MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Trads v. Micros Article  (Read 4520 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

eendicott

« on: April 04, 2007, 09:51 »
0
I found the CNN B2B Article:


Photo wars: A $2 billion business gets rough

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/04/01/8403372/index.htm?postversion=2007040405

One thing I find interesting and that I've started to address with relation to how I do business is the comment:

"While the big two offer exclusives on great photos at prices that range from a few hundred dollars to more than $10,000 apiece, these startups sell pretty good pictures for a good deal less--often just a dollar or two."

Surely someone is going to recognize that there are two completely opposite poles and there isn't much attention being paid to the middle market in between.  My thoughts are either the micros are going to raise prices and eventually fill that middle market leaving behind places like Flickr to address the low end, or the macros are going to have to stoop down to the middle market level.

...and while we're on topic about articles and markets, I'm not sure how many saw the editorial blog post on Black Star Rising about addressing the Chinese market and how Shutterstock is the only agency really doing anything about that market segment:

http://rising.blackstar.com/feature-1-18.html


« Reply #1 on: April 04, 2007, 10:24 »
0
Interesting article.  Long but interesting.

Still no word on Corbis new offering.  Cant be long before they launch. 

« Reply #2 on: April 04, 2007, 11:07 »
0
I think that the following quote from Fotolia President is quite interesting:

"As he describes it, the microstock model is the picture of efficiency. Submissions pour in electronically from photographers, who get 50 percent or more of the proceeds of each sale."

I know that I'm not getting 50% from Fotolia!  Are any of you?

« Reply #3 on: April 04, 2007, 12:34 »
0
Yes, interesting articles.  Thanks for posting.

Interested that FT sold 4 million images last year.  That's very low considering the headline image numbers.  Also, as they only employ 18 people and all but three work from home, this explains why they don't get the sales volume; sales need investment in marketing and promotion etc etc.  They don't appear to be doing much of that.

The Shutterstock guy makes the most sense.  Interesting that he's identified a 'middle ground' for mid priced images.  Perhaps a development to come.

« Reply #4 on: April 04, 2007, 12:59 »
0
Yeah I do not get the 50% or more too. Maybe we should inform Ft, that they have a bug in their system and we only get 33% instead as we should get: 50% or more  ;) We can send them the quote of their president  ;D

They still seem to stick to their too high number of images on their site..

For their age I would say they are quite good, but I do not like it at all that they are so dishonest.

Fitting to this article here is another link I found by following endicotts link: http://rising.blackstar.com/getty-photographers-pessimistic-about-the-future-5.html


« Reply #5 on: April 04, 2007, 13:32 »
0
Yes, interesting articles.  Thanks for posting.

Interested that FT sold 4 million images last year.  That's very low considering the headline image numbers. ...


Ft might have sold less, I do not trust them anymore on their numbers.

Here is an article also including an interesting number: http://news.com.com/iStockphoto+sees+new+rivals+everywhere/2008-1025_3-6173039.html?tag=st.num

that is istockphoto has a download every 2,5 sec. That means 12614400 downloads in a year. Take that number times 4 or something and thats what they might make in a year.
With approximately 1 590 000 images online the average is about 7,9 dls/year per image. If you are below that number you are below the average sales with you images and if you are above then you are above the average sales per image.
Just thought that might be interesting, I love statistics  :)

« Reply #6 on: April 04, 2007, 14:27 »
0
Do FT pay 50% for an exclusive image?

« Reply #7 on: April 04, 2007, 15:31 »
0
Yes, Fotolia pays 50+% for exclusive images.

« Reply #8 on: April 04, 2007, 16:59 »
0
...and while we're on topic about articles and markets, I'm not sure how many saw the editorial blog post on Black Star Rising about addressing the Chinese market and how Shutterstock is the only agency really doing anything about that market segment:
Interesting, because I thought 123RF would be ahead - they have a Chinese version of their site, don't they?

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #9 on: April 04, 2007, 17:12 »
0
...and while we're on topic about articles and markets, I'm not sure how many saw the editorial blog post on Black Star Rising about addressing the Chinese market and how Shutterstock is the only agency really doing anything about that market segment:
Interesting, because I thought 123RF would be ahead - they have a Chinese version of their site, don't they?
They are based in Hong Kong (to some extent) as well.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
3578 Views
Last post November 29, 2006, 17:37
by leaf
3 Replies
4242 Views
Last post April 18, 2007, 04:15
by CJPhoto
3 Replies
3288 Views
Last post June 08, 2008, 06:52
by chellyar
22 Replies
5989 Views
Last post July 23, 2012, 10:39
by Lagereek
14 Replies
7734 Views
Last post November 27, 2012, 13:58
by RacePhoto

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors