MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: The Future Big 5  (Read 18436 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 17, 2007, 22:08 »
0
Lets hear what everyones future big 5 predictions are in terms of profitability. Lets say 1 year from now.

1. Shutterstock
2. Dreamstime
3. Istockphoto
4. StockXpert
5. Fotolia
--- And I will add a couple more for the heck of it.
6. Lucky Oliver
7. Bigstockphoto


« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2007, 22:12 »
0
1 shutterstock
2 istock
3 fotolia
4 bigstock/ or 123
5 dreamstime/ or stockxpert



« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2007, 00:56 »
+1
Istock
Shutterstock   
Fotolia   
Dreamstime   
StockXpert

« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2007, 03:31 »
0
Istock
Shutterstock   
Fotolia   
Dreamstime   
StockXpert

I agree with this order

« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2007, 04:48 »
0
I think there is a clear big 4

dreamstime
fotolia
shutterstock
istock

but in fifth place, it is tough.  Bigstock maybe??

« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2007, 05:39 »
0
Hi!

I think it will be:
- Shutterstock
- Dreamstime
- Fotolia
- Bigstockphoto
- StockXpert / Lucky Oliver

I've signed up to both stockxpert and bigstockphoto at about the same time (about 1 mounth ago). StockXpert's recent rejection rate makes it a worse performer than Bigstockphoto for me.

I just signed up with iStock - so I can't do any predictions for them yet. But the fact that they make uploading hard for photographers makes me think that they won't be in the top 3 in the future.

All the best,
Michael

« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2007, 05:45 »
0
I think there is a clear big 4

dreamstime
fotolia
shutterstock
istock

but in fifth place, it is tough.  Bigstock maybe??

I agree.

But maybe that question should be put to the customers, rather than contributors, to get a more accurate ranking.

Amongst my circle of acquaintances (some in design, some not) iStock is far and away the most well-known of the microstocks.  Even teachers and business people know of iStock (and sometimes pinch images from them, I've found).

grp_photo

« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2007, 06:04 »
0
Stockxpert
iStock
MicroCorbis
Shutterstock
Dreamstime

« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2007, 09:32 »
+1
I think Dreamstime and Shutterstock will be the two big rivals a year from now. I just can't see Istockphoto being so popular much longer. It's a pain to upload, the commission is poor, and the prices are quite a bit higher than Dreamstime and Shutterstock. If Istockphoto was a starting out site today with their current prices and commissions I bet it would be a flop.

« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2007, 09:46 »
-1
iStock will most likely remain tops for a long time...or top 2 or 3 for sure.  Getty will whip out some stuff hopefully in the near future that will make it better for contributors but as for the price, they charge a premium but they have some of the best photographers under exclusivity agreements - which is a rare resource that SS or DT doesn't have.  Andresr is one hell of a photographer but he himself and Phil Date and a few others cannot give enough pictures to keep a site afloat. 

From recent observation, iStock is gaining a lot of momentum lately and I'm thinking of going exclusive eventually.


« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2007, 09:52 »
+1
Based on my own sales, it will be:

1. Shutterstock
2. Dreamstime
3. iStock
4. Fotolia
5. Bigstock

If I had been asked three months ago, I would have put StockXpert on a strong 4th, but for me, they are falling like a stone. The big positive surprise is Dreamstime. The are selling great, so they must be doing something right. Bigstock is also improving.

« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2007, 09:55 »
+1
I think istock will remain the big player. Their connection to getty really helps them. Dreamstime is also a solid contender. After these two Fotalia,Stock Expert are the next tier. Then who is fifth and sixth is wide open with Stock exchange,Bigstock and others in play.

With the addition of lots of other players it will interesting to watch who fall out of the second tier. Which one of these can make the jump into the first tier. Canstock has been around the longest of these tier two companies but it does not appear to have gained ground. LO and 123 will be interesting ones to watch.

I think microstock will see growth for the next several years. The model is sound and it is obvious that microstock has had an impact on the image business. As more designers and markets in Asia start to tap into this we all can experience success. But like any business there is a saturation point and an inevitable contraction of the players in the field. I would be surprised to see more than four or five real players in five years.

I also would bet that companies continue to try to lock up talent. If the same picture is on 5 sites then the buyers have no incentive to work exculusively with one image source.

« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2007, 13:42 »
0
I agree wholeheartedly with your 'lock-up' view.  This is why IS are giving so much extra to their exclusives - more uploads, greater marketing, exclusive deals. higher commission etc..

The trend can only continue.

« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2007, 16:16 »
0
Yeah, istock does sure have an ace card with their exclusive photogs.  They have a lot of good submitters and their deal with getty and being able to submit to getting I am sure helps attract a few photogs.  I wonder if we will see any other strict exclusive deals in the future.

« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2007, 18:08 »
0
fotolia is really starting to happen for me now. SS is by far the seller, but getting them to accept anything is a nightmare. For me, I still use DT as my benchmark.

Really starting to get both bored and annoyed with iStock.

And simply cannot get accepted into StockXpert. But from what I hear it might not be worth the hassle

« Reply #15 on: February 18, 2007, 20:30 »
+1
I also would bet that companies continue to try to lock up talent. If the same picture is on 5 sites then the buyers have no incentive to work exculusively with one image source.

Since I'm also a buyer of images, I have the opposite view. If most agencies have the same images, there's not much point in shopping around. If they all have different images, I will have to search more than one place to find what I want. The fact that an image is exclusive to IS doesn't help me much anyway. As long as it isn't exclusive to me as a buyer, I couldn't really care less.

« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2007, 20:36 »
0
In addition to a few large, international agencies, I think we will see smaller ones catering for local markets and special areas. We have that in traditional stock already, and they obviously have an important function. An agency in Bigtown, USA will never be able to get a grip of what's going on in Smalltown, Northern Norway. There are different tastes, different needs, local motives etc.

Typically, around 50% of what I sell on Scanstock are Norwegian motives. In Asia, a similar situation will probably arise. Almost all of the Asian motives in the agencies are more or less tourist related. For those of us who live here, it looks kind of odd. Asian customers aren't more interested in buying images of temples than western buyers are in images of churches.


« Reply #17 on: February 18, 2007, 21:14 »
0
Where will growth occur over the next couple years?  As designers become aware of their options, movement between agencies will slow down.  Getty has figured this out. Saturation in one market means that growth has to occur in another. Getty brought images online. Who will connect image buyers online?

The largest business growth in the next few years will be small businesses and consumers.  Publishing tools will continue to make it easy to 'do it yourself'. Companies positioned for this area will see growth. These segments are difficult because the image needs vary, the price point is aggressive, and the marketing needs to be both broad and vertical.

« Reply #18 on: February 19, 2007, 02:27 »
0
The largest business growth in the next few years will be small businesses and consumers.  Publishing tools will continue to make it easy to 'do it yourself'.
This is why IS tie up with microsoft office is interesting.  And Corbis (owned by Bill Gates) going into microstock.

Powerpoint presentations/photos on cover pages in the small business must be a big market.

« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2007, 02:53 »
0
fotolia is really starting to happen for me now. SS is by far the seller, but getting them to accept anything is a nightmare. For me, I still use DT as my benchmark.

That's strange. For me I'm getting ~90% acceptance rate with SS. Dreamstime and Fotolia are easy too, but not as easy as SS. The only agency which constantly rejects my photos for "Please submit better quality photos" is StockXpert. Dunno why they don't like my shots.

All the best,
Michael

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2013, 06:17 »
0
1. Shutterstock
2. Fotolia
3. 123 RF
4. iStock
5. Dreamstime

I think that SS will stay the first for a while
With the last changes iS will go down very fast
Dreamstime will continue to lose positions.

I have nothing, no real statistics, to say that, but I have this very strong feeling

Ron

« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2013, 06:22 »
0
I agree wholeheartedly with your 'lock-up' view.  This is why IS are giving so much extra to their exclusives - more uploads, greater marketing, exclusive deals. higher commission etc..

The trend can only continue.

This was the consensus 5 years ago. Contrast.

travelwitness

« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2013, 07:13 »
0
For me in monthly earnings.

1 iStock
2 Fotolia
3 Stocksy
4 Shutterstock
5 Dreamstime

iStock 2800 images
Fotolia 400 images
Stocksy 200 images
Shutterstock 400 images
Dreamstime 300 images

Once my port is uploaded in full iStock will drop into last place.
RPI at Shutterstock and Fotolia combined have the same RPI when I was exclusive at iStock
RPI at Stocksy is heading to equal iStock exclusive RPI on its own.

To put it into context earnings from Fotolia with 400 images are about 70% of iStocks with 2800 images.

« Reply #23 on: July 12, 2013, 09:32 »
+1
ANCIENT THREAD ALERT

(But someone once believed in LuckyOliver!)  ;)

« Reply #24 on: July 12, 2013, 10:37 »
+2
It is interesting to see how off some people were... and the demise of iStock has been predicted for so long.

For profit I am betting/ hoping my Symbiostock site will be in the top 5.

EmberMike

« Reply #25 on: July 12, 2013, 10:40 »
0
ANCIENT THREAD ALERT

(But someone once believed in LuckyOliver!)  ;)

I never understood what everyone saw in Lucky Oliver. I never even signed up with them. It just always seemed like a joke. Too gimmicky with the carnival theme.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #26 on: July 12, 2013, 10:46 »
+5
It is interesting to see how off some people were... and the demise of iStock has been predicted for so long.

For profit I am betting/ hoping my Symbiostock site will be in the top 5.

It is interesting about the demise prediction.  Wondering how long it takes?  Reminds me of my wife -- 30 years ago she told me not to drive so fast or I would get a speeding ticket.
When I finally got one -- 30 years later -- she said, "I told you so."   ;D


« Reply #27 on: July 12, 2013, 11:04 »
+1
It is interesting to see how off some people were... and the demise of iStock has been predicted for so long.

For profit I am betting/ hoping my Symbiostock site will be in the top 5.

It doesn't look like much has changed (even though a lot has). The big 4 still remain at the top of the list to the right. It would be nice to see the Self-Hosted option get enough votes to get a ranking.

« Reply #28 on: July 12, 2013, 14:23 »
0
Apart from StockXpert it is surprising perhaps that in such a seemingly turbulent environment there seems little change

« Reply #29 on: July 13, 2013, 02:19 »
0
It is interesting to see how off some people were... and the demise of iStock has been predicted for so long.

It is interesting about the demise prediction.  Wondering how long it takes?  Reminds me of my wife -- 30 years ago she told me not to drive so fast or I would get a speeding ticket.
When I finally got one -- 30 years later -- she said, "I told you so."   ;D

The decline might eventually lead to iStock falling from 2nd to 3rd place - but the Big 4 will probably remain the Big 4 for quite some time.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #30 on: July 17, 2013, 12:00 »
0
I'm only one more vote and that's not coming until the Fall.

What does it take again? 25 votes? I forget.

November 2013 news: Symbiostock enters the Poll Results with a .5  :)

It is interesting to see how off some people were... and the demise of iStock has been predicted for so long.

For profit I am betting/ hoping my Symbiostock site will be in the top 5.

It doesn't look like much has changed (even though a lot has). The big 4 still remain at the top of the list to the right. It would be nice to see the Self-Hosted option get enough votes to get a ranking.

« Reply #31 on: July 17, 2013, 18:14 »
+1
ANCIENT THREAD ALERT

(But someone once believed in LuckyOliver!)  ;)

I never understood what everyone saw in Lucky Oliver. I never even signed up with them. It just always seemed like a joke. Too gimmicky with the carnival theme.
I liked Lucky Oliver and they sold more for me than lots of the other sites that had just copied the big sites.  Unfortunately, they were a victim of the credit crunch.  I think if they had started a few years earlier, they would of been a success.

Dan

« Reply #32 on: July 28, 2013, 07:22 »
0
     Maye  not  in  any  particular  order  -  but  close.
1  shutterstock
2  istock  (wish  they'd  dry  up and  blow  away)
3  123rf 
4  fotolia
5  dt
*  big  may  be  in  there  somewhere













« Reply #33 on: July 28, 2013, 08:22 »
0
Thats pretty similar to me Dan - had a very good run on Photodune but seemed to slow as I inched over the payout line. RF123 has always been a good performer for me

Ron

« Reply #34 on: July 29, 2013, 02:09 »
0
     Maye  not  in  any  particular  order  -  but  close.
1  shutterstock
2  istock  (wish  they'd  dry  up and  blow  away)
3  123rf 
4  fotolia
5  dt
*  big  may  be  in  there  somewhere

Your portfolio on Shutterstock is empty?

Dan

« Reply #35 on: July 29, 2013, 07:20 »
-1
     The   question  didn't  say  you  had  to  have  pics  there!!!  None  on  istock  as  well.  It  just  ask  for  an  opion.  Why  do  you  pick  on  me?

Ron

« Reply #36 on: July 29, 2013, 07:40 »
0
     The   question  didn't  say  you  had  to  have  pics  there!!!  None  on  istock  as  well.  It  just  ask  for  an  opion.  Why  do  you  pick  on  me?
I am not picking on you, how can you name a top 5 when you are not even submitting to number 1 and 2 on your list? You named a top 5, so I assumed you were submitting to the 5 agencies. Why would you name agencies you are not submitting to?


Dan

« Reply #37 on: July 29, 2013, 07:47 »
-1
     It's  simple  for  some.  The  question  DID  NOt  say  that  you  had  to  have  pics  there.  It  asked  for  an  opion  and  i  gave  mine.  Guess  who  just  went  on  my  IGNORE  list  (first  2  quesses  don't  count)    >:(   >:(    :P   :-X

Ron

« Reply #38 on: July 29, 2013, 08:16 »
0
     It's  simple  for  some.  The  question  DID  NOt  say  that  you  had  to  have  pics  there.  It  asked  for  an  opion  and  i  gave  mine.  Guess  who  just  went  on  my  IGNORE  list  (first  2  quesses  don't  count)    >:(   >:(    :P   :-X

Thats fine Dan, no worries. People here talk about agencies they are submitting to. If you want to make some money you need to get accepted into SS and IS, as they are the top 2. I have seen your portfolio on 123, and I think you wont pass the initial tests. You have been reluctant to take any advice from anyone, and when people ask you questions about your earnings or portfolio, you get upset. I asked a normal question, I was wondering why you would name an agency in your top 5 that you are not even a member of.

Anyhoo... since you wont be reading this, I guess its no use for me to keep talking.

PS: The OP is about earnings  ;)

« Reply #39 on: July 29, 2013, 08:59 »
0
I can kind of understand. I could name my top 5 agencies, but they will never be everyone else's top 5 or the overall top 5.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #40 on: July 29, 2013, 09:07 »
0
It's not about our top five, it's about which five we think will be top in future. Someone who doesn't submit to any agencies could still have an opinion, perhaps even a well-informed opinion (if they have a different sort of knowledge than the purely subjective) which would be worth more than some who submit to all and are only judging by what sells for them, or who they wish would be the top 5.

Ron

« Reply #41 on: July 29, 2013, 09:08 »
0
I can kind of understand. I could name my top 5 agencies, but they will never be everyone else's top 5 or the overall top 5.
Yes, but you have images with the agencies in your top 5 right? I am not going to add agencies to my list that I am not submitting to, when asked what is my most profitable top 5 agencies.

« Reply #42 on: July 29, 2013, 09:22 »
0
I can kind of understand. I could name my top 5 agencies, but they will never be everyone else's top 5 or the overall top 5.
Yes, but you have images with the agencies in your top 5 right? I am not going to add agencies to my list that I am not submitting to, when asked what is my most profitable top 5 agencies.

I quit Fotolia and iStock a couple years ago, but I still think they are some of the top agencies for contributors.

« Reply #43 on: July 29, 2013, 09:25 »
+1
I can kind of understand. I could name my top 5 agencies, but they will never be everyone else's top 5 or the overall top 5.
Yes, but you have images with the agencies in your top 5 right? I am not going to add agencies to my list that I am not submitting to, when asked what is my most profitable top 5 agencies.

I quit Fotolia and iStock a couple years ago, but I still think they are some of the top agencies for contributors.

for sales, headaches, shady deals, and cuts.

« Reply #44 on: July 29, 2013, 09:33 »
0
for sales, headaches, shady deals, and cuts.

LOL. Yeah, for that too. Someone had asked me recently which sites they should join. I found the question tricky. Do you tell them the sites that will make them the most money or the ones with the least headaches?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #45 on: July 29, 2013, 09:36 »
0
The OP (2007!) was about which agency would be the most profitable, which almost certainly isn't the same as what would be most profitable for the contributor.

Ron

« Reply #46 on: July 29, 2013, 09:41 »
0
It's not about our top five, it's about which five we think will be top in future. Someone who doesn't submit to any agencies could still have an opinion, perhaps even a well-informed opinion (if they have a different sort of knowledge than the purely subjective) which would be worth more than some who submit to all and are only judging by what sells for them, or who they wish would be the top 5.
No, its about what will be the most profitable in the future. I understand that as earning a certain profit from that agency, and we predict the top 5 profitability to us. Or is the OP asking about the profitability of the agency?



Ron

« Reply #47 on: July 29, 2013, 09:44 »
-1
The OP (2007!) was about which agency would be the most profitable, which almost certainly isn't the same as what would be most profitable for the contributor.
How can you make any guess about the profitability of an agency you know nothing about, havent submitted to, are not submitting to, etc.??

This is getting silly. Carping every letter.

Cheers

« Reply #48 on: July 29, 2013, 10:21 »
-1
How can you make any guess about the profitability of an agency you know nothing about, havent submitted to, are not submitting to, etc.??

This is getting silly. Carping every letter.

Cheers

totally agree, not even contributing and saying which agency is best/worst makes no sense, just mixes things up in a wrong way

EmberMike

« Reply #49 on: July 29, 2013, 10:29 »
+2
totally agree, not even contributing and saying which agency is best/worst makes no sense, just mixes things up in a wrong way

Why? You don't need to be a contributor at SS to know that they'll still likely be top 5 in a few years.

« Reply #50 on: July 29, 2013, 10:39 »
-2
totally agree, not even contributing and saying which agency is best/worst makes no sense, just mixes things up in a wrong way

Why? You don't need to be a contributor at SS to know that they'll still likely be top 5 in a few years.

oh Mike come on, do you talk about things you never heard about or don't have any experience? Dan can continue reporting his sales but this one is just ridiculous

« Reply #51 on: July 29, 2013, 10:49 »
0
totally agree, not even contributing and saying which agency is best/worst makes no sense, just mixes things up in a wrong way

Why? You don't need to be a contributor at SS to know that they'll still likely be top 5 in a few years.

I totally agree. I'm not sure if I'll a contributor there in 5 years, but I'm sure they'll still be most people's number one. I can't just look at it from my earnings. It's much more objective to look at it from how the majority are doing.

Ron

« Reply #52 on: July 29, 2013, 10:54 »
+1
Its about profitability, I cant say ANYTHING about Getty, because I am not there, I have no clue. How am I supposed to comment on profitability to me, as I am not making any profits from them?
 


« Reply #53 on: July 29, 2013, 11:10 »
-2
Its about profitability, I cant say ANYTHING about Getty, because I am not there, I have no clue. How am I supposed to comment on profitability to me, as I am not making any profits from them?

People don't really talk much about Getty here though. They talk a lot about the micro sites though, so it isn't that far fetched to get a general idea of what is happening at these sites based on other contributors' posts.

Ron

« Reply #54 on: July 29, 2013, 11:17 »
0
For real? Are we now making guesses on an agency profitability or portfolio profitability based on other peoples comments on MSG?

Hahahahaha, I cant take this serious any longer. You have fun guys, the sandbox is all yours.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #55 on: July 29, 2013, 11:43 »
0
The OP (2007!) was about which agency would be the most profitable, which almost certainly isn't the same as what would be most profitable for the contributor.
How can you make any guess about the profitability of an agency you know nothing about, havent submitted to, are not submitting to, etc.??
Could be, for example, an industry analyst, who is at least as likely to be right (or wrong) as any of us are.

EmberMike

« Reply #56 on: July 29, 2013, 11:47 »
+2
Why? You don't need to be a contributor at SS to know that they'll still likely be top 5 in a few years.

oh Mike come on, do you talk about things you never heard about or don't have any experience? Dan can continue reporting his sales but this one is just ridiculous

Lack of experience with a company doesn't mean that someone can't have an opinion about the company. That's how we all decide which new companies to join, isn't it? We do our research, ask questions, and decide which companies to work with. I've passed on invites from some new companies that I don't think are going anywhere. Just because I haven't participated in those companies doesn't mean that I can't have an opinion about their future prospects.

It works the same for established companies. Some people have past experiences with these companies and are no longer contributors. Some people might have never sold an image with a company but they may still have some insight into how that company is doing, where they are going, etc.

And when we're talking about SS, a public company, it's even easier to form an opinion when we all have access to detailed reports and financial data.


« Reply #57 on: July 29, 2013, 11:54 »
0
For real? Are we now making guesses on an agency profitability or portfolio profitability based on other peoples comments on MSG?

Hahahahaha, I cant take this serious any longer. You have fun guys, the sandbox is all yours.

and we are getting minus for saying the obvious, what a joke!

my prediction is that Zoonar, FeaturePics, MostPhotos, photaki and photokore will be the future top 5 ;D
« Last Edit: July 29, 2013, 12:00 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #58 on: July 29, 2013, 11:59 »
0
Lack of experience with a company doesn't mean that someone can't have an opinion about the company. That's how we all decide which new companies to join, isn't it? We do our research, ask questions, and decide which companies to work with. I've passed on invites from some new companies that I don't think are going anywhere. Just because I haven't participated in those companies doesn't mean that I can't have an opinion about their future prospects.

It works the same for established companies. Some people have past experiences with these companies and are no longer contributors. Some people might have never sold an image with a company but they may still have some insight into how that company is doing, where they are going, etc.

And when we're talking about SS, a public company, it's even easier to form an opinion when we all have access to detailed reports and financial data.

I kind of thought that was the whole point of MSG. It's to get news and information about sites from your peers.

That and being a social butterfly.  ;D

« Reply #59 on: July 29, 2013, 12:03 »
0
and we are getting minus for saying the obvious, what a joke!

my prediction is that Zoonar, FeaturePics, MostPhotos, photaki and photokore will be the future top 5 ;D

LOL. I don't think I'd put money on that. I hardly ever use the minus, so it wasn't me.

« Reply #60 on: July 29, 2013, 12:06 »
0
and we are getting minus for saying the obvious, what a joke!

my prediction is that Zoonar, FeaturePics, MostPhotos, photaki and photokore will be the future top 5 ;D

LOL. I don't think I'd put money on that. I hardly ever use the minus, so it wasn't me.

oh and Crestock as well ;D

« Reply #61 on: July 29, 2013, 12:14 »
+3
We all have a right to an informed opinion, as Harlan Ellison once put it.  Whether we submit to a particular agency or not, we have access to enough information about their practices and their results to draw conclusions.  Anyone who does the homework should be able to comment and, if their conclusions make sense, should be respected.

On the other hand, extrapolating minimal experience and drawing conclusions from that is generally a bad idea.  I will state my results from various agencies and believe they are indicative of others with relatively large portfolios of similar quality who also submit many similar images from a single shoot, for example to explain why I do pretty well at SS and 123RF, where similars often sell but not nearly so well at DT, where until recently they rejected such images out of hand.  But my views are based on getting many sales a month, not single digits.  Someone with a handful of images and a small number of sales has little understanding of how their images will do as their portfolio grows.  Sales are variable enough that a small seller may go days without a sale.  If I go days without one, I can say with confidence that something is wrong at the agency.  I may still be wrong, but at least I have the data to back up my theory.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #62 on: July 31, 2013, 12:41 »
+1

my prediction is that Zoonar, FeaturePics, MostPhotos, photaki and photokore will be the future top 5 ;D

Sorry to disagree. These are the top five of the future:

LuckyOliver.com,
StockXpert.com,
SnapVillage.com,
Albumo.com,
Zymmetrical.com

I still can't believe all the people who joined El Bummo for the bribe payments.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2185 Views
Last post January 17, 2007, 12:45
by Istock News
Future

Started by rene Crestock.com

2 Replies
3346 Views
Last post April 07, 2008, 05:31
by rene
8 Replies
5327 Views
Last post May 22, 2008, 21:42
by michaeldb
43 Replies
13327 Views
Last post August 18, 2011, 01:41
by Shank_ali
Future of MicroStock?

Started by RacePhoto « 1 2  All » Off Topic

36 Replies
28163 Views
Last post January 26, 2012, 14:24
by stockastic

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors