pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Pocketstock  (Read 6305 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 20, 2013, 12:56 »
0
Hi all

I believe I've seen a topic about this recently - Pocketstock. I've just received a mail from them, where they state that they would like to represent my portfolio, and if I upload before this and this date, they will set the royalty rate to 40 % on all future uploads. Anyone else received this email?

Anyone of you in here represented on Pocketstock? Any sales?

Please enlighten me :-)

Oh, and my 50 cents regards Stocksy..... No answer yet for me either.

Brian


« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2013, 13:44 »
0
zero

« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2013, 14:56 »
0
I received the same email and took them up on it.  Have had about 300 images accepted so far.  Fairly slow review times, and no sales yet.

« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2013, 17:39 »
+1
I had no sales after several months and noticed that the only people selling anything were getting really low subs commissions.  So I didn't want to spend years getting to the payout level and asked for my portfolio to be removed.  They tried to persuade me to stay but I didn't see the point.  It took 90 days to get my images removed.

THP Creative

  • THP Creative

« Reply #4 on: February 20, 2013, 18:11 »
+2
Just terminated my account with them on Feb 1st, just gotta wait out the 90 days now. No sales at all. No communication.

« Reply #5 on: February 20, 2013, 19:27 »
+1
I received the same email and took them up on it.  Have had about 300 images accepted so far.  Fairly slow review times, and no sales yet.

Most folks will agree that it is not worth uploading there.

Microbius

« Reply #6 on: February 21, 2013, 03:31 »
+1
Unbelievably low paying sales, especially bad after all their press releases saying they were going to offer something different.
The problem is that with Veer partnering with them with no opt we could well end up with our work selling there anyway, and make even less. I hate this industry sometimes.

« Reply #7 on: February 21, 2013, 13:07 »
0
Waste of time.

Two sales - since last June - for a total of 55 cents.

Contrast that with GL Stock - where I'm still uploading my portfolio (started about a month ago) - where I have had 4 sales in a month for $16.64 royalty.

« Reply #8 on: February 21, 2013, 13:26 »
0
I gave it about one year with nothing to show for the work of uploading.  I bowed out gracefully last month.

SID

« Reply #9 on: February 21, 2013, 13:54 »
+3
Hi all

I believe I've seen a topic about this recently - Pocketstock. I've just received a mail from them, where they state that they would like to represent my portfolio, and if I upload before this and this date, they will set the royalty rate to 40 % on all future uploads. Anyone else received this email?

Anyone of you in here represented on Pocketstock? Any sales?

Please enlighten me :-)

Oh, and my 50 cents regards Stocksy..... No answer yet for me either.

Brian

Did you check the site?
Could you find something special there?
A sensational image selection, innovative licenses or other unique features?
I couldnt.
It seems to be an ordinary, fanciless new microstock site nothing special.
So - how could they be successful in a fiercely competitive market?
The only thing that crosses my mind is - low, lower lowest prices or cheap tricks at photographers expense (see the Veer deal)

Btw: The owner of Pocketstock is Russell Glenister the former owner of image100, a royalty free agency which he sold for good money to Corbis a few years ago.

Now the sixty-four-thousand-dollar question:  What could be the reason for Russell to start a new game with nearly no chance to find success in the market?

PS: They asked me in February last year I decided not to join - pointless in my view

« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2013, 01:36 »
0
Unbelievably low paying sales, especially bad after all their press releases saying they were going to offer something different.
The problem is that with Veer partnering with them with no opt we could well end up with our work selling there anyway, and make even less. I hate this industry sometimes.

Well that's it. I'm quite bemused by this one, as they were an advocate of high pricing when they launched, but in such a short space of time they completely reversed that. Doesn't give the impression that they had much forethought about their business.

« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2013, 03:22 »
0
Its a shame they didn't seem to do their research before launching the site but I suppose anyone that did, wouldn't bother launching another microstock site.  They tried having a USP by letting buyers ask for a discount but that was tried by Cutcaster long before and didn't really work.  So then they decided to try low prices, that was the final straw for me, as that doesn't work either.

Stocksy might have a genuine USP, they're the first new site for many years that might offer buyers something different that they want.  Almost all the other new sites have copied a business plan that hasn't worked for years or have come up with something that's not wanted by buyers.

Microbius

« Reply #12 on: February 22, 2013, 04:43 »
+2
Btw: The owner of Pocketstock is Russell Glenister....



Anyone thinking of submitting should Google the owner to see what he thinks about micro and microstock contributors. Could explain why they don't mind giving away our work?

http://www.whichstockagency.com/en/33/page/9/opinion/300/full

and more here:

http://www.whichstockagency.com/en/33/opinion


« Reply #13 on: March 05, 2013, 00:52 »
0
Hi all

I believe I've seen a topic about this recently - Pocketstock. I've just received a mail from them, where they state that they would like to represent my portfolio, and if I upload before this and this date, they will set the royalty rate to 40 % on all future uploads. Anyone else received this email?

Anyone of you in here represented on Pocketstock? Any sales?

Please enlighten me :-)

Oh, and my 50 cents regards Stocksy..... No answer yet for me either.

Brian

How did they get your email? I am wondering.

Milinz

« Reply #14 on: March 05, 2013, 08:59 »
0
Just terminated my account with them on Feb 1st, just gotta wait out the 90 days now. No sales at all. No communication.

Why does everybody join these new dead sites. They aren't never going to pay and they just start and die. Maybe not the smart kind like GL or Stocksy but these poor starts won't make anything but a waste of time. If you stop supporting them maybe they will stop wasting your time. You don't reply to spam why do you join spam sites?

« Reply #15 on: March 05, 2013, 13:30 »
+2
There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

« Reply #16 on: March 05, 2013, 15:17 »
0
Btw: The owner of Pocketstock is Russell Glenister....



Anyone thinking of submitting should Google the owner to see what he thinks about micro and microstock contributors. Could explain why they don't mind giving away our work?

http://www.whichstockagency.com/en/33/page/9/opinion/300/full

and more here:

http://www.whichstockagency.com/en/33/opinion


ouch. couple of years of insulting microstock, now starts a micro agency


« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2013, 02:43 »
0
There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

Batman

« Reply #18 on: March 08, 2013, 00:28 »
0
There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

It's unhealthy competition and a waste of time, all they do is cut prices and ruin the marketing.

« Reply #19 on: March 08, 2013, 03:48 »
0
There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

It's unhealthy competition and a waste of time, all they do is cut prices and ruin the marketing.
Some do but it's not true that they're all like that  Some of the ones I use have higher prices than some of the big 4 sites.  I read that Yuri uses 200 microstock sites.  That seems like too many for me but I have no problem with around 20.  Some don't get the marketing right but some pick up enough buyers to keep me happy and pay a good commission.  I'd much rather buyers used them than the big sites that have been cutting commissions.

« Reply #20 on: March 08, 2013, 09:09 »
-1
I read that Yuri uses 200 microstock sites.


he isn't but I would love to know where have you read that :)

http://alastair27mancoll.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/stock-photography-yuri-arcurs.html

yep a ton of lies in there, he was doing 30k EUR monthly in 2005, right  ;D
« Last Edit: March 08, 2013, 09:22 by luissantos84 »

RacePhoto

« Reply #21 on: March 08, 2013, 09:38 »
+2
Lets get real. Yuri is Yuri and no one else is.

He has a paid staff that's bigger than my family, cousins, their cousins and all their offspring.  ;) A studio, rents locations, Makeup, production, editing, keyword, uploading, and pays hundreds of thousands a year to make the machine run. He's a genius and deserves everything he's earned. BUT we aren't him and for people to keep saying Yuri does this and Yuri does that, is absurd.

So what if he has 500 agencies. His staff is paid to upload. He's maximizing his returns on every shot, but sending it everywhere. He doesn't care if it goes to CrapStock and sits all year and makes nothing. But I'd expect if it does, he will be watching and eventually drop unproductive sites. Why should he pay someone to work a site that doesn't return the expense of uploading to it?

And that's where we can be the same and make some logical business decisions. If a site isn't making a return worth the time and effort one of us puts in to upload and allow our images to be sold there. We should drop that site, and only support the ones that do work for us.

Supporting the parasitic, price cutting, bottom feeders does nothing to improve the market, our income, or Microstock income. The idea that more piss poor competition and devaluation of the whole market is a good business decision, because they are competition for the good ones that do work for us... Is foolish.

Maybe people should want to be like Lisa or SJLocke, something realistic. Nothing wrong with Yuri or his plan or business, it's just not what most of the people here are about. We don't have a staffed corporation. Ask some people who have 5000 and up images, how many agencies do they support?

Mr. Locke was an exclusive! Lisa has her own site and a good distribution of representative agencies. I'd bet she didn't take the bait from any of these new start-ups with empty promises.

And a direct answer to the "some have higher prices" which could also have been some pay higher commissions. That's wonderful, but they have almost no sales, no effective marketing, they don't produce any volume return, so you are getting 100% of nothing and wasting your time and effort. Some might have higher prices, most have lower prices. Get real!


There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

It's unhealthy competition and a waste of time, all they do is cut prices and ruin the marketing.
Some do but it's not true that they're all like that  Some of the ones I use have higher prices than some of the big 4 sites.  I read that Yuri uses 200 microstock sites.  That seems like too many for me but I have no problem with around 20.  Some don't get the marketing right but some pick up enough buyers to keep me happy and pay a good commission.  I'd much rather buyers used them than the big sites that have been cutting commissions.

« Reply #22 on: March 08, 2013, 12:48 »
0
I read that Yuri uses 200 microstock sites.


he isn't but I would love to know where have you read that :)

http://alastair27mancoll.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/stock-photography-yuri-arcurs.html

yep a ton of lies in there, he was doing 30k EUR monthly in 2005, right  ;D

It was in Professional photographer magazine.  Has he said that everything in that article was wrong?  I did think the numbers looked a bit crazy but if he has 80 people working for him, it wouldn't surprise me if they've managed to find 200 sites to upload to.  With his portfolio, they're probably all worth using.

« Reply #23 on: March 12, 2013, 22:43 »
0
There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

It's unhealthy competition and a waste of time, all they do is cut prices and ruin the marketing.

I strongly agree with you. Simply cutting price is an unhealthy approach which will ruin the stock photo market. But not all of them, there are some those cheap price sites we should certainly avoid.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
69 Replies
22853 Views
Last post November 30, 2012, 09:18
by CD123
1 Replies
2859 Views
Last post August 14, 2012, 14:59
by luissantos84
4 Replies
3103 Views
Last post September 15, 2012, 15:54
by tomasfoto
Pocketstock RIP?

Started by Microbius « 1 2 3  All » New Sites - General

50 Replies
10157 Views
Last post April 24, 2013, 10:50
by Poncke
6 Replies
5252 Views
Last post October 11, 2013, 22:00
by BD

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors