Author Topic: Which Site Will be Next to TanK? (Read 17614 times)

stormchaser · « **on:** November 12, 2008, 00:57 »

With recent economic stress and recent closure of PhotoShelter and demise of Dig Railroad, just wonder what sales venue(s) will go under next.

I really thought Albumo would be a goner by now, but still alive.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #1 on:** November 12, 2008, 06:42 »

Albumo's corporate address is an apartment. Good chances are their server is in a closet there. And along with no marketing it probably doesn't take much for them to keep going.

I thought Featurepics would be gone already but they're still chugging along.

Tim Markley · « **Reply #2 on:** November 12, 2008, 07:47 »

I suspect that cutcaster or Yay would be likely targets. Snap village is another candidate.

takestock · « **Reply #3 on:** November 12, 2008, 08:01 »

Quote from: tsmarkley on November 12, 2008, 07:47

I suspect that cutcaster or Yay would be likely targets. Snap village is another candidate.

I'd second that!

borg · « **Reply #4 on:** November 12, 2008, 08:33 »

Quote from: tsmarkley on November 12, 2008, 07:47

I suspect that cutcaster or Yay would be likely targets. Snap village is another candidate.

Why Cutcaster , they are still on start position!?

nicemonkey · « **Reply #5 on:** November 12, 2008, 08:57 »

Yaymicro is showing no sign of life at all!

leaf · « **Reply #6 on:** November 12, 2008, 09:22 »

I sure hope YAY makes it. I like their site. Very quick and nice upload process... and they pay well as well.

I had 4 sales this month which earned me 10 Euros.

johngriffin · « **Reply #7 on:** November 12, 2008, 10:06 »

I can tell you that Cutcaster is going nowhere but up. We are very happy with our progress and have strong financial backing. Plus I am way more open about the inner workings of our company than most others. My burn rate and overhead is extremely low and we could hum along for at least a few years. I just spend on marketing and tech projects. But I love the few doubters and the challenge. Brings out the competitiveness in me when I get bet against.

What shocks me is that companies like DRR can burn through 15mm and have nothing to show for it.

sharpshot · « **Reply #8 on:** November 12, 2008, 11:33 »

Isn't it pointless speculating when we have no idea how much it costs some of these sites to run, how much they make, how much debt they have or who is investing in them?

Lucky Oliver went when they were doing much better than some other sites for me. Perhaps their investors pulled the plug? Some sites have been going for years with very low sales, so perhaps they are breaking even or have patient investors.

borg · « **Reply #9 on:** November 12, 2008, 12:03 »

Quote from: johngriffin on November 12, 2008, 10:06

I can tell you that Cutcaster is going nowhere but up. We are very happy with our progress and have strong financial backing. Plus I am way more open about the inner workings of our company than most others. My burn rate and overhead is extremely low and we could hum along for at least a few years. I just spend on marketing and tech projects. But I love the few doubters and the challenge. Brings out the competitiveness in me when I get bet against.

What shocks me is that companies like DRR can burn through 15mm and have nothing to show for it.

Best wishes John!

Who knows what the stocks are, then he knows what can expect in business like microstock.... ;-)
No doubt for Cutcaster!

hali · « **Reply #10 on:** November 12, 2008, 12:18 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on November 12, 2008, 06:42

Albumo's corporate address is an apartment. Good chances are their server is in a closet there. And along with no marketing it probably doesn't take much for them to keep going.
I thought Featurepics would be gone already but they're still chugging along.

true. some sites are legitimately serious with investment put aside to run the business; others we don't know how much it takes to run it, like Pauline says, if you're a closet microstock sites, it takes cost overheads.
i wonder if the review time indicates their overheads, ie. faster review, more employee reviewers vs.
takes forever to review and no views, no sales. no overheads, no bankruptcy.
or maybe we can see how many new images are approved vs how many sales. that could tell us if
the company is next to tank, or just a front for something else.

just guessing. as sharpshot pointed out, it's all specualtion if we don't see the balance sheet.

melastmohican · « **Reply #11 on:** November 12, 2008, 14:20 »

Based only on my experience it would be FP or CS. No sales on FeaturePics for 5 months. I gave up uploading to Crestock cause they reject 90% of my photos while I have 1 sale a month.

cascoly · « **Reply #12 on:** November 12, 2008, 14:34 »

if a site has never been really active it's hard to say it's tanked -- albumo and feature have been neaqr flatline since the start - i did make $150 in upl rewards on albumo, but nothing since; i get a sale on feature every month or 2 - stopped upl to them long ago

i still upl to yay, but have stopped sending to most & cut until some sales start coming in.

at this pont it's gonna be really hartd for any newcomer to compete against the established companies -- right now none of the new guys really offer substantial improvements over the ones that get all the traffic.

takestock · « **Reply #13 on:** November 12, 2008, 15:28 »

Quote from: borg on November 12, 2008, 12:03

Quote from: johngriffin on November 12, 2008, 10:06
I can tell you that Cutcaster is going nowhere but up. We are very happy with our progress and have strong financial backing. Plus I am way more open about the inner workings of our company than most others. My burn rate and overhead is extremely low and we could hum along for at least a few years. I just spend on marketing and tech projects. But I love the few doubters and the challenge. Brings out the competitiveness in me when I get bet against.

What shocks me is that companies like DRR can burn through 15mm and have nothing to show for it.

With all due respect John, if you are saying your overheads are very low, is that not a reflection of how hard you are pushing the site at present.

Just to say "we could hum along for at least a few years" doesn't sound really convincing and a bit casual I would think in this very competitive market.
Contributors have every reason to be doubtful, this arises from their previous experiences with other new sites.

The problem is, as we have seen in other posts above, when sales are not forthcoming people stop uploading and that is not good for CC.

All that said I do wish you success - good luck!

Best wishes John!

Who knows what the stocks are, then he knows what can expect in business like microstock.... ;-)
No doubt for Cutcaster!

madelaide · « **Reply #14 on:** November 12, 2008, 15:35 »

Hopefully one I have not wasted my time uploading to yet...

Regards,
Adelaide

melastmohican · « **Reply #15 on:** November 12, 2008, 16:23 »

Some businesses are set up to get acquired. It's nothing wrong with that and it happens in many industries. They got excellent product idea but no chance to compete with market leaders so they spend most money on their product instead of growing business. In case of microstock their product is website they do not care about selling photos. Are there any potential buyers still around?

eppic · « **Reply #16 on:** November 12, 2008, 21:27 »

Quote

Plus I am way more open about the inner workings of our company than most others.

I'll second that concerning John's approach at Cutcaster. Plus I was also able to call him up on a whim and chat for awhile. My personal opinion is that CC is definitely worth the effort on my part as a contributor even though I was recently burned with Photoshelter. I for one would love to see the CC model succeed and will do my part to help make it happen.

helix7 · « **Reply #17 on:** November 12, 2008, 22:32 »

Quote from: tsmarkley on November 12, 2008, 07:47

...Snap village is another candidate.

Definitely. Very little activity over there. I wouldn't be surprised to see them close their doors.

traveler1116 · « **Reply #18 on:** November 12, 2008, 22:49 »

Aren't they owned by Corbis? I've had increasing sales the past few months, better than crestock and about the same as BigStock.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #19 on:** November 13, 2008, 01:57 »

Quote from: stormchaser on November 12, 2008, 00:57

With recent economic stress and recent closure of PhotoShelter and demise of Dig Railroad, just wonder what sales venue(s) will go under next.

I really thought Albumo would be a goner by now, but still alive.

Digital Railroad had professional backing, investors, Sports Illustrated and other major companies rented server space, it was an archive as well as a sales site. They lost over 15 million dollars. If they couldn't make it, it's pretty scary looking into 2009 for upstarts and the old cobweb sites.

Can Stock.

Actually "sold" to Fotosearch which may make it a better site. I'm still not contributing there, but for those of you who do, you might watch and see if anything changes?

October 17th:

Quote

MicroStockPhoto is approaching its first birthday in a few weeks and we would like to inform you of some imminent and positive changes that will be taking place in the near future. For those of you that contribute to several sites, you may have noticed that one or two have disappeared recently.

And this one was stillborn?

I won't say it's impossible but I think it was FlemishDreams who pointed out that no new site since 2005 has really made it. So far that's true, and my feelings are that all we see are imitators with hardly a truly inspired vision for something different. Copycats who want a piece of the pie, which is already sliced up and getting stale. Subscription sites that sell for less and less in hopes of scraping up pennies to make dollars.

Lets go back in history for the one reason I won't say "there will never be a new site added to the big seven Micro sites". Seven is because I choose to include BS as a contender for worthwhile sites that bring returns for those of you who devote time to sites that bring in income.

Years ago there was a battle between Altavista, Yahoo, Dogpile/Metacrawler (which I still use because it gives good results), MSN, AOL, Netscape and ASK was a new site. Google didn't exist. Search sites were eating each other and buying up the smaller ones. Sound familiar? Then out of nowhere comes Google with a new way of doing things and now they hold over 70% of the market.

IF someone comes up with something different and attractive to photographers and buyers that is revolutionary, they could change the Micro, Mid, Macro photo market. Right now, the world economy is not thriving. Starting, just another micro site, isn't going to make it. Corbis is #2 and not turning a profit. #1 Getty revenue has been dropping. These are the big guys! Alamy says they are leveling off, but are expanding into the US market, which is three times the European market where they have most of their sales. Alamy was an upstart that wasn't exclusive and allowed anyone who produced a good photo, to be able to market them. They changed the market.

Quote

Digital photography companies have seen stock prices come down due to increasing pressure in the royalty-free photography business from discount Web sites offering pictures.

The reason why micro is interesting is because it's a volume business which is very attractive to the buyers. The reason in my opinion why it's so difficult for anyone (agency or photographers) to make a profit is the margin is minimal. Microstock photographers who produce very good work are underselling themselves, in hopes of making it up with the volume, because that's the way the competition is working. I realize this forum is for sellers and we all know how hard it is to make it in micro. Hard work, long hours, great ideas, a good eye, taking stock appropriate pictures, thousands of accepted photos and yes some people do make it. That's not the issue here.

What does it take for a microstock agency to turn a profit on such a small margin? Some people see the agencies and think they are pulling in big bucks at our expense. HA... if it was so easy why do they fail, one after another? Servers, advertising, staff, accounting, taxes, commission, software, programmers and after all that is done, maybe some profit. They sell photos for a dollar, after all the expenses, they might make pennies, just like us.

Any new site that thinks it's easy money and all they have to do is copy the successful sites is going to collapse. Watch them come and go. I have no sympathy for anyone who walks in to a highly competitive market as nothing but an imitator. It's like someone who thinks they can be a photographer because, heck, all you do is get a camera and push the button!

I think the question isn't which site will be next but what's the over under on the number of sites that will fail in 2009.

sharpshot · « **Reply #20 on:** November 13, 2008, 02:48 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on November 12, 2008, 22:49

Aren't they owned by Corbis? I've had increasing sales the past few months, better than crestock and about the same as BigStock.

That is the only reason I uploaded there but they don't seem to have much interest in the site. The changes that they said were coming months ago never happened. It wouldn't be a shock if corbis decided to buy one of the more established microstock sites and where would that leave snapvillage?

hali · « **Reply #21 on:** November 13, 2008, 13:19 »

racephoto, i like the analogy of google for microstock. be different and succeed.
but then again, photoshelter was different , and brave too... picking on getty...
and they died right after that. i like photoshelter's culture. they rejected all my "micro" type images and took just the unique ones. good idea, i thought, as you can sell the same image for 25 cents and 250 dollars.
but photoshelter explained why they failed. the public did not fall for that new idea of rewarding contributors with larger commissions.

so all in all, the final say is still the bottom line. 25 cents or nothing.
i think, it was someone else here who grumbled, "how long do we go?"
well, that is a scary question, isn't it?

johngriffin · « **Reply #22 on:** November 13, 2008, 13:47 »

@takestock you said,
"With all due respect John, if you are saying your overheads are very low, is that not a reflection of how hard you are pushing the site at present.

Just to say "we could hum along for at least a few years" doesn't sound really convincing and a bit casual I would think in this very competitive market.
Contributors have every reason to be doubtful, this arises from their previous experiences with other new sites."

Great question and I am glad you asked. Just because I keep my overhead low in one of the worst economic downturns in the history of the US doesn't mean that I don't work 24/7 to market and grow the site. I spend on important things like reaching out to buyers and being in places where they will be. I have put in 3 years of my life, from morning to night (everyday), to make sure I will be left standing when the rest of the industry consolidates. DRR had 15mm that they spent and they are done. Gone. Not coming back. I have a tiny fraction of that and Cutcaster will live to see a lot more days. Who is the smart one then? I'm going no where but forward. "Overhead" in a down economy is a killer and the first piece of advice any investor would tell a business is to cut overhead and make sure you have cash to take you at least a year out. Cutcaster DEFINITELY DOES.

I completely agree with you that contributors have to be wary and the times make it really hard for Cutcaster to get contributors bc they are afraid from their experiences with sites like PS and DRR (two sites you have to pay to upload and join). I have asked people to trust Cutcaster that we can be a viable option and that we want to create a different union between our contributors and the site.

From takestock again, "The problem is, as we have seen in other posts above, when sales are not forthcoming people stop uploading and that is not good for CC.

All that said I do wish you success - good luck!

Best wishes John!

Who knows what the stocks are, then he knows what can expect in business like microstock.... ;-)
No doubt for Cutcaster!"

Cutcaster is barely 6 months old and just opened to buyers in the middle of Sept. Picturehouse, last month, was our first image buyers conference and we have set up in office meetings with over 35 publishers, advertisers and graphic designers. The conference was a great experience for us as we met over 220 image buyers in the NYC area that really were enthusiastic about the Cutcaster business model and a new challenger.

I am asking for a chance. Give me a year to host your content for free and show you results. That is all I can ask for. If I don't come through on my end of the bargain you can leave immediately. I left my job trading stocks on Wall st in January to do this full time and eat, breathe and sleep Cutcaster. I put my cell phone on the site so you can call me if you have any concerns or questions. I don't hide in the slightest and make fixes immediately when they are asked for. I'm not giving up until I am at the top of that list and you can save this post and look back on it when that happens. I appreciate your support and hope you are with me.

takestock · « **Reply #23 on:** November 13, 2008, 14:33 »

Thanks very much John for yor response and for answering my questions.
I admire your approach - and yes, i will be with you.

RT · « **Reply #24 on:** November 13, 2008, 18:05 »

Quote from: nicemonkey on November 12, 2008, 08:57

Yaymicro is showing no sign of life at all!

I just asked on their forum for Linda to expand on her statement of "we are marketing the site", I have a horrible feeling that their marketing in being done in the same vein as LuckyOlivers was i.e. 'pretend marketing' (networking, attending seminars, blogs etc), in which case they aint ever going to get any customers, it's a shame because I like the site layout, but then again I liked LO's.

Whether she replies or not waits to be seen, either way if I don't see or hear of any real marketing being done by Christmas I'll pull the few images I stupidly uploaded there and they can keep the few euros I've earned.

hali · « **Reply #25 on:** November 13, 2008, 18:17 »

Quote from: RT on November 13, 2008, 18:05

Quote from: nicemonkey on November 12, 2008, 08:57
Yaymicro is showing no sign of life at all!

I just asked on their forum for Linda to expand on her statement of "we are marketing the site", I have a horrible feeling that their marketing in being done in the same vein as LuckyOlivers was i.e. 'pretend marketing' (networking, attending seminars, blogs etc), in which case they aint ever going to get any customers, it's a shame because I like the site layout, but then again I liked LO's.
Whether she replies or not waits to be seen, either way if I don't see or hear of any real marketing being done by Christmas I'll pull the few images I stupidly uploaded there and they can keep the few euros I've earned.

agree too here. linda is very communicative, and i like YAY style. but maybe they don't have a good marketing expert. the same for Featurepic, very nice people.
so maybe someone who is a sales expert should go work for linda and oksana (yay and fp).
i still have my images there, but i stop uploading. i hope they get lucky because both are wonderful.

lobby · « **Reply #26 on:** November 13, 2008, 18:23 »

my vote goes to crestock

louoates · « **Reply #27 on:** November 13, 2008, 19:31 »

I don't know anything about Cutcaster.

But I think the next to close up will be SnapV, probably by the end of this year. Big companies like to pull the plug on mistakes along with the Christmas lights.

Yay will be next in my opinion. Dead traffic. Dead sales. At least for a few hundred of my best. This time next year it'll be "Yay who?" I hope the nice folks there have their resumes updated possibly excluding the last year or so.

goldenangel · « **Reply #28 on:** November 13, 2008, 22:24 »

With John's attitude and drive to success, I really believe that Cutcaster is here to stay. It's great to hear that it is also already getting some traction with potential customers and agencies.

Best wishes for success!

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #29 on:** November 13, 2008, 22:50 »

Quote from: goldenangel on November 13, 2008, 22:24

With John's attitude and drive to success, ...

Bryan at LuckyOliver had a great attitude and an astonishing level of drive to succeed. Is this enough to be successful?

Eco · « **Reply #30 on:** November 14, 2008, 01:44 »

Let’s argue this objectively. What can a new agency possibly offer a customer that they cannot find at one of the big 6 sites? I often hear the comment that they must spend more money on marketing. “Marketing” - that magic word that can cure everything. What can a new agency advertise in a marketing campaign? “Come to us. We offer you a FRACTION of the images that you can find on all the major sites at the same or higher price point”.

What an agency needs to succeed are long term, regular, bulk buyers. Unfortunately these buyers are all INFORMED buyers who are not going to fall for these new agencies since they know a new agency can offer them nothing. In this regard the well established agencies are now just too far ahead in terms of contents and reputation and informed buyers will always use one of the more established agencies. At best a new agency may attract an occasional buyer who is not well informed and who may accidentally stumble open the site. These types of buyers are not enough to ensure their long term success.

Unless a new site can come up with something really radically unique FOR THE BUYER, in combination with a fair deal to the photographers, they don’t stand a chance to make it in this industry. Sorry to say but an easy upload system and a good attitude are not enough to ensure success. Of all the new startup sites I would say that Vivozoom appears to be the only new site that maybe onto something new to buyers - warranting that the buyer won't get sued. This is based on a requirement of many potential buyers as established through actual marketing research. Only time will tell if this strategy will be enough to attract bulk buyers.

sharpshot · « **Reply #31 on:** November 14, 2008, 03:11 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on November 13, 2008, 22:50

Quote from: goldenangel on November 13, 2008, 22:24
With John's attitude and drive to success, ...

Bryan at LuckyOliver had a great attitude and an astonishing level of drive to succeed. Is this enough to be successful?

I agree. Finding the right strategy is the most important thing. The sites that have succeeded have spent lots on advertising in design magazines. Is that a coincidence? It doesn't always work, snapvillage spent money on advertising but they didn't have the site right and that hasn't worked.

I am going to give John a chance though, as he is investing his time and money and all I have to do is upload my portfolio while I am doing other things on my computer. It isn't a big risk for me, as I have low expectations and any extra money I can make is a bonus. Lucky Oliver came close to making it at one point and perhaps if the credit crunch hadn't happened, they would still be around. With John's financial background, I hope he has the right strategy to keep cutcaster going through these tough times.

goldenangel · « **Reply #32 on:** November 14, 2008, 19:23 »

John has also mentioned that they have enough money to run for a year at least, so that gives some security too...

bittersweet · « **Reply #33 on:** November 17, 2008, 07:48 »

Just got this email from Mostphotos:

[q]Development of Mostphotos.com has almost stood still for the last few months as you may have noticed.
I would just like to inform all our members why.

We are currently developing Mostphotos 3.0 and we have put all development of the 2.0 platform on hold due to that.
The new version of Mostphotos is a big rebuild of the site which will lead to a better and faster user experience.
We will also be adding new features in the new version.

One big difference will be a brand new design and logo, you can find a sample here:
http://www.mostphotos.com/v3/

The new version will be up and running in the begining of next year. But we would really like your input on features we should add and things we should redo to make the site even better.

So please send your suggestions to [email protected] and put "Suggestion" in the headline.

Best regards
Michael Lindfors
Mostphotos.com[/q
[

Tim Markley · « **Reply #34 on:** November 17, 2008, 07:58 »

I am not sure how new logo will help sales. If they said one of the big thing we are doing is increasing our marketing budget I would be happier.

louoates · « **Reply #35 on:** November 17, 2008, 08:55 »

I had two suggestions: Dump the cheesy reflections on all the images (on our images! on the new images page) and, dump the reversed type. Anyone reading their gray or white type on black for very long will go nutty.

nicemonkey · « **Reply #36 on:** November 17, 2008, 09:49 »

I agree with "Louoates" although I feel that the black gives a classy look to the site it makes my eyes bleed after a while! Maybe I would add faster transfer of files from the ftp folder (like stockexpert) to the list

helix7 · « **Reply #37 on:** November 18, 2008, 10:55 »

Quote from: stormchaser on November 12, 2008, 00:57

With recent economic stress and recent closure of PhotoShelter and demise of Dig Railroad...

Kind of funny how there's an ad for DRR in the November issue of Communication Arts, basically mocking microstock. The sub-headline reads, "Not microstock - standout stock. Find it at DRR.NET"

Wait, who just shut down? And who is still up and running?

stormchaser · « **Reply #38 on:** November 18, 2008, 11:17 »

Quote from: helix7 on November 18, 2008, 10:55

Quote from: stormchaser on November 12, 2008, 00:57
With recent economic stress and recent closure of PhotoShelter and demise of Dig Railroad...

Kind of funny how there's an ad for DRR in the November issue of Communication Arts, basically mocking microstock. The sub-headline reads, "Not microstock - standout stock. Find it at DRR.NET"

Wait, who just shut down? And who is still up and running?

The irony of that is both sad and funny at the same time. But also kind of pathetic. I don;t know how the deadline dates for pulls in in CA magazine, but when I used to work in industrial advertising, I could pull an ad sometimes as little as 30 days before shelf date, sometimes even less time with a smaller circulation. As an advertiser though, your still liable to honor the insertion contract whether the ad runs or not, so maybe they just said . with it. Even so, the professionals involved with it should be embarrassed. Looks like the rug was pulled out from under very quickly.

louoates · « **Reply #39 on:** November 18, 2008, 11:27 »

I forgot to mention that I hate that muddy mustard color on the "Most" logo. Throw a dart on the color wheel and you'll find a better color to use.

hali · « **Reply #40 on:** November 18, 2008, 11:32 »

Quote from: louoates on November 18, 2008, 11:27

I forgot to mention that I hate that muddy mustard color on the "Most" logo. Throw a dart on the color wheel and you'll find a better color to use.

ah yes, but if you play darts, you know there's only two colours to choose

Tuilay · « **Reply #41 on:** November 25, 2008, 23:23 »

iStock

If based on the amount of objections here, and everyone , out of frustration, pulls out their portfolio, that could cause some undesirable consequences.
Even the exclusives cannot hope to maintain an upheaval.
Empires have been toppled by discontentment of the masses.
iStock is not immuned.

traveler1116 · « **Reply #42 on:** November 25, 2008, 23:30 »

Viva la revolucion!! Maybe not a revolution, but I have started to put files up on DT and FT exclusively since the new IS best match. I would never have considered that before a few months ago but things and Istock is becoming less and less important to me.

hali · « **Reply #43 on:** November 26, 2008, 08:49 »

Quote from: Tuilay on November 25, 2008, 23:23

iStock
If based on the amount of objections here, and everyone , out of frustration, pulls out their portfolio, that could cause some undesirable consequences.
Even the exclusives cannot hope to maintain an upheaval.
Empires have been toppled by discontentment of the masses.
iStock is not immuned.

that may be so, that "empries ", as you said,"have been toppled" by consensus, but "iStock", as you call them, is beyond an empire. iStock is divine , they have worshippers that offer their nextborn.
So sorry, I hate to disagree. Istock can never be tanked. Where will the reviewers
find a job after that ?

Roadrunner · « **Reply #44 on:** November 26, 2008, 11:20 »

I remember reading something that went "Pride goes before the fall". Did that mean IS is in their Autimn or they would fall flat on their but ome day?

Tim Markley · « **Reply #45 on:** November 26, 2008, 13:43 »

Istock will not go down, they are still the industry leader and they are affiliated with a large stock entity (Getty). I only the big six getter stronger.

I also believe that many of the smaller operations will disappear. I have hopes that one of the euro sites will take off. The only question is which one.

NancyCWalker · « **Reply #46 on:** November 26, 2008, 15:40 »

With Getty picking up Jupiter it does leave me wondering how StockXpert will fit into the grand scheme after all is said and done. If they end up a casualty of mergers then who would be the next in line to fill out the "Big 6"?

hali · « **Reply #47 on:** November 26, 2008, 16:41 »

re: azulelaroux (with Getty...wondering how StockXpert will fit)
i am curious too, already there is an apparent slowdown in review with StockXpert,
as they are usually fast; so maybe the culture has changed

re: tsmarkley (hopes one of the euro sites will take off...only which one).
certainly the pie is going to be smaller, with Alamy, ScanStock ,... expanding into the North American market. is this a sign that Euro is not big enough to stay viable,
or there is something attractive about the American Pie.

Phil · « **Reply #48 on:** November 27, 2008, 19:57 »

generally I think that the next one to fail is the one that gives me a high percentage of rejections on my latest batch of images.

of course when the following batch goes through with few rejections they get reallocated to the site that is going places

bittersweet · « **Reply #49 on:** January 11, 2009, 13:21 »

Nobody guessed StockRiot?

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #50 on:** January 11, 2009, 13:31 »

If anybody had ever heard of it maybe somebody would have guessed it.

Adeptris · « **Reply #51 on:** January 11, 2009, 13:58 »

Quote from: johngriffin on November 13, 2008, 13:47

Cutcaster is barely 6 months old and just opened to buyers in the middle of Sept. Picturehouse, last month, was our first image buyers conference and we have set up in office meetings with over 35 publishers, advertisers and graphic designers. The conference was a great experience for us as we met over 220 image buyers in the NYC area that really were enthusiastic about the Cutcaster business model and a new challenger.

I am asking for a chance. Give me a year to host your content for free and show you results. That is all I can ask for.

Best of luck John,
That is almost the same text as the Photohelters Collection "What Buyers Want", listening to NYC buyers wants and needs, the prospects for PSC and general feeling was good, but in the cold light of day and analysis of the market, the actual happenings did not live up to the hype, and the plug was pulled and the baby flushed with the bathwater, the quality of photographers content was blamed and the hands washed clean.

It is ok talking to buyers but in a lot of cases thier hands are already tied with other suppliers, and in a recession they will play safe, people do not take chances and change suppliers but look for comfort and stability in a recession, often looking back to the good old times.

But reading your replies they look sincere and honest, so do hope all goes well for you!

David

Pixart · « **Reply #52 on:** January 11, 2009, 14:39 »

Quote from: whatalife on January 11, 2009, 13:21

Nobody guessed StockRiot?

Hehe... I see they didnt even make Leaf's list of up and coming. He won't have to remove them.

litifeta · « **Reply #53 on:** January 11, 2009, 14:48 »

I think consolidation will be the key for those with a decent model, but low sales. Canstockphoto managed to find a buyer.

But a lot of these fringe businesses are just copies of the big players, so there is little to sell. So they will tank.

digiology · « **Reply #54 on:** January 11, 2009, 17:22 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 11, 2009, 13:31

If anybody had ever heard of it maybe somebody would have guessed it.

that's what I was going to say too

snaprender · « **Reply #55 on:** January 11, 2009, 20:10 »

My vote is Crestock as the next to go.

As for Getty/IStock, I can't help but think even a big company can fall once greed takes over. They are purchasing Jupiter/Stockxpert for $96 million, just got a judgement against them for $600,000.00 by a photographer in France, and are currently being sued by dozens of their own photographers for $100,000,000.00 for a breach of contact type suit.

microstockinsider · « **Reply #56 on:** January 11, 2009, 20:35 »

Quote from: snaprender on January 11, 2009, 20:10

My vote is Crestock as the next to go.

As for Getty/IStock, I can't help but think even a big company can fall once greed takes over. They are purchasing Jupiter/Stockxpert for $96 million, just got a judgement against them for $600,000.00 by a photographer in France, and are currently being sued by dozens of their own photographers for $100,000,000.00 for a breach of contact type suit.

From what I can see I don't think its going to be crestock, (but you never can tell)

I agree with that about getty and the big players. I read Corbis had never turned a profit (but that might just be a tax thing as they spend their profits on buying smaller agencies) we've watched Jupiter fall from being a healthy looking 3rd to a shrivelled take-over opportunity. Who knows what this year will bring us. we'll all be on our toes that's for sure. More over, the average buyer just doesn't care about any of it unless the site they use closes down.

At least with microstock most peoples eggs are not in one basket.

helix7 · « **Reply #57 on:** January 11, 2009, 22:06 »

Quote from: snaprender on January 11, 2009, 20:10

My vote is Crestock as the next to go.

I do pretty well with Crestock. Not huge amounts of money, but enough to make me think that something is going well at Crestock.

Quote from: snaprender on January 11, 2009, 20:10

As for Getty/IStock, I can't help but think even a big company can fall once greed takes over. They are purchasing Jupiter/Stockxpert for $96 million, just got a judgement against them for $600,000.00 by a photographer in France, and are currently being sued by dozens of their own photographers for $100,000,000.00 for a breach of contact type suit.

Maybe I've been living under a rock, but I don't know anything about those lawsuits. Anyone got a link to articles?

hoi ha · « **Reply #58 on:** January 12, 2009, 00:46 »

Quote from: litifeta on January 11, 2009, 14:48

I think consolidation will be the key for those with a decent model, but low sales. Canstockphoto managed to find a buyer.

But a lot of these fringe businesses are just copies of the big players, so there is little to sell. So they will tank.

I agree with you on this - the next little while will be all about consolidation ... which will lead to price rises which will in turn open the door again to new players ... the econmic cycle is the same in almost all industries, microstock included.

snaprender · « **Reply #59 on:** January 12, 2009, 01:18 »

Quote from: snaprender on January 11, 2009, 20:10

As for Getty/IStock, I can't help but think even a big company can fall once greed takes over. They are purchasing Jupiter/Stockxpert for $96 million, just got a judgement against them for $600,000.00 by a photographer in France, and are currently being sued by dozens of their own photographers for $100,000,000.00 for a breach of contact type suit.

Maybe I've been living under a rock, but I don't know anything about those lawsuits. Anyone got a link to articles?

Here's the links:
http://www.artinfo.com/news/story/29795/getty-aef-ordered-to-pay-french-photographer-more-than-1m/

http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_display/photo-news/legal-news/e3i397aa99d2932d77de7356ca95abd7023

I don't think you've been living under a rock - I think they try and hide this stuff as much as possible.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Which Site Will be Next to TanK? (Read 17614 times)

hali

helix7

traveler1116

RacePhoto

hali

hali

bittersweet

helix7

hali

Tuilay

traveler1116

hali

hali

bittersweet

digiology

helix7

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors