MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: You'll hear about a new site soon - stockphoto.com domain story  (Read 13384 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

stocked

« Reply #25 on: December 11, 2013, 05:17 »
+1

Every time when iStockPhoto.com agency invests their money, sources, and efforts in promotion of their iStockPhoto.com brand name, they (I am sure very involuntary now) make free promotion also for StockPhoto.com domain!

Pity is they only invest money to promote iStock.com and Thinkstock.com! Istockphoto.com doesn't get any promotions anymore.
Actually I believe they only promote Thinkstock.com can't remember any iStock ads in magazines for quite a long time.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2013, 05:27 by stocked »


« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2013, 08:25 »
0
I go to a local PHO restaurant and they have a BBQ kind of spring roll I like, but we usually get soup.  Our little saying at work is lets go get some PHOQUE... ;D ;D ;D ;D

« Reply #27 on: December 11, 2013, 11:03 »
0
Domain name is a past! Google ranking is everything!

« Reply #28 on: December 11, 2013, 11:17 »
0
Domain name is a past! Google ranking is everything!

Google ranking is the past! Personal recommendation is everything!

Most people looking to buy stock photos can ask their peers who to use - on Twitter, FB etc.

Seriously - I almost never Google when I am looking to spend money. Partly because I do not find the results particularly good. I go for personal recommendations - or else I use sites which I already trust such as Amazon (Amazon itself - not the 3rd party sellers). I also largely trust the seller reviews on eBay - although I am careful how I read them.

I find that Google is good if I am looking to know more about a particular product - but I do not trust it as a way of finding out who to buy a product from. For example - Google seems to often bring up company review results from TrustPilot and similar review sites - which are compromised (retailers can subscribe to 'moderate' bad reviews). These sites also seem to make it possible for dodgy retailers to spam their reviews with false positives via presumably bogus social media accounts. Some of the most unreliable companies have very positive review site scores and Google rankings.

« Reply #29 on: December 11, 2013, 11:40 »
+3
Google spins their algorithms  like penguin and panda and can drop sites into the abyss overnight. This could happen to stockphoto.com and the party is over.

Also, their site is dreadful. New buyers are expecting better and more full-featured sites. It is funny and kinda misleading to state " since 1995". On the other hand, it looks like it has not been updated since then

« Reply #30 on: December 11, 2013, 13:19 »
+1
Google spins their algorithms  like penguin and panda and can drop sites into the abyss overnight. This could happen to stockphoto.com and the party is over.

Also, their site is dreadful. New buyers are expecting better and more full-featured sites. It is funny and kinda misleading to state " since 1995". On the other hand, it looks like it has not been updated since then

I remember on Happy Days when Fonzie wanted to update Al's menu with new images and he had to use stock photos...

« Reply #31 on: December 11, 2013, 14:48 »
0
Business brand is everything and the domain should match. This is current SEO best practice. Unless the owner is going to invest heavily in the site to make it of high quality, then there is minimal advantage to owning this particular one. He must have a wad of spare cash though; I could have bought a nice house for that!

« Reply #32 on: December 11, 2013, 15:43 »
0
I go to a local PHO restaurant and they have a BBQ kind of spring roll I like, but we usually get soup.  Our little saying at work is lets go get some PHOQUE... ;D ;D ;D ;D

We don't have Pho restaurants where I live so I send people to the far que instead.

« Reply #33 on: December 11, 2013, 22:20 »
0
stockphotos.com

 
All I see on the site is this:
 

This URL is currently for sale.

For more information contact Jeff Kubarych at:

jeff@futuredot.com

phone: 203-200-0607

« Reply #34 on: December 11, 2013, 22:34 »
0
stockphotos.com

 
All I see on the site is this:
 

This URL is currently for sale.

For more information contact Jeff Kubarych at:

jeff@futuredot.com

phone: 203-200-0607

it's  stockphoto.com

« Reply #35 on: December 12, 2013, 01:28 »
0
stockphotos.com

 
All I see on the site is this:
 

This URL is currently for sale.

For more information contact Jeff Kubarych at:

jeff@futuredot.com

phone: 203-200-0607

it's  stockphoto.com

stockphotos.com is actually on flippa right now https://flippa.com/3002284-stockphotos-com-category-owning-domain-name-now-on-the-market

« Reply #36 on: December 12, 2013, 04:33 »
+2
stockphotos.com

 
All I see on the site is this:
 

This URL is currently for sale.

For more information contact Jeff Kubarych at:

jeff@futuredot.com

phone: 203-200-0607

it's  stockphoto.com

stockphotos.com is actually on flippa right now https://flippa.com/3002284-stockphotos-com-category-owning-domain-name-now-on-the-market

Maybe that explains the Flippa article  ;D

« Reply #37 on: December 12, 2013, 15:13 »
+3
IMHO, domain names are no longer important and if someone spent $250,000 on this one, I wouldn't want to be an investor.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2013, 16:31 by stockastic »

Uncle Pete

« Reply #38 on: December 13, 2013, 00:34 »
+10
Not sure about more on this but it was a joke for a few years, and then someone in NY registered the name. I did the faux whine about how I wanted that site and now it was too late.

Some people here took off on that and said, "well you should have registered it."  :o
Then I got an email from the lady who had registered it for an art project and she had decided on some other direction. We negotiated and I took over the site name.

So that's how humor turns into reality. Creation Date: 28-may-2011 (which by the way is before some of the people who object sternly to the name had heard of Microstock and before one of them owned a camera.) But I'm the evil troll who did this just to upset people.

OK No I didn't!

I did it for a joke. I did it to mock some of the CrapStock that people produce and try to sell. I did it to protest the 20,000 sliced vegetable photos, isolated on white, business handshake, girl with a headset, and the copies of every popular image, that some lemmings create in an effort to cash in on someone else's creative success.  And I did it with the intention of making a site with what I considered good images, that agencies had rejected. In fact it was going to be 100% rejected images, to prove a point.

But you don't want to know the rest of the story. The threats, the ignores, the accusations and criticism from some people with no sense of humor and who want to tell others how to run their lives. And what I should call my own website?

There will never be a real site, it's a Mock Site! I hope that explains it for anyone else who was terribly offended by me making fun of myself and the industry garbage that some sites and some people try to pass off as stock. I could add the Instagram fad, but I'm hoping that, like 3D TV, it will run it's course naturally and head back into the shadows.  :)

Now back on topic. I don't think that stockphoto.com has the value it might have, five years ago. All the people seem to think the name stock and photo are needed to make yourself noticed. I think rather, it's how to get buried in the weeds with all the other sites with similar names. Loss of identity anyone?

How does istock get away with "i" anything when Apple seems to own that? Maybe it's overlooked or because it's been around since before the Apple "i" everything phase?

And phone number? I've had one of them, since 1972, it ends 2277 which is? (what would you have thought?) CARS  8)  Home phone, private line at work and eventually ported to my cell phone. True,  easy phone numbers aren't what they once were either. We all carry phone books in our devices and don't need to remember easy numbers. People who I've know for 40 years have said what's your cell phone number and I say, same as it's always been, my home number. And if they don't have it in their phone, they don't remember?

What did Google mean, before Google.com? Hardly anyone but math people and science types had heard of a google or googleplex. What was a Yahoo? Twitter? WiKi? The Amazon is a natural place not a marketplace. eBay? But ask anyone and they know what these are. What the heck is a Zazzle or a Etsy? Maybe not giant killers, but well known and accepted.

Type in "Stock Photo Downloads" (BING) and what do you get? Dreamstime #1.

The name doesn't make the place, the content and public recognition makes the name! Call your next site BluePossum and it will be more memorable than all the stock or photo names in the world.

...
Right now I've got my money on crapstock.com over stockphotos .com in the next few years....

That domain's already taken - a photographer here with a sense of humor is setting up a site on it as we speak :)

Ron

« Reply #39 on: December 13, 2013, 01:33 »
+1
Pete, your posts are always balanced and smart. You get far too less up votes. ^^ one from me, more should follow

« Reply #40 on: December 13, 2013, 06:09 »
0
stockphotos.com

 
All I see on the site is this:
 

This URL is currently for sale.

For more information contact Jeff Kubarych at:

jeff@futuredot.com

phone: 203-200-0607

it's  stockphoto.com

stockphotos.com is actually on flippa right now https://flippa.com/3002284-stockphotos-com-category-owning-domain-name-now-on-the-market

that was fast, maybe not doing that ton of cash he talked about

ShadySue

« Reply #41 on: December 13, 2013, 06:21 »
+2
stockphotos.com

 
All I see on the site is this:
 

This URL is currently for sale.

For more information contact Jeff Kubarych at:

jeff@futuredot.com

phone: 203-200-0607

it's  stockphoto.com

stockphotos.com is actually on flippa right now https://flippa.com/3002284-stockphotos-com-category-owning-domain-name-now-on-the-market

that was fast, maybe not doing that ton of cash he talked about

Different site, note the 's'.


« Reply #42 on: December 13, 2013, 06:31 »
0
oh indeed!

Uncle Pete

« Reply #43 on: December 14, 2013, 17:34 »
+2
I try to be balanced and fair, but I know I'm a fool for that. Everyone has personal bias, and who says life is fair?  ;) Thanks for the thoughtful unprejudiced opinion.

Pete, your posts are always balanced and smart. You get far too less up votes. ^^ one from me, more should follow

« Reply #44 on: December 17, 2013, 09:03 »
+10
Hi everyone,

I'm Jon and I'm the one that bought the 'Stockphoto.com' domain via the Flippa marketplace.

Appreciate the kind comments but I also acknowledge all questions (and doubts). All concerns raised are reasonable and valid - I would have done the same.

I am the first to admit that you would have to be at least a little bit mad to pay that much money for a mere domain name. But I can assure you that the Flippa article was written to provide a tongue-in-cheek overview and as such, it does gloss over many details of my plan for the business - a long-term plan.

However, I'm not a stock photographer and so an important part of my day-to-day routine is to make sure I stay as up-to-date as I can on what works/doesn't work for you, via industry blogs and forums such as Tyler's here.

I surmise that there are two main avenues for the the stock photographer to market his/her portfolio. Firstly through marketplaces like SS, iStock, Stocksy etc. And the second, directly via a personal site. Both have their own strengths and weaknesses (documented extensively in this forum).

It is my hope that Stockphoto.com bridges the gap a little between the perceived lack of control experienced at the established marketplaces (commission rates, submissions etc), and the problem of attracting profitable amounts of targeted traffic at the personal website end of the spectrum.

Stockphoto.com's sole asset is its ability to consistently attract targeted web traffic. I've owned the domain for a year now and unless Google Analytics is lying to me, I know this to be a fact. With a test portfolio of 57,000 images also marketed at established marketplaces, priced at the same levels as that at those marketplaces, I have been able to validate that we are indeed able to attract visitors as well as getting them to buy (for a given level of quality and price). I even have a little profit left over after paying commissions, webhosting and all other expenses in running the business.

So I'm now slowly kicking on with growing the small amount of inventory I have.

I absolutely agree with the following sentiments:
- it's the ugliest website this side of the www
- it's so clunky (too many steps from search to download)
- it's got zero functionality like lightboxes etc
- this guy is not a stock photographer and lacks the perspective and understanding of one
- it's only got one contributor (...for the moment)

I'm working on it :) It's, still, practically a test site.

Again, thanks to Tyler for allowing me to be a member of this community (I've been happily lurking here for almost a year now). I'm very pleased to be here and look forward to learning the ropes from all of you.

Cheers,
Jon

« Reply #45 on: December 17, 2013, 09:49 »
0
OVERSUPPLY!!!!! Welcome to the fray.

« Reply #46 on: December 17, 2013, 09:56 »
0
OVERSUPPLY!!!!! Welcome to the fray.

not on stockphoto

« Reply #47 on: December 17, 2013, 10:04 »
0
stockphotos.com

 
All I see on the site is this:
 

This URL is currently for sale.

For more information contact Jeff Kubarych at:

jeff@futuredot.com

phone: 203-200-0607

it's  stockphoto.com

stockphotos.com is actually on flippa right now https://flippa.com/3002284-stockphotos-com-category-owning-domain-name-now-on-the-market

that was fast, maybe not doing that ton of cash he talked about

Different site, note the 's'.



Thank you for all of the comments and questions. StockPhotos.com is currently ranked on the 2nd page of Google for the search term stock photos. Google returns more than 500 Million results for that query and StockPhotos.com is ranked above some of the major companies in the industry at this time. Search engine algorithms change frequently and there is no guarantee of ranking in a certain position for any period of time, but it is powerful to see such a high ranking, given that there is no relevant content posted on the domain at this time.

Please feel free to send any questions you may have through the messaging section of flippa. Thanks.

(23 hours ago)

« Reply #48 on: December 17, 2013, 13:58 »
0
StockPhotos.com is currently ranked on the 2nd page of Google for the search term stock photos.

Not here it isn't. It's on page 5 for me.

« Reply #49 on: December 17, 2013, 15:23 »
+1
I got to the end of page 2 and gave up - no sign. Most user would not look past the top 3 or four results.

There is no definitive placing in Google. It depends where you are searching from and a whole other host of factors such as previous search history, sites you've visited etc, regularly used sites etc.

The same keyword phrase isn't all that brilliant either. It's very generic with a huge number of matches -"stock photo". Let's say you search for, "stock photo web site" - do you want to visit the URL for www.stockphoto.com or do you want to go to a site selling stock photos? It's not a keyword gem! By contrast type in "apple web site"; you know where you'll end up...

That said - I'm a hopeless businessman... Good luck to you with your domain name. You'll need to make "stockphotos.com" a distinctive brand to succeed.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
38 Replies
8546 Views
Last post January 20, 2010, 20:38
by a.k.a.-tom
2 Replies
2790 Views
Last post February 22, 2007, 07:06
by epixx
26 Replies
5344 Views
Last post July 17, 2013, 18:21
by cascoly
5 Replies
1971 Views
Last post November 17, 2013, 19:00
by Uncle Pete
3 Replies
2519 Views
Last post April 22, 2014, 14:04
by cascoly

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results