pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: fotolia is sinking  (Read 37669 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

saniphoto

« on: June 07, 2011, 04:59 »
0
hi
would like to know if it is just me, but Fotolia was going down in one year, from around 80 dollars per day, to a 15/20...  apparently without reason. I means, I upload regularly images, new ideas not same old same old, no views usually.. then noticed also lots of subs recently.
I am emerald BTW. I would like to know other emerald if they are noticing a similar decline, otherwise must think is just me and must correct something in my production of new images. thanks.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2011, 09:29 by wiseguy »


« Reply #1 on: June 07, 2011, 05:07 »
0
its always at low rank for me, i am just a small guy...but if i can earn 80 a day i could make a lving for that at least in my country 8)

« Reply #2 on: June 07, 2011, 06:11 »
0
I'm nowhere near emerald but have noticed my earnings have fallen a bit in the past few months.  Every time they cut commissions or change the cannister levels, I lose motivation and they lose money.  Funny how the sites that cut commissions don't seem to be making as much as they used to.  Perhaps if they pay us more, we will have an incentive to work harder and it will make them more money.  I know that's not likely to happen, as they are focused on grabbing as much money from us as they can but it really looks like a flawed policy in the long term.

« Reply #3 on: June 07, 2011, 06:18 »
0
There has been a sharp decline in my earnings at Fotolia as well. Interesting the way the agencies that slashed our royalties are in decline, while the sites that treat us fairly are doing much better - poetic justice at work.

« Reply #4 on: June 07, 2011, 07:02 »
0
I have been increasing slowly but last month had a drop but cannot compare results with you for sure.. I am on the 100 sales per month and yes I am having more subs than ever.. and still a little far from the silver, and what for? to get 25% when a few months ago was at 28%.. stock is a lot of fun :)

incredible how can I earn now less than when I started! yep keep on uploading and dreaming they wont cut again when we are close to another "level"

« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2011, 07:10 »
0
my earnings at fotolia are down about 30% for the first 5 months of this year compared to the first 5 months of last year.

I have increased my portfolio by about 40% in that time. Most other agencies I have seen an increase iin earnings.

I'm at the lower end of the scale compared to you but I am seeing fallings in earnings.

Worthy noting that my royality pecentage has gone from 33% when I started to 23%. Thanks for that.

saniphoto

« Reply #6 on: June 07, 2011, 09:33 »
0
There has been a sharp decline in my earnings at Fotolia as well. Interesting the way the agencies that slashed our royalties are in decline, while the sites that treat us fairly are doing much better - poetic justice at work.

yes, you are right! in fact Dreamstime is now my number one. And they treat us fairly, communication is fantastic, you can even write to Serban and he always answer. Try that with Chad at Fotolia!   :)
Anyway is something that escape my mind, what logic they have in making us demotivated.. as rightly pointed out Sharpshot.

lisafx

« Reply #7 on: June 07, 2011, 09:50 »
0
I'm emerald at FT also, and have noticed the same.  It is very distressing!

My stats for May showed a 15% decline from May 2010.  Yet the amount of downloads was statistically dead even!  (only 16 actual downloads fewer this May, out of over 2k). 

In my case it makes it pretty clear that the main culprit is subscriptions.  The vast majority of sales seem to have gone to subs.  There is also the issue of slow sellers being converted from 2 down to 1 credit base, but those sales are still relatively few for me.  Mostly it is just the subs. 

I didn't calculate the percentage changes from last year in the stats thread, but just did it now, so I'll share:

IS: -15%
SS: +20%
DT: +11%
FT: -15%

So my numbers agree with Allsa's theory.  Istock and FT equally (and substantially) down, SS and DT both up, with SS sales going through the roof!  Is this this some form of microstock Karma?  ;)

« Reply #8 on: June 07, 2011, 10:10 »
0
They just found a way to not report sales.

« Reply #9 on: June 07, 2011, 10:32 »
0
My April was 60% down on the previous year, not that I've ever done very well there.

saniphoto

« Reply #10 on: June 07, 2011, 10:50 »
0
I'm emerald at Fotolia also, and have noticed the same.  It is very distressing!

My stats for May showed a 15% decline from May 2010.  Yet the amount of downloads was statistically dead even!  (only 16 actual downloads fewer this May, out of over 2k). 

In my case it makes it pretty clear that the main culprit is subscriptions.  The vast majority of sales seem to have gone to subs.  There is also the issue of slow sellers being converted from 2 down to 1 credit base, but those sales are still relatively few for me.  Mostly it is just the subs. 

I didn't calculate the percentage changes from last year in the stats thread, but just did it now, so I'll share:

IS: -15%
Shutterstock: +20%
Dreamstime: +11%
Fotolia: -15%

So my numbers agree with Allsa's theory.  Istock and Fotolia equally (and substantially) down, Shutterstock and Dreamstime both up, with Shutterstock sales going through the roof!  Is this this some form of microstock Karma?  ;)


Thank Lisa for your reply. Lucky you, with just a 15% loss! I better not tell what percentage is mine!  :'(
Well, it seems that at least the consensus is toward a kind of nice Karmic revenge on our behalf...  :)

saniphoto

« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2011, 10:50 »
0
They just found a way to not report sales.

 :D

« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2011, 12:07 »
0
7 days rank: from 130-150 down to 450 to 500 in April 2011,
$$ down 30%

I think they did the Best Match Tweak.

« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2011, 14:19 »
0
Same here and  I'm also emerald.  I have also gone from averaging 50 euros a day to averaging 20 euros a day.  It was a dramatic drop from one month to the next about 6 months ago which also makes me think that it was a best match change.   Luckily Dt has gone more or less the same in the other direction to take most of the loss or I would be hysterical now. Ft was my best earner and DT my 4th and now it is the other way round, Dt is my best earner and Ft my 4th.

« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2011, 14:22 »
0
Its funny how the experience on any given stock site is so different for each person, as I was about to ask the question in a different thread, what has changed at Fotolia recently? Not in a bad way, but in a good way.

For a long time I had the same experience of a friend, we called Fotolia the "one hit wonder" site, because we each had a few images that sold like crazy, and nothing else seemed to sell at all, or very rarely.

Now, in the last month, I am getting a lot of original sales, plus EL's...and I only have 153 images on the site.  I have never really cared for Fotolia, one because its sales potential was really weak for me, and because of its crazy rejections. I have a 70% plus approval rating with everyone else, and like 35% with Fotolia. It was annoying enough that I finally gave up, and decided I'll just wait for payouts with what I have up.

Now I am beginning to wonder if I should try again, and post some newer stuff.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2011, 14:26 by gwhitton »

« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2011, 15:01 »
0
I too am an emerald contributor and my sales have dropped over 50% in the last few months! New images are getting hardly any views and no sales. Something has obviously changed for the worst for many contributors - i can only hope things pick up soon.

saniphoto

« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2011, 15:36 »
0
Its funny how the experience on any given stock site is so different for each person, as I was about to ask the question in a different thread, what has changed at Fotolia recently? Not in a bad way, but in a good way.

For a long time I had the same experience of a friend, we called Fotolia the "one hit wonder" site, because we each had a few images that sold like crazy, and nothing else seemed to sell at all, or very rarely.

Now, in the last month, I am getting a lot of original sales, plus EL's...and I only have 153 images on the site.  I have never really cared for Fotolia, one because its sales potential was really weak for me, and because of its crazy rejections. I have a 70% plus approval rating with everyone else, and like 35% with Fotolia. It was annoying enough that I finally gave up, and decided I'll just wait for payouts with what I have up.

Now I am beginning to wonder if I should try again, and post some newer stuff.

This is interesting. And made me wonder if FT isn't maybe more glad to pay you, than to pay me? I means, every sale by a silver is costing to FT less (exactly 0.25 for non excl.) than to pay an Emerald (0.37 for non excl.)...  if somebody object that also FT earn less by the sales from lower ranks, I can counter with the fact that probably is well compensated by the number of many small sales (that equal to lower payments by FT to contrib.). If FT earn 1 million dollars and must pay on that amount the 20 to 25% is surely better deal for them than to pay a lot of 30 to 40%... isn't it?
Not to mention the other old arguments of dollars vs euro... and the many cunning 'tricky' way FT has used to rip money from us, here and there... 
The fact is, that you cannot possibly plan anything seriously in a professional way (also in terms of investment), if the agencies can 'swing' in this crazy way and your sales as well go from crazy high to crazy low.

« Reply #17 on: June 07, 2011, 15:51 »
0
Wiseguy,

If I ever got seriously into this business, the lesson i have learned so far is to never count on anyone site for your survival. I would never ever consider going exclusive, as the agency has all the power and you have none. However by spreading yourself out, you decrease the impact any one site has on you. I would also make sure that micros aren't my only source of income.  You almost have to branch out if you don't want to become a victim of this race to the bottom that seems to be occurring.

I've always thought of my photos as a product that if I am careful I can sell forever at as many outlets as possible. The main thing I have to be careful of is not spread myself to thin trying to sell at shops that don't have any customers.  And we've all run into those.

saniphoto

« Reply #18 on: June 07, 2011, 16:04 »
0
I agree totally with you on this. But is true that I had to vent a little about this whole * FT falling!  :)

« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2011, 16:06 »
0
been gold about a month or so, sales I would describe as a bit low, cant say I noticed the commission increase.
I got to rank 422 overall with 7 days often hitting 300. when they lowered commissions last my 7 day rank went into the 700's. the change in gold hasn't changed my rank, still in the 700's (overall is now 426).
My inclination (and obviously I cant really tell) is that the best match is skewed away from higher ranks

nruboc

« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2011, 16:26 »
0
been gold about a month or so, sales I would describe as a bit low, cant say I noticed the commission increase.
I got to rank 422 overall with 7 days often hitting 300. when they lowered commissions last my 7 day rank went into the 700's. the change in gold hasn't changed my rank, still in the 700's (overall is now 426).
My inclination (and obviously I cant really tell) is that the best match is skewed away from higher ranks

Yup, Fotolia is obviously hitting the higher ranked folks, probably due to the incresed number of subscriptions. They stand to make more off the higher ranks in the ppd scheme, since they charge more for their files , however, not so from a subscription standpoint, at least that I know of.

Who knows they may even have introduced two separate BMs. That's what I would do, based on whether the logged in customer was a PPD or a Subscription customer. They may be targeting the lower tiered photographers in their Subscription best match , and then the higher tiered photographers in thier PPD best match.

 

lisafx

« Reply #21 on: June 07, 2011, 16:56 »
0

My inclination (and obviously I cant really tell) is that the best match is skewed away from higher ranks

This thread would certainly suggest that's what's going on.  What a bummer.  Emeralds used to have favored search positions because they wanted to "put their best images in front of the customer".  Looks like that changed somewhere along the line. 

Taking a page from Istock's playbook - using the search engine to manipulate profits. 

« Reply #22 on: June 07, 2011, 23:23 »
0
my analysis is that SS will be market leader in no more than 2 years.

lagereek

« Reply #23 on: June 07, 2011, 23:51 »
0
Im Gold, and yes, nowhere near what it used to be, Its their best match-change that did it. They as always imitates IS, as soon as IS change their best match, two weeks later Fotolia will always do the same. Only this time the Fotolia change was actually more severe, damaged a lot of portfolios.
Right now, its not much better then a middle-tier agency.

« Reply #24 on: June 08, 2011, 00:35 »
0

My inclination (and obviously I cant really tell) is that the best match is skewed away from higher ranks

This thread would certainly suggest that's what's going on.  What a bummer.  Emeralds used to have favored search positions because they wanted to "put their best images in front of the customer".  Looks like that changed somewhere along the line.  

Taking a page from Istock's playbook - using the search engine to manipulate profits.  

I don't think its a direct targeting of emeralds. Maybe they're pushing older files further back in the search rank. As I said, my results there have always been dismal - I'm silver with no prospect of making it to a higher level in the foreseeable future - and I got hit, too. Before the search shake-up I had clawed up to $140-200 a month. After the 20% pay cut and the search shift I'm now down to $70 a month from several thousand images. This month it looks as if 123 will be way ahead of Fotolia.

Oh, yeah ... what I meant to say when I started writing this is that the impression that emeralds are the target could be created by the fact that it tends to be high-ranking people who post here.

OF course, they could have looked at emeralds, thought "there are lots of older files there", demoted old files to improve sustainability and taken my portfolio out as collateral damage.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 00:39 by BaldricksTrousers »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
3542 Views
Last post May 02, 2006, 12:40
by leaf
1 Replies
3324 Views
Last post May 04, 2006, 09:18
by leaf
9 Replies
2885 Views
Last post November 04, 2012, 04:58
by aeonf
373 Replies
64469 Views
Last post September 04, 2015, 19:01
by 60D
43 Replies
11244 Views
Last post November 09, 2015, 04:11
by DavidZydd

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results