MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: 2008/2009 (10 Years Ago) Image Prices  (Read 1000 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 27, 2019, 14:59 »
0
Curious - for anyone that was actually submitting images in 2008/2009...

What was the income like then? I know right now it is often $0.30-$1/image... But what was it like then? Were you getting regular $200 sales/image, so maybe $5k/month in sales? Or..... what?

EDIT: Now that I realized some people are also replying about "RPD" - I am also curious as to sales volume/portfolio sizes. I.e., say you had 1000 images, how much would you have made $$$ wise say in 2005, 2010, 2015, etc? Thanks!
« Last Edit: March 29, 2019, 07:56 by SuperPhoto »


« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2019, 15:22 »
+4
No, the volume was like 10 times higher.

Images could have more than 10 000 downloads, so even if you got 30 cents to a dollar, a good series could earn you thousands of dollars and thus you could invest in your production.

There was also more traditional macrostock with higher prices, but my impression was that often money on the micros was higher if you had the right kind of content.

Low price + extremly high volume...which gave you very reliable and predictable income.

Today there is a lot of oversupply, so even a very good series will have a difficult time bringing in production costs.

swisschocolate

  • A girl from the Alps
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2019, 15:53 »
+2
In 2008/2009 there wasn't regular $200 sales anymore (at least for newbies), maybe in 2002 :)

And on Shutterstock it was already the same 0,25c for a beginner.

But the volume was great even with a small portfolio.

Looking at my SS stats I think 100 images back then is like 10.000 images now :)
« Last Edit: March 27, 2019, 15:56 by swisschocolate »

« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2019, 15:58 »
+6
No, the volume was like 10 times higher.

Images could have more than 10 000 downloads, so even if you got 30 cents to a dollar, a good series could earn you thousands of dollars and thus you could invest in your production.

Before my image was stolen by everyone on the internet, my girl with headset had more than 10K downloads at IS.

« Reply #4 on: March 28, 2019, 03:29 »
0
Guys, have started a thread where we are attempting to push back to the agencies on some of the contributor issues. Help and advise will be much appreciated

https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/uniting-contributors-for-better-royalty-price-control-and-safeguarding-this-indu

« Reply #5 on: March 28, 2019, 03:35 »
+3
No, the volume was like 10 times higher.

Which can be rephrased as "the competition was 1% or less compared to today".

Today there is a lot of oversupply, so even a very good series will have a difficult time bringing in production costs.

There, you said it.

The price is just an EFFECT of a supply that is incredibly large. Prices aren't lowered for no reason. And as we can see here, they haven't even really changed the last 10 years...

What can you do about it? Nothing. Unless you ban companies from making affordable cameras that now most people can buy.

swisschocolate

  • A girl from the Alps
« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2019, 03:47 »
+1
Prices aren't lowered for no reason. And as we can see here, they haven't even really changed the last 10 years...

That's a great argument against this "race to the bottom" talk.

SS didn't touch it's prices/royalties for how many years? 11? 15?

« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2019, 04:30 »
+4
Prices aren't lowered for no reason. And as we can see here, they haven't even really changed the last 10 years...

That's a great argument against this "race to the bottom" talk.

SS didn't touch it's prices/royalties for how many years? 11? 15?
We can also see that over the years SS have paid about 33% commission. Lots come and go promising more but eventually fail or bring commissions to similar levels. Many hugely underestimate the cost of running a sustainable agency. Marketing is probably the most important and expensive thing. It is not in the agencies interests to reduce prices.

« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2019, 16:27 »
+2
I just figured this up the other day for iStock. RPD at 40%:
2008 1.85
2009 2.44
2018 3.59
« Last Edit: March 28, 2019, 16:49 by asiseeit »

ShadySue

« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2019, 17:36 »
0
I just figured this up the other day for iStock. RPD at 40%:
2008 1.85
2009 2.44
2018 3.59
Yeah, my rpd is higher now than  in 2008/9 (but nowadays I get far fewer dls), but what about e.g. 2012 or 3, my rpd was higher then (I know that's not what the OP asked).

« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2019, 22:19 »
0
I just figured this up the other day for iStock. RPD at 40%:
2008 1.85
2009 2.44
2018 3.59
Yeah, my rpd is higher now than  in 2008/9 (but nowadays I get far fewer dls), but what about e.g. 2012 or 3, my rpd was higher then (I know that's not what the OP asked).

What does RPD mean? Is that 'return per download'?

« Reply #11 on: March 29, 2019, 01:04 »
+1
rpd, return per download.

which needs total sales volume to really give you the real picture. an rpd of 100 dollars but only sales once a year doesnt really help you.

« Reply #12 on: March 29, 2019, 07:12 »
0
I just figured this up the other day for iStock. RPD at 40%:
2008 1.85
2009 2.44
2018 3.59

40% of what for what? You know what they charge? How's your total income on IS since 2008?

My RPD Alamy is $50 only 2 sell a year, the number RPD means nothing.

Volume was much higher before 2012. Competition up, sales down, income down. But I don't feed the parasites or the race to the bottom, might be different for desperate people who put their work anywhere that will take it, probably worse for them. If you feed the bottom agencies you are stealing from your own earnings, forcing prices down.

ShadySue

« Reply #13 on: March 29, 2019, 07:25 »
0
I just figured this up the other day for iStock. RPD at 40%:
2008 1.85
2009 2.44
2018 3.59

40% of what for what? You know what they charge? How's your total income on IS since 2008?

My RPD Alamy is $50 only 2 sell a year, the number RPD means nothing.

Volume was much higher before 2012. Competition up, sales down, income down. But I don't feed the parasites or the race to the bottom, might be different for desperate people who put their work anywhere that will take it, probably worse for them. If you feed the bottom agencies you are stealing from your own earnings, forcing prices down.

The OP's question was specifically about RPD.

« Reply #14 on: March 29, 2019, 07:56 »
0
I just figured this up the other day for iStock. RPD at 40%:
2008 1.85
2009 2.44
2018 3.59

40% of what for what? You know what they charge? How's your total income on IS since 2008?

My RPD Alamy is $50 only 2 sell a year, the number RPD means nothing.

Volume was much higher before 2012. Competition up, sales down, income down. But I don't feed the parasites or the race to the bottom, might be different for desperate people who put their work anywhere that will take it, probably worse for them. If you feed the bottom agencies you are stealing from your own earnings, forcing prices down.

The OP's question was specifically about RPD.

Realized I should have asked about total sales as well... Curious what the market was like back then.

« Reply #15 on: March 29, 2019, 08:23 »
0
.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2019, 08:25 by asiseeit »

« Reply #16 on: March 29, 2019, 08:24 »
+2
I just figured this up the other day for iStock. RPD at 40%:
2008 1.85
2009 2.44
2018 3.59

40% of what for what? You know what they charge? How's your total income on IS since 2008?

My RPD Alamy is $50 only 2 sell a year, the number RPD means nothing.

Volume was much higher before 2012. Competition up, sales down, income down. But I don't feed the parasites or the race to the bottom, might be different for desperate people who put their work anywhere that will take it, probably worse for them. If you feed the bottom agencies you are stealing from your own earnings, forcing prices down.

The OP's question was specifically about RPD.

Realized I should have asked about total sales as well... Curious what the market was like back then.

Everyone has different experiences, so sometimes you'll get different answers all around. I was just a hobbyist in 2004 but went full time in 2009 after passing 5 figures in 2008. RPD for me was far lower before 2008, 48 cents in 2006 for example, but I wasn't exclusive then. RPD peaked in 2013 at over $10, but we had much higher priced collections back then too (TAC and Vetta). Then iStock subscriptions came in in 2014 which caused a big drop in RPD and $, but way up in volume. Downloads came back through subscriptions and money followed after a year or two. 2017 and 2018 were my BYEs in downloads and $, but I run a small team now. I don't think I would have seen the increase on my own only.


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #17 on: March 30, 2019, 10:42 »
0
Curious - for anyone that was actually submitting images in 2008/2009...

What was the income like then? I know right now it is often $0.30-$1/image... But what was it like then? Were you getting regular $200 sales/image, so maybe $5k/month in sales? Or..... what?

EDIT: Now that I realized some people are also replying about "RPD" - I am also curious as to sales volume/portfolio sizes. I.e., say you had 1000 images, how much would you have made $$$ wise say in 2005, 2010, 2015, etc? Thanks!

RPD lower, Volume Lower, Income Lower. Competition higher, much higher.
February 14, 2010 - Shutterstock reaches 10 million Photos
Feb. 14, 2019 - 250 Million images on Shutterstock

Don't do percentages or times higher, the answer is, competition was 10 million images, now the competition is 250 million images.

We can also see that over the years SS have paid about 33% commission. Lots come and go promising more but eventually fail or bring commissions to similar levels. Many hugely underestimate the cost of running a sustainable agency. Marketing is probably the most important and expensive thing. It is not in the agencies interests to reduce prices.

If I remember the annual reports, the share SS paid to contributors is more like 22% Jo Ann reads more carefully she will know.

Marketing for a successful agency is a big expense, and the reason why the small ones stay small or will close. Without marketing and new customers there is no growth. On the other side, iStock lost their market share because of competition from new agencies advertising and price cutting. Holding the buyers you have is also important for any agency.

On the positive, my sales did get a bump up when I added 3,000 Editorial images in January 2012.  If I'm only comparing photos and illustrations to the same photos and illustrations, and new photos and illustrations, excluding Editorial content, a fair description would be income implosion.  ;)

iStock RPD is easily 1/3rd of what it used to be. (unfortunately all my Editorial is gone from there, so not a totally fair comparison) Alamy is about 28% of what it was early on 2010 and before. FT/AS has increased for me, now at .87 RPD and I have nothing much there or exceptional. SS is at .70 RPD, which could be up due to better content and different images. SS did not increase prices and ELs are actually lower, but OD and S&O are better.

I can't compare years to modern because my content changed. The above is the best I can offer. Pond5 is new, doesn't count. I dropped DT, went back, no fair data there either.

And the other 10-15 or maybe 20 places I tried and dropped, my sales are 0, my RPD is the same and I'm happy as can be, to be done with them. Hey FOAPers, RPD was $5 and always the same (just a bit of sarcastic enlightenment. If I remember, seven sales in two years) Also dropped.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2019, 10:44 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #18 on: March 30, 2019, 10:56 »
0
They pay "up to" 30% so a the actual amount is probably somewhere in the middle. But I think we agree for all its many faults and it seeming to be staggering somewhat in recent times it remains the biggest earner for the majority of contributors. If it we easy to run a business to compete with them and pay out more then they would have more competition. Plenty of people on here seem to know how to do it...perhaps they should and make a packet.

« Reply #19 on: March 30, 2019, 11:15 »
0
I just figured this up the other day for iStock. RPD at 40%:
2008 1.85
2009 2.44
2018 3.59

40% of what for what? You know what they charge? How's your total income on IS since 2008?

My RPD Alamy is $50 only 2 sell a year, the number RPD means nothing.

Volume was much higher before 2012. Competition up, sales down, income down. But I don't feed the parasites or the race to the bottom, might be different for desperate people who put their work anywhere that will take it, probably worse for them. If you feed the bottom agencies you are stealing from your own earnings, forcing prices down.

The OP's question was specifically about RPD.

My mistake assuming he wanted both.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
19 Replies
5888 Views
Last post June 17, 2008, 17:21
by litifeta
30 Replies
6445 Views
Last post June 09, 2008, 03:04
by francisblack
1 Replies
2441 Views
Last post June 02, 2008, 21:43
by madelaide
12 Replies
4894 Views
Last post June 10, 2008, 23:24
by DanP68
26 Replies
9381 Views
Last post March 29, 2009, 16:52
by ozbandit

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results