MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: DT in trouble?  (Read 24833 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 03, 2010, 10:07 »
0
What happens at DT (even Stockxpert seems do better)? Third (consequential) month Dreamstime has \\\"red arrow\\\" in poll results.
My numbers are bad, RPI dropped below 1$ for last 3 months (never happend before), 50% dls less.
How about your results?


Xalanx

« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2010, 10:11 »
0
Same results. Also, in December DT earned me less than 123RF (which is constantly improving). They are getting worse, no matter if I upload or not. I thought I must have had upset someone there, but I see many contributors sharing the same view as mine.

« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2010, 10:18 »
0
down for me too :(

Perhaps many new contributors (and no entry exam) is the reason?

« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2010, 10:28 »
0
Hi Rene,
I seem to remember reading many of your posts regarding DT before. You didn't really like them.
What's the sudden change? Are you worried about them now?
DT is the only one agency that increased prices this year and didn't lower our commissions at the same time.
That's something to keep in mind.
I like them.
And by my standards, they're doing just fine.

« Reply #4 on: January 03, 2010, 10:32 »
0
That's not my experience as DT have been doing well for me of late. Earnings for December were 66% higher than Dec 08 (against an average 40% increase elsewhere) and I had an RPD of $1.52 too. Mind you I was helped a bit by a few EL's, the frequency of which seem to be increasing recently.

I'm hoping that the rapid increases in prices/levels and the 'adjustment' to our commission rates will allow DT more marketing power and to compete more effectively with the Big 3.

Unfortunately I am going to be suspending new uploads there whilst I explore the feasibility of going exclusive with IS later in the year. Not DT's fault __ I think I've just had a belly-full of the way that FT treats contributors.

« Reply #5 on: January 03, 2010, 10:33 »
0
I won't draw any conclusions from one month's results, much less a month with major holidays.  December was down across the board for me, but still much better than 2008.  The next couple of weeks will be a better indicator.  In any event, I don't see any signs of systemic problems with DT.  My only complaint (okay, I'd also complain about their attitude toward image series) is that their minimum payout is too high.  I can make a payout just about every month with all the other majors; DT's the only one where I can't.

« Reply #6 on: January 03, 2010, 10:39 »
0
Yes, it seems (also according to the stats on the left side) that DT is going down for several months in row. I really hope this is just temporary trend and will be reverted. I don't like the idea of FT going up while DT going down.

« Reply #7 on: January 03, 2010, 10:48 »
0
DT has been holding steady for me.  In fact, today as of 10 am, I've already had my best Sunday ever, thanks to a huge amount of DT downloads... various times, sizes and types of DLs so it's clearly not from just one or a few buyers.  Maybe pent up demand after holiday down time?  People getting back to work early?

« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2010, 11:09 »
0
initially DT and StockXpert were actually my best since in insertion into micro stock.
the others were more or less non-starters with not enough to make it worth my while to be consistently contriubuting.
but you are right, even though my approval rating has more or less been near 90% or even 100% in the past months, my downloads have not increased.

maybe DT is concentrating on their own favourites such as Assignments,etc.., and in turn neglecting those who are not directly associated with them.
i am not sure. this is not an accusation, but more so just a supposition.
i am not here to be at loggerheads with anyone... more so with DT.
they obviously like my work , or else they would not have approved all of it in the past months. so i am not one to find a quarrel with Achilles. my name is Perseus, not Paris or Hector, ha!ha!.

seriously,
to date, my rejected box contains only 4 images.
i would expect my dls to be better . perharps i am not one of DT's priorities in the keyword search. 
whatever, i sure like to know as well, as i like DT and StockXpert equally  and hopefully
i can stay a regular contributor with both.

« Last Edit: January 03, 2010, 11:14 by Perseu »

« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2010, 11:13 »
0
I am really quite surprised that DT is below StockXpert in the poll now.  StockXpert was quite a bit worse than DT for me last month.

It wonder though if dreamstime is giving a lot more weight to new images in their best match searches, which would mean that those of us with older portfolios would see a decrease in our earnings.

« Reply #10 on: January 03, 2010, 11:15 »
0
I am really quite surprised that DT is below StockXpert in the poll now.  StockXpert was quite a bit worse than DT for me last month.

It wonder though if dreamstime is giving a lot more weight to new images in their best match searches, which would mean that those of us with older portfolios would see a decrease in our earnings.

no Tyler, this is not true, as my comment before you is evidence . in the past 4 months my upload (and approval ) have more than quadrupled. yet my dls have actually gone down, earning money only via my affliate commissions

vonkara

« Reply #11 on: January 03, 2010, 12:41 »
0
After all the bad/worthless announcement, I wouldn't be surprised. Istock got Vetta DT got a weird Myspace postcard deal...

Dreamstime is also a agency that don't move a lot. This will play against themselves in medium-long term. I also see a lot of portfolio with more uploaded files than sales. That speak about the amount of sales you can excpect from DT
« Last Edit: January 03, 2010, 12:42 by Vonkara »

dbvirago

« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2010, 12:53 »
0
DT is all over the board for me. December horrible, worst than last November. November 2nd BME.

« Reply #13 on: January 03, 2010, 14:16 »
0
DT is all over the board for me too, but December was my BME. I always hope a good month means they are starting to perform, but then a bad month comes along there...

DT should be doing fine with their higher % take now (yes, I am still bitter about that, and when they fully implement it, they will be raking a quite large slice out of every sale. The independent contributors may be another story there, but although they aren't steady, they haven't had any systematic changes in DLs like an IS best match change.

I am surprised anyone is putting StockXpert over DT, they dropped off a cliff for me in December and I don't really see much hope for them now.

« Reply #14 on: January 03, 2010, 17:36 »
0

I am surprised anyone is putting StockXpert over DT, they dropped off a cliff for me in December and I don't really see much hope for them now.

i agree pancaketom ... but in my case, StockXpert was my best performer, at least until Getty took over.
 but anything can happen here too for StockXpert... one way is for Getty to kill it,
the other way, which i am hoping...for the good of contributors and employees of StockXpert esp the reviewers who are awesome , is for Getty to sell StockXpert , which could revive its potential. (not an absurd idea, as SS bought BigStock, didn't they?)

so, for now, i am still fully active with StockXpert (hoping for the latter to happen),
 but opting out on both IS and StockXpert.
does it make sense?
 
« Last Edit: January 03, 2010, 17:41 by Perseu »

« Reply #15 on: January 03, 2010, 17:58 »
0
so, for now, i am still fully active with StockXpert (hoping for the latter to happen), but opting out on both IS and StockXpert.
does it make sense?

The people that made StockXpert are currently working on a new site. Hopefully, they will have learned from their (mainly financial) mistakes, since technically, StockXpert was very sound. Wait and see what their pricing policy will be.

« Reply #16 on: January 03, 2010, 18:24 »
0

The people that made StockXpert are currently working on a new site. Hopefully, they will have learned from their (mainly financial) mistakes, since technically, StockXpert was very sound. Wait and see what their pricing policy will be.

wow, that's awesome news. i for one has been a big fan of StockXpert , and lately, it does seem that they are getting conscientious about something, perharps, hired new reviewers,etc..

remember how they abruptly  sort of forgot about my portfolio, like so many of you here, with nary a sight or sign of response from support? but in the past 3 months they have sort of resumed back to new life, with reviewers approving my work same day, like they used to do before.

so, really, i am pitching for the old StockXpert to come back to life and take off where it was rudely
f....ed - up when ...oh well, you all know the rest of the story.
 ;)

lisafx

« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2010, 18:54 »
0
That's not my experience as DT have been doing well for me of late. Earnings for December were 66% higher than Dec 08 (against an average 40% increase elsewhere) and I had an RPD of $1.52 too. Mind you I was helped a bit by a few EL's, the frequency of which seem to be increasing recently.

I'm hoping that the rapid increases in prices/levels and the 'adjustment' to our commission rates will allow DT more marketing power and to compete more effectively with the Big 3.

Unfortunately I am going to be suspending new uploads there whilst I explore the feasibility of going exclusive with IS later in the year. Not DT's fault __ I think I've just had a belly-full of the way that FT treats contributors.

Ditto to all of the above.  Particularly the last bit (highlighted by me)

« Reply #18 on: January 03, 2010, 19:04 »
0
Hi Rene,
I seem to remember reading many of your posts regarding DT before. You didn\\\'t really like them.
What\\\'s the sudden change? Are you worried about them now?
DT is the only one agency that increased prices this year and didn\\\'t lower our commissions at the same time.
That\\\'s something to keep in mind.
@ Eireann
Ha ha it\\\'s even worst, there is no micro site I like. But  with DT and FT is different - I don\\\'t trust them.
I don\\\'t worry about DT, I only worry about my money - my relation with sites is purely business relation. If Dt goes down buyers will not disappear, they will go to another site so there\\\'s nothing to worry.
DT decreased  our commission from 50 to 30% - that\\\'s something to keep in mind.

KB

« Reply #19 on: January 03, 2010, 19:27 »
0
Not DT's fault __ I think I've just had a belly-full of the way that FT treats contributors.
LOL!
Ditto to all of the above.  Particularly the last bit (highlighted by me)

That's my biggest incentive for going exclusive!  ;D  ;D  ;D

« Reply #20 on: January 03, 2010, 20:44 »
0
I am really quite surprised that DT is below StockXpert in the poll now.  StockXpert was quite a bit worse than DT for me last month.

It wonder though if dreamstime is giving a lot more weight to new images in their best match searches, which would mean that those of us with older portfolios would see a decrease in our earnings.

no Tyler, this is not true, as my comment before you is evidence . in the past 4 months my upload (and approval ) have more than quadrupled. yet my dls have actually gone down, earning money only via my affliate commissions

Agree with Persue. I have been uploading in the past few months. My acceptance is above 80%. But DT sells 40% less than FT which has a smaller port. Since DT started subscription, my earnings have not been good.

« Reply #21 on: January 03, 2010, 20:48 »
0
it was a BME for me by about 20$ thanks to an EL. Unusually good month (for December) - I have no XMAS photos.

« Reply #22 on: January 03, 2010, 22:17 »
0
@Rene,
You want to go exclusive with IS.
That's my answer right there.
IS is a lovely agency and I wish you all the best.

@FD-Amateur,
is that so?
Exciting!
Keep us posted please!

« Reply #23 on: January 03, 2010, 22:34 »
0
Ditto to all of the above.  Particularly the last bit (highlighted by me)
That's my biggest incentive for going exclusive!  ;D  ;D  ;D

So the fact that FT [email protected] its contributors is good enough for you to leave DT and become a serf to iStock? You must be a woman.  :P  ;D

« Reply #24 on: January 03, 2010, 23:18 »
0
...Unfortunately I am going to be suspending new uploads there whilst I explore the feasibility of going exclusive with IS later in the year. Not DT's fault __ I think I've just had a belly-full of the way that FT treats contributors.
Ditto to all of the above.  Particularly the last bit (highlighted by me)

My decision about exclusivity was made a while ago now, but in addition to all the positives in IS's column while weighing pros and cons, there was a pile of negatives from truly awful and and contributor-hostile behavior at various sites. FT's behavior since that time hasn't gotten any better :). As soon as one agency's antics were addressed, another turned around followed suit. Certainly FT's success combined with ongoing pullback of contributor royalties and benefits sets an environment that gives shelter to other agencies to follow along.

I don't see iStock contributors as serfs, and if you wanted some evidence for that I'd suggest the fact that we got some changes in the proposed royalty shifts (cannister changes) by voicing our views loudly. If we were serfs they'd just have thrown more slop buckets on us and let us be unhappy :)

I realize that many folks just won't work with only one agency on principle, which I understand, but contiuing to support an agency that doesn't treat you right only encourages the agency to treat you badly yet again.

RacePhoto

« Reply #25 on: January 04, 2010, 02:42 »
0
What happens at DT (even Stockxpert seems do better)? Third (consequential) month Dreamstime has \\\"red arrow\\\" in poll results.
My numbers are bad, RPI dropped below 1$ for last 3 months (never happend before), 50% dls less.
How about your results?

It's a poll and it measures opinion, instead of impartial sales data.

lagereek

« Reply #26 on: January 04, 2010, 07:29 »
0
As it happens I think they are in trouble, images I have with them are selling close to 100 times per day at other places but at DT, nothing.
Im also considering to start removing files.

best.  Christian

« Reply #27 on: January 04, 2010, 07:57 »
0
The people that made StockXpert are currently working on a new site.

I'm surprised at this, I would have thought that after selling the company, they would have had to sign a no-compete clause for a period of time. If it's true, I will be happy though. StockXpert always did ok for me.

As far as DT goes, they also have been an ok site for me. Steady sales growth, nice site, now that they've added ftp uploads it's much easier to upload, etc.

For people who have stopped uploading to DT because they are exploring exclusivity, it makes sense that your sales would drop. We should all know by now that you must keep uploading new material to keep your name out there and to keep generating new sales. It's just how microstock works.

The only beef I have with DT is the 6 month commitment period. I was willing to do it 4 years ago, but since that time I now see how volatile these companies are. Change is a constant and I don't think making that kind of commitment for commissions that keep getting lower and lower is a good idea for us contributors.


« Reply #28 on: January 04, 2010, 08:09 »
0
The only beef I have with DT is the 6 month commitment period. I was willing to do it 4 years ago, but since that time I now see how volatile these companies are. Change is a constant and I don't think making that kind of commitment for commissions that keep getting lower and lower is a good idea for us contributors.

Six months isn't much of a commitment in the greater scheme of things. After all the agency does have to invest significant sums in the review process, etc and it is only natural for them to insist on a few months to recover those costs. As Jonathan has pointed out tie-ins of 5 years or more are common within the macro agencies.

The onerous bit is actually IS's insistence on artist exclusivity rather than just the images themselves. If it weren't for that then DT's commitment would have very little effect.

« Reply #29 on: January 04, 2010, 08:31 »
0
As Jonathan has pointed out tie-ins of 5 years or more are common within the macro agencies.

These aren't macro photos that we are getting macro commissions for. I am in total agreement with a commitment for 5 years on an image that you make $100 or more a pop on. I would be in total agreement if our commissions were steadily rising, but they are not.

For images that we get paid pennies for, I think it a little much. Especially when some micros don't have any time commitment. The micro companies are all over the board on this.

« Reply #30 on: January 04, 2010, 10:20 »
0
The people that made StockXpert are currently working on a new site.
I'm surprised at this, I would have thought that after selling the company, they would have had to sign a no-compete clause for a period of time. If it's true, I will be happy though. StockXpert always did ok for me.
(Off-topic)
As far as I understood, it's the developers and perhaps some reviewers. They were just employees near the end (as I suspect) and Getty fired them. A non-compete clause can't be forced when you are fired. That's why in some corporations, part of the staff (e.g. sales) is obsolete but kept anyways to keep them from competing, or more clearly said, to keep their mouth shut. Probably Getty has a clause like that when they hire, but the old StockXpert techies weren't hired by Getty.

This is all speculation. Wait and see.

« Reply #31 on: January 04, 2010, 10:24 »
0
Good explanation. Fingers crossed that they get something going.

lagereek

« Reply #32 on: January 04, 2010, 10:34 »
0
StockXpert,  sad story actually, used to be brillant and now?  a gonner.
Future scenario is as follows:  Getty/IS,  will either buy-out or force-out any competition. Others dont stand a chance.
Now is the time to really consider IS exclusivity, including myself.
After 25 years in this stock business and a member of the Getty-RM, I can easily see where all this is going and believe me, its not going in favour of anybody, except the Getty umbrella.
Good rythms! I will say. Theyve worked hard for it, clever marketing and its paying off.

« Reply #33 on: January 04, 2010, 10:40 »
0

Six months isn't much of a commitment in the greater scheme of things. After all the agency does have to invest significant sums in the review process, etc and it is only natural for them to insist on a few months to recover those costs. As Jonathan has pointed out tie-ins of 5 years or more are common within the macro agencies.

But the lock in doesn't actually address the issue of costs - for a hypothetical portfolio that just doesn't sell, they might never get their costs covered. It's about leverage and when a contributor can't walk whenever they want to, it gives the agency a bit more power and the contributor a bit less. Even if IS weren't part of the picture, when DT can change any and all of its terms with no notice, but you can't pull your portfolio for 6 months even if you don't like the new terms, that seems highly unbalanced.

With all the agencies except DT and BigStock, if you don't like their new commission structure or license terms or whatever, you can pull your portfolio and be on your way (in general we don't, but we could). If DT or BigStock had some sort of reciprocity in delays before new terms went into effect so contributors who didn't like them wouldn't have to be bound by them, then it would seem more equitable.

When you consider how little work the agencies actually do in microstock - compared to traditional agencies which did all the keywording and other preparations for sale - I think comparing micro and macro isn't apples to apples in terms of who does what upfront anyway. The sites do have huge up front costs to get the site up and running and market themselves, but not getting the content ready for sale.

« Reply #34 on: January 04, 2010, 10:46 »
0
It would be a shame if DT were in fact in trouble but let's not forget their sub program which played a big role in my decision to back to being Exclusive with IS.

« Reply #35 on: January 04, 2010, 10:47 »
0
StockXpert,  sad story actually, used to be brillant and now?  a gonner.
Future scenario is as follows:  Getty/IS,  will either buy-out or force-out any competition. Others dont stand a chance.
Now is the time to really consider IS exclusivity, including myself. >...

Off-Topic, but I would say now is the time to value your assets more and consider which images you put with which agencies, go IS exclusive if it floats your boat, exclusive does not mean that everything goes to IS, be selective if you have images that are not really suited to generic microstock then don't put these with IS or other micro's to get your image count up, but put these as RM with a Macrostock site.

David  ;)

« Reply #36 on: January 04, 2010, 10:55 »
0
JoAnne - It's a fair point about the reciprocity but then again we have all either accepted those conditions when we joined DT or have had ample time to leave since the 6-month lock-in was imposed. Don't forget the lock-in was only brought in as a counter measure to Istock's exclusivity deal.

The 'getting the content ready for sale' costs are indeed significant. Take SS for example who we know have peaked at accepting over 100K images per week. To do so they might have inspected 140K images or about 20K per day. Even if the inspection/bandwidth/storage of each image was just 10c then it still works out at $60K per month. I'd imagine that DT has to cope with a fairly similar number of images.

« Reply #37 on: January 04, 2010, 11:00 »
0
JoAnne - It's a fair point about the reciprocity but then again we have all either accepted those conditions when we joined DT or have had ample time to leave since the 6-month lock-in was imposed. Don't forget the lock-in was only brought in as a counter measure to Istock's exclusivity deal.

The 'getting the content ready for sale' costs are indeed significant. Take SS for example who we know have peaked at accepting over 100K images per week. To do so they might have inspected 140K images or about 20K per day. Even if the inspection/bandwidth/storage of each image was just 10c then it still works out at $60K per month. I'd imagine that DT has to cope with a fairly similar number of images.

True, some countries have walls to keep people in while others have walls to keep people out.  Where do you want to live?  Metaphorically speaking of course.

« Reply #38 on: January 04, 2010, 11:36 »
0
My decision about exclusivity was made a while ago now, but in addition to all the positives in IS\\\'s column while weighing pros and cons, there was a pile of negatives from truly awful and and contributor-hostile behavior at various sites. FT\\\'s behavior since that time hasn\\\'t gotten any better :). As soon as one agency\\\'s antics were addressed, another turned around followed suit. Certainly FT\\\'s success combined with ongoing pullback of contributor royalties and benefits sets an environment that gives shelter to other agencies to follow along.

I don\\\'t see iStock contributors as serfs, and if you wanted some evidence for that I\\\'d suggest the fact that we got some changes in the proposed royalty shifts (cannister changes) by voicing our views loudly. If we were serfs they\\\'d just have thrown more slop buckets on us and let us be unhappy :)

I realize that many folks just won\\\'t work with only one agency on principle, which I understand, but contiuing to support an agency that doesn\\\'t treat you right only encourages the agency to treat you badly yet again.
Jsnover, you are my hero. Like always I agree with everything you say.

lagereek

« Reply #39 on: January 04, 2010, 12:39 »
0
StockXpert,  sad story actually, used to be brillant and now?  a gonner.
Future scenario is as follows:  Getty/IS,  will either buy-out or force-out any competition. Others dont stand a chance.
Now is the time to really consider IS exclusivity, including myself. >...

Off-Topic, but I would say now is the time to value your assets more and consider which images you put with which agencies, go IS exclusive if it floats your boat, exclusive does not mean that everything goes to IS, be selective if you have images that are not really suited to generic microstock then don't put these with IS or other micro's to get your image count up, but put these as RM with a Macrostock site.

David  ;)


Well at IS,  Ive managed to become a Diamond member, non-exclusive and I would say 99% of all my stuff with them is non-generic. Generic stuff will tend to just disappear.
To put images up for RM, is today a hell of a gamble, Gettys RM is not at all what it used to be and Alamys is a joke.
The entire RM business is very, very unstable.
Ive been with the Getty-RM since 93 and boy! have I seen it plunge down or what.

best.

« Reply #40 on: January 04, 2010, 13:24 »
0
Well at IS,  Ive managed to become a Diamond member, non-exclusive and I would say 99% of all my stuff with them is non-generic. Generic stuff will tend to just disappear.
To put images up for RM, is today a hell of a gamble, Gettys RM is not at all what it used to be and Alamys is a joke.
The entire RM business is very, very unstable.
Ive been with the Getty-RM since 93 and boy! have I seen it plunge down or what.

best.
Hi lagereek,
I was coming more from an exclusive point, if a contributor goes IS exclusive then they are limited to RF at IS, if I am right they cannot put images as RF anywhere else, if you have any image that might not suit microstock or you think they may only get an odd download then taking a chance with RM might be better for them images, by being selective in where you place your images instead of uploading them to IS just to make up the numbers for the next canister.

When I say generic I was not thinking just about handshakes more on suitable microstock content, my thinking had come from a post I read yesterday where a photographer had seen one of thier images in a travel mag which was downloaded at $0.30, as it is a niche image it may only get a couple of downloads, where had they thought about the potential and limited market it may have been better uploading it as RM, at least if they had a sale it may be worth it.

David   ;) (Off-Topic Sorry)

« Reply #41 on: January 04, 2010, 13:45 »
0

Six months isn't much of a commitment in the greater scheme of things. After all the agency does have to invest significant sums in the review process, etc and it is only natural for them to insist on a few months to recover those costs. As Jonathan has pointed out tie-ins of 5 years or more are common within the macro agencies.

But the lock in doesn't actually address the issue of costs - for a hypothetical portfolio that just doesn't sell, they might never get their costs covered. It's about leverage and when a contributor can't walk whenever they want to, it gives the agency a bit more power and the contributor a bit less. Even if IS weren't part of the picture, when DT can change any and all of its terms with no notice, but you can't pull your portfolio for 6 months even if you don't like the new terms, that seems highly unbalanced.

With all the agencies except DT and BigStock, if you don't like their new commission structure or license terms or whatever, you can pull your portfolio and be on your way (in general we don't, but we could). If DT or BigStock had some sort of reciprocity in delays before new terms went into effect so contributors who didn't like them wouldn't have to be bound by them, then it would seem more equitable.

When you consider how little work the agencies actually do in microstock - compared to traditional agencies which did all the keywording and other preparations for sale - I think comparing micro and macro isn't apples to apples in terms of who does what upfront anyway. The sites do have huge up front costs to get the site up and running and market themselves, but not getting the content ready for sale.

another interesting insight. as always jsnover , you open your mouth and pearls fall out  8)
i always pay full attention to what you write.

i think it should be that we, the copyright holder of our work, should have full say as what we want to do with our chattel, when we want to do. failing this, it smells of ransom or a bad case of divorce due to irreconciliable differences  ;D

prior to all these most recent upheaval and recurring curveballs by the Big 6, i never thought the 90 days of BigStock nor the 6 months of DT to be anything but.
But now, it seems to be the proverbial last straw.

at volatile times like these, one would think the agencies would try their best to work with the people who actually keep them afloat. no, not the buyers as we all seem to be brainwashed to think.
.. but the dudes who supply the crop.
you can have a frigging marketplace without farmers? ya!!!!
can anyone tell me if this is true?
the marketplace thrives, only because farmers are too afraid to lose their place in the marketplace.

same thing is happening in the real world with fishery industry, and agriculture.
we are hopeless because we let the blokes who when we were little elephant tied us up with a chain (metaphor derived from S.E. Asian fable).
now that we are a gigantic elephant, the same blokes tie us up with a rope, and we still think we are helpless to break this bound, even though it is now a frigging rope.




nruboc

« Reply #42 on: January 04, 2010, 13:55 »
0
The people that made StockXpert are currently working on a new site.
I'm surprised at this, I would have thought that after selling the company, they would have had to sign a no-compete clause for a period of time. If it's true, I will be happy though. StockXpert always did ok for me.
(Off-topic)
As far as I understood, it's the developers and perhaps some reviewers. They were just employees near the end (as I suspect) and Getty fired them. A non-compete clause can't be forced when you are fired. That's why in some corporations, part of the staff (e.g. sales) is obsolete but kept anyways to keep them from competing, or more clearly said, to keep their mouth shut. Probably Getty has a clause like that when they hire, but the old StockXpert techies weren't hired by Getty.

This is all speculation. Wait and see.



Hopefully they downloaded the customer email list. Oh never mind, I'm SURE they did :)

lagereek

« Reply #43 on: January 04, 2010, 14:13 »
0
David!  hi!

yes in one sense youre right ofcourse. It would be great if one could think in the terms of supplying good saleable shots as RM. Trouble is once they are in RM files, well, thats that, the file is pretty much "locked" for a number of years.
Today, I can only see a very specific client type going to RM and prepared to pay the money, the typical AD-agency AD, the corporate Designer and perhaps a company that actually needs exclusivity. Not enough by a long shot!
We might as well face facts, the Traditional Stock-agency is on its way out, for better or worse, personally, although I myself am an RM member, I would say its for the better. Im fed up with the RM policies of world-rights and all, charging more for that then the actual picture, etc, etc.

best. Christian

« Reply #44 on: January 04, 2010, 14:19 »
0
Six months isn't much of a commitment in the greater scheme of things. After all the agency does have to invest significant sums in the review process, etc and it is only natural for them to insist on a few months to recover those costs.

No comments!  :-\




Xalanx

« Reply #45 on: January 04, 2010, 14:59 »
0
Six months isn't much of a commitment in the greater scheme of things. After all the agency does have to invest significant sums in the review process, etc and it is only natural for them to insist on a few months to recover those costs.

No comments!  :-\





I think they recover pretty much the costs by getting a huge comission from our sales (and of course by cutting down OUR comission). Sounds like a plan - "let's not forget to recover the reviewers' salaries from the sales of the arrested files of contributors who want to leave!"

« Reply #46 on: January 04, 2010, 15:22 »
0
The people that made StockXpert are currently working on a new site.
I'm surprised at this, I would have thought that after selling the company, they would have had to sign a no-compete clause for a period of time. If it's true, I will be happy though. StockXpert always did ok for me.
(Off-topic)
As far as I understood, it's the developers and perhaps some reviewers. They were just employees near the end (as I suspect) and Getty fired them. A non-compete clause can't be forced when you are fired. That's why in some corporations, part of the staff (e.g. sales) is obsolete but kept anyways to keep them from competing, or more clearly said, to keep their mouth shut. Probably Getty has a clause like that when they hire, but the old StockXpert techies weren't hired by Getty.

This is all speculation. Wait and see.



Hopefully they downloaded the customer email list. Oh never mind, I'm SURE they did :)

regardless of the semantics, what cannot be denied is the StockXpert was one heck of a performer before they were hijacked.
for that , and that alone, i for one look for a new StockXpert ... and hopefully with all the brains that made StockXpert the great site to belong to.

traveler1116

« Reply #47 on: January 05, 2010, 05:56 »
0
Hi Rene,
I seem to remember reading many of your posts regarding DT before. You didn't really like them.
What's the sudden change? Are you worried about them now?
DT is the only one agency that increased prices this year and didn't lower our commissions at the same time.
That's something to keep in mind.
I like them.
And by my standards, they're doing just fine.
Didn't lower commissions?  They lowered our percentage from 50 to 30% for level one sales didn't they?

« Reply #48 on: January 05, 2010, 06:47 »
0
DT is slowing down a little for me too. Not too much though. But the downwards trend for the past three months is worrying, especially considering that it was during autumn.

Yuri_Arcurs

  • One Crazy PhotoManic MadPerson
« Reply #49 on: January 05, 2010, 07:46 »
0
I have had some bad experiences with DT lately. Beside being the only agency in the world that does not allow you to submit images on the Getty generic release, which results in massive extra paperwork, they also seem to be rejecting images based on similarity so much these days that it is almost not worth uploading to them. Having uploaded more than 6000 images over the last 6 months, my income is slightly dropping with them which is not a good sign either.
I addressed these issues with DT SEO and actually got a slightly unpleasant email back. I was very surprised by this.
We must remember that DT has an otherwise generous photographer commission and should be respected for that. Some tolerance seems in place because of this.

Lev

« Reply #50 on: January 05, 2010, 08:12 »
0
i've shared my bad experience in "More than usual rejections from Dreamtime" thread. i believe it's all connected a lot.

« Reply #51 on: January 05, 2010, 10:33 »
0
@Traveller,
yes.
However they increased prices and changed Image Levels structure to benefit us. And if I remember correctly you too wanted to go exclusive with IS, just like Rene.
I'm beginning to think that this is a common syndrome.
Not to worry though. It (mostly) affects people who want to go exclusive with IS.
6 months is a long time, IS is great and I can understand your frustration.
Best of luck,


« Reply #52 on: January 05, 2010, 10:44 »
0
@Traveller,
yes.
However they increased prices and changed Image Levels structure to benefit us. And if I remember correctly you too wanted to go exclusive with IS, just like Rene.
I'm beginning to think that this is a common syndrome.
Not to worry though. It (mostly) affects people who want to go exclusive with IS.
6 months is a long time, IS is great and I can understand your frustration.

If you're going to start trying to dismiss people's comments on the basis of their status (regarding wanting to go exclusive or whatever it is makes you see a "common syndrome"), then you open yourself up to similar comments. You have a very small portfolio at DT, you haven't been there long and have a small number of sales. Other people have been with them a long time - i.e. have a lot of experience of their behavior over time vs just the last 6 months - and their perspective could be a result of that.

If I were speculating I'd say you're feeling good about DT at the moment and want to invalidate those who have a different experience and have a negative opinion of them. And that 6 month would have been one year if not for a number of us pushing back hard on DT and stopping uploads when they first proposed the lock...

« Reply #53 on: January 05, 2010, 11:09 »
0
However they increased prices and changed Image Levels structure to benefit us. And if I remember correctly you too wanted to go exclusive with IS, just like Rene.
I\'m beginning to think that this is a common syndrome.
Not to worry though. It (mostly) affects people who want to go exclusive with IS.
I had a feeling that something was wrong with me. Now I know, thank you Eireann, that  I\'m suffering from \'common IS syndrome\'.
Let\'s be more serious.
In my portfolio almost 90% of images are level 1- it means  in 9 cases out of 10 DT get 70% and I get 30% -- HUGE benefit for the agency not for the contributor
Increased prices is not a present. DT benefit from this much more then us. For example if credit value increase  10 cts, 7 goes to DT\'s pocket and only 3 in mine.
So I cannot find one reason to say thank you Dreamstime.

« Reply #54 on: January 05, 2010, 11:16 »
0
earlier i came in here to comment on my UL number , not my approval rating,
which in fact, as opposed to some of you more experienced and more esteemed contributors have in fact increased rather than decreased, and curiously to say, been pretty close to 90 % in the past quarterly. even though my all time average still stands close to 70% due to massive rejection at the beginning of my "career with DT".
am i happy with this? DT rejecting more , of even our esteemed top sellers?
is DT really giving "moi" a newbie  with a tiny portfolio (count not even close to 500, lol)as opposed to the rest of the field (count more than 6000), more attention?
or is it because my work is as i indicate in my profile, "not tailor made for stock photography".
to be honest, i am quite chuffed to hear this, actually.

for months on end, i have been writing that microstock is heading close to redundance with everyone copying the great Yuri . and that it's almost impossible to be serious about micro stock for a photographer like myself who came from the old school of shooting photographs for the sake of photography... even though i have been gainfully employed in glamour, fashion, commercial, model portfolio, runway, designers on spec, photo correspondence, etc..

i never really took my insertion into microstock as something permanent nor serious, because quite honestly , i thought it be a joke with everyone claiming to sell the same old same old... and making tons of money.

then now, everyone seems to be complaining that DT is rejecting many of their new uls based on "sorry, we already have too many of these," or "too similar".
i too, had a few of that, not many, from FT , and DT.

i think it's not wrong to agree with DT, if they truly want to remain within the Big 6.  you cannot live in a vacuum making the same old same old and expect to be maintaining your income.
buyers change, trend change, your favourite buyer who thought your same old same old was cool and awesome, may also have been laid off during the real stock market correction.
or they have been replaced by younger minds with a new fresh idea of what media should be for the next decade.  and they could be the one who will be telling sites to renovate or rethink their idea of what is stock photos.

you know what?  i am going to go out on the limb to say, if this is what DT meant when they reject so many en masse , then , hurrah for DT.
it's about time.

i know i am going to make a lot of enemies saying this. but hell, i don't need friends, that i do not already have.  and i certainly won't say something just to win friends.

so i repeat, "if DT rejects everyone due to same old same old stuff.
HURRAH! it's about time."

the emperor needs new clothes.

« Reply #55 on: January 05, 2010, 11:24 »
0
@Jsnover,
I don't base anything on speculations. I only comment on facts.
It is a fact that (some) artists who want to go exclusive with IS are annoyed at DT's 6 months lock-in. The bashing starts and suddenly nothing about DT is worthy anymore.
I find this questionable and you're not going to change my perception no matter how many times you'll be looking at my portfolio or my status or my stock longevity.
Let's leave my portfolio alone for a moment and go back on Rene's topic.
'DT in trouble?'
Looking on the right I would think most of them are.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #56 on: January 05, 2010, 11:31 »
0
@Jsnover,
I don't base anything on speculations. I only comment on facts.
It is a fact that (some) artists who want to go exclusive with IS are annoyed at DT's 6 months lock-in. The bashing starts and suddenly nothing about DT is worthy anymore.
I find this questionable and you're not going to change my perception no matter how many times you'll be looking at my portfolio or my status or my stock longevity.
Let's leave my portfolio alone for a moment and go back on Rene's topic.
'DT in trouble?'
Looking on the right I would think most of them are.


@eireann
when this thread was posted, DT was the only one of the top 6 with a red arrow ... and they had just dropped to 5th place.  Yes, there is a lot of red there now.  Maybe all of Microstock is in trouble.  Or, maybe you have gotten a little too emotional?

Maybe your loyalty will be rewarded.  I haven't found that to be the case.  I don't even have an IS account ... much less exclusive.  I even considered exclusivity at DT ... until Achilles started making it a mandatory part of be "Loyal." 
No thanks.  I see too much of that "Iron Curtain" attitude to feel comfortable or to depend on ONE agency.

« Reply #57 on: January 05, 2010, 11:38 »
0
I like Dreamstime. I think they are a good agency to work with, but I'm worried about them too. I made more in the first half of 2009, than I did in the second with them. They were the only agency that seem to shrink in 2009. Hopefully, they can turn it around in 2010.

« Reply #58 on: January 05, 2010, 11:45 »
0
@Jsnover,
I don't base anything on speculations. I only comment on facts.
It is a fact that (some) artists who want to go exclusive with IS are annoyed at DT's 6 months lock-in. The bashing starts and suddenly nothing about DT is worthy anymore.
I find this questionable and you're not going to change my perception no matter how many times you'll be looking at my portfolio or my status or my stock longevity.
Let's leave my portfolio alone for a moment and go back on Rene's topic.
'DT in trouble?'
Looking on the right I would think most of them are.


It is a fact that (some) artists who want to go exclusive with IS are annoyed at DT's 6 months lock-in. The bashing starts and suddenly nothing about DT is worthy anymore.

well spoken Eireann !

everytime someone gets mad because of something related to IS, it seems that we awake a whole closet of skeleton, and we see the sequel to the Curse of the Mummy, or The Reaping.
it takes alot of guts to stand up and still stick to your guns when such things occur.

but objectively speaking, it does appear to be so.
(some) artists who want to go exclusive with IS are annoyed at DT's 6 months lock-in. The bashing starts and suddenly nothing about DT is worthy anymore.

« Reply #59 on: January 05, 2010, 12:56 »
0
Quote
(some) artists who want to go exclusive with IS are annoyed at DT's 6 months lock-in. The bashing starts and suddenly nothing about DT is worthy anymore.

Speaking for myself, I was always annoyed at DT's 6 month lock-in. It has become even more annoying, not because I may be contemplating exclusivity with IS, but because of all of the microstock company's performances over the past 4 years. Way too volatile to be locked in for that long of a period on microstock. And that's about the only thing I can say negative about DT.

Keep in mind that people that are bashing DT now tend to lean towards bashing anyone and anything. And there is a distinct difference between bashing and discussing. I see a lot of discussion going on, I see a lot of speculation, I'm not seeing too much bashing. Maybe I just ignore it now. :)

ap

« Reply #60 on: January 05, 2010, 13:42 »
0
Beside being the only agency in the world that does not allow you to submit images on the Getty generic release, which results in massive extra paperwork,

?? i use only the generic getty release without any problems, just not in massive #s. otherwise, you're right about everything else.

« Reply #61 on: January 05, 2010, 15:43 »
0
@CC,
I know you're contemplating exclusivity with IS right now. :)
It is probably the right thing to do and I genuinely wish you all the luck with completing the necessary steps in a satisfactory manner.
And you're right, 6 months is really a long time.
I wish DT would change that.
Regarding my understanding of this thread, based on my previous readings, I remain convinced I'm right.

@Warren,
I like that fire, and I think we both share it :)
DT is not perfect, but there's a lot worse out there.
I like them.
To persuade me otherwise only facts will do. No emotions, no personal likes, dislikes, vendetta or conflict of interest.
Until such times DT remains high up on my list of favourites.

« Reply #62 on: January 05, 2010, 16:30 »
0
Quote
@CC,
I know you're contemplating exclusivity with IS right now. Smiley
It is probably the right thing to do and I genuinely wish you all the luck with completing the necessary steps in a satisfactory manner.

Just to be clear...
I have been considering it, but I have not made a definite decision either way. I am not convinced (yet) that it is the right thing to do. We shall see what transpires over the next couple of months.

lisafx

« Reply #63 on: January 05, 2010, 16:52 »
0
Although I have been giving some thought to IS exclusivity, Dreamstime remains my favorite agency as far as the way they treat their contributors.

If DT had anywhere near the volume IS does I would probably be considering going exclusive there instead of IS.

Hopefully they will use the extra cash from the price increase and royalty cut to advertise aggressively in 2010.  It would be great to see them in the top one or two position for sales :)

lagereek

« Reply #64 on: January 05, 2010, 17:15 »
0
Although I have been giving some thought to IS exclusivity, Dreamstime remains my favorite agency as far as the way they treat their contributors.

If DT had anywhere near the volume IS does I would probably be considering going exclusive there instead of IS.

Hopefully they will use the extra cash from the price increase and royalty cut to advertise aggressively in 2010.  It would be great to see them in the top one or two position for sales :)



Hi Lisa!  and a happy new year!

Yep!  Im seriously considering IS exclusivity as well and thats for many reasons, one being all the extra work uploading to other agencies, leaves hardly any time over for photography, add to that, IS, is by far the best earner.
DT treat their contributors right,  well yes but in my books that should go without saying, photographers is a stock-agencies life-blood, lets not forget that.

Personally I really dont know what to make of DT anymore? several days can go and nada, then all of a sudden its as if they wake up and voila, 20 DLs.
Pretty unpredictable and unstable I would say,  not exactly going according to my pension plans.

best.  Christian

traveler1116

« Reply #65 on: January 06, 2010, 01:38 »
0
@Traveller,
yes.
However they increased prices and changed Image Levels structure to benefit us. And if I remember correctly you too wanted to go exclusive with IS, just like Rene.
I'm beginning to think that this is a common syndrome.
Not to worry though. It (mostly) affects people who want to go exclusive with IS.
6 months is a long time, IS is great and I can understand your frustration.
Best of luck,


I think you are confusing which came first.  Dt and Ft have both changed policies recently resulting in lower % and money, DT without any possibility of opting out of their new scheme, which has pushed me to go exclusive with IS.  The 6 months thing was understood, them changing our commissions(and I think our agreement when I submitted, although technically they can do anything they want with our images for 6 months including giving them all away for free if they want, it's in the TOS) is the real issue. 

« Reply #66 on: January 06, 2010, 06:45 »
0
Dreamstime is doing very well, thank you all for your concerns. We grow in all areas: submissions, downloads, buyers and registered users. The highest jump in the last months is for buyers and registrations, which was quite impressive considering the submissions are not a few either. As for our status, Dreamstime remains an independent agency, the only one of all microstock leaders. Our resources are limited and the royalty cut is not producing results overnight.

Although we could've bought ads everywhere, we will never spend a penny unless it produces results, no matter how self-flattering a double spread can be. On the long term the most healthy strategy for a business is to focus a viable ROI not vanity.

Most our contributors report significant increases and records months,  but your mileage may vary. The size of your portfolio, the placement in search, seasonal or quality factors may all affect you. I'm sympathetic with all our contributors, but they have to realize competition is fierceful. As much as we would want to bring BME records to everyone, it's simply impossible due to the size of our community.

Overall, the number of downloads is highest ever. There is no better parameter to track contributors' revenue than downloads. We also monitor average accounts and see how contributors are doing, in order to ensure these downloads are split in an equitable manner.

I was also surprised to see changes in the hierarchy here, but let's not forget that this hierarchy is limited to a specific number of contributors and our decrease comes after our royalty decrease. I'm pretty sure that our current price update will improve your experience a lot.

Yuri, I'm surprised to see your post here considering my harsh email came after your team submitted images that were refused in the past and that you requested preferrential treatment. Nevertheless, I do appreciate the positive ending of your statement.
As for similarity, yes, rules are the same for everyone. Similars will lead to a lower RPD so submitting similars will always produce a decline in sales.

Dreamstime will never favor portfolios. I've always said that we favor great images, never portfolios. Any amateur can produce a best seller and any pro can submit less-than-good images. As the buyer buys the image, they should be compensated according to the image!

« Last Edit: January 06, 2010, 06:57 by Achilles »

« Reply #67 on: January 06, 2010, 07:10 »
0
^^^ Thanks for that Serban. Nice update and information.

« Reply #68 on: January 06, 2010, 07:25 »
0
 :) :) :)
Great post. If all policies is for every contributor then I will be happy.
But there is something that I can understand. You said sales are growing but we see not only revenue decreasing but number of downloads to.
This forum has a lot of members and averge say so. Something must be wrong

« Reply #69 on: January 06, 2010, 07:55 »
0
You said sales are growing but we see not only revenue decreasing but number of downloads to.
This forum has a lot of members and averge say so. Something must be wrong

I'm sure sales must be growing overall although my own have been relatively static over the last couple of years. Revenue however, which is obviously more important, is still growing nicely. In 2009 my average monthly income was up 21% compared to 2008 (roughly in line with my average at all agencies) and up 90% compared to 2007.

« Reply #70 on: January 06, 2010, 10:44 »
0

Yuri, I'm surprised to see your post here considering my harsh email came after your team submitted images that were refused in the past and that you requested preferrential treatment. Nevertheless, I do appreciate the positive ending of your statement.
As for similarity, yes, rules are the same for everyone. Similars will lead to a lower RPD so submitting similars will always produce a decline in sales.

Dreamstime will never favor portfolios. I've always said that we favor great images, never portfolios. Any amateur can produce a best seller and any pro can submit less-than-good images. As the buyer buys the image, they should be compensated according to the image!



Achilles,
I mistakenly thought that ASSIGNMENTS (usa)... was a favoured portfolio.
but now that I have been told it is not...
I am glad to hear that my suspicions are unfounded.

I take it that you are not one to mince words, so, what you just mentioned to Yuri
is good enough for me. I am glad that in spite of my question on Assignment,
I had continue to increase uploading to DT, which as I said elsewhere , have given me
my highest approval rating ever ...in the past 3 months.

I take it that finally, I have found the types of images that DT wants to sell. Or maybe I have just got too good for you to resist ... ;D

jokes aside, may 2010 be the performance year for me at DT.



« Reply #71 on: January 06, 2010, 12:09 »
0
But there is something that I can understand. You said sales are growing but we see not only revenue decreasing but number of downloads to.
This forum has a lot of members and averge say so. Something must be wrong

Maybe because everyone loves to have something to complain about and if things are status quo there is no point adding to a thread like such?  I am very pleased with DT the last half of 09, my earnings are only growing even though I have been limited with my supply for several months.  That leads me to think that I am not part of this "average" or it is only new uploads that everyone is concerned about.

lagereek

« Reply #72 on: January 06, 2010, 12:26 »
0
Well, we will see.

KB

« Reply #73 on: January 06, 2010, 12:36 »
0
Overall, the number of downloads is highest ever. There is no better parameter to track contributors' revenue than downloads.

Actually, I think revenue is a more important factor to most contributors than downloads. An increase in subscription downloads does not necessarily lead to an increase in revenue for contributors.

As for similarity, yes, rules are the same for everyone.

Based on what you wrote about Yuri, I have no doubt that this is your goal. It is fair and laudable.

However, based on some of the posts in other threads here showing many images that are identical to the extent that it would make a very difficult "Spot the Difference" game, I'm afraid the "similars" rule is not being applied equally AT ALL.


« Reply #75 on: January 06, 2010, 12:54 »
0
@KB, those images slipped through, read my post in the other thread:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/dreamstime-com/more-than-usual-rejections-from-dreamtime/msg128148/?topicseen#new

As for subscriptions, credits are growing much faster than subscriptions. Portfolio with many similars will always have many sub downloads though.


Achilles, it 's good that you are responsive to clear the air on controversy such as this.
might i ask is there any other way for contributors who do not want their works to be "watered down
by subscribers " (to quote your words loosely)?   would it be wise to be able to opt out, or would it be damaging to both DT and contributors?

also, if subscription is such a bane, then perharps DT should be the first to show they prefer credits.
being different could spur more contributorship as no doubt every contributor prefer 1 dl with $2 commission , then 20 subs for the same bottom line. 

that being said, there are some, if not many, of us who would rather see less dls but more credit money. reason why some of us are choosing alternatives such as Alamy, 3d studio,etc..
could not DT provide the same thing in a micro framework?



« Reply #76 on: January 06, 2010, 15:26 »
0
also, if subscription is such a bane, then perharps DT should be the first to show they prefer credits.

Yes, at least please let us opt out! 

« Reply #77 on: January 06, 2010, 17:18 »
0
I really won't mind the .70 sub sales now that so many of my photos have been elevated to level level 3 status (10 dls).

« Reply #78 on: January 06, 2010, 18:56 »
0
At least subscription at DT helps take the photo to a higher level so I can live with that. And 1 subscription sale = 1 sale at DT contrary to another agency where it takes you 4 sub to make 1 sale.

I'm also happy to see that the new levels are now live. Thanks Achilles :)

« Reply #79 on: January 07, 2010, 06:33 »
0
But there is something that I can understand. You said sales are growing but we see not only revenue decreasing but number of downloads to.
This forum has a lot of members and averge say so. Something must be wrong

It is great to see that sales are growing on any site, but that does not mean that contributor revenue is up and quite often it falls, or does it mean that the site is doing well, there is a cost for each upload and that cost comes from sales revenue and not from the number of uploads, if the sales are up by x% but the number of images submitted are up by xx% the operating costs are higher for the site and the RPI overall will be down.

As a contributor to any site, and for me to be up with the game I would need to be maintaining my share of the revenue pool, to do this I would need to increase my portfolio with good images at a rate that maintains my overall percentages of online images, I did do some general calculations last year that concluded I would need to double my portfolio year on year just to stay at a low level of return.

If the website revenue and number of downloads increase but is well below the number of new images and contributors then most will see a fall in thier revenue due to revenue dilution.

It is likely that the RPI on the sites is down year on year dispite any sales revenue increases, due to the increase in the number of images online growing faster than the number of increased sales, many complain about IS limiting the number of uploads but this has enabled them to manage costs and grow at a controlled rate.

David  ;)

« Reply #80 on: January 07, 2010, 07:09 »
0
I think the big companies should raise the price of subscription plan, as we work to improve the images quality of the level every year, now buyers get the better goods but only to pay the old price, for contributors may be unfair!   

Just my sense :P

« Reply #81 on: January 07, 2010, 11:30 »
0
I really won't mind the .70 sub sales now that so many of my photos have been elevated to level level 3 status (10 dls).
They are nice, something that DT has done well and some of the other sites should be following their example.  Looking at the number of $0.70 subs sales, buyers don't mind paying a bit extra, the same as with pay per download.  I hope the subs sites that have kept our commissions low will realise it isn't a sensible strategy.

« Reply #82 on: January 08, 2010, 10:19 »
0
I think the big companies should raise the price of subscription plan, as we work to improve the images quality of the level every year, now buyers get the better goods but only to pay the old price, for contributors may be unfair!   

Just my sense :P

just like you said, " sense" . and you're one of the few who has "sense".
wish there were more like you who has not lose their common "sense". ;)

« Reply #83 on: January 08, 2010, 15:33 »
0
People did not like when all production was shifted to China but at the same time everybody expected goods to be cheap :-) All agencies got mostly same contributors and images how could they compete with each other?

« Reply #84 on: January 08, 2010, 16:11 »
0
I think the big companies should raise the price of subscription plan, as we work to improve the images quality of the level every year, now buyers get the better goods but only to pay the old price, for contributors may be unfair!   

Just my sense :P

Most of the big companies do raise the price of the subscription plan. The problem is that this doesn't always flow onto the contributor.

« Reply #85 on: February 10, 2010, 12:01 »
0
I am experiencing very low sales this month at DT, just one sale! Same on 123RF.. what is going on?...

WarrenPrice

« Reply #86 on: February 10, 2010, 12:16 »
0
I avoid these DT threads, trying to stay off the "black list." 

But, I am experiencing something very strange there ... My subscriptions sales are higher than credit sales.  I have two subscription sales, each for 35 cents.  I have four credit sales, one for 26 cents, two for 29 cents and, thankfully, a Large (4 credit sale)  for $1.19.  That BIG sale helped my RPD surge to 46 cents.  Before that last sale, I was pulling for more subscription sales vs the 26 and 29 cent credit sales.

I'm wondering how credit sales got so far below the subscriptions?

PS:  Thanks for posting about the slow down.  I was starting to think I was already on the "black list."   :-\

« Reply #87 on: February 10, 2010, 13:21 »
0
iam doing ok  on DT ,EL sale yesterday and regular sub dls every day .

« Reply #88 on: February 10, 2010, 15:03 »
0
Only subs sales this month, and just a few of them.

« Reply #89 on: February 10, 2010, 18:44 »
0
I guess I will wait, you never know right? :P

« Reply #90 on: February 10, 2010, 18:49 »
0
Normal, nothing to report. It's just 1/3 of the month so do not panic yet :-)

« Reply #91 on: February 10, 2010, 21:25 »
0
Dreamstime will never favor portfolios. I've always said that we favor great images, never portfolios. Any amateur can produce a best seller and any pro can submit less-than-good images. As the buyer buys the image, they should be compensated according to the image!
In my experience at DT (since 2005) this is very true. It is one of my favorite things about DT and I hope it never changes. IMO all sites would be better to approach the business this way. Let every image compete equally on its merits.

« Reply #92 on: February 10, 2010, 21:35 »
0
Normal. It works better and better.
Last month was my BE.
May be this month will be double from February last year.  :)

« Reply #93 on: February 11, 2010, 05:44 »
0
But, I am experiencing something very strange there ... My subscriptions sales are higher than credit sales.  I have two subscription sales, each for 35 cents.  I have four credit sales, one for 26 cents, two for 29 cents ...I'm wondering how credit sales got so far below the subscriptions?
PS:  Thanks for posting about the slow down.  I was starting to think I was already on the "black list."   :-\
Yes they silently went back to 30%, as they announced last year. I was surprised by an Xsmall 1credit sale of 0.28$ too. I never saw anything 2 there before, unlike at IS where I even have 0.19$. Makes you think better of subs on DT, at 0.35$.  ;)

« Reply #94 on: February 11, 2010, 05:46 »
0
Normal. It works better and better. Last month was my BE.
This is totally irrelevant if you are anonymous and you don't give any portfolio (size) link.

« Reply #95 on: February 11, 2010, 06:53 »
0
I like DT's pricing and structure. I was very surprised at a sale I had today. It was on a level 5 image, sold as small size, I received $6.35 (the buyer paid 11 credits using 2010 credits), the previous sale for the same image was a sub, I received $1.05. The image in question is a single tomato on white, nothing special. I think this is another demonstration that (some) buyers are not particularly price sensitive.

I took a quick look at my past 250 sales or so and none of them received a commission below $0.35, perhaps I've just been lucky. Whilst I'm not jumping for joy at receiving $0.35 as a commission, at least DT has a structure in place that allows popular images to return more to the contributor.

« Reply #96 on: February 11, 2010, 07:34 »
0

I addressed these issues with DT SEO and actually got a slightly unpleasant email back. I was very surprised by this.

Ups. Being unpleasant with Yuri: not the best move I've seen...

« Reply #97 on: March 02, 2010, 20:06 »
0
Six months isn't much of a commitment in the greater scheme of things. After all the agency does have to invest significant sums in the review process, etc and it is only natural for them to insist on a few months to recover those costs.

No comments!  :-\





Well, shut my mouth :-) 

« Reply #98 on: March 03, 2010, 04:23 »
0
subs everywhere, not only at DT...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2442 Views
Last post April 02, 2013, 12:56
by Jogga0
16 Replies
5010 Views
Last post June 27, 2013, 09:20
by Beppe Grillo
5 Replies
4444 Views
Last post May 31, 2017, 03:48
by Noedelhap
6 Replies
2788 Views
Last post July 06, 2020, 02:55
by Justanotherphotographer
14 Replies
2799 Views
Last post March 28, 2021, 13:39
by Fairplay

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle