MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Premium Subscription  (Read 17395 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2009, 10:49 »
0
Deleted


« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2009, 11:00 »
0
Agencies with PPD sales on first place have the future...
Even "king of subscriptions" like SS knows that... "on demand" is a first step forward...
Will be big migration of contributors in future to PPD and midstocks...
Also IS knows that, Vetta is first step...

WHo was it that said "absence of risk" or "not being threatened", in once of the comments. Was it you, borg? Anyway, that poster is right in one sense.
If it eventually comes to us making next to nothing and 35 cents mostly. We really have no risk or no threat to losing too much if we decide to make that "big migration to PPD and midstocks.."
The odds to earn a lot more with another experience site like Veer or IS because of their Corbis or Getty enveloping influence far outweigh the necessity to stay with the micro sites choosing to sell more and more images at sub-level prices.
Not sure if I put it clear enough to show what I mean. I hope what I've written here made sense.

« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2009, 12:08 »
0
Look closer, the "Premium" subs packages are about 25% more expensive than the regular subs.

The contributor commission is raised between 11,9% (highest ranking level) and 16,7% (newbies).

Looks like the standard Fotolia way.... >:(

Oh, I was happy about it when I read their newsletter because of the raise in commission. 

 But after reading the % you posted it seems like kind of a rip off.   :(


« Reply #28 on: July 07, 2009, 13:23 »
0
I'm now so cynical that I don't even read announcements like this in detail. I let more knowledgeable people pick them apart, and the bottom line is always another cut in prices, and commissions, packaged in spin about expanding the market.

Mind you, I'm not saying these agencies are evil, it's just an evolving business.  What they're doing now is probing the resistance on supplier pricing, and so far, they haven't found any, so they keep going.  If we had hidden microphones in the conference rooms of these companies, we'd overhear new executives saying "look people, I know you find this hard to believe, but 95% of these contributors will GIVE us their photos. Seriously. And we don't need the other 5%"
« Last Edit: July 07, 2009, 13:26 by stockastic »

« Reply #29 on: July 07, 2009, 13:57 »
0
I'm now so cynical that I don't even read announcements like this in detail. I let more knowledgeable people pick them apart, and the bottom line is always another cut in prices, and commissions, packaged in spin about expanding the market.

Mind you, I'm not saying these agencies are evil, it's just an evolving business.  What they're doing now is probing the resistance on supplier pricing, and so far, they haven't found any, so they keep going.  If we had hidden microphones in the conference rooms of these companies, we'd overhear new executives saying "look people, I know you find this hard to believe, but 95% of these contributors will GIVE us their photos. Seriously. And we don't need the other 5%"

You're probably dead right, Stocktastic.  I am sure they say pretty much exactly that. 

I would disagree that they don't need the other 5% though.  I bet the 5% who want decent royalties for their work produce the majority of desirable product and generate the vast majority of sales. 

« Reply #30 on: July 07, 2009, 14:20 »
0
I would disagree that they don't need the other 5% though.  I bet the 5% who want decent royalties for their work produce the majority of desirable product and generate the vast majority of sales. 

I think you're right in a sense, but it will take time for this to play out.  I would like to think that eventually there will be new stock agencies focussed more on quality than quantity, and that buyers will tire of the same old stuff. 




« Reply #31 on: July 07, 2009, 14:28 »
0

« Reply #32 on: July 07, 2009, 17:18 »
0

I think you're right in a sense, but it will take time for this to play out.  I would like to think that eventually there will be new stock agencies focussed more on quality than quantity, and that buyers will tire of the same old stuff. 





Hope you are right about that.

BTW, my disagreement was with the hypothetical industry execs, not with you.  I think you hit the nail on the head with your comments :)

Squat

  • If you think you know, you know squat
« Reply #33 on: July 08, 2009, 08:14 »
0
I'm now so cynical that I don't even read announcements like this in detail. I let more knowledgeable people pick them apart, and the bottom line is always another cut in prices, and commissions, packaged in spin about expanding the market.

Well, I don't think you should sit and watch, as following closely with this forum you seem to me to possess  strong skills to articulate your opinion, as much as some of the best commentors here .  I may be naive to think that the CEOs of sites don't pass here to read what you are saying, but looking at the changes made by Getty , I feel part of it was due to the strong reaction and combined efforts of the exclusives, and non exclusives in a small part.

Open forum is a good instrument to move markets. Ignorance is bliss to monopolies , much like politics where the politicians love to see the growing population stay ignorance to their exploitation.

With your input and other knowledgeable people, CEOs of sites will know that there are not only excellent photographers in the grapevine, but also equally conscious negotiators to bring about a better deal for all involved. 

Nobody wants to be in a win-lose situation, this will only be temporary.
As someone once said to me, "to succeed in business , it has very little to do with trusting your clientele, associates,etc... or vice versa, it has more to finding a mutual interest. once there is mutual interest, the bond is impossible to break".
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 18:56 by tan510jomast »

« Reply #34 on: July 08, 2009, 10:47 »
0


Open forum is a good instrument to move markets. Ignorance is bliss to monopolies , much like politics where the politicians love to see the growing population stay ignorance to their exploitation.
 

Completely agree with this ^^. 

This forum is a great service both to contributors and to any web site that is smart enough to pay attention to it.

« Reply #35 on: July 08, 2009, 12:53 »
0
tan510jomast, I actually don't think there's anything that contributors could say or do at this point that would change things.  

Microstock has just gone through a 'boom' - bigger players with more money have rushed in - new sites showing up every week - and they've all been sucked into a mindless price war.  We will just have to wait for the 'bust' that inevitabley follows a 'boom'.  

There will be a shakeout, and maybe after that, new ways to sell images will emerge.  Until then, all we can really is put photos on the big existing sites and accept the trickle of money they generate.  Just pulling them all and not participating is an option too, of course, but it has no benefit, until we have somewhere else to sell them.  

I do think that we are at the point where skilled, experienced photographers are losing motivation and probably shooting and submitting less.  But no one at the agencies cares about that, yet.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 13:01 by stockastic »

Squat

  • If you think you know, you know squat
« Reply #36 on: July 08, 2009, 14:22 »
0
tan510jomast, I actually don't think there's anything that contributors could say or do at this point that would change things. 

Microstock has just gone through a 'boom' - bigger players with more money have rushed in - new sites showing up every week - and they've all been sucked into a mindless price war.  We will just have to wait for the 'bust' that inevitabley follows a 'boom'. 

There will be a shakeout, and maybe after that, new ways to sell images will emerge.  Until then, all we can really is put photos on the big existing sites and accept the trickle of money they generate.  Just pulling them all and not participating is an option too, of course, but it has no benefit, until we have somewhere else to sell them.   

I do think that we are at the point where skilled, experienced photographers are losing motivation and probably shooting and submitting less.  But no one at the agencies cares about that, yet.


stockastic  Your last para. reminds me of what a top gun in CBS once said re. record sales. viz: only Bruce Springstein & a handful actually mattered to  CBS. They make  $$$$ for the record co. All else was more or less window dressing. If the other 85%  faded away, CBS wouldn't give a rat's ass, as Bruce + the few cream on the top brought in the dough.
I think micro is the same. Only what the top slice say matters, at least that seems like it these days. Has it always  been this way?
« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 14:24 by tan510jomast »

« Reply #37 on: July 08, 2009, 14:30 »
0
I'm sure that's how a lot of people in the agencies feel. They sure don't need me and my 100 or so images.

Think of a hardware store. You go there because you know you can get that weird bolt or nut to repair the lawn mower. Once in a while, you buy a big ticket item that makes money for the store. But they need all those money-losing, oddball little parts that take up precious shelf space, to keep you coming in year after year.

« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 14:43 by stockastic »

« Reply #38 on: July 13, 2009, 16:10 »
0
Got my first premium subs sale today.  Extra cents are nice, but I can't say I am happy.

Squat

  • If you think you know, you know squat
« Reply #39 on: July 13, 2009, 18:24 »
0
I'm sure that's how a lot of people in the agencies feel. They sure don't need me and my 100 or so images.

Think of a hardware store. You go there because you know you can get that weird bolt or nut to repair the lawn mower. Once in a while, you buy a big ticket item that makes money for the store. But they need all those money-losing, oddball little parts that take up precious shelf space, to keep you coming in year after year.



I better explain myself in case Fotolia thinks I have been saying bad things against them. I don't want my comments  being misinterpreted. *touch wood !*

I was not pointing a finger at  Fotolia or any agencies .That ( not caring a hoot about the small ones) was the interpretation in reference to the music industry.
 What I mean is their bread and butter is the top layer that brought in revenue... .
Further to your analogy,  nuts and bolts maybe, but even in a hardware store, when the big ticket sales come in, the nuts and bolts are pushed away to make room, because "they are not selling enough".

Y'know, we find the same in our own business dealing as well eg. How your bank  manager gives you preferential treatment and someone else gets less.  It's the reality , that's what we call  pecking order .
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 19:14 by tan510jomast »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
36 Replies
20659 Views
Last post August 20, 2011, 01:18
by tubed
6 Replies
4443 Views
Last post July 19, 2009, 09:34
by willie
34 Replies
13025 Views
Last post July 30, 2009, 20:47
by a.k.a.-tom
19 Replies
10930 Views
Last post September 10, 2009, 15:34
by NitorPhoto
3 Replies
2607 Views
Last post November 16, 2009, 22:34
by cthoman

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle