pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: BOOM (48-hour sale. 20% off credit packs.)  (Read 13329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2014, 13:58 »
+28
I would like to see once in my life : 48-hour rise of royalties % for contributor !

« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2014, 14:06 »
+3
I would like to see once in my life : 48-hour rise of royalties % for contributor !

Best post I've seen all year.

« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2014, 14:12 »
-12
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:02 by tickstock »

« Reply #4 on: March 19, 2014, 14:18 »
+10
Well, I already was exclusive, and the download became so low, I choose not to put all my eggs in the same basket.
Here I'm just saying that sales on credit for contributors happens on istock but not rise for contributor.

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2014, 14:18 »
+6
My sales at iStock have plummeted over the past week. But over on SS, today is shaping up to be my BDE, thanks to a bunch of high-paying sales I could never hope to make on iStock.

In other news, iS/Getty saw a bump in Facebook likes after their embedding announcement, but have since fallen back to getting about 1/3 the amount of new likes each week as SS.

I really do wish iStock would succeed, because that would mean more $$$ for me. I'd love to have two or three sites performing well. But it doesn't seem to be shaking out that way.

« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2014, 14:19 »
-1
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:02 by tickstock »

« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2014, 14:25 »
+9
You can already get more than a 48 hour rise of royalty % if you stop contributing to low paying sites and only work with high paying ones.

You can also retire if you buy a winning lottery ticket. It doesn't mean you are going to be successful with that strategy though.

« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2014, 14:26 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:01 by tickstock »

« Reply #9 on: March 19, 2014, 14:35 »
+1
Besides don't you know that if any site pays you more than 30% you'll make less money overall.

I'm sorry. What do you mean by this? I don't understand or was this sarcasm?

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #10 on: March 19, 2014, 14:35 »
+1
You can already get more than a 48 hour rise of royalty % if you stop contributing to low paying sites and only work with high paying ones.

You can also retire if you buy a winning lottery ticket. It doesn't mean you are going to be successful with that strategy though.
You'll be successful in getting a higher royalty % which is what I was replying to.  Besides don't you know that if any site pays you more than 30% you'll make less money overall.

Sociological experiment?

« Reply #11 on: March 19, 2014, 14:42 »
+1
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:01 by tickstock »

« Reply #12 on: March 19, 2014, 14:45 »
+1
Am I correct that long time ago Dreamstime had one day in a year with 100% fot authors?

Yes, it would be nice if any stock agency do that, but please, not friday - sunday!  :P

« Reply #13 on: March 19, 2014, 14:46 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:01 by tickstock »

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #14 on: March 19, 2014, 14:47 »
+3
Besides don't you know that if any site pays you more than 30% you'll make less money overall.


I'm sorry. What do you mean by this? I don't understand or was this sarcasm?

Brian Fitzgerald - Jefferies

When you guys think of the rev share agreements with contributors, there are competitors out there that have more generous revenue shares. Can you -- would that tend to impact or take share from you guys over the course of time or can you talk about how that dynamic is panning out? And then, it seems like guys have been driving down pricing among your major competitors. They're now trying to price match. Have you seen any real impact from that thus far? Thanks.

Jon Oringer - Founder, CEO & Chairman

Yes, as far as our contributors go, we've had 30% of them and we've seen competitors come in and try to play with that number. What happens is if they payout more to contributors, they leave less room for marketing spend and that causes less sales in the long run and less payout to their contributors. So with this we really found the sweet spot over the past 10 years with the subscription plan, with the 30% payout, and competitors have come and gone and tried different things but we haven't seen much change.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2037843-shutterstocks-ceo-discusses-q4-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=6


I don't get what your point is at all. I'm beginning to doubt you're a photographer, honestly. I think you're just a troll. You'll throw anything out there to get a rise out of people.

Sociological experiment? Yes or no.

« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2014, 14:50 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:01 by tickstock »

« Reply #16 on: March 19, 2014, 14:51 »
+2
Istock did years ago ! That was very cool for contributor ! A small gift for us. That's why I said it would be great if instead of a sales for buyer, a rise for contributor for 48 hours. That could help for a good relationship between contributor and istock.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #17 on: March 19, 2014, 14:52 »
0
Am I correct that long time ago Dreamstime had one day in a year with 100% fot authors?

Yes, it would be nice if any stock agency do that, but please, not friday - sunday!  :P
iStock used to.
On a weekday in August, which tends to be quiet.  But although usually my sales were slow on Punctum Day (summer slump), once I got a good EL, which was nice  :) especially as it happened to be the file on which I'd nominated sales to a charity project my school was supporting.

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #18 on: March 19, 2014, 14:53 »
0
You don't think it's relevant in a discussion about raising royalty rates to put a direct quote about that very issue from the CEO of one of the largest microstock sites?

Yes or no.

« Reply #19 on: March 19, 2014, 14:55 »
-3
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:01 by tickstock »

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2014, 14:58 »
0
You don't think it's relevant in a discussion about raising royalty rates to put a direct quote about that very issue from the CEO of one of the largest microstock sites?

Yes or no.
I think it's relevant which is why I posted it.

Answer the question. Yes or no.

« Reply #21 on: March 19, 2014, 15:01 »
-2
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:01 by tickstock »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #22 on: March 19, 2014, 15:02 »
+1
Well, I already was exclusive, and the download became so low, I choose not to put all my eggs in the same basket.
Here I'm just saying that sales on credit for contributors happens on istock but not rise for contributor.
And of course, -20% for the buyer means -20% for us.
Hope iS isn't going to be like the Body Shop (and many other companies, it seems), with prices held high so that they can be having constant 'special offers'.

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #23 on: March 19, 2014, 15:08 »
+1
You don't think it's relevant in a discussion about raising royalty rates to put a direct quote about that very issue from the CEO of one of the largest microstock sites?

Yes or no.
I think it's relevant which is why I posted it.

Answer the question. Yes or no.
I'm not sure what game you are trying to play here but you call me a troll and then post this nonsense over and over again, I think I can see what's going on.

Really? What's "going on?" Why won't you answer my question? It's a simple one.

« Reply #24 on: March 19, 2014, 15:09 »
-5
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:01 by tickstock »

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #25 on: March 19, 2014, 16:23 »
-1
Really? What's "going on?" Why won't you answer my question? It's a simple one.
What is your question?  Looking back, is your question what's my point?  If so then I can answer that.  She said she wanted a raise in royalty % and I said she could have one by not supporting sites like iStock that only pay 15-20% (apparently that is a very unpopular view from all the negatives it got) but on the other hand if you support sites that pay more than 30% you will make less money according to Jon Oringer at Shutterstock.

Oh please. I asked you twice if this is a sociological experiment. By refusing three times to answer the question and pretending you don't know what I asked, you've just given yourself away.

« Reply #26 on: March 19, 2014, 16:29 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:00 by tickstock »

« Reply #27 on: March 19, 2014, 17:05 »
+2
Besides don't you know that if any site pays you more than 30% you'll make less money overall.


I'm sorry. What do you mean by this? I don't understand or was this sarcasm?

Brian Fitzgerald - Jefferies

When you guys think of the rev share agreements with contributors, there are competitors out there that have more generous revenue shares. Can you -- would that tend to impact or take share from you guys over the course of time or can you talk about how that dynamic is panning out? And then, it seems like guys have been driving down pricing among your major competitors. They're now trying to price match. Have you seen any real impact from that thus far? Thanks.

Jon Oringer - Founder, CEO & Chairman

Yes, as far as our contributors go, we've had 30% of them and we've seen competitors come in and try to play with that number. What happens is if they payout more to contributors, they leave less room for marketing spend and that causes less sales in the long run and less payout to their contributors. So with this we really found the sweet spot over the past 10 years with the subscription plan, with the 30% payout, and competitors have come and gone and tried different things but we haven't seen much change.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2037843-shutterstocks-ceo-discusses-q4-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=6


Ah, I see. I can't say I really agree with his statement, but to each his own.

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #28 on: March 19, 2014, 17:26 »
+4

LOL you were serious?  Yes you figured me out, I'm doing a sociological experiment.  I'm really a Harvard professor and you were my most interesting case until you figured it all out.  Drat!!!

ETA:  I shouldn't have to write this but then again maybe I do, I'm not really a Harvard professor doing a sociological experiment involving Shelma.

Humor me for a moment. You're on the boards day after day during business hours posting and reposting snips from the same news articles found online. You don't seem to have a strong opinion about anything one way or another; your main motivation seems to be to get a rise out of people by making almost every discussion you're involved in Getty/iStock vs. Shutterstock.

It's an odd way to conduct yourself. It seems you're either an employee of Getty or just playing around here for some reason. I don't for a minute think it's directed at me in particular.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #29 on: March 19, 2014, 17:30 »
0
You're on the boards day after day during business hours ...
How do you know where they come from, therefore what business hours would be there?
In any case s/he might be retired, unemployed, rich or work non-traditional hours; or be a full time stock photographer.

« Reply #30 on: March 19, 2014, 17:31 »
+4
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:00 by tickstock »

« Reply #31 on: March 19, 2014, 17:33 »
+3
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:00 by tickstock »

« Reply #32 on: March 19, 2014, 17:51 »
+3
tickstock posts a lot I disagree with but has a point of view different to mine that doesn't make him a troll. Personally I see little point in always reading posts I agree with - thats how you stop thinking.

« Reply #33 on: March 19, 2014, 18:01 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 23:00 by tickstock »

Goofy

« Reply #34 on: March 19, 2014, 18:25 »
0
I would like to see once in my life : 48-hour rise of royalties % for contributor !

Instead we most likely will get our 'claw-back' emails within the next 48-hours since the PP payout is now closed for Feb  :-\


lisafx

« Reply #35 on: March 19, 2014, 20:49 »
+3
Am I correct that long time ago Dreamstime had one day in a year with 100% fot authors?

Yes, it would be nice if any stock agency do that, but please, not friday - sunday!  :P
iStock used to.

Only for exclusives.  DT did it for all contributors.

« Reply #36 on: March 19, 2014, 21:57 »
+2
Am I correct that long time ago Dreamstime had one day in a year with 100% fot authors?

Yes, it would be nice if any stock agency do that, but please, not friday - sunday!  :P
iStock used to.

Only for exclusives.  DT did it for all contributors.

Envato have this also maybe whole week but in slowest month. Also when they are making discount for buyers they dont cut percentage from contributor side.

lisafx

« Reply #37 on: March 19, 2014, 22:23 »
0

Envato have this also maybe whole week but in slowest month. Also when they are making discount for buyers they dont cut percentage from contributor side.

You're right.  That was very generous and much appreciated.  Those type of gestures go a long way toward contributor loyalty. 

BoBoBolinski

« Reply #38 on: March 21, 2014, 04:09 »
+4
"
Oh please. I asked you twice if this is a sociological experiment. By refusing three times to answer the question and pretending you don't know what I asked, you've just given yourself away."

I personally find you a very aggressive poster, tickstock has not 'given anything away', you are just making yourself look ridiculous.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
21 Replies
8052 Views
Last post June 26, 2009, 11:09
by Milinz
2 Replies
4373 Views
Last post January 07, 2011, 09:21
by 123XXX
5 Replies
3442 Views
Last post April 28, 2012, 14:54
by steheap
6 Replies
4072 Views
Last post August 06, 2013, 20:30
by Jo Ann Snover
54 Replies
3708 Views
Last post September 13, 2023, 08:25
by HalfFull

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors