happens from time to time that our predictions are exceeded and people submit much more images. We expected this when we lowered the daily maximum amount at 40 files per day. It seems this was not enough. Our editors team is expanded constantly as we need to keep the pace. We cannot add editors faster because they need to pass the training stage and they need time to start reviewing at full capacity or else serious problems can appear in the review process. 
Add to this the fact that most editors had a few days off because of Easter vacation. This is their right, I am sure everyone will agree. It happened before, after the Christmas break the pending was close to 45K and in less than a month it decreased significantly.

2. Favoring users and transparency. We always try to be as transparent as possible. This is not an obligation, it is our decision.
We did help Ron Chapple and assist his team in uploading the files. We explained how the system works, helped them with a few FTP details and that's about all. We did similar things for amateur photographers in the past, there is no secret. Not a single day passes without receiving emails from users who are completely newbies and need to learn everything from scratch.

The fact that over 100 of his images were approved yesterday doesn't mean they follow a different path. The max limit is applied when you finish submitting a file not when the editors review it. If no images were reviewed in the last couple of days, then the number of images waiting on the pending line multiplies with that number of days. That's if the contributor submitted images daily of course.

From what I remember they submitted images before the max amount limit was decreased. If not and the average is higher, it could be a glitch somewhere, but I have checked and they can only submit the max. amount at this time, just as any other users.

Ron has an approval ratio which is lower than 100%. I will see if they have no issues with us disclosing the exact number. Every photographer receives his share of refusals, including editors. There is not a single user on the site with a significant number of images online and with 100% approval ratio.

3. an image uploaded a while ago in the unfinished section will reach a different spot in the pending line than the one submitted today. this is no secret and has been explained on our forums. Thanks Ed for posting this sooner, I presume is clarified now.

Now, whether we make things easier for a photographer or not, is simply our decision. If the community receives certain benefits, we can agree to help a certain user. If that happens we'll NOT hide this, what would be the reason for that? Uploading on our site is a privilege not a right, no offense. Do any of you have an issue with any feature on the site or have specific questions? Drop us an email and we will be happy to assist you.

« Reply #60 on: April 11, 2007, 03:48 »
0
If you have 25000 contributors and they all have $50 (average of 0 and 100) then that is 1,250,000.  Interest a 5%pa is about $50,000.  Even if everyone has $99, that is only $100k so it is not millions per year.

I am afraid your estimation doesn't take into account size of the portfolio, shelf-life, seasonal trends and so on, so I have to tell you they are not accurate. We don't even have 25,000 contributors, but only half of that.
However, if they would be, do you see a problem somewhere?

« Reply #61 on: April 11, 2007, 04:52 »
0
If you have 25000 contributors and they all have $50 (average of 0 and 100) then that is 1,250,000.  Interest a 5%pa is about $50,000.  Even if everyone has $99, that is only $100k so it is not millions per year.

I am afraid your estimation doesn't take into account size of the portfolio, shelf-life, seasonal trends and so on, so I have to tell you they are not accurate. We don't even have 25,000 contributors, but only half of that.
However, if they would be, do you see a problem somewhere?

All I was doing was putting numbers down (someone else said 25,000 submitters so I used this) as some people were talking millions in interest.  I have no problem with you holding the money until people reach payout as there are costs to paying out.  As someone esle pointed out $100 is not that big an amount. 

I dont think size of portfolio has anything to do with it.  A person with 1 photo and a person with 1m photos could both be stuck on $99 until they get one more download.

If a person cant get to $100 to get a payout, I think it is only fair you use the money you earn on interest to market the site better so they do get to payout!

« Reply #62 on: April 11, 2007, 05:00 »
0
If you have 25000 contributors and they all have $50 (average of 0 and 100) then that is 1,250,000.  Interest a 5%pa is about $50,000.  Even if everyone has $99, that is only $100k so it is not millions per year.

...

If a person cant get to $100 to get a payout, I think it is only fair you use the money you earn on interest to market the site better so they do get to payout!

I agree.

And Achilles, thanks for taking the time to explain.

« Reply #63 on: April 11, 2007, 07:26 »
0
thanks for posting achilles - it is nice to have your input on this.

the thread is now locked for obvious reasons.

one post was removed due to a very high ratio of insults to critique.  Had there been more critique and less insults I would have been happy to keep it.


 

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results