MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: fotolia is sinking  (Read 48351 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: June 30, 2011, 07:07 »
0
Sales are picking up!!  last three days have been good actually. Anybody else?

I have zero sales allready for a week.


« Reply #101 on: June 30, 2011, 10:09 »
0

I have zero sales allready for a week.
[/quote]

Same here... ???

« Reply #102 on: June 30, 2011, 10:14 »
0
Sales are picking up!!  last three days have been good actually. Anybody else?

I have zero sales allready for a week.

cannot be true.. looking at your port they all look good, really weird no sales..

« Reply #103 on: July 01, 2011, 00:41 »
0
Sales are picking up!!  last three days have been good actually. Anybody else?

I have zero sales allready for a week.

cannot be true.. looking at your port they all look good, really weird no sales..

Maybe i'm stuck with that bronze rank... I have good sales at all other sites, this one should be performing well, but it isnt. Maybe i just need to wait.

nruboc

« Reply #104 on: July 01, 2011, 00:51 »
0
and sinking.... and sinking.. from a strong first place finisher.... now to third place almost overnight. Reaffirms my decision to never go exclusive anywhere....except maybe ShutterStock.. which has always been strong. Good old ShutterStock

lagereek

« Reply #105 on: July 01, 2011, 01:51 »
0
What I cant understand is this:  they see the disaster results following an IS, best match change, which happens every single time. Then they go and do exactly the same thing?
What are they thinking about?  sometimes I get this crazy feeling that agencies do search changes just out of plain stupidity, just "thinking" something will improve?

Why not take wisdom from a Cape-Canaveral space-launch: you better be bloody SURE! its gonna work or else you be in crap street.

« Reply #106 on: July 01, 2011, 03:41 »
0
Same story here - shift to subs, sales decrease :(

« Reply #107 on: July 01, 2011, 04:30 »
0
June was better than May for me.  Still a bit below their best but not too bad.  I've slipped down the rankings a bit, probably because I haven't uploaded much in the past few months.  I really don't see FT sinking much, nowhere near as bad as istock.

« Reply #108 on: July 01, 2011, 05:45 »
0
Weak this week, but on average this month, subs mainly, eroding RPD.

« Reply #109 on: July 01, 2011, 05:50 »
0
Fotolia remains extremely strong for me.  Was my #2 earner again in June.

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #110 on: July 01, 2011, 18:55 »
0
With 1535 on line  only 96 files been downloaded in June.
Really disappointing. At IS and SS I make at least 5 times more

RacePhoto

« Reply #111 on: July 05, 2011, 20:37 »
0
Same story here - shift to subs, sales decrease :(




Titanic drawing (c) expired by the way. ;)

« Reply #112 on: July 05, 2011, 20:49 »
0
I haven't read the whole tread, so I don'y know if anybody mentioned this: Bad Karma  ;)

IS and FT, sinking together:D

« Reply #113 on: July 06, 2011, 00:19 »
0
Me I'm not seeing that.  June was nearly BME for FT which just missed by a few cents.  And if this month doesn't fall to pieces I should see about the same in June.  I only care about my revenue going up from previous months the rest of it doesn't really matter to me.

CD123

« Reply #114 on: July 06, 2011, 09:02 »
0
I find this sort of amusing. Since joining here I found constantly in the threads people complaining about bad sales or no sales at all on certain sites (and in this instance a "sinking" site), then you look at the poll on the right, and find it very rarely corresponds with the chatter.  ???
Fotolia up by 0.03
Panthermedia (another thread - no sales at all) on 2.7 and up by 0.08
etc.
etc.
etc.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2011, 11:51 by CD123 »

« Reply #115 on: July 06, 2011, 11:50 »
0
The poll numbers are much less interesting than watching who is reporting declines in threads like these. When people with large portfolios and a strong sales record report sales are dropping, that's useful information.

eggshell

« Reply #116 on: July 06, 2011, 14:17 »
0
I find this sort of amusing. Since joining here I found constantly in the threads people complaining about bad sales or no sales at all on certain sites (and in this instance a "sinking" site), then you look at the poll on the right, and find it very rarely corresponds with the chatter.  ???
Fotolia up by 0.03
Panthermedia (another thread - no sales at all) on 2.7 and up by 0.08
etc.
etc.
etc.

+1
BME in June , changing rank helped a lot .

CD123

« Reply #117 on: July 06, 2011, 14:32 »
0
The poll numbers are much less interesting than watching who is reporting declines in threads like these. When people with large portfolios and a strong sales record report sales are dropping, that's useful information.
I rather follow the threads. As newcomer I used the polls to assist to which sited I would contribute, not knowing that some of them are very obviously pumped up by false statistics. So now I sit on a few very much dead middle and low tier sites I spent a lot of time on, like PantherMedia and Zoonar.  ::)
Have learned a lot through the forums though (if you know who to listen to, I have to add).  ;)  
It obviously also helps now that I have a reasonable portfolio on a few sites myself and can start seeing trends for myself.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2011, 14:36 by CD123 »

« Reply #118 on: July 06, 2011, 17:57 »
0
I have a small portfolio and I don't take part in the poll, but what I can say is that the number of sales in FT hasn't changed much, however the proportion of subs has increased, making RPD and monthly earnings lower.

lagereek

« Reply #119 on: July 07, 2011, 00:03 »
0
I thought FT said something about a new search or something, coming soon or whatever, didnt they?

« Reply #120 on: July 08, 2011, 17:09 »
0
I find this sort of amusing. Since joining here I found constantly in the threads people complaining about bad sales or no sales at all on certain sites (and in this instance a "sinking" site), then you look at the poll on the right, and find it very rarely corresponds with the chatter.  ???

Agreeing with CD123 here. There are still contributors on Fotolia that have great sales (I can't complain myself) - But my output is high - It's an uphill battle to some degree.

Microstock has become some sort of a numbers game. Unless you don't put out 500+ images a month (or even more), your sales will drop over the course of time. Too much competition: Thousands of new contributors joining every month, on a site like FT alone...

 
« Last Edit: July 08, 2011, 17:32 by bolivarhavanna »

CD123

« Reply #121 on: July 08, 2011, 17:34 »
0
bolivarhavanna , such a same you complete reply got edited out (guess it was too long but luckily I got the complete input by email). Your point (not completely reflected in the edited version of your reply) that people working hard at their portfolios every month does not feel the effects of "minor" site changes as those depending on previous sales and older images makes a lot of sense.

I think the top tier is further less influenceable than those below it, which can manipulated by a number of "false" contributor votes (which is very obviously the case in some of the sites I mentioned).

My situation is quite similar to yours bud (unfortunately not reflected in the remainder of your post above), mine is just medical of nature, but I wish you well and best of luck!!!
« Last Edit: July 08, 2011, 17:37 by CD123 »

« Reply #122 on: July 08, 2011, 17:45 »
0
mindscanner, such a same you complete reply got edited out (guess it was too long but luckily I got the complete input by email). Your point (not completely reflected in the edited version of your reply) that people working hard at their portfolios every month does not feel the effects of "minor" site changes as those depending on previous sales and older images makes a lot of sense.

I think the top tier is further less influenceable than those below it, which can manipulated by a number of "false" contributor votes (which is very obviously the case in some of the sites I mentioned).

My situation is quite similar to yours bud (unfortunately not reflected in the remainder of your post above), mine is just medical of nature, but I wish you well and best of luck!!!

Ha!!! I decided to edit it after I re-read it and feared it was too boring and too long of a read  ;)
But thanks for pointing out, that an essential point I was trying to make got indeed lost, which was that putting more work into your portfolio helps to eleminate the vulnerabilty of your portfolio to sales fluctuations.

Best of luck to you as well!!

Slovenian

« Reply #123 on: July 08, 2011, 17:48 »
0
Microstock has become some sort of a numbers game. Unless you don't put out 500+ images a month (or even more), your sales will drop over the course of time. Too much competition: Thousands of new contributors joining every month, on a site like FT alone...

It's one of 2 possible strategies. Bombarding it with tons of photos, hoping some will hit. However if you work alone and upload 500+ images, you can deliver quality, so it is quantity over quality (image factories can deliver that with good quality as well, or deliver way more without it). The other is focusing on quality and great, edgy concepts. Than you can deliver 50 images and earn the same. Or even more if we are talking about utterly boring isolated on white shots etc. Personally I prefer the second option, although my work lacks quality in most cases and I only get online someting like 35 images/month.

« Reply #124 on: July 08, 2011, 18:00 »
0
It's one of 2 possible strategies.

Slovenian, I absolutely agree. I forgot to add that this strategy works for ME, it may not work for everyone. I try to keep the balance between mass production and quality. It's a compromise, for sure...

If you have amazing skills and talent, you will succeed with a portfolio of 500 images and leave port's with 5000+ images behind easily.

The point I was trying to get accross was: In either case, and whatever strategy works for you, if you stop at 100 images with stratgey no.1, or stop at 2000 images with strategy no.2, your sales WILL stagnate. I think at this point, microstock requires constant contribution. The agencies like to portray contribution to their sites as "passive income" to make an easy and quick buck. Well, technically, it may be passive income, since you don't earn anything right after you're done shooting, but like I said: with the increasing competition, the limits of the sales potential of your portfolio increases as well, if you don't keep up with the pace.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
4634 Views
Last post May 02, 2006, 12:40
by leaf
9 Replies
3863 Views
Last post November 04, 2012, 04:58
by aeonf
373 Replies
79725 Views
Last post September 04, 2015, 19:01
by 60D
103 Replies
24672 Views
Last post May 15, 2020, 04:32
by Rage
2 Replies
2133 Views
Last post February 24, 2020, 01:26
by leaf

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle