MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: IS vs SS: buyer's viewpoint  (Read 7724 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #25 on: September 02, 2014, 10:07 »
I'm forced to agree with what you have written:

Dormant/inactive accounts are a waste and maybe agencies should start closing them. I know it's just space, but people who tried and left, are a distraction. Most of that material is stale anyway.

True, it is about agency profit not supplier profits. Was it ever different?

Yes, there is nothing that one person can do. I also feel that without leverage or something to hold over the agencies, 10,000 people have no power to make a change, when 20,000 will take the scraps, or minimum returns and be happy.

Good advise, new people should read here and take your advise and that of many others. It's not worth it anymore. Maybe for people who have the large collections in place, but someone starting out, will be disappointed.

I don't have anyplace I go with parking meters, but it is time to question the industry and the value of working it. People here do a good job of that, but get distracted and take it personally instead of looking at the broad picture.

The search changes are not about US, they are about the buyers and the agencies. People might as well get over it. The "good old days" are gone. It's not going to be 2005 or 2007 anymore. Times have changed.

I don't know if it pays anymore. I'll stick to innovation and new ideas and changing what someone uploads. Including finding a niche and looking at trends or different genres for opportunities.

But I sure agree with the entire message from you, that I quoted. Only small disagreement is I like SS and it's growing in returns and earnings, ever since I dropped the rest, except IS. The only two sites that pay, (for me) that's my direction for efforts right now.

... also the post below you with millions of contributors with 20 or so images getting in the way is a very valid point. inactive accounts should mean accounts closed so that the suppliers that are serious about this can make a living. but again, the genie is out of the bottle, and it is all about company profit, not supplier profit. sadly there is nothing only one person can do, but for me, i chose long ago, and continue to do so to not contribute to sub sites. now that being said, my balls have been put in a vice as IS now offers subs. my choice here is to lose a very handsome income or sell out and let them sell subs. if i could opt out, i would, but the agencies don't give me that choice any more. and yeah, it is a hard work thing, but even now that is not really worth the time, it simply does not pay off anymore. when you know you have to sell an image 20 times just to pay for the parking meter to take the shot, you know it's time to question the industry.

« Reply #26 on: September 02, 2014, 10:16 »
Subs let you earn money by selling a lot of images, and non-subs let you earn money by selling fewer images for more money

The larger the collections inevitably grow, the more likely it is that the RF sub model will be about the agency selling in volume and not the individual contributor. Because individual contributors cannot hope to keep up with collection growth.

As the market for cheap stock inevitably declines, the more likely it is that agencies will strike deals which effectively mean that content is provided free at the point of use.

If I was a Shutterstock contributor I would be trying to persuade the buyers to download their complete allowance every day.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2014, 10:25 by bunhill »


Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
Last post January 26, 2008, 04:36
by redbaron
18 Replies
Last post May 07, 2009, 13:10
by epantha
22 Replies
Last post October 28, 2012, 11:37
by gostwyck
34 Replies
Last post September 26, 2013, 04:15
by ShadySue
20 Replies
Last post November 30, 2015, 10:42
by cathyslife


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle