pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

POLL: Please vote which "FAIR TRADE AGENCY" will be the first in our "Joint promotion and marketing campaign"!

Shutterstock
80 (18.3%)
iStock
12 (2.7%)
Fotolia
7 (1.6%)
Dreamstime
34 (7.8%)
DepositPhotos
19 (4.3%)
123RF
18 (4.1%)
Pond5
61 (14%)
Stockfresh
33 (7.6%)
Canstockphoto
21 (4.8%)
Bigstockphoto
2 (0.5%)
Veer
5 (1.1%)
Envato
7 (1.6%)
YayMicro
15 (3.4%)
GLStockImages
65 (14.9%)
FeaturePics
5 (1.1%)
PantherMedia
0 (0%)
MostPhotos
5 (1.1%)
Crestock
0 (0%)
Cutcaster
5 (1.1%)
Alamy
43 (9.8%)

Total Members Voted: 169

Voting closed: April 03, 2013, 08:54

Author Topic: POLL: Let's promote together "The best contributor friendly agency"! First time!  (Read 40170 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: April 02, 2013, 03:25 »
+1
Not sure why so many people have voted for SS...

Yeah, it's a mystery to me. I guess the istock folks were right, and it's really not money that will make us happy.

The fact is, if we were able to take all of the buyers at SS and move them over to a better paying site, we'd all be doing a heck of a lot better financially. I'm averaging just under $4 RPD at Stockfresh, while I average about $0.55 at SS.

Disagree...strongly....



First of all I haven't voted for SS but when i deeply rethink , I wouldn't feel bad about it too much even If i did...When your already that surprised why some voted SS...I try explain from my perspective, and I hope it makes sense.

From that April in 2006. when i pressed agree, things haven't change much there and they kept their fingers in their part of the jar. They even threw few raises that I actually felt in my wallet in good days.
And if other sites had their days , SS had its , i remember long beautiful scrolling on sales page...

Thay simply never let me down comparing to some.

Even more..... I don't remember situations i had to explain sales on forums, sales deductions, asking questions...and more or less  beating a dead horse against guy with a ban button and a paycheck. on 68. page of the topic.



Also personally I find their transparency among best in industry...and it means a lot to me...


Search engine yes changed few times but it never killed me.

They could also play some moves and "vast majority" would be still contributing , or u think  it wouldn't.


Yet maybe I'm stupid cause  there are sites with higher RPD
You would bet your money  that some would be paying that much if they get up there in big league.
Or that they wont be sold and youll need someone to promote from scratch....


I would sure not want them to go down for any site, known or unknown, but I would always like to see things spiced  with healthy competition in the game.
None of that makes any difference to me when they are paying me between 70c and 90c per Download.  I don't want to send even more buyers there.  Quite the opposite I want to send buyers somewhere like DT where I get between 3$ and $4 per dl.   I pay my bills with my stock earnings so I want to sell my images at the place that will give me the best RPD. I've said before I have nothing against SS but I will support the sites that pay me well.  I couldn't be happier if the SS buyers defect to a place like GL or Pond 5.


« Reply #101 on: April 02, 2013, 03:32 »
0
Why consider only %?
What is better a site that gives you 90% and sell 1 photo a year or a site that gives you 20% and sells 50 photos a day?

No, what is better is a site that sells 50 photos a day and pays 90%.  This isn't about how much we earn at a site it is about who pays the most per download and therefore who we shoud be promoting and sending the buyers to.  If we are making the most money at a low paying site it means that a lot of the buyers are there instead of at a place that gives us better commission. We shouldn't promote sites just because they have a lot of buyers we should promote sites that pay us well per dl.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2013, 03:37 by fotografer »

« Reply #102 on: April 02, 2013, 04:25 »
0
Why consider only %?
What is better a site that gives you 90% and sell 1 photo a year or a site that gives you 20% and sells 50 photos a day?

Thank You for pointing out the obvious that has been ignored. One place pays 50% and people average $19 a month, the other pays 20% and people average $160 a month, but this thread, ignores bottom line, actual earnings and money in the bank, in favor of percentages.

The most recent site to drop from the Microstock business offered 80% didn't it?

And then some want to remove sites that they don't want, from the poll. Lets see? We don't like the response and people aren't answering the way we want, so we'll eliminate the choices until we get the answer we want to see? ???

Wag the dog folks, it's not going to make the buyers change to places that are "contributor friendly".
Did people read the poll question?
Quote
POLL: Please vote which "FAIR TRADE AGENCY" will be the first in our "Joint promotion and marketing campaign"!
I put the "FAIR TRADE AGENCY" in bold.  To me, an agency can't be considered as "fair trade" if they pay under 30% commission to their contributors while other sites have had no problem paying 50%.  Then we have istock giving Google images and paying their contributors $6 or $12.  How can they possibly be considered as a fair trade agency?  But people have still voted for them.  So this poll to me is a joke.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #103 on: April 02, 2013, 04:26 »
-1
Why consider only %?
What is better a site that gives you 90% and sell 1 photo a year or a site that gives you 20% and sells 50 photos a day?

No, what is better is a site that sells 50 photos a day and pays 90%.  This isn't about how much we earn at a site it is about who pays the most per download and therefore who we shoud be promoting and sending the buyers to.  If we are making the most money at a low paying site it means that a lot of the buyers are there instead of at a place that gives us better commission. We shouldn't promote sites just because they have a lot of buyers we should promote sites that pay us well per dl.

Yes, I understand. But you are just dreaming/joking (50 photos 90% ;) ).

Do you really think that 10 of us will change things "promoting" some sites?
(I don't see a lot of people really interested here, just the same few users, the few ones that generally participate to interesting subjects like)
Or you are all at the level of Yuri or Africa Studio, except me?  :P

It will be good to understand how to promote some site *concretely*

Have you (or better the creator of this thread) some concrete plan/action that you can expose here to do this?

Before to promote some site I think that there is a really big work to do on contributors (not the 10 here) to change their mind. And as I think that for 99% of the contributors the actual situation it is enough good, so I bet it will be really hard.

For the moment I can only say that I like the idea, but it looks a little like a nice fairy tale, or like believing in Santa Klaus.

I really hope that this dream could become a reality.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2013, 05:08 by Beppe Grillo »

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #104 on: April 02, 2013, 04:35 »
0
while other sites have had no problem paying 50%. 
How do you know that the sites that pay 50% have no problem to do it?
« Last Edit: April 02, 2013, 05:05 by Beppe Grillo »

« Reply #105 on: April 02, 2013, 08:13 »
0
Why consider only %?
What is better a site that gives you 90% and sell 1 photo a year or a site that gives you 20% and sells 50 photos a day?

No, what is better is a site that sells 50 photos a day and pays 90%.  This isn't about how much we earn at a site it is about who pays the most per download and therefore who we shoud be promoting and sending the buyers to.  If we are making the most money at a low paying site it means that a lot of the buyers are there instead of at a place that gives us better commission. We shouldn't promote sites just because they have a lot of buyers we should promote sites that pay us well per dl.

Totally agree!

Imagine what would be if for example Istock has 99% of whole image market...

Then IS can pay only 5% (even less) to their contributors and still be the most paying stock agency... Other 1% of market and all other agencies can not make enough big amount every month, even with 90% royalty rate for their contributors...

This poll clearly shows lack of knowledge of contributors,if anything else... They can feed the beast whole the time and think "we are not guilty for low commision rate"...
« Last Edit: April 02, 2013, 08:15 by borg »

« Reply #106 on: April 02, 2013, 08:18 »
+1
  So this poll to me is a joke.

It is not a joke, is a tragedy! Contributors are mainly guilty for their destiny!

« Reply #107 on: April 02, 2013, 09:10 »
+1
Do you really think that 10 of us will change things "promoting" some sites?
(I don't see a lot of people really interested here, just the same few users, the few ones that generally participate to interesting subjects like)
Or you are all at the level of Yuri or Africa Studio, except me?  :P

It depends on who you are trying to get change for. Most things aren't likely to change the industry, but you can make a difference in your own wallet. It just takes some work and a plan. Unfortunately though, most people aren't going to put in that work. I think the fact that the self-hosted option never gets the 50 votes needed to make the earnings poll tells you that. So do the results of this poll. But, that doesn't mean some people still won't make changes for themselves  and have success.

« Reply #108 on: April 02, 2013, 10:47 »
0
while other sites have had no problem paying 50%. 
How do you know that the sites that pay 50% have no problem to do it?
Many sites paying 50% commission have been around almost since microstock started.  DT paid 50% for years and I don't believe their excuses for cutting commissions.  Stockxpert were earning me more than all sites except SS while paying 50% commission.  It's a shame they were sold and then closed but I'm sure they were making a nice profit.  So I don't think its a problem for sites to pay 50% commission.

Its not all about the percentage commission sites pay us but if we're going to spend time and money promoting a site, I don't see the logic in choosing one that already spends lots of the money they make from us promoting themselves?  If they're already taking 70 to 85% of the money they make from selling a license for our images, they shouldn't need us helping them.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #109 on: April 02, 2013, 10:51 »
0
So do the results of this poll. But, that doesn't mean some people still won't make changes for themselves  and have success.

I agree.
And I can say more. I am new on stocks and I did not even heard about GL stock before (I have only considered only the top and middle tier till now - and I understand that it was a wrong idea).
So, in front of the result of the poll (I don't think it will change a lot now) I have understood that GL could be an interesting site where to upload my images, and I will do it (I am waiting the acceptation now). And for this reason I want to thank you all, and specially the "father" of this thread.
So maybe in this way, for the little part that I can do, I will contribute to the promotion of this site.
Cheers!


Many sites paying 50% commission have been around almost since microstock started.  DT paid 50% for years and I don't believe their excuses for cutting commissions.  Stockxpert were earning me more than all sites except SS while paying 50% commission.  It's a shame they were sold and then closed but I'm sure they were making a nice profit.  So I don't think its a problem for sites to pay 50% commission.

Its not all about the percentage commission sites pay us but if we're going to spend time and money promoting a site, I don't see the logic in choosing one that already spends lots of the money they make from us promoting themselves?  If they're already taking 70 to 85% of the money they make from selling a license for our images, they shouldn't need us helping them.

For what I have understood (but I am too much new in stocks to have a precise idea) the sites that was paying 50% and then cut the commissions are still alive.
The sites that still pay 50% or they have not a lot of sales (why? because not a lot of contributors or not a lot of customers?) or they close fast.
So, if the general trend is to reduce the commissions to live (survive?) there are some (good/bad) reasons for this or not? Maybe a simple law of market offer/demand?
« Last Edit: April 02, 2013, 10:59 by Beppe Grillo »

RacePhoto

« Reply #110 on: April 02, 2013, 11:43 »
0
I think the wording of the poll was confusing. I don't even know what a fair trade agency is, until someone defined it? Never heard of that term before. And using friendly could mean anything. Nice emails, easy uploads, sales dollars, pretty forum hosts?  :D

So people read the poll and answered based on the question. Let's promote together "The best contributor friendly agency"! First time!

I answered the two that I find the most friendly and make me the most money. I didn't even pick three. Now I'm told I'm stupid for liking SS and how they should be in the poll? OK how about only put places that pay 50% in the poll, that would solve the confusion and limit to the ones that are intended to be the beneficiaries of the support?

That's my answer to making it better.




  So this poll to me is a joke.

It is not a joke, is a tragedy! Contributors are mainly guilty for their destiny!

Also:

Symbiostock and Stocksy are missing  :(

And Alamy only pays 40%

« Reply #111 on: April 02, 2013, 11:49 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 14:56 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #112 on: April 02, 2013, 11:52 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 14:56 by Audi 5000 »

RacePhoto

« Reply #113 on: April 02, 2013, 13:22 »
0
And Alamy only pays 40%
They pay 50%.

Not always on everything, but fine, add them to the next poll and only include sites that pay 50% or more (most of the time?). That would solve the questions of who we should or shouldn't vote for. If it was only for places that are 50% and up (most of the time?), why are all the Microstock sites that don't pay that, included as an option.

See where it's confusing? And it said "The best contributor friendly agency"

I like Alamy even at 40% Distributor makes 40% I make 40%

40% Distributor Commission    30.90    
40% Distributor Commission    27.80    

« Reply #114 on: April 02, 2013, 13:40 »
0
Not always on everything, but fine, add them to the next poll and only include sites that pay 50% or more (most of the time?). That would solve the questions of who we should or shouldn't vote for. If it was only for places that are 50% and up (most of the time?), why are all the Microstock sites that don't pay that, included as an option.

See where it's confusing? And it said "The best contributor friendly agency"

I like Alamy even at 40% Distributor makes 40% I make 40%

40% Distributor Commission    30.90    
40% Distributor Commission    27.80

It's not necessarily all about %. It's about what you get paid per sale. I think many of us were surprised (as was I) at the number of votes SS got because it is pretty much known as the lowest per sale agency out there.

I actually think this poll was pretty interesting because it shows most contributors don't really care about RPD at all. They'd rather promote SS because... Actually, I'm not really sure why. I guess that would be a good follow up question.

« Reply #115 on: April 02, 2013, 13:54 »
0
Not always on everything, but fine, add them to the next poll and only include sites that pay 50% or more (most of the time?). That would solve the questions of who we should or shouldn't vote for. If it was only for places that are 50% and up (most of the time?), why are all the Microstock sites that don't pay that, included as an option.

See where it's confusing? And it said "The best contributor friendly agency"

I like Alamy even at 40% Distributor makes 40% I make 40%

40% Distributor Commission    30.90    
40% Distributor Commission    27.80

It's not necessarily all about %. It's about what you get paid per sale. I think many of us were surprised (as was I) at the number of votes SS got because it is pretty much known as the lowest per sale agency out there.

I actually think this poll was pretty interesting because it shows most contributors don't really care about RPD at all. They'd rather promote SS because... Actually, I'm not really sure why. I guess that would be a good follow up question.


Shortly

-most people joined there in same  model as they have now

-they never played tricky moves trying to grab in the part they promised to contributors

-when they were dominant in their part of market they showed intention to push prices up...and
share that with us

- their forum is most democratic and never banned people for nothing , at least I feel that way

-never throw limits

- never rejected for we have enough of those

-never set upload limits

- i like their transparency

- never experienced sale returns there

I can put more reasons if u want





« Reply #116 on: April 02, 2013, 14:01 »
0
Not always on everything, but fine, add them to the next poll and only include sites that pay 50% or more (most of the time?). That would solve the questions of who we should or shouldn't vote for. If it was only for places that are 50% and up (most of the time?), why are all the Microstock sites that don't pay that, included as an option.

See where it's confusing? And it said "The best contributor friendly agency"

I like Alamy even at 40% Distributor makes 40% I make 40%

40% Distributor Commission    30.90    
40% Distributor Commission    27.80

It's not necessarily all about %. It's about what you get paid per sale. I think many of us were surprised (as was I) at the number of votes SS got because it is pretty much known as the lowest per sale agency out there.

I actually think this poll was pretty interesting because it shows most contributors don't really care about RPD at all. They'd rather promote SS because... Actually, I'm not really sure why. I guess that would be a good follow up question.


Shortly

-most people joined there in same  model as they have now

-they never played tricky moves trying to grab in the part they promised to contributors

-when they were dominant in their part of market they showed intention to push prices up...and
share that with us

- their forum is most democratic and never banned people for nothing , at least I feel that way

-never throw limits

- never rejected for we have enough of those

-never set upload limits

- i like their transparency

- never experienced sale returns there

I can put more reasons if u want
That's fine if you are a hobbyist but not if you are in this to make  a living.  I'll take 4$ or more a dl over less than a dollar any day.


« Reply #117 on: April 02, 2013, 14:04 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 14:56 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #118 on: April 02, 2013, 14:05 »
+1
Sorry but I don't agree , i make a living from this and SS is holding the roof of the house from the day one with same portfolio on other sites.

What makes u sure if a site  gets big as ss it wont play u with a move , ok maybe it want..

But the fact is that I really trust SS more than i trust some others because they earned that trust
durin all this YEARS.


« Reply #119 on: April 02, 2013, 14:08 »
0

Shortly

-most people joined there in same  model as they have now

-they never played tricky moves trying to grab in the part they promised to contributors

-when they were dominant in their part of market they showed intention to push prices up...and
share that with us

- their forum is most democratic and never banned people for nothing , at least I feel that way

-never throw limits

- never rejected for we have enough of those

-never set upload limits

- i like their transparency

- never experienced sale returns there

I can put more reasons if u want
A few things about that.  They did go back on referral earnings which were supposed to be forever.  They have not raised prices at all (nothing meaningful) and still sell average photos, video, and vectors for less than $2.50.  They do have returns just not for subs, yet.  About transparency has anyone seen the sensitive use license?  The prices for that are not public, ie not transparent.

Stands but...

name a long lasting strong site that treat us more fair in the past , in your opinion if u wish ?

« Reply #120 on: April 02, 2013, 14:34 »
+1

name a long lasting strong site that treat us more fair in the past , in your opinion if u wish ?

I guess it depends on what you mean by fair. I don't think it's particularly fair to get paid on average under a buck. I also don't give extra credit to SS because they never reduced commissions (because they were already the lowest). I have nothing against SS. I like them. It just comes down to math for me in most of these decisions.

I guess you can buy my loyalty.  ;D

« Reply #121 on: April 02, 2013, 14:45 »
0

name a long lasting strong site that treat us more fair in the past , in your opinion if u wish ?

I guess it depends on what you mean by fair. I don't think it's particularly fair to get paid on average under a buck. I also don't give extra credit to SS because they never reduced commissions (because they were already the lowest). I have nothing against SS. I like them. It just comes down to math for me in most of these decisions.

I guess you can buy my loyalty.  ;D

So u can mine , but I would not wish them to go down and when earnings are concerned in long term for me nobody came close to them.

 
Forget to say personally I don't like BS move,  but i can understand its probably answer to TS only with option not to accept the deal for us but i still don't like it.


To be clear , Im not for promoting them , but do understand why some voted for them and I sure not wish them to tank in favor of some site that is enigma for the future from my perspective , thats all I wanted to say







« Reply #122 on: April 02, 2013, 14:50 »
0


What makes u sure if a site  gets big as ss it wont play u with a move , ok maybe it want..


I don't but it would have to go down an awful lot to get nearly as low as the RPD at SS.   What makes you think that SS aren't going to pull the same at SS as they have at BS?

« Reply #123 on: April 02, 2013, 15:10 »
0


What makes u sure if a site  gets big as ss it wont play u with a move , ok maybe it want..


I don't but it would have to go down an awful lot to get nearly as low as the RPD at SS.   What makes you think that SS aren't going to pull the same at SS as they have at BS?

Because they had 8 yeas to do it , it would have pass ( or u think it wouldn't) and yet they didn't do it. 

I cannot know but if I would bet on someone not to trick me ...I would just have to bet on them...based on my experience. And I mean long term.


« Reply #124 on: April 02, 2013, 15:27 »
0

One more thing , If I just needed to pick a site and bet getty wont get it , i would pick SS...and if Im wrong then there is strong chance Im stupid.

And the history showed that they only need to move a finger to get those in level with ones some vote we promote. Some even claimed they are starting with goal to sell the site.  Hey ? 


So, I should look only numbers,  and neglect the facts that things not only have strong chance for happening but yet they already happened  in this  industry.

And even if u want compare business models , Im sure many would bet SS would be lower by now and loosing some battles yet again have a look at the list on the right.

Without cutting our share...ever.  For that they have my hat down , because some of their rivals were financing that and partly from part that was once considered ours. SS didnt respond with same move.

Low or not i see them as positive guys in the industry



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
4755 Views
Last post July 28, 2009, 17:48
by johngriffin
11 Replies
8489 Views
Last post July 22, 2010, 16:28
by madelaide
38 Replies
21514 Views
Last post June 08, 2011, 14:53
by Slovenian
4 Replies
4411 Views
Last post July 31, 2012, 16:50
by chromaco
11 Replies
3370 Views
Last post January 10, 2021, 23:22
by cascoly

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors