Quote from: DanP68 on January 19, 2009, 23:38

Quote from: ironarrow on January 19, 2009, 18:02

To summarize, Shutterstock and followers shot themselves in the head for the sake of short term success. Sure, they got very good numbers in the past but the subscription model is eventually going to create "a doomsday effect" for microstock industry.

Take a look to the right.  Do you see that chart? 

Where is Shutterstock ranked? 
#1. 

Where have they been ranked for the last 12 months? 
#1.

I've been there for 18 months, and my images continue to sell from my initial uploads.  I also make $28 per EL sale, which is substantially more than I make anywhere else.  So will you revisit your theory on how we have shot ourselves in the head one year from now when SS is still ranked #1 among contributors?

I also don't appreciate SS contributors being called "it's followers" as if we are all a bunch of lemmings.  Perhaps you should accomplish something meaningful in microstock before criticizing all of us?

By "it's followers" I meant StockXpert, FT, DT, 123rf and other sites which introduced subs following SS. Not contributors. And SS is only the best If you haven't got enough images and acceptance at IS. Because anyone claiming SS is better than IS is dreaming.

The reason SS is on top on the right is because most contributors are not approved by IS.

IS has 22.000 contributors...
SS claims to have 135.000 something... The difference is 113.000 people. They don't even have an experience of a real high standard microstock site.

SS is at best 2nd website. No top contributor will rate SS over IS. If they do, it means they are not TOP, and they have not achieved anything yet.

Oh no, I have not achieved anything yet...  I must rely on IronArrow to tell me when I have achieved something. That will be my goal in the new year, to achieve something according to IronArrow's standards.. oh if only I can succeed..

don't forget that subs existed long before microstock and SS in a form of RF CD collections...

I do suspect these forums don't tell the truth.

I do suspect people follow their own agenda.

So decrees "e-person."   

Why exactly would someone vote SS #1 in personal earnings if they weren't?  Who would have such an agenda, and what would they stand to gain?

Whatever the 'truth' is, chances are it won't be found on an internet forum. Generally they are largely populated by the opinionated, and usually the opinionated tend to have biases.  A forum can also become the focus for a certain set of biases, thus on a fan site for a certain TV show the most viewed and publicly popular episode can become, ala 'comic guy' "the worst episode..ever"

The 'truth' of the poll results is that they are from a self selected small panel from an internet forum, with no controls and with no weighting for income per completer.

The only problem with that is when it gets quoted as 'the truth'.

Yeap, as simple as that. The column on the right is NOT the truth. What counts is the amount of traffic the sites get. Anybody feel free to check the stats on for example "alexa. com"

It is logically impossible that SS is going to be selling more than IS. That is only true if you have got 1000 images on SS, and 150 on IS.

For me, the number of images are close, that is why IS multiplies SS every month. And most of the times it is not only two times better but even 3 or 4

Quote from: ironarrow on January 20, 2009, 09:56

Yeap, as simple as that. The column on the right is NOT the truth. What counts is the amount of traffic the sites get. Anybody feel free to check the stats on for example "alexa. com"

This meassure is more inaccurate than the poll we have.

Does the alexa.com counts the buyers only? What site has the biggest and most developed 'social network' of sellers?

I believe alexa is very accurate. It shows the traffic regardless it is buyers or contributors and it is the same for all sites. IS is one of the top 500 sites in the world, SS is always moving between 1500 and 2000. My numbers reflect that alexa is pin-point accurate.

No one has to agree. I don't see why people make a big deal of this 

Quote from: ironarrow on January 20, 2009, 10:20

I believe alexa is very accurate. It shows the traffic regardless it is buyers or contributors and it is the same for all sites. IS is one of the top 500 sites in the world, SS is always moving between 1500 and 2000. My numbers reflect that alexa is pin-point accurate.

No one has to agree. I don't see why people make a big deal of this 

It's a big deal because people like to quote Alexa as 'the truth' when in fact again it's collected from a self selected uncontrolled set of users, and which during the last year has shown wild swings due to their internal methodology changes.

I agree with that, but when I combine it with my personal experience it becomes my personal truth 

Before another one of these anti-subs threads is started, I would like to see the poster put his money where his mouth is.  Pull out of Shutterstock.  Pull out of Dreamstime.  Pull out of Fotolia.  Opt out at StockXpert.  Then talk all you want.  Until then, it's just words.  You don't have the conviction to back yourself up, so why expect anyone else to do it for you?

I never joined SS because of subs.  I've opted out from subs in StockXpert (and I thank them so much for letting me have a choice).  I stopped uploading to FT, 123RF, CS and CanStockPhoto (FT may be a major loss, as it's always a good seller for me - if only they allowed me to opt out!).  I am still at DT because there a lot of positive aspects there (increasing levels is one), and subs sales, although frequent, are generally marginal. I haven't deleted my portfolio on any of those sites, but this is something I consider doing when I reach my next payout (what may take several years in CS and CanStockPhoto....)

Regards,
Adelaide

Oh same old bulls.it everytime... "Shutterstock does this Shutterstock does that. Oh subs are bad..."

I know what Shutterstock does: They made me thousands of dollars... and I am very grateful to them. Istock fanboys have to pay me a lot of money in order to convince me...

Get a life. Get paid. Don't waste your time in meaningless discussions...

[quote author=DanP68 link=topic=6852.msg79853#msg79853

Amazing.  iStock exclusives spent the last several months denying any validity to the Alexa charts which showed their traffic falling fast while other agencies were rising.  Now they are quoting Alexa like it is The Bible.  Get your arguments straight.
[/quote]

It's like our politicians here Dan. They "speak through both sides of their mouth"
(a direct quote from yet another famous canadian).

Quote from: thesentinel on January 20, 2009, 11:15

Source? 

About Alexa? SEO forums or SEO sites.

About mostly hits by Google? Bryan of LO on the LO forum (now defunct). A buyer will never come by Google, but he has the RF site in his bookmarks of course. I run a few sites myself and looking into Google analytics, I observe the same (Google driven traffic). A knowledgeable IT person will never install the Alexa (or Yahoo or Google) toolbar on his browser. What's the profit for slowing down your surfing and enhance your bandwidth? Alexa toolbars are mostly installed accidentally by naive persons that get it in installing some "free" software.

There is also the session question. I'm logged in eternally into Dreamstime and SS. I guess (subscription) buyers are too. Even if I had Alexa installed, my visits would never be counted.

Indeed, but it was the 0.001% figure I was interested in, it's such a specific wee number you've quoted.

I remember  how I used to need 20+ dls a day to get to Top 50 most popular vectors.

Believe it or not I managed to get to the Top 50 vectors with about 8 dls per day. This alone, proves low sales in general.

This specific argument is wrong.
The fact that a lower number of DLs gets you into the Top 50 could as well be proof of higher competition (or more precisely: the number of images offered is rising faster than the number of images downloaded - no matter if that second number is rising or falling).

These are two different exclusives with two different opinions. It's not "speaking from both sides of the mouth"... there is more than one mouth. Good grief. Are you saying that what one exclusive believes, all should? That's ridiculous.

Not at all.  I am referring to past arguments made by the same people in this thread that Alexa and Compete.com had no validity.  Now they wish to use the same statistical data to prove iStock is the leading microstock site.  I could care less whether it is or not.  I contribute to IS, and as long as they do well, I have a better chance of doing well.

But this is not the Woo-Yay forum.  I've watched the same iStock gang mentality which exists on the IS forum pervade this fine forum for over a year, and frankly I'm tired of it.  It's the same several people, making the same tired arguments, running down other agencies, and defending each others' backs.  It never takes you long to show up in these debates, does it?

If you don't keep your arguments straight, I'm going to call you on it. 

Quote from: whatalife on January 22, 2009, 07:53

These are two different exclusives with two different opinions. It's not "speaking from both sides of the mouth"... there is more than one mouth. Good grief. Are you saying that what one exclusive believes, all should? That's ridiculous.

Not at all.  I am referring to past arguments made by the same people in this thread that Alexa and Compete.com had no validity.  Now they wish to use the same statistical data to prove iStock is the leading microstock site.  I could care less whether it is or not.  I contribute to IS, and as long as they do well, I have a better chance of doing well.

But this is not the Woo-Yay forum.  I've watched the same iStock gang mentality which exists on the IS forum pervade this fine forum for over a year, and frankly I'm tired of it.  It's the same several people, making the same tired arguments, running down other agencies, and defending each others' backs.  It never takes you long to show up in these debates, does it?

If you don't keep your arguments straight, I'm going to call you on it. 

Hello, you seem to have quoted me in the above mentioned posting... oddly enough I was saying that Alexa data was from a self selective panel, as is the side bar, and that it is a problem when either are quoted as 'the truth' I cannot see how I'm using this to prove that any site is the leading site.

I'm not sure where I've taken on a gang mentality, but I am aware it can run both ways.