MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: lisafx on October 14, 2013, 10:09
-
Not sure if it's just me or if it is widespread, but my sales across all sites are still at (anemic) summer levels. This is the first time in 8 years I have not seen a significant jump in sales in September, and a very robust October.
I'm curious if this is a widespread phenomenon. If it is, then it may be related to the uncertainty around a possible US debt default, or perhaps the long-term results of the changes in the way google displays images, or phases of the moon, or .....?
If it's just me, I'd like to know. In that case I guess it could be portfolio aging, reduced production of new images, someone spreading rumors that my photos have cooties, or ....?
I know we have an end of the month thread, but sales are so dire I'd like to find some way to improve them ASAP, if there is a way.
-
Not sure if it's just me or if it is widespread, but my sales across all sites are still at (anemic) summer levels. This is the first time in 8 years I have not seen a significant jump in sales in September, and a very robust October.
I'm curious if this is a widespread phenomenon. If it is, then it may be related to the uncertainty around a possible US debt default, or perhaps the long-term results of the changes in the way google displays images, or phases of the moon, or .....?
If it's just me, I'd like to know. In that case I guess it could be portfolio aging, reduced production of new images, someone spreading rumors that my photos have cooties, or ....?
I know we have an end of the month thread, but sales are so dire I'd like to find some way to improve them ASAP, if there is a way.
It feels like walking through mud. I am with Microstock since many years and never had the case of uploading so much relevant material with so little response in sales. You are not alone. It gets more difficult every year. I wonder when the huge suppliers drop out (after Yuri).
-
lisafx
I'm seeing the same as you are, but with a much smaller portfolio (~1000 images) across all the agencies.
-
Definitely awful for me on iS - Sept picked up a bit relative to Jul-Aug, but October is way down again. And nada so far in Oct on Alamy.
In fact, almost halfway through the month and I'm WELL under half the dls I had in July, which was my worst month since becoming exclusive in mid 2007.
But very concerned that your port over a range of agencies is stagnant, Lisa. That's bad for the industry.
Let's hope that the "UKIP with Guns" party sees sense.
-
Terrible, terrible sales on iStock this past couple of weeks, really dire.
I would guess I'm approaching 10% of the volumes I would have sold a few years ago with a portfolio half the size.
-
Thanks very much for the replies so far. I am not sure if I am comforted or alarmed that others are seeing the same. A bit of both. Hope more folks weigh in.
Oh, and apologies to anyone not in the US for the complete incompetence of our elected government, if that is part of what's going on. :P
-
Same with me.
I think there are lots of phenomenons ... market, competition, and many others ... but I wonder if others like me are slowing the production even more (for micro) and trying other ways to sell at better prices.
I am doing less and less images with microstock in mind, because I believe that all images may sell but they do not sell in volume as they do in the past.
I really prefer to be represented with an agencie that sell fewer times at better prices, and microstock are not in this business model.
-
Hopefully, I'm not the only one with positive news. October has been a lot better. The summer and September were pretty terrible though.
-
Hopefully, I'm not the only one with positive news. October has been a lot better. The summer and September were pretty terrible though.
It's good to hear that at least someone is doing well. :)
-
as usually SS doing well, all other doing peanuts ;D
-
As I said before is easy to do well if you earn less than, lets say, $1000/month ... more than that I guess it is rare the contributor that are doing well.
But if is someone out there, keep your secret ;-)
-
"someone spreading rumors that my photos have cooties, or ....? "
The cooties theory is very interesting.
-
As I said before is easy to do well if you earn less than, lets say, $1000/month ... more than that I guess it is rare the contributor that are doing well.
But if is someone out there, keep your secret ;-)
is that a joke? nobody doing over 1k $ is doing well? that is the dumbest statement I have ever heard, I understand what you mean but you haven't said it properly
-
Oh, and apologies to anyone not in the US for the complete incompetence of our elected government, if that is part of what's going on. :P
Typically, I'm off on a tour of the southwest National Parks in a weeks time. I'll be sitting around twiddling my thumbs unless they get their act together!
-
As I said before is easy to do well if you earn less than, lets say, $1000/month ... more than that I guess it is rare the contributor that are doing well.
But if is someone out there, keep your secret ;-)
is that a joke? nobody doing over 1k $ is doing well? that is the dumbest statement I have ever heard, I understand what you mean but you haven't said it properly
Luis,
Maybe you are not trying to understand my sentence properly ... but I can explain to you.
Always have been easy to grow when the photographer is starting and the income is low, and it's hard to keep making more and more money when you already earn a lot.
Now I believe that almost all photographers that earn, lets say, more than $1000 are earning less than the year before (or even the month before).
Of course I am not sure, but it's what I think is happen.
Why do you think Yuri are trying the exclusive thing at istock? ;-)
-
I'm earning much less than $1000pm and I'm still in a falling sales and $$ scenario. It's not suprising at iS, where uploading makes little or no difference nowadays; but I hadn't guessed that things would be as bad elsewhere.
-
As I said before is easy to do well if you earn less than, lets say, $1000/month ... more than that I guess it is rare the contributor that are doing well.
But if is someone out there, keep your secret ;-)
is that a joke? nobody doing over 1k $ is doing well? that is the dumbest statement I have ever heard, I understand what you mean but you haven't said it properly
Luis,
Maybe you are not trying to understand my sentence properly ... but I can explain to you.
Always have been easy to grow when the photographer is starting and the income is low, and it's hard to keep making more and more money when you already earn a lot.
Now I believe that almost all photographers that earn, lets say, more than $1000 are earning less than the year before (or even the month before).
Of course I am not sure, but it's what I think is happen.
Why do you think Yuri are trying the exclusive thing at istock? ;-)
that is not correct, if you check the monthly earnings topic here at MSG you will see that many are still growing and are certainly doing more than 1k $, you can add me on that statistic as well, your logic may be right for a big chunk of contributors but not for everybody
regarding Yuri I rather not talk about him because I am just tired of it, it won't take us anywhere ;)
-
I'm currently projected to be about 8% down on Oct 2012. The situation may actually be a bit worse than that as I had an early flurry of SOD's on SS which may be distorting the numbers somewhat. Certainly no seasonal boost evident. It didn't happen in the Spring and it looks like it's not happening in the Autumn either.
-
I'm earning much less than $1000pm and I'm still in a falling sales and $$ scenario. It's not suprising at iS, where uploading makes little or no difference nowadays; but I hadn't guessed that things would be as bad elsewhere.
Yep, and many that earn less than $1000pm also.
There is a world crise lots of small business closing, and over supply ... soon or later most of us will lost the starting motivation in microstock and have to find other ways to make money with photography.
-
As I said before is easy to do well if you earn less than, lets say, $1000/month ... more than that I guess it is rare the contributor that are doing well.
But if is someone out there, keep your secret ;-)
is that a joke? nobody doing over 1k $ is doing well? that is the dumbest statement I have ever heard, I understand what you mean but you haven't said it properly
Luis,
Maybe you are not trying to understand my sentence properly ... but I can explain to you.
Always have been easy to grow when the photographer is starting and the income is low, and it's hard to keep making more and more money when you already earn a lot.
Now I believe that almost all photographers that earn, lets say, more than $1000 are earning less than the year before (or even the month before).
Of course I am not sure, but it's what I think is happen.
Why do you think Yuri are trying the exclusive thing at istock? ;-)
that is not correct, if you check the monthly earnings topic here at MSG you will see that many are still growing and are certainly doing more than 1k $, you can add me on that statistic as well, your logic may be right for a big chunk of contributors but not for everybody
regarding Yuri I rather not talk about him because I am just tired of it, it won't take us anywhere ;)
Believe what you want ... you will get there some day.
-
I had high hopes for October, because I had a killer summer with my portfolio. But it seems October is much slower then July August September.
-
I'm earning much less than $1000pm and I'm still in a falling sales and $$ scenario. It's not suprising at iS, where uploading makes little or no difference nowadays; but I hadn't guessed that things would be as bad elsewhere.
Yep, and many that earn less than $1000pm also.
There is a world crise lots of small business closing, and over supply ... soon or later most of us will lost the starting motivation in microstock and have to find other ways to make money with photography.
Or just other ways to make money.
In a financial crisis, there isn't much spare money to spend on portraits and wedding photography. I can easily see that here, but to be fair, watching CreativeLIVE, and seeing the reported sales on FAA, it seems that there's still a lot of discretionary money around in parts of the US.
-
As I said before is easy to do well if you earn less than, lets say, $1000/month ... more than that I guess it is rare the contributor that are doing well.
But if is someone out there, keep your secret ;-)
is that a joke? nobody doing over 1k $ is doing well? that is the dumbest statement I have ever heard, I understand what you mean but you haven't said it properly
Luis,
Maybe you are not trying to understand my sentence properly ... but I can explain to you.
Always have been easy to grow when the photographer is starting and the income is low, and it's hard to keep making more and more money when you already earn a lot.
Now I believe that almost all photographers that earn, lets say, more than $1000 are earning less than the year before (or even the month before).
Of course I am not sure, but it's what I think is happen.
Why do you think Yuri are trying the exclusive thing at istock? ;-)
that is not correct, if you check the monthly earnings topic here at MSG you will see that many are still growing and are certainly doing more than 1k $, you can add me on that statistic as well, your logic may be right for a big chunk of contributors but not for everybody
regarding Yuri I rather not talk about him because I am just tired of it, it won't take us anywhere ;)
Believe what you want ... you will get there some day.
I believe in my own numbers, may I?
guess you are missing something, I haven't said I don't understand your logic but 1k $ is relatively low, I believe you should say 3-5k
-
...if you check the monthly earnings topic here at MSG you will see that many are still growing and are certainly doing more than 1k $...
I'd like to think I'm still growing, although it seems like a couple steps forward and a couple steps backward. I think there are still more steps forward overall though.
-
Thanks very much for the replies so far. I am not sure if I am comforted or alarmed that others are seeing the same. A bit of both. Hope more folks weigh in.
Oh, and apologies to anyone not in the US for the complete incompetence of our elected government, if that is part of what's going on. :P
That's probably part of it, but to be frank I think we have to except the fact that the market is just watered down with millions upon millions of images . . . . . the glory days are over. The crowd in "Crowd Sourcing" becomes bigger, . . . . remember the song "Video Killed The Radio Star"? Things move on.
-
As I said before is easy to do well if you earn less than, lets say, $1000/month ... more than that I guess it is rare the contributor that are doing well.
But if is someone out there, keep your secret ;-)
is that a joke? nobody doing over 1k $ is doing well? that is the dumbest statement I have ever heard, I understand what you mean but you haven't said it properly
Luis,
Maybe you are not trying to understand my sentence properly ... but I can explain to you.
Always have been easy to grow when the photographer is starting and the income is low, and it's hard to keep making more and more money when you already earn a lot.
Now I believe that almost all photographers that earn, lets say, more than $1000 are earning less than the year before (or even the month before).
Of course I am not sure, but it's what I think is happen.
Why do you think Yuri are trying the exclusive thing at istock? ;-)
that is not correct, if you check the monthly earnings topic here at MSG you will see that many are still growing and are certainly doing more than 1k $, you can add me on that statistic as well, your logic may be right for a big chunk of contributors but not for everybody
regarding Yuri I rather not talk about him because I am just tired of it, it won't take us anywhere ;)
Believe what you want ... you will get there some day.
I believe in my own numbers, may I?
guess you are missing something, I haven't said I don't understand your logic but 1k $ is relatively low, I believe you should say 3-5k
You are too picky! $1000, $1500, $2000 ... I think is not hard to understand what I mean.
But, as you said you have your own numbers, and you are growing. Lucky you.
-
Same here. Sales for me are fairly steady since the big plunge with the SS site "update" in mid-July, which depressed my sales. I'm selling Halloween, Thanksgiving and Christmas files, but somehow sales of my other files are dropping, so there's no overall bump. Today is particularly slow, but it's a holiday in the U.S.
-
My September wasn't horrible but wasn't that hot either. Usually it is a best month of the year but this year it was below August. I'm still hoping for a better Oct. With 31 days and only 4 weekends that certainly helps. The usual fall blast sure doesn't seem to be present though
-
After a better September (specially first half) things are going South in my IS exclusive portfolio.
-
.
-
Sales are pretty good up at least 25% compared to last year. ;D
Congrats! I hope you continue like that ;-) May I ask you if you had been uploading a lot in relative numbers to your portfolio size?
-
... watching CreativeLIVE, and seeing the reported sales on FAA, it seems that there's still a lot of discretionary money around in parts of the US.
But not if you're Banksy, apparently:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24518315 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24518315)
-
... watching CreativeLIVE, and seeing the reported sales on FAA, it seems that there's still a lot of discretionary money around in parts of the US.
But not if you're Banksy, apparently:
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24518315[/url] ([url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24518315[/url])
I'd be ok with $420 for less than a day of selling one color stencil spraypainted canvasses. Maybe I should go to NY and sell some "banksy's" myself...
As for my photo sales - It seems that after the first few months my sales dropped this year and have been under last years numbers since then. No real noticeable summer drop or fall boost this year.
-
.
-
I'm iStock exclusive and have had a really bad year even though I've uploaded regularly, and my vectors are a lot better now than when I joined this business. But I guess it's not just iStock that is on its way down then.
Can't it just be that the golden days are over? There must be a hundred times as many contributors now compared to a few years ago, and millions of similar images. So less and less to each of us.
I guess it's time to get back to a real job soon... :(
-
I'm iStock exclusive and have had a really bad year even though I've uploaded regularly, and my vectors are a lot better now than when I joined this business. But I guess it's not just iStock that is on its way down then.
Can't it just be that the golden days are over? There must be a hundred times as many contributors now compared to a few years ago, and millions of similar images. So less and less to each of us.
I guess it's time to get back to a real job soon... :(
...what I observe too is the amazing quality nowadays found on the sites. A level of professionalism which is not easily to be achieved if you are a one man show. Companies formed like mushrooms in the past years and most likely will leave not much space for individuals.
-
...what I observe too is the amazing quality nowadays found on the sites. A level of professionalism which is not easily to be achieved if you are a one man show. Companies formed like mushrooms in the past years and most likely will leave not much space for individuals.
I find it a little hard to believe that you'd make much money as a company these days. I'd think they'd be seeking out special deals and higher prices or they'd downsize.
-
Oh, and apologies to anyone not in the US for the complete incompetence of our elected government, if that is part of what's going on. :P
+1 on that!
I pulled out of IS 3 years ago so can't say what's happening there. But my other agencies are producing almost nothing for me.
Makes it easy to spend time building my own SYS site. I'm now uploading new images exclusively there. That feels good.
-
September was worse than August and October is worse than September. I hope this isn't a long term trend.
-
Again thinking about the 'world economy' factor. Wouldn't people already have credits and subs to be using up, even if they didn't buy new ones? Especially on the 25 a day subs plan at SS, where if you don't use them you lose them?
-
It is getting worse for me, too, Lisa. Interestingly, it is Shutterstock and Dreamstime that are yielding eroding commissions, mostly SS. But I think with them I was on the sh*t end of a search change. I have been having some Mondays and Fridays as if they were Saturdays and Sundays. I've not had this kind of commission behavior from them before. FT is 1/2 of what I used to get, but that is from $100 to $50, beer money.
Comparing last year to this year:
DP seems to be growing
PD is flat
Bigstock is down by 20%
Alamy down 50%
SS down 18%
IS flat due to PP pick up
The last few months have had the biggest negative influence of the entire year.
-
...what I observe too is the amazing quality nowadays found on the sites. A level of professionalism which is not easily to be achieved if you are a one man show. Companies formed like mushrooms in the past years and most likely will leave not much space for individuals.
I think this is a very relevant factor in the overall decline in sales, for sure. Used to be that I'd browse new uploads and think my stuff compared favorably to most of it. Now, when I happen to glance at new uploads, I am thinking more along the lines of "how am I supposed to compete with THAT?" It is tougher as a one person show.
Even so, I would have expected some seasonal bump. Maybe not up to previous best years, but at least up relative to the lousy summer numbers.
-
September was worse than August and October is worse than September. I hope this isn't a long term trend.
YES, EXACTLY! It's crazy, isn't it? :o
-
Can't complain! SS and IS are doing fine and rest of the agencies are:
(http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/images/RAWTxfer.gif)
-
I just want to say, thanks very much for all the informative and thoughtful posts. I find myself nodding in agreement with nearly all of them. A picture is definitely emerging.
To the folks who are doing well, Cory and Tickstock, honest congratulations to both of you. Tick, since you are anonymous, I don't know what your secret to success is, but if your numbers are improving, I can see why you are still so positive on Istock.
Cory, I think you are the best case study for the benefits of building and promoting your own sales channels. Between your talent for illustration and your marketing skills, you seem to have found the sweet spot.
Interesting that those of us relying most heavily on the micros are the ones taking the worst beating.
Also thanks, Tyler, for letting this mid month sales talk happen. I know some folks don't want to hear about sales until the end of month thread, butd when things are this bad it's hard to keep quiet and wait it out.
-
As I said before is easy to do well if you earn less than, lets say, $1000/month ... more than that I guess it is rare the contributor that are doing well.
But if is someone out there, keep your secret ;-)
I definitely get what you are saying. Once you have reached a certain level of income and portfolio size, it's hard to keep going up. The dreaded "wall", or "law of diminishing returns" in action.
I still keep hoping that a lot of businesses are sitting on their money waiting to see if the US defaults on its debts, and if that gets resolved, hopefully this month, maybe we will see good sales in November and the first half of December.
If this situation is a factor, they are going to screw, not just us, but retail merchants all over the place if this drags on into the holiday season...
-
Definitely seeing a bump UP on SS and 123. The rest are about average for the year.
-
Can't complain! SS and IS are doing fine and rest of the agencies are:
([url]http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/images/RAWTxfer.gif[/url])
AWESOME!!
-
I just want to say, thanks very much for all the informative and thoughtful posts. I find myself nodding in agreement with nearly all of them. A picture is definitely emerging.
To the folks who are doing well, Cory and Tickstock, honest congratulations to both of you. Tick, since you are anonymous, I don't know what your secret to success is, but if your numbers are improving, I can see why you are still so positive on Istock.
Cory, I think you are the best case study for the benefits of building and promoting your own sales channels. Between your talent for illustration and your marketing skills, you seem to have found the sweet spot.
Interesting that those of us relying most heavily on the micros are the ones taking the worst beating.
Also thanks, Tyler, for letting this mid month sales talk happen. I know some folks don't want to hear about sales until the end of month thread, butd when things are this bad it's hard to keep quiet and wait it out.
I think I'm more stubborn than savvy. I really can't say if it was the right decision to pull away from the market and focus on higher RPD sites. The summer was brutal for me. I'm still pretty irked about all of it. I think it all still has potential, but it isn't growing like I want. Also, there is always some new obstacle in the way.
-
Definitely appears to be a falling trend. July was my best month this year.
August and September were both consecutively lower, and October is not looking great.
Fingers crossed it the US economic problems and we will all bounce back!!.
-
I'm seeing a bump since the summer ended, with almost no new uploads added to account for it. Actually got very close to a BDE at SS last week.
-
If it is the US problems causing this, wouldn't the US have a noticeably larger drop in sales? I did have a better day yesterday, on a US holiday.
-
... watching CreativeLIVE, and seeing the reported sales on FAA, it seems that there's still a lot of discretionary money around in parts of the US.
But not if you're Banksy, apparently:
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24518315[/url] ([url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24518315[/url])
I'd be ok with $420 for less than a day of selling one color stencil spraypainted canvasses. Maybe I should go to NY and sell some "banksy's" myself...
I'd try Sydney or London to pull that scam.
-
Oh, and apologies to anyone not in the US for the complete incompetence of our elected government, if that is part of what's going on. :P
is that official? we've just gotten rid of a govt who spent their whole 2 terms saying "but look how awful everyone else is doing" as some kind of marker of their skills and justification for how we stayed afloat DownUnder. (actual truth: by spending the surplus left by the previous administration, plus a whole bunch more)
-
I find it interesting that Japan has the highest debt per capita but doesn't seem to get mentioned much in the debt crisis news. From my sketchy understanding of the dark arts of economics, that might be because the Japanese generally save their money and don't like big credit debts. So the government can borrow from its own people and not have to pay another country high interest rates.
Most of Europe and the US seem to be following a policy that makes no sense to me. Keep governments borrowing more and more and let people build up their own personal debts. Hope the economy grows so big or the currency falls so low that the debts are sustainable. Getting the deficit down seems to be a big achievement but until there's a surplus, the debts continue to get bigger. The world debt is $51,988,615,154,182 but that's already out by a few million.
http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/ (http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/)
-
I find it interesting that Japan has the highest debt per capita but doesn't seem to get mentioned much in the debt crisis news. From my sketchy understanding of the dark arts of economics, that might be because the Japanese generally save their money and don't like big credit debts. So the government can borrow from its own people and not have to pay another country high interest rates.
Most of Europe and the US seem to be following a policy that makes no sense to me. Keep governments borrowing more and more and let people build up their own personal debts. Hope the economy grows so big or the currency falls so low that the debts are sustainable. Getting the deficit down seems to be a big achievement but until there's a surplus, the debts continue to get bigger. The world debt is $51,988,615,154,182 but that's already out by a few million.
[url]http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/[/url] ([url]http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/[/url])
I could not write it better down...It is not only the US, the crisis is felt worldwide. Europe is no different. Last week I read something about 15 million americans living off food stamp like support!? Can anybody from there confirm this? Quite shocking for the richest country in the world....
here a documentary about the world economy at the moment (I hope it is not too off topic):
Four Horsemen - Feature Documentary - Official Version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fbvquHSPJU#)
-
I think it is very unlikely that the debt crisis in the US may be the cause of the weak sales in microstock market. Because microstock is actually a cheaper option for buyers and should be more popular especially during the crisis times. As far as I remember, in 2008, 2009 World economy was in a deeper crisis but our sales performance was better when compared to 2013.
I have been in this business since late 2006 and I think, up until 2012 buyers used to buy a lot of images and built up a quite remarkable stock in their internal drives and since then they look for only new and very interesting/high quality images.
Of course there has to be / will be also new (to microstock) customers but most of them will be more likely to be the small businesses (ad agencies) and individuals (students, teachers, company managers).
In my opinion, we have left the booming period way behind.
"A time limit" for usage (like best before in food broducts) can boost the market but I am not sure if it could be applicable?
-
LisaFX - Congrats on being featured in the DepostPhotos email promotion today.
DT has been off this month for me. SS has been on fire last two days.
-
Keep in mind that the debt ceiling is simply paying for expenses already budgeted for -- Its the country agreeing to pay its credit card bill. Something that individuals do every month. You spend money and then you pay the bill.
A budget is a different matter. That is requires planning ahead and deciding if one wants to go further into debt or not.
-
LisaFX - Congrats on being featured in the DepostPhotos email promotion today.
DT has been off this month for me. SS has been on fire last two days.
Really? I thought SS was pretty much closed for business given my download numbers for the past couple of days!
-
I am having a the best month since 2011 at DT which is helping, but all the other sites are in the can - even SS isn't slipping back.
Why am I having such a good month at DT? It sure is amazing how fast "regular" sales add up. It makes me more and more frustrated with the whole subs scenario when you receive a healthy amount of regular sales mixed with the subs. Makes me a little bit sick when I sell the same photo side by side and earn .35 for one sale and 6.97 for the other.
When is this whole give-photos-away-for-nothing idea going to pass?
What fools started this full rez subscription model anyway?
-
LisaFX - Congrats on being featured in the DepostPhotos email promotion today.
DT has been off this month for me. SS has been on fire last two days.
Really? I thought SS was pretty much closed for business given my download numbers for the past couple of days!
Results may vary!
-
I am having a the best month since 2011 at DT which is helping, but all the other sites are in the can - even SS isn't slipping back.
Why am I having such a good month at DT? It sure is amazing how fast "regular" sales add up. It makes me more and more frustrated with the whole subs scenario when you receive a healthy amount of regular sales mixed with the subs. Makes me a little bit sick when I sell the same photo side by side and earn .35 for one sale and 6.97 for the other.
When is this whole give-photos-away-for-nothing idea going to pass?
What fools started this full rez subscription model anyway?
I really wish DT would start a no subs option for some files - there's a lot I would send there, that I simply won't sell at subs rates. 20% of portfolio would be a good start.
-
If it is the US problems causing this, wouldn't the US have a noticeably larger drop in sales? I did have a better day yesterday, on a US holiday.
I keep seeing references to a US holiday on Monday. I had no idea it was a holiday yesterday, and neither did anyone else I asked. Literally NOBODY I know was off work yesterday.
After seeing your post I googled it and see that it was Columbus Day. I seriously doubt that accounts for any real impact on sales.
-
If it is the US problems causing this, wouldn't the US have a noticeably larger drop in sales? I did have a better day yesterday, on a US holiday.
I keep seeing references to a US holiday on Monday. I had no idea it was a holiday yesterday, and neither did anyone else I asked. Literally NOBODY I know was off work yesterday.
After seeing your post I googled it and see that it was Columbus Day. I seriously doubt that accounts for any real impact on sales.
It seems to have been a Canadian holiday yesterday too FWIW.
-
Oh, and apologies to anyone not in the US for the complete incompetence of our elected government, if that is part of what's going on. :P
is that official? we've just gotten rid of a govt who spent their whole 2 terms saying "but look how awful everyone else is doing" as some kind of marker of their skills and justification for how we stayed afloat DownUnder. (actual truth: by spending the surplus left by the previous administration, plus a whole bunch more)
Good for you for voting out the idiots. I hope we do the same, but here it seems like the crazies always vote and a lot of the sane folks stay home.
And no, the apology isn't official, just from me. The D-bags who should be apologizing have absolutely no shame and will never admit they're wrong.
-
LisaFX - Congrats on being featured in the DepostPhotos email promotion today.
Oh, thanks! I didn't even know it. Thanks for the headsup!
-
@Pixart - congrats on your great month! Good to hear from those who are doing well, even if I am grumbling myself ;)
-
The D-bags who should be apologizing have absolutely no shame and will never admit they're wrong.
Seems like all sides of the debate are completely intransigent. And yet it must be obvious that this is theatre and that there will be a compromise at the last possible moment so that everyone can claim victory.
-
This happened to me last year. It took until the new year to recover. And it seems to be at play this year, too, but to a slightly lesser degree.
-
Big Holiday weekend in the US especially for leaf peepers around here in New England - but my SS sales were great on Monday so there must have been a lot of people with the nose to the grind stone.
-
I'm up to 60% of last October's sales, as of the 15th - so looking good so far this month to me. The bulk of that is due to my 3500 images on Dreamstime - up 40% over last Oct if the month continues.
-
I am having a the best month since 2011 at DT which is helping, but all the other sites are in the can - even SS isn't slipping back.
Why am I having such a good month at DT? It sure is amazing how fast "regular" sales add up. It makes me more and more frustrated with the whole subs scenario when you receive a healthy amount of regular sales mixed with the subs. Makes me a little bit sick when I sell the same photo side by side and earn .35 for one sale and 6.97 for the other.
When is this whole give-photos-away-for-nothing idea going to pass?
What fools started this full rez subscription model anyway?
I really wish DT would start a no subs option for some files - there's a lot I would send there, that I simply won't sell at subs rates. 20% of portfolio would be a good start.
Sub sales at DT are actually very useful in promoting your images up the Levels. A couple of 35c sub sales now is likely to lead to an extra $3-5 on later sales. It works for me anyway.
I tend to think if your images are 'too precious' to be sold at sub rates, then they shouldn't be on microstock at all. It seems to me that roughly 40% of all microstock income is derived directly through subs and, most likely, a significant majority of the other income is derived from the high sort-order position attained via multiple sub sales.
Maybe I've been doing this too long but for me a photo, pretty much any photo, is worth only what income it generates. My 'most precious' photos are those that generate the most income for the least amount of work and expense. If that happens to be an isolated tin of Spam or whatever then fine. I used to think nothing of driving to picturesque places and waiting hours for, hopefully, the right light and conditions to arrive. I wouldn't dream of doing that nowadays. I'd rather play golf and then shoot my dinner afterwoods if necessary. It'll almost certainly make more money than a landscape.
-
I tend to think if your images are 'too precious' to be sold at sub rates, then they shouldn't be on microstock at all.
To me, it's not really about my images being too precious. I sold at a variety of different prices for a while. What I learned was that higher prices worked better for me. It doesn't make my images special or better than anybody else's images. It just means it is better for me to sell them at higher prices and less profitable to sell them at lower prices. I'd love the option to turn off subs at a number of sites and even set my own prices. It would most likely improve my income drastically overnight.
-
I tend to think if your images are 'too precious' to be sold at sub rates, then they shouldn't be on microstock at all.
To me, it's not really about my images being too precious. I sold at a variety of different prices for a while. What I learned was that higher prices worked better for me. It doesn't make my images special or better than anybody else's images. It just means it is better for me to sell them at higher prices and less profitable to sell them at lower prices. I'd love the option to turn off subs at a number of sites and even set my own prices. It would most likely improve my income drastically overnight.
But isn't it the fact that the 'Big 5' agencies have way more data than any of will ever have, and they also have the same desire as us to optimise prices and profits ... and yet all of them have pretty much ended up embracing subs in one form or another. Nowadays your stuff needs to be really unique and special to warrant making it unavailable on subs.
-
I tend to think if your images are 'too precious' to be sold at sub rates, then they shouldn't be on microstock at all.
To me, it's not really about my images being too precious. I sold at a variety of different prices for a while. What I learned was that higher prices worked better for me. It doesn't make my images special or better than anybody else's images. It just means it is better for me to sell them at higher prices and less profitable to sell them at lower prices. I'd love the option to turn off subs at a number of sites and even set my own prices. It would most likely improve my income drastically overnight.
But isn't it the fact that the 'Big 5' agencies have way more data than any of will ever have, and they also have the same desire as us to optimise prices and profits ... and yet all of them have pretty much ended up embracing subs in one form or another. Nowadays your stuff needs to be really unique and special to warrant making it unavailable on subs.
I always assumed their deal was volume. I was never really able to do that massive volume as an individual (especially outside of SS), but they crowdsource so they can. The massive volume works for some though. It just didn't work that great for me (at least, not as well as other methods).
-
I tend to think if your images are 'too precious' to be sold at sub rates, then they shouldn't be on microstock at all.
To me, it's not really about my images being too precious. I sold at a variety of different prices for a while. What I learned was that higher prices worked better for me. It doesn't make my images special or better than anybody else's images. It just means it is better for me to sell them at higher prices and less profitable to sell them at lower prices. I'd love the option to turn off subs at a number of sites and even set my own prices. It would most likely improve my income drastically overnight.
But isn't it the fact that the 'Big 5' agencies have way more data than any of will ever have, and they also have the same desire as us to optimise prices and profits ... and yet all of them have pretty much ended up embracing subs in one form or another. Nowadays your stuff needs to be really unique and special to warrant making it unavailable on subs.
I always assumed their deal was volume. I was never really able to do that massive volume as an individual (especially outside of SS), but they crowdsource so they can. The massive volume works for some though. It just didn't work that great for me (at least, not as well as other methods).
Also, what is good for the microstock sites is not necessarily good for the artists. For instance, their ideal sub buyer never downloads anything = money for the site and none for the artist.
I do think the sub sales move the images up the levels at DT nicely, but I wish they hadn't gotten rid of the higher return for the higher level subs. It makes for very bi-modal sales (which is what I get at SS too I suppose)
-
If it is the US problems causing this, wouldn't the US have a noticeably larger drop in sales? I did have a better day yesterday, on a US holiday.
I keep seeing references to a US holiday on Monday. I had no idea it was a holiday yesterday, and neither did anyone else I asked. Literally NOBODY I know was off work yesterday.
After seeing your post I googled it and see that it was Columbus Day. I seriously doubt that accounts for any real impact on sales.
It seems to have been a Canadian holiday yesterday too FWIW.
yep, thanksgiving was on monday
-
Chiming in a bit late, but with the same song as most of us : sales down all over compared to Oct.2012. And not just "a bit down" but a LOT (between 20 and 25%). Oct. 2012 was a BME.
Only site that's doing well (read: showing growth) is 123rf.
The fact that I'm going down 27% at Fotolia WITHOUT going down too much in 7-days-rank means that this trend is not just for me ...
-
The fact that I'm going down 27% at Fotolia WITHOUT going down too much in 7-days-rank means that this trend is not just for me ...
Same here. I earn less and stay at the same ranking....
-
.
-
I tend to think if your images are 'too precious' to be sold at sub rates, then they shouldn't be on microstock at all.
To me, it's not really about my images being too precious. I sold at a variety of different prices for a while. What I learned was that higher prices worked better for me. It doesn't make my images special or better than anybody else's images. It just means it is better for me to sell them at higher prices and less profitable to sell them at lower prices. I'd love the option to turn off subs at a number of sites and even set my own prices. It would most likely improve my income drastically overnight.
But isn't it the fact that the 'Big 5' agencies have way more data than any of will ever have, and they also have the same desire as us to optimise prices and profits ... and yet all of them have pretty much ended up embracing subs in one form or another. Nowadays your stuff needs to be really unique and special to warrant making it unavailable on subs.
I always assumed their deal was volume. I was never really able to do that massive volume as an individual (especially outside of SS), but they crowdsource so they can. The massive volume works for some though. It just didn't work that great for me (at least, not as well as other methods).
Exactly. Our photos aren't precious, but we know people will pay a bit more for some of them. As I've said many times, not everything sells in the volume required to be worthwhile as subs, but can do very well at say $20 a pop. Unfortunately no site with volume is offering that.
I once had a game of golf (actually in August 1970, now I think of it, at Newquay). After
9 holes for 357 shots, I realised it wasn't for me, but it does mean I have a lot more time available for my camera.
-
No secrets, sorry to say. Just continuing to do what I've been doing for the last 8 years. The start of this year while things were down I decided to invest in a few more shoots than I normally would have and it seems to be paying off now.
Well, you responded to the slowdown with increased production and I got discouraged and slowed production. Looks like yours was definitely the smarter strategy. Glad it's paying off for you :)
-
I've been working hard without summer holidays. And only now I took 2 weeks off the stock. But to be honest I can't see any big October bump in sales. Yesterday were very poor sales on SS like on weekends. :(
-
Got to tell my golf story. I'm really bad at golf. After a few air shots on the previous tee, I went to tee off and someone walking past the course shouted "FORE" just before I hit the ball. It was the best shot of my round. The person ran away laughing at my terrible shot while I was laughing at my best shot :)
-
The best thing about golf is the Andy Williams-esque fashions.
-
The best thing about golf is the Andy Williams-esque fashions.
;D
-
no sales for 7 days at istock. Longest bad run since exclusive. What is going on? Nothing good I suppose...
-
no sales for 7 days at istock. Longest bad run since exclusive. What is going on? Nothing good I suppose...
You may have had sales that just aren't showing in the stats. I don't show any sales since the 25th, but the sales are showing in the my uploads area, and the money has been added to my totals.
Hopefully it is the same for you? If not, that's really depressing...
-
No sales are showing up. Believe me I checked everywhere :)
You may have had sales that just aren't showing in the stats. I don't show any sales since the 25th, but the sales are showing in the my uploads area, and the money has been added to my totals.
Hopefully it is the same for you? If not, that's really depressing...
-
No sales are showing up. Believe me I checked everywhere :)
That is really depressing. Are most of your files relatively new (e.g the past 14 months or so)?
Added: And if so, have they got a few dls?
I've found that in the same search, files I've uploaded in the past year with a couple of downloads are well down in the best match and FM search compared to those uploaded months earlier, but still within the past year, with 0 dls.
New files sink like a stone; but if they have the temerity to get a few downloads, they sink like a stone with lead weights attached.
-
stats are not updating @istock
-
just a slow update in the stats.
-
My October rocked on Shutterstock, which is by far my best earner. I made almost twice as much as I did in October 2012, and I beat my previous best month there by $200.
-
Just hit BME last night on Shutterstock...took 3 months to recover from the mid-July site maintenance. Looks like it will be my BME at iStock as well, if PP sales come in at the rate they normally do. A slight bump.
-
My theory is that agencies have been selling images so cheaply, for so long, that it's gotten to the point where a growing number of customers simply don't need that many images anymore. I'm not suggesting that they have stopped buying, but perhaps they buy less than they used to?
I can't back this up with data. But for years many have argued that there was no difference between selling 5 images for $7 each and 100 images for $0.35 each. It still pays the same, right? The difference is the former option theoretically keeps demand higher (because I only own 5 images and I need 95 more), whereas the latter option reduces demand more quickly (I already have 100 images, I don't need any more).
I don't think the agencies have all the answers, regardless of their data. It could be that they realize they are killing demand long term by grabbing market share now, and are looking to make their money and run before the market collapses.
-
My experience is that ad agencies, at least, rely on stock images more and more every day. But there are so many images uploaded daily that supply far outweighs demand.
-
My theory is that agencies have been selling images so cheaply, for so long, that it's gotten to the point where a growing number of customers simply don't need that many images anymore. I'm not suggesting that they have stopped buying, but perhaps they buy less than they used to?
I can't back this up with data. But for years many have argued that there was no difference between selling 5 images for $7 each and 100 images for $0.35 each. It still pays the same, right? The difference is the former option theoretically keeps demand higher (because I only own 5 images and I need 95 more), whereas the latter option reduces demand more quickly (I already have 100 images, I don't need any more).
I don't think the agencies have all the answers, regardless of their data. It could be that they realize they are killing demand long term by grabbing market share now, and are looking to make their money and run before the market collapses.
I have a printer friend who supplies marketing materials for small to medium local businesses. Five years ago he was spending a few hundred quid per year buying stock images on his clients' behalf for their projects. Nowadays however they nearly always supply their own images taken by themselves (usually of their own premises, staff or services in action). Digital cameras are just so cheap and easy to use that almost anyone can produce a passable image.
-
My theory is that agencies have been selling images so cheaply, for so long, that it's gotten to the point where a growing number of customers simply don't need that many images anymore. I'm not suggesting that they have stopped buying, but perhaps they buy less than they used to?
I can't back this up with data. But for years many have argued that there was no difference between selling 5 images for $7 each and 100 images for $0.35 each. It still pays the same, right? The difference is the former option theoretically keeps demand higher (because I only own 5 images and I need 95 more), whereas the latter option reduces demand more quickly (I already have 100 images, I don't need any more).
I don't think the agencies have all the answers, regardless of their data. It could be that they realize they are killing demand long term by grabbing market share now, and are looking to make their money and run before the market collapses.
I have a printer friend who supplies marketing materials for small to medium local businesses. Five years ago he was spending a few hundred quid per year buying stock images on his clients' behalf for their projects. Nowadays however they nearly always supply their own images taken by themselves (usually of their own premises, staff or services in action). Digital cameras are just so cheap and easy to use that almost anyone can produce a passable image.
Also over the past few years the trend is moving towards authentic imagery, so businesses actually show their own premises and staff. I've heard this recommended over stock images several times on CreativeLIVE and also read it in design publications. Though the business publications which come my way have always used their own people and premises and built articles around them.