MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: jonalex88 on April 01, 2017, 09:55
-
(note: members requested a little more info about who we are. I've given more info on a post on page 2 of this thread - Reply #29, 4 April at 16:14
Hi there!
I am hoping that the MSG community can help me out!
We are looking to launch a stock image service which pays 80%-90% commission to contributors. Before we launch, we’d like to test some assumptions that we’ve made about the image supply side of the business; that's where you come in.
We think that we can do something really cool in the stock photography world, and at the same time, make sure that the cash paid for images gets into the hands of the people who created them.
We would really appreciate your feedback; it will help us to get going. As a gesture of thanks, if you complete all questions (including the ‘optional’ ones), we will give you an extra 5% commission for the first year post-launch - make sure your email is correct so we can keep our promises!
Some of the information in this survey is sensitive (i.e. not usually something you share with just anyone), however I can assure you that no responses will be shared outside of our small team. In a way, once you complete this survey, you become a partner to our business. If our commission structure says anything, it’s that we value our partners.
Thank you so much for your time - we look forward to getting to know you.
https://goo.gl/forms/Wxk6xBT6UMSgIGux2
Questions: 23 (mostly quick, multiple choice)
Time to complete: 5 - 10 minutes
-
No one should be clicking a goo.gl link as it could lead anywhere and there's a spate of viruses doing the rounds at the moment in this way. Maybe post the actual link?
-
What's your USP? I.e., Why would a buyer care what you are doing?
-
I'm sure there are a lot of photographers, vector artists and video, etc. that are willing to partner on something new. I'm probably at that point where I can't really continue doing the same old same old. That said, it has to be the right opportunity.
-
I would love to see a stocksy co-op style site for all. Not just the chosen (admittedly talented) few.
-
Of all the days in the year to do this, is April fools day really the best one :)
-
My fear is that they plan to compete on price, thinking they can sell for less as they pay us a bigger percentage. Result being the big boys will also cut prices and we won't be able to leave because they make up a much bigger chunk of our income. That is what I am guessing the "assumption" is.
-
I would love to see a stocksy co-op style site for all. Not just the chosen (admittedly talented) few.
Wouldn't work. If you want to have higher prices you have to have the best content.
-
I would love to see a stocksy co-op style site for all. Not just the chosen (admittedly talented) few.
Wouldn't work. If you want to have higher prices you have to have the best content.
I think artists should control their own pricing. Tomatoes should be priced like tomatoes. The "best content" should demand more. Exclusivity should be optional.
I would like to see a big tent co-op that would compete with the mega libraries. Stocksy has the boutique artsier than thou angle covered.
-
I think it would only work if you were still selective about who got in, then people could be trusted to price their own work from there. Otherwise it would very quickly be inundated with garbage.
-
80 to 90% is not practical you'd be out of business in no time either that it's a hook to get people involved before your slash royalties down to 30%
-
Of course we would all like higher commission but these levels are not sustainable.......seems to me many contributors hugely underestimate marketing costs which is actually the key component of what Agencies do. You can set up your own site and pay yourself 100% but unless you spend a large proportion of your time (therefore $$$) on marketing and are at the exceptional range of the talent spectrum you will make very little.
-
I think 70 to 80% would be perfectly sustainable if it wasn't for the history involved. Getty's aggressive stiving for monopoly over the years means photographers have found themselves tied to agencies paying a much lower percentage. New agencies can't compete paying a higher percentage because they will be out spent.
-
No one should be clicking a goo.gl link as it could lead anywhere and there's a spate of viruses doing the rounds at the moment in this way. Maybe post the actual link?
Its a link to a google form, so that is the actual link :)
-
What's your USP? I.e., Why would a buyer care what you are doing?
I have 2 or 3 which i am developing, however I'd like to keep them on the DL for the time being. What is pretty positive is that the USP for the buyer actually leads to higher revenue for the contributor.
-
I'm sure there are a lot of photographers, vector artists and video, etc. that are willing to partner on something new. I'm probably at that point where I can't really continue doing the same old same old. That said, it has to be the right opportunity.
thanks for the comment. The point of this survey is to understand (1) what that opportunity looks like for you (and people like you), and importantly, what the barriers are for you to try it out (i.e. free listing, greater revenue percentage, etc). In other words, why *wouldn't* you try a new stock site / what is the actual overhead / time commitment, etc.
-
My fear is that they plan to compete on price, thinking they can sell for less as they pay us a bigger percentage. Result being the big boys will also cut prices and we won't be able to leave because they make up a much bigger chunk of our income. That is what I am guessing the "assumption" is.
Competing on price alone is a bad business model when the bigger guys have more money than you. Our strategy is not to compete on price, although this may factor in. Remember, i can't pay you more and then charge less, because the small percentage we collect would be to small then.
-
I think artists should control their own pricing. Tomatoes should be priced like tomatoes. The "best content" should demand more. Exclusivity should be optional.
I would like to see a big tent co-op that would compete with the mega libraries. Stocksy has the boutique artsier than thou angle covered.
I like this idea in that the better photos should cost more, however I don't think the pricing should be set by the contributors, as this will lead to pricing that is hard to plan for / understand for the buyer. The plan is to have tiers within the site (think iStock + Getty under a single domain) with different pricing per tier. Which tier the photo falls into will be up to us though.
-
80 to 90% is not practical you'd be out of business in no time either that it's a hook to get people involved before your slash royalties down to 30%
We have run the numbers and are comfortable with paying a higher percentage. Our team also includes stock photographers, and we are passionate about ensuring that contributors don't get fleeced (I think contributors do get fleeced by current agency options).
-
My fear is that they plan to compete on price, thinking they can sell for less as they pay us a bigger percentage. Result being the big boys will also cut prices and we won't be able to leave because they make up a much bigger chunk of our income. That is what I am guessing the "assumption" is.
Competing on price alone is a bad business model when the bigger guys have more money than you. Our strategy is not to compete on price, although this may factor in. Remember, i can't pay you more and then charge less, because the small percentage we collect would be to small then.
My bold. I think I would need more information before considering. Will you be releasing full terms before asking for content?
-
I think 70 to 80% would be perfectly sustainable if it wasn't for the history involved. Getty's aggressive stiving for monopoly over the years means photographers have found themselves tied to agencies paying a much lower percentage. New agencies can't compete paying a higher percentage because they will be out spent.
Yes but the history is involved we are where we are not where we would like to be.
-
I think 70 to 80% would be perfectly sustainable if it wasn't for the history involved. Getty's aggressive stiving for monopoly over the years means photographers have found themselves tied to agencies paying a much lower percentage. New agencies can't compete paying a higher percentage because they will be out spent.
Yes but the history is involved we are where we are not where we would like to be.
Absolutely agree.
-
Get buyers for the images and you will have no issues with getting image volume.
-
I think artists should control their own pricing. Tomatoes should be priced like tomatoes. The "best content" should demand more. Exclusivity should be optional.
I would like to see a big tent co-op that would compete with the mega libraries. Stocksy has the boutique artsier than thou angle covered.
I like this idea in that the better photos should cost more, however I don't think the pricing should be set by the contributors, as this will lead to pricing that is hard to plan for / understand for the buyer. The plan is to have tiers within the site (think iStock + Getty under a single domain) with different pricing per tier. Which tier the photo falls into will be up to us though.
I don't want to be negative, and I've thought that some sort of co-op is an answer, where contributors share, after expenses. Here's your first problem. 1 million uploads a week, who's going to review and set the prices for those? :o Big problem! Product intake and evaluation.
Good luck.
-
My fear is that they plan to compete on price, thinking they can sell for less as they pay us a bigger percentage. Result being the big boys will also cut prices and we won't be able to leave because they make up a much bigger chunk of our income. That is what I am guessing the "assumption" is.
Competing on price alone is a bad business model when the bigger guys have more money than you. Our strategy is not to compete on price, although this may factor in. Remember, i can't pay you more and then charge less, because the small percentage we collect would be to small then.
My bold. I think I would need more information before considering. Will you be releasing full terms before asking for content?
Yes, 100%, the terms will be clear. The objective (from a supplier perspective) is to provide a far better structured, better designed relationship and technical solution than what is currently available. But thank you for highlighting the importance of this so we can factor in your concern (you just helped us build our business :))
-
Sounds exciting. The industry needs innovation. Canva has shown new ideas can succeed. Look forward to seeing what you offer.
-
Hi there!
I am hoping that the MSG community can help me out!
We are looking to launch a stock image service which pays 80%-90% commission to contributors. Before we launch, we’d like to test some assumptions that we’ve made about the image supply side of the business; that's where you come in.
We think that we can do something really cool in the stock photography world, and at the same time, make sure that the cash paid for images gets into the hands of the people who created them.
We would really appreciate your feedback; it will help us to get going. As a gesture of thanks, if you complete all questions (including the ‘optional’ ones), we will give you an extra 5% commission for the first year post-launch - make sure your email is correct so we can keep our promises!
Some of the information in this survey is sensitive (i.e. not usually something you share with just anyone), however I can assure you that no responses will be shared outside of our small team. In a way, once you complete this survey, you become a partner to our business. If our commission structure says anything, it’s that we value our partners.
Thank you so much for your time - we look forward to getting to know you.
https://goo.gl/forms/Wxk6xBT6UMSgIGux2
Questions: 23 (mostly quick, multiple choice)
Time to complete: 5 - 10 minutes
Why not tell us a little bit about who you are before soliciting information?
-
Are you a contributor, buyer, or what is your experience in microstock? Will you do video?
-
Why not tell us a little bit about who you are before soliciting information?
Yeah, 3 brief sentences of who you are and why we should invest time in helping you certainly wouldn't hurt.
-
Why not tell us a little bit about who you are before soliciting information?
Are you a contributor, buyer, or what is your experience in microstock? Will you do video?
Yeah, 3 brief sentences of who you are and why we should invest time in helping you certainly wouldn't hurt.
Hi everyone
Happy to share some info on who we are. I genuinely appreciate your interest!
We are a team of 3 people; the other two I have known for several years.
- On the business side is myself; I work in business development in the fintech / marketing tech industry, in a successful company i joined during start up phase. Sidenote: I have background in media production and hold a degree in business and another degree in social science. I have modeled a couple stock photo shoots for fun, and definitely think i look better than the RPI of images I'm in suggests. ;)
- On the stock / photo side, there is an experienced and very successful contributor who runs a business / community training up stock photographers (value add? possibly...)
- On the tech side, there is an IT director for a global company. His interests are cybersecurity and bitcoin ( :-X).
The basic premises of what we want to are pretty simple:
- Where iStock, and indeed Uber and Airbnb are so successful, there is a compelling business model in any 'onselling platform' which accesses a low-loyalty global market (if designed and marketed well).
- Contributors are fleeced (financially) and mistreated (generally). I don't believe that this is necessary in order to have an exponentially successful business
- Uploading, keywording, payments to contributors, buyer user journey and how to cater for buyers specific requirements: list of 'systems' to which very little creativity and real innovation has been applied. We have ideas to significantly improve these systems, and believe in the market enough to give this a shot.
This is a super simplified view of what we're doing, but I hope it gives you some insight into who we are and what our approach is. Your input via the survey is one of the best ways that we can check assumptions and get ideas to make this happen.
Feel free to PM me.
Many thanks,
Jon
PS. We are not currently planning to include video initially.
-
I really like the concept but unless it is operated in a similar manner as Stocksy, were the original owners had great contacts in the advertising industry, I am sad to say I don't think it will work.
I do not know for sure but I reckon they have agreements with agencies that they are the first port of call for images and a lot will be shot as if the photographers are contracted by the agency, so that they get there bases covered and then the other work is the cream on top.
-
The questions don't really seem to be about building a stock site, it looks like you're collecting info for marketing or some other reason. Almost none of the questions are about making a site that contributors would want to use. You ask 2 times for our email address. Then sex, age, and how much we make with how many images. The only vaguely relevant question is how we keyword, I say vaguely relevant because every site already lets you upload the metadata or keyword on the site, what's the point of that question? I'm left thinking this is a scam, "In a way, once you complete this survey, you become a partner to our business. If our commission structure says anything, it’s that we value our partners." what business am I a partner with? I don't see a business name or any info about a business.
-
The questions don't really seem to be about building a stock site, it looks like you're collecting info for marketing or some other reason. Almost none of the questions are about making a site that contributors would want to use. You ask 2 times for our email address. Then sex, age, and how much we make with how many images. The only vaguely relevant question is how we keyword, I say vaguely relevant because every site already lets you upload the metadata or keyword on the site, what's the point of that question? I'm left thinking this is a scam, "In a way, once you complete this survey, you become a partner to our business. If our commission structure says anything, it’s that we value our partners." what business am I a partner with? I don't see a business name or any info about a business.
Hi Tickstock
thanks for your post; i appreciate your suspicion :) You are right in saying that there is a bit of a marketing spin on the info I am collecting, but wrong in suspecting that I am collecting data for dishonest reasons. Marketing is all about understanding who you are dealing with. Stock sites have 2 'target markets' and have to convince both that the product is worthwhile. Obviously, contributors are one of these target markets. The more data, the better our understanding of who you are, but its not for any other purpose than what i've described.
Initially we were going to ask for your name, but decided against that, as we don't really need to know your name. The double email address was bad design (judge us!) due to a feature of google forms (we ask once, google forms asks once).
Regarding company details, as you can appreciate, the stock industry is very big and VERY small at the same time, and we would prefer to remain a little vague until we launch. I totally understand if that discourages some from filling out the survey, but that is unfortunately how it is (for now).
Thanks again for engaging. No feedback is without value :)
cheers,
Jon
-
I have to say I would have completed the form if it were not for the request for an email address I don't see the necessity for it and with the best will in the world whatever your assurances your a complete stranger to me. Remove that requirement or make it optional and I suspect you would get a higher response.
-
i don't think it's too important to give us so much (80%), as someone already mentioned the cost of the agency is high too.
i only think if you wish to get up there against ss, you must sell aggressively, ie have a good marketing share of the global
microstock market to compete against , yes you got it ss.
sales have dwindled for many ss experienced contributors since they lax on the 7/10 and filled the daily new images with absolute
garbage. so, i would say, be like the old once super great ss, who was always in the 90% on the right of this page,
only challenged by the also once great istock.
be like the old ss and is... and it really does not matter if you give us 80% ...
because i'd rather have 40 % of lots of dls incl SOD of 28 to 108 dollars each,
than 90% of 000 cts.
.. which was the promo of most of these redundant agenciesto the right who after years still do not reach 20 % er.
so, it's simple, be the old Oringer and we will be there for you.
-
I have to say I would have completed the form if it were not for the request for an email address I don't see the necessity for it and with the best will in the world whatever your assurances your a complete stranger to me. Remove that requirement or make it optional and I suspect you would get a higher response.
I have gotten a fair number of responses, but would really like more, so..... your wish is my command :)
EMAIL FIELD NOW OPTIONAL IN SURVEY.
Looking forward to seeing your feedback; thanks again :)
-
i don't think it's too important to give us so much (80%), as someone already mentioned the cost of the agency is high too.
i only think if you wish to get up there against ss, you must sell aggressively, ie have a good marketing share of the global
microstock market to compete against , yes you got it ss.
sales have dwindled for many ss experienced contributors since they lax on the 7/10 and filled the daily new images with absolute
garbage. so, i would say, be like the old once super great ss, who was always in the 90% on the right of this page,
only challenged by the also once great istock.
be like the old ss and is... and it really does not matter if you give us 80% ...
because i'd rather have 40 % of lots of dls incl SOD of 28 to 108 dollars each,
than 90% of 000 cts.
.. which was the promo of most of these redundant agenciesto the right who after years still do not reach 20 % er.
so, it's simple, be the old Oringer and we will be there for you.
thank you very much for your feedback!
-
Hi there MSG community!
Thought I'd go ahead and check in - we've received a great response with a whopping 1% of thread views leading to responses!
I kid - the response hasn't been overwhelming (in terms of volume), however the content of the responses have been totally invaluable. So, THANK YOU.
PS. Anyone thinking this was an April 1st joke, promise it was not! :)
Have a great morning / afternoon / evening wherever you are.
Jon
-
Hi Jon, best of luck in doing this. We all need some new amazing agencies to change the game.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk