MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 22% decline In 2012 sales compared to 2011  (Read 9644 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 04, 2012, 14:37 »
0
Ive just completed an analysis of the downloads of 193 of iStocks leading contributors.  As of June 30th these people had a total of 30,449,000+ downloads, or about 24% of iStocks total downloads since they the company was founded. On average this contributor group had 22% fewer sales in the first half of 2012 than they had during the same period in 2011. This doesnt necessarily mean revenue was down. Customers may have purchased higher priced images. But a drop of this magnitude in the number of images licensed is cause for concern. To see how I arrived at my conclusions check out http://www.selling-stock.com/Article/trends-at-istockphoto-unit-sales-decline. What do you think?


« Reply #1 on: July 04, 2012, 14:42 »
0
Not sure I want to pay to be told something I already know.

« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2012, 14:48 »
0
link aint working here (Server Error in '/' Application. The resource cannot be found. Description: HTTP 404.  Requested URL: /Article/trends-at-istockphoto-unit-sales-decline.)

apart from that we have seen and talked about it (a few time ago) more exaclty regarding the drop in downloads (25% less comparing 2011 to 2010), so your new research shows how it continues..

« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2012, 14:50 »
0
Your link doesn't work.  I suspect I read your story on your paid site yesterday.  Over the course of the last 2 full years my income and downloads are both cut in half.  So I don't doubt your analysis.  The price increases are in no way making up for the less downloads for me.

« Reply #4 on: July 04, 2012, 14:50 »
0
your link doesn't work even after you remove the period from the end.

How much slop is in the # of downloads reported by IS at those levels? I wonder if the revenue is down or up. Either way it doesn't look so good for the IS heavies - who in the past seem to have been very favored.


« Reply #6 on: July 04, 2012, 15:06 »
0
Well, I'm not one of iStock's leading contributors - just a very average one - but if I compare my figures for the same periods, I get

DLs : -17%
$$s : +47%

so for me, E+ and price increases have more than made up for loss of sales.

Make of it what you will...

« Reply #7 on: July 04, 2012, 15:08 »
0
Simply don't need to sign up for a site and pay to know we are getting less and less of the juice.  That's pretty well known.

« Reply #8 on: July 04, 2012, 15:13 »
0
pie graph made based on iStock exclusives reports at "their" forum



- 32 have less than 10k downloads
- 10 from 10k to 17k downloads
- 16 from 20k to 36k downloads
- 14 from 57k to 96k downloads
- 4 from 120k to 190k downloads
- 3 have more than 260k downloads


and free of charge!

« Reply #9 on: July 04, 2012, 15:25 »
0
you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

« Reply #10 on: July 04, 2012, 15:25 »
0
For me, sales took a dive starting June 2011 and have remained fairly consistent since then.  These are IS's numbers without Thinkstock included. 

Jan-Jun 2011 - 758 sales
Jul-Dec 2011 - 419 sales down 45%
Jan-Jun 2012 - 399 sales down 48% from Jan-Jun 2011

Earnings are also decreasing, although not as rapidly.  Probably due to all the price increases.

Jan-Jun 2011 - $900
Jul-Dec 2011 - down 14%
Jan-Jun 2012 - down 28% from Jan-Jun 2011

« Reply #11 on: July 04, 2012, 15:55 »
0
regular/els (no thinkstock included but it is close to 50% of the regular sales)

Jan-Jun 2011 - 289 sales
Jul-Dec 2011 - 346 sales +20%
Jan-Jun 2012 - 457 sales +58% from Jan-Jun 2011

Jan-Jun 2011 - 295.66$
Jul-Dec 2011 - 441.39$ +49%
Jan-Jun 2012 - 668.69$ +126% from Jan-Jun 2011

only have close to 1500 sales in iStock, not +14k like you Karin, I have no new uploads in iStock for 4 months
« Last Edit: July 04, 2012, 16:01 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #12 on: July 04, 2012, 15:59 »
0
I haven't uploaded since Aug 2010.

lisafx

« Reply #13 on: July 04, 2012, 17:30 »
0
Thanks for doing the work of compiling this.  Personally, my own situation at Istock is quite a bit more dire.  Sales down 35% since this time last year, and $ down 25%. 

« Reply #14 on: July 05, 2012, 14:53 »
0
Sorry for the problems with the link. Thanks to jm for fixing it.

It is also that these 193 contributors are also adding a lot of new images -- 47,313 since the beginning of 2012. Although 25 have added no new images in the period and another 30 added less than 10. What happens when the most productive shooters stop contributing? And where do those shooters go to continue to cover their costs and make a living?

« Reply #15 on: July 05, 2012, 14:57 »
0
I'm 100% down from last year at iStock.  ;D

That joke never gets old to me.

wut

« Reply #16 on: July 05, 2012, 15:00 »
0
What happens when the most productive shooters stop contributing? And where do those shooters go to continue to cover their costs and make a living?

What costs? There's no costs if you stop producing. And yeah, poor guys earning high 4 and 5 figures how will they make a living...I really can't understand such way of thinking... :o

They probably stopped for a reason. They found something better than this devalued oversaturated business.


« Reply #17 on: July 05, 2012, 15:57 »
0
I'm 100% down from last year at iStock.  ;D

That joke never gets old to me.

 :D Me neither.

antistock

« Reply #18 on: July 06, 2012, 01:58 »
0
the funny thing is that Pickerell makes a living talking about selling stock but he wouldn't touch a stock agency with a 10 foot pole and he probably doesn't sell a stock photo since a few decades when he was a news reporter.

« Reply #19 on: July 06, 2012, 02:49 »
0
Frankly the number of DL does not truly reflect how the exclusives are doing financially.

My port performance was satisfactory from Jan - May 2012, though DLs were not something to call home about. June was disappointing but it is always the worst or near worst month for me. Part of the reason is the designers often buy small images to make plans for the final purchases when the summer is over.

Lagereek

« Reply #20 on: July 06, 2012, 02:57 »
0
Yeah well Im somewhere among their top,  550 contributors, Diamond,   and my drop is about the same as Lisas,  not a happy story at all. However, the vast increase in sales at SS, DT and the Getty-RM,  has ofcourse made up for it. Still, its a lousy story.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2012, 03:08 by Lagereek »

wut

« Reply #21 on: July 06, 2012, 03:51 »
0
I got more DLs in the first 5 days of July (even though there are the 4th of July holidays in the states), than in Jan ;D


ShadySue

« Reply #22 on: July 06, 2012, 06:40 »
0
Good for you.
My July 1-5 is down almost 35% on 1-5 Jan, though 1-3 Jan are holidays over here, and 1st is a universal holiday unlike July 4th.
(I don't accept 'summer slump' as being the answer: I'm down almost 30% on last July 1-5th.)
As those above have noted, I don't need to register for a site to read what I already know.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2012, 07:50 by ShadySue »

« Reply #23 on: July 06, 2012, 07:37 »
0
Good for you.
My July 1-5 is down almost 35% on 1-5 Jan, though 1-3 Jan are holidays over here, and 1st is a universal holiday unlike July 4th.
(I don't accept 'summer slump' as being the answer: I'm down almost 30% on last July 1-5th.)

Wow.  Just checked mine. 

Jan 1-5 compared to Jul 1-5, down 56% in July.
Jul 1-5 2012 compared to Jul 1-5 2011, down 40%.
Jan 1-5 2011 compared to Jul 1-5 2011, down 63% (my portfolio took a dive in June 2011 and never recovered).
Jan 1-5 2011 compared to Jul 1-5 2012, 78%.

Removing images from my portfolio does not account for the severe drop, because the vast majority were images that hadn't sold more than once in 5 years or more.

And I agree...the summer slowdown doesn't explain the drop, because July is typically better than January for me, as born out by numbers for the same time periods in 2009 and 2010, which at quick glance show DLs between 70-75% higher than they are now.

« Reply #24 on: July 06, 2012, 21:38 »
0
Ive just completed an analysis of the downloads of 193 of iStocks leading contributors.  As of June 30th these people had a total of 30,449,000+ downloads, or about 24% of iStocks total downloads since they the company was founded. On average this contributor group had 22% fewer sales in the first half of 2012 than they had during the same period in 2011. This doesnt necessarily mean revenue was down. Customers may have purchased higher priced images. But a drop of this magnitude in the number of images licensed is cause for concern. To see how I arrived at my conclusions check out http://www.selling-stock.com/Article/trends-at-istockphoto-unit-sales-decline. What do you think?


I think... earnings per download are over 22% higher than 2011.

Edit: Just checked, it's about twice that.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2012, 21:42 by asiseeit »

« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2012, 03:44 »
0
.... On average this contributor group had 22% fewer sales in the first half of 2012 than they had during the same period in 2011.

Stock sales reflect the worldwide economic conditions?

Never lose heart and the hope that the sun will shine brighter and longer one day.

« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2012, 10:16 »
0
Ive just completed an analysis of the downloads of 193 of iStocks leading contributors.  As of June 30th these people had a total of 30,449,000+ downloads, or about 24% of iStocks total downloads since they the company was founded. On average this contributor group had 22% fewer sales in the first half of 2012 than they had during the same period in 2011. This doesnt necessarily mean revenue was down. Customers may have purchased higher priced images. But a drop of this magnitude in the number of images licensed is cause for concern. To see how I arrived at my conclusions check out http://www.selling-stock.com/Article/trends-at-istockphoto-unit-sales-decline. What do you think?


I think... earnings per download are over 22% higher than 2011.

Edit: Just checked, it's about twice that.


honestly I dont understand why so many exclusives report a big drop in sales/downloads, weird!


« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2012, 12:02 »
0
E+ and Vetta prices have increased a lot over the last couple of years - as well as the basic exclusive prices. Offsetting the drops in downloads with sales at those higher prices is fine at the beginning, but truly isn't sustainable over time - without more price increases, how are you going to grow in the future? Tripling your portfolio each year?

Lagereek

« Reply #28 on: July 07, 2012, 14:24 »
0
E+ and Vetta prices have increased a lot over the last couple of years - as well as the basic exclusive prices. Offsetting the drops in downloads with sales at those higher prices is fine at the beginning, but truly isn't sustainable over time - without more price increases, how are you going to grow in the future? Tripling your portfolio each year?


Know what?  they dont care, growing or not growing, its all in the laps of Getty, the IS, admin, is stripped of just about everything and havent got any say, getting their salary regardless, so why should they care? theyre 9 to 5 workers, thats it.

lisafx

« Reply #29 on: July 07, 2012, 14:42 »
0
E+ and Vetta prices have increased a lot over the last couple of years - as well as the basic exclusive prices. Offsetting the drops in downloads with sales at those higher prices is fine at the beginning, but truly isn't sustainable over time - without more price increases, how are you going to grow in the future? Tripling your portfolio each year?

You're exactly right about that.  This was one of the factors that kept me from going exclusive a couple of years ago. Can't keep raising prices forever to cover loss of sales. 

In fact, it's a self-feeding loop.  Sales drop->raise prices->buyers leave->sales drop more->raise prices more.... Eventually it's just going to be a ghost town. 

« Reply #30 on: July 07, 2012, 15:49 »
0
I am about even with June of last year when comparing last year ..June.. to now if i take i to account stick stock. Otherwise I would be off by $100 to $200 per month.....25%

« Reply #31 on: July 07, 2012, 21:50 »
0
Not that weird. Many who sell well keep things to themselves because they don't want to be copied.

I bet those who tend to complain about $$ are those who have few E+.  ;) 


honestly I dont understand why so many exclusives report a big drop in sales/downloads, weird!

« Reply #32 on: July 07, 2012, 22:01 »
0
Not that weird. Many who sell well keep things to themselves because they don't want to be copied.

I bet those who tend to complain about $$ are those who have few E+.  ;) 


honestly I dont understand why so many exclusives report a big drop in sales/downloads, weird!

sure there are many doing just fine but the trend aint positive

« Reply #33 on: July 07, 2012, 22:11 »
0
Not that weird. Many who sell well keep things to themselves because they don't want to be copied.

I bet those who tend to complain about $$ are those who have few E+.  ;) 


honestly I dont understand why so many exclusives report a big drop in sales/downloads, weird!

sure there are many doing just fine but the trend aint positive

For some.  ;)

« Reply #34 on: July 08, 2012, 06:50 »
0
For the first seven days of July, I'm up 15% from the same period last year.

Most of the agencies are showing higher gains than this, but the lousy performance of IS, DT and FT this year are offsetting everyone else.

EDIT: Just realized most people are just talking about IS... In isolation, they are down about 12% for me during first week of July.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2012, 06:52 by stockmarketer »

« Reply #35 on: July 08, 2012, 10:56 »
0
Not that weird. Many who sell well keep things to themselves because they don't want to be copied.

I bet those who tend to complain about $$ are those who have few E+.  ;) 


honestly I dont understand why so many exclusives report a big drop in sales/downloads, weird!

sure there are many doing just fine but the trend aint positive

For some.  ;)

its incredible how can some exclusives still think that iStock is going the right way, wow! thats just crazy IMO! sure everybody is concerned about their own income but seeing other dropping so fast I would be worried too...

« Reply #36 on: July 09, 2012, 09:01 »
0
E+ and Vetta prices have increased a lot over the last couple of years - as well as the basic exclusive prices. Offsetting the drops in downloads with sales at those higher prices is fine at the beginning, but truly isn't sustainable over time - without more price increases, how are you going to grow in the future? Tripling your portfolio each year?

You're exactly right about that.  This was one of the factors that kept me from going exclusive a couple of years ago. Can't keep raising prices forever to cover loss of sales. 

In fact, it's a self-feeding loop.  Sales drop->raise prices->buyers leave->sales drop more->raise prices more.... Eventually it's just going to be a ghost town.
 

It is interesting that Getty did exactly the same thing with macrostock RF back around 2001. At that time the average price of an RF image on Getty was about $97. In two and a half years they had pushed the average price up to $240. During that period Getty acquired several RF distributors and production companies and in general added a lot more content, but the total number of images licensed remained flat.

Meanwhile meanwhile many RF users started saying, "stock photography is too expensive" and "I need cheaper images." They started trading images among themselves and microstock was born.

What will be next? Don't ignore history.


Lagereek

« Reply #37 on: July 09, 2012, 09:16 »
0
Not that weird. Many who sell well keep things to themselves because they don't want to be copied.

I bet those who tend to complain about $$ are those who have few E+.  ;) 


honestly I dont understand why so many exclusives report a big drop in sales/downloads, weird!

sure there are many doing just fine but the trend aint positive

For some.  ;)

its incredible how can some exclusives still think that iStock is going the right way, wow! thats just crazy IMO! sure everybody is concerned about their own income but seeing other dropping so fast I would be worried too...

I doubt it Luis!  very much indeed. I know many, many IS exclusives, Diamonds and Golds and they are worried stiff and especially about the future. They can not voice their worries over any forums and its frustrating. Whats their options? as exclusives and with big ports you simply have to ride it out, dont you, take the rough with the smooth,  end of story.

The few IS exclusives coming on here pretending not to worry, well, no more then a spit in the ocean and with the same worn out glib.

ShadySue

« Reply #38 on: July 09, 2012, 09:19 »
0
I know many, many IS exclusives, Diamonds and Golds and they are worried stiff and especially about the future. They can not voice their worries over any forums and its frustrating.
Why can't they 'voice their worry' on forums? Plenty of us do it here. Many people have voiced concern in the iStock June sales thread.

Lagereek

« Reply #39 on: July 09, 2012, 11:54 »
0
I know many, many IS exclusives, Diamonds and Golds and they are worried stiff and especially about the future. They can not voice their worries over any forums and its frustrating.
Why can't they 'voice their worry' on forums? Plenty of us do it here. Many people have voiced concern in the iStock June sales thread.

Yes you do Sue and a few others and thats commendable but many have got too much to loose and are ofcourse afraid to voice anything derrogative, which is understandable, since we all know the IS admin, etc.
Sales thread is a differant story and within IS, its accepted but in another forum? no sir.
Come on, you know the score, dont tell me you as an exclusive dont have friends within IS who are greatly concerned about the future.

ShadySue

« Reply #40 on: July 09, 2012, 12:28 »
0
I know many, many IS exclusives, Diamonds and Golds and they are worried stiff and especially about the future. They can not voice their worries over any forums and its frustrating.
Why can't they 'voice their worry' on forums? Plenty of us do it here. Many people have voiced concern in the iStock June sales thread.

Yes you do Sue and a few others and thats commendable but many have got too much to loose and are ofcourse afraid to voice anything derrogative, which is understandable, since we all know the IS admin, etc.
Sales thread is a differant story and within IS, its accepted but in another forum? no sir.
Come on, you know the score, dont tell me you as an exclusive dont have friends within IS who are greatly concerned about the future.

Of course, but your friends must be as wimpy as you.
Where's the 'more to lose': speaking up, or just waiting until the ship sinks?
Sean has more to lose than anyone, and he's not afraid to voice his concerns, and not just about falling sales.

lisafx

« Reply #41 on: July 09, 2012, 12:47 »
0
I know many, many IS exclusives, Diamonds and Golds and they are worried stiff and especially about the future. They can not voice their worries over any forums and its frustrating.
Why can't they 'voice their worry' on forums? Plenty of us do it here. Many people have voiced concern in the iStock June sales thread.

Yes you do Sue and a few others and thats commendable but many have got too much to loose and are ofcourse afraid to voice anything derrogative, which is understandable, since we all know the IS admin, etc.
Sales thread is a differant story and within IS, its accepted but in another forum? no sir.
Come on, you know the score, dont tell me you as an exclusive dont have friends within IS who are greatly concerned about the future.

Of course, but your friends must be as wimpy as you.
Where's the 'more to lose': speaking up, or just waiting until the ship sinks?
Sean has more to lose than anyone, and he's not afraid to voice his concerns, and not just about falling sales.

I would describe Christian as many things, but "wimpy" is not one of them, LOL. 

I can easily believe that there are a lot of high level exclusives who are worried but not speaking up publicly.  It has never been proven that any of the sites drop your images in the search based on what you say in forums, but if all my eggs were in any one basket I would be hesitant to call that site out publicly. 

People who do like you, Liz, and Sean, deserve a lot of credit for cojones, but you guys seem to be the exception to the rule. 

ShadySue

« Reply #42 on: July 09, 2012, 12:52 »
0
I would describe Christian as many things, but "wimpy" is not one of them, LOL. 
It's in relation to him thinking that Glasgow is scary (another thread).

Lagereek

« Reply #43 on: July 09, 2012, 12:55 »
0
I know many, many IS exclusives, Diamonds and Golds and they are worried stiff and especially about the future. They can not voice their worries over any forums and its frustrating.
Why can't they 'voice their worry' on forums? Plenty of us do it here. Many people have voiced concern in the iStock June sales thread.

Yes you do Sue and a few others and thats commendable but many have got too much to loose and are ofcourse afraid to voice anything derrogative, which is understandable, since we all know the IS admin, etc.
Sales thread is a differant story and within IS, its accepted but in another forum? no sir.
Come on, you know the score, dont tell me you as an exclusive dont have friends within IS who are greatly concerned about the future.

Of course, but your friends must be as wimpy as you.
Where's the 'more to lose': speaking up, or just waiting until the ship sinks?
Sean has more to lose than anyone, and he's not afraid to voice his concerns, and not just about falling sales.

I dont take any notice of your missinterpretation. Never mind. Seriously, you have just turned Gold with a meager 11K, dls, believe me there are plenty of contributors with a LOT more to lose AND, they are not wimps, far from it.
However, youre doing fine, walking a thin line between here and IS. Good on you.

all the best and lots of love.  ( now dont get your knickers in a twist) :D and Glasgow is still a weirdo place. The goebbles!
« Last Edit: July 09, 2012, 12:57 by Lagereek »

ShadySue

« Reply #44 on: July 09, 2012, 13:04 »
0

I dont take any notice of your missinterpretation. Never mind. Seriously, you have just turned Gold with a meager 11K, dls, believe me there are plenty of contributors with a LOT more to lose AND, they are not wimps, far from it.
However, youre doing fine, walking a thin line between here and IS. Good on you.

all the best and lots of love.  ( now dont get your knickers in a twist) :D and Glasgow is still a weirdo place. The goebbles!

The more any particular contributor has to lose, the more iStock would have to lose by penalising them for telling the truth.
That's no doubt why Sean gets censured/censored less than others. They certainly don't want him quitting iS and spreading his work elsewhere.

Lagereek

« Reply #45 on: July 09, 2012, 13:09 »
0

I dont take any notice of your missinterpretation. Never mind. Seriously, you have just turned Gold with a meager 11K, dls, believe me there are plenty of contributors with a LOT more to lose AND, they are not wimps, far from it.
However, youre doing fine, walking a thin line between here and IS. Good on you.

all the best and lots of love.  ( now dont get your knickers in a twist) :D and Glasgow is still a weirdo place. The goebbles!

The more any particular contributor has to lose, the more iStock would have to lose by penalising them for telling the truth.
That's no doubt why Sean gets censured/censored less than others. They certainly don't want him quitting iS and spreading his work elsewhere.

You are just being bloody stubborn on purpose here!  they have already, by certain actions proved and beyond belief, that they are ready to forsake just about anybody, exept maybe the Seans and his alike but I bet you anything, if Sean, etc, got too heavy for them, no, they wouldnt care and I will tell you why.
The IS, admin of today are just 9-5,ers, thats all, they havent got any say. Getty runs the show, 110% and believe me, in the eyes of Getty, everyone and anything is expendible. Period.

now go get yourself some HAGGIS!  and shutup! :)

« Reply #46 on: July 09, 2012, 13:13 »
0

all the best and lots of love.  ( now dont get your knickers in a twist) :D and Glasgow is still a weirdo place. The goebbles!

I'm sure most of us have heard of " Godwins Law"  aka "Reductio ad Hitlerum " But this bringing of Goebbels into the discussion is certainly out of the blue ;-)


Lagereek

« Reply #47 on: July 09, 2012, 13:21 »
0

all the best and lots of love.  ( now dont get your knickers in a twist) :D and Glasgow is still a weirdo place. The goebbles!

I'm sure most of us have heard of " Godwins Law"  aka "Reductio ad Hitlerum " But this bringing of Goebbels into the discussion is certainly out of the blue ;-)

Might have spellt it wrong but ask Sue, theres a special area or people in Glasgow under that name. Its got nothing to do with Josef Goebbles if thats what you thought. :)

ShadySue

« Reply #48 on: July 09, 2012, 13:32 »
0

all the best and lots of love.  ( now dont get your knickers in a twist) :D and Glasgow is still a weirdo place. The goebbles!


I'm sure most of us have heard of " Godwins Law"  aka "Reductio ad Hitlerum " But this bringing of Goebbels into the discussion is certainly out of the blue ;-)


Might have spellt it wrong but ask Sue, theres a special area or people in Glasgow under that name. Its got nothing to do with Josef Goebbles if thats what you thought. :)

I'm guessing you were thinking of a historically-deprived area of Glasgow called the Gorbals which "has long had a reputation as a gritty and rough area of Glasgow". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorbals
I've photogaphed in that area during the day a couple of times; my camera attracted more attention/commnet in the Gallowgate/Barras area.

Lagereek

« Reply #49 on: July 09, 2012, 13:37 »
0

all the best and lots of love.  ( now dont get your knickers in a twist) :D and Glasgow is still a weirdo place. The goebbles!


I'm sure most of us have heard of " Godwins Law"  aka "Reductio ad Hitlerum " But this bringing of Goebbels into the discussion is certainly out of the blue ;-)


Might have spellt it wrong but ask Sue, theres a special area or people in Glasgow under that name. Its got nothing to do with Josef Goebbles if thats what you thought. :)

I'm guessing you were thinking of a historically-deprived area of Glasgow called the Gorbals which "has long had a reputation as a gritty and rough area of Glasgow". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorbals
I've photogaphed in that area during the day a couple of times; my camera attracted more attention/commnet in the Gallowgate/Barras area.


Yes, yes, thats what I meant, the Gorbals,  blimey, didnt I just spell that wrong ::) well to be fair I recon its no worse then the East-end in London, just happend to have gained a bad reputation I suppose. Today the East-end in London has become much more trendy with pubs, winebars, etc.

« Reply #50 on: July 09, 2012, 13:45 »
0

all the best and lots of love.  ( now dont get your knickers in a twist) :D and Glasgow is still a weirdo place. The goebbles!


I'm sure most of us have heard of " Godwins Law"  aka "Reductio ad Hitlerum " But this bringing of Goebbels into the discussion is certainly out of the blue ;-)


Might have spellt it wrong but ask Sue, theres a special area or people in Glasgow under that name. Its got nothing to do with Josef Goebbles if thats what you thought. :)

I'm guessing you were thinking of a historically-deprived area of Glasgow called the Gorbals which "has long had a reputation as a gritty and rough area of Glasgow". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorbals
I've photogaphed in that area during the day a couple of times; my camera attracted more attention/commnet in the Gallowgate/Barras area.

No problem as long as you're prepared to give anyone who bothers you a "Glesga kiss" :)
I used to work with a guy who was born and brought up in the Gorbals before WWII. A genuinely nice guy. As tough as the reputation though!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
43 Replies
7772 Views
Last post May 18, 2012, 17:50
by djpadavona
71 Replies
19980 Views
Last post June 19, 2012, 08:14
by ProImage
38 Replies
6963 Views
Last post June 14, 2012, 10:55
by wut
1 Replies
2661 Views
Last post December 27, 2012, 15:44
by Microbius
6 Replies
6389 Views
Last post June 19, 2013, 05:33
by jjneff

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results