MicrostockGroup

Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: stokfoto on June 02, 2008, 11:58

Title: FT subs already started!
Post by: stokfoto on June 02, 2008, 11:58
wow that was quick!
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: Peter on June 02, 2008, 13:03
wow that was quick!

USD    249 for  3 months
USD    999 for 6 moths
USD   1899  for a year


your info is not correct...

not 3 months (it is 599$), but 1 month (249$).

(http://i28.tinypic.com/rh5xrs.png)

(http://i30.tinypic.com/2s9owtz.png)



also, for photographers:

(http://i29.tinypic.com/11tyg75.png)
(this is partial screenshot of Chad's post on the forum)
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: jsnover on June 02, 2008, 13:09
I think FT made a mistake in the order of rankings - Sapphire comes after emerald (that's just Andres and Yuri for now), so they get 30 cents and Ruby gets 31 if anyone ever sticks around long enough to get there.
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: nativelight on June 02, 2008, 13:37
ooooooooohhhhhhhhhh....an extra penny for each new rank!  What an incentive!  NOT! ;)
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: Sean Locke Photography on June 02, 2008, 14:43
Giving away 25 "L" images for $10 a day is an absolute scandal.  Fotolia should be embarrassed.
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: stokfoto on June 02, 2008, 15:52
your info is not correct...

Thank you Chode for correcting .sorry I must have been so surprised ( I mean shocked)and got the numbers wrong.
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: PeterChigmaroff on June 02, 2008, 16:02
From a buyers perspective, is there anything that really sets apart one agency from another?
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: stokfoto on June 02, 2008, 16:06
From a buyers perspective, is there anything that really sets apart one agency from another?
may be IS has the advantage of offering some exclusive content among them other than that no I don't think so.
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: lisafx on June 02, 2008, 16:07
From a buyers perspective, is there anything that really sets apart one agency from another?
may be IS has the advantage of offering some exclusive content among them other than that no I don't think so.

I agree with this.  From my limited buying experience the main difference was the exclusive content offered by istock. 
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: stokfoto on June 02, 2008, 16:08
Giving away 25 "L" images for $10 a day is an absolute scandal.  Fotolia should be embarrassed.
others already offering XL size images on that price aren't they.But I agree with you I'd rather they didn't
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: madelaide on June 02, 2008, 18:42
Given what they may get for the 3months and above packages, maybe we should be grateful for their commission? ;D

I had one sale only today, non-subs, 4 credits.  If I could only stay this way... edited: another 4-credit sale. let me enjoy the moment while it lasts...

On the forum they said "only" 5% of the sales were subs.  I find it in fact an impressively high number for a first day.

Regards,
Adelaide
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: PeterChigmaroff on June 02, 2008, 21:56
Does anyone know how many images the average sub user downloads? i.e. what does an agency actually make?
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: madelaide on June 02, 2008, 21:57
Does anyone know how many images the average sub user downloads? i.e. what does an agency actually make?

Actually I really don't care.  All I know is that the buyer is getting too much for too little!

Regards,
Adelaide
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: PeterChigmaroff on June 02, 2008, 22:18
Does anyone know how many images the average sub user downloads? i.e. what does an agency actually make?

Actually I really don't care.  All I know is that the buyer is getting too much for too little!

Regards,
Adelaide

I believe you are correct!!
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: bravajulia on June 02, 2008, 23:17
on the average time I think buyer don't reach to download the total number of photos they subscribe on, or if they do, never use more than a little part of the downloaded. In the first case, there is a gain for the agency, and not too much interest for the photographer, in the second case there is a loss for the agency (0,33 x 750=247,5$ to pay photographers ) and interesting income for photographer. Is like a bet, we hope for the second behavior....
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: andresr on June 03, 2008, 02:54
I am part of a subscription site in asia which pays 50% of the royalties made from subscriptions to photographers and I average between $0.65 and 0.70 per sale, that means subscription agencies in micro are getting about 65-75% of subscription sales earnings.

I hate subscriptions, we have no control over our images and it is the best place for thieves.
I am seriously going to reconsider my position in microstock later this year.
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: steppysteph on June 03, 2008, 04:29
What! Was there a newsletter about it? Anyway still no sales.. darn.. what's the "style" in fotolia (in SS you should always upload).

Andresr, what's the name of the subscription site in Asia?
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: epixx on June 03, 2008, 06:16

I am seriously going to reconsider my position in microstock later this year.


Ditto. I'm actually re-editing a batch right now for macro/RM that was prepared for upload to the micros this week. I'll probably lose money short-term, but the way this is going, that won't last long.
Title: Re: FT subs already started!
Post by: stokfoto on June 03, 2008, 10:33
I wonder what Yuri ,Ron and other big players reactions like. I don't think it'd be any differentl from Andres's.