pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fresh exclusive feedback  (Read 12908 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 17, 2010, 07:36 »
0
After over 2 months of exclusivity my feelings are mixed. Before my IS earnings represented 40-50% of total microstock earnings.
Now it's about 120%-yes, I earn more and it's a positive point.
Now negative point: my downloads' number is the same. It seems that I didn't benefit from better best match placement.
My earning increase come only from better commission and much higher prices (exclusive, exclusive+ and Vetta).
I'm curious about experiences from other fresh exclusives.


« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2010, 08:02 »
0
There was always some thread about exclusivity and best match position in search, and although most people say exclusives have better postilion in search I think it was never proved to be truth. I have read several threads where exclusives say they earn more just because they get more per image because they are exclusives, not because they get more downloads.

lisafx

« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2010, 08:13 »
0
Thanks for posting Rene.  This is very good information.  Exactly the type of thing fence-sitters need to know in deciding which direction to go in :)

« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2010, 08:27 »
0
I am going exclusive soon but I am not expecting my images will get any better best match placement.  

What made you think there is currently such a benefit for exclusives ?  (Though it would be great!)
« Last Edit: May 17, 2010, 08:29 by Digital66 »

« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2010, 08:34 »
0
After over 2 months of exclusivity my feelings are mixed. Before my IS earnings represented 40-50% of total microstock earnings.
Now it's about 120%-yes, I earn more and it's a positive point.
Now negative point: my downloads' number is the same. It seems that I didn't benefit from better best match placement.
My earning increase come only from better commission and much higher prices (exclusive, exclusive+ and Vetta).
I'm curious about experiences from other fresh exclusives.

Have you increased your uploads substantially during that time? If you have and you still don't show an increase in downloads, that is disappointing.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2010, 08:35 »
0
After over 2 months of exclusivity my feelings are mixed. Before my IS earnings represented 40-50% of total microstock earnings.
Now it's about 120%-yes, I earn more and it's a positive point.
Now negative point: my downloads' number is the same. It seems that I didn't benefit from better best match placement.
My earning increase come only from better commission and much higher prices (exclusive, exclusive+ and Vetta).
I'm curious about experiences from other fresh exclusives.

So did you actually check file placement to see if there was any before/after difference? Or are you just assuming there was no best match change because your downloads didn't increase?

« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2010, 08:35 »
0
We need to know that behavior of customers  can be different for each of them...

Someone want usual best seller, but someone want a new photo, in that case best match position is  irrelevant!

P.S.

I have heard that IS exclusivity brings 40-60% more in average...

So , IS piece of cake before exclusivity need to be also cca 40-60%  ...

My part of IS is cca 30%, that is not enough to think about exc.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2010, 08:42 by borg »

« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2010, 08:55 »
0
Yes indeed, thanks again Rene for the honest feedback. I have to say I haven't found any evidence of exclusive images being better placed (other than Vetta) since they implemented the BM2.0 thing which must be a couple of years ago now.

On a positive note the fact that your images are now significantly more expensive to the buyers than non-exclusive and yet it hasn't had a negative effect on sales numbers. The 20% increase in overall earnings sounds very worthwhile anyway. Does that also include the effect of the Exc+ prices?

« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2010, 08:58 »
0
A significant advantage of being exclusive is the larger number of upload slots. If you don't upload all your work to istock because of the restriction (as independent) then building a larger portfolio should generate more income too.

« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2010, 09:15 »
0
After over 2 months of exclusivity my feelings are mixed. Before my IS earnings represented 40-50% of total microstock earnings.
Now it's about 120%-yes, I earn more and it's a positive point.
Well, that's the purpose of exclusivity I figure, exceeding earnings on one site compared to when on many. Mission accomplished then, no? But it's a very interesting observation that you need at least 40-50% on iStock before even considering exclusivity. This is very valuable info. Thanks. It deserves a heart.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2010, 09:19 by FD-amateur »

« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2010, 09:18 »
0
Also, anecdotal reports so far indicate that downloads have been lower on iStock since March, which was a BME for many contributors.

So, if you still have roughly the same number, maybe that's not so bad!

lisafx

« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2010, 09:22 »
0
What made you think there is currently such a benefit for exclusives ?  (Though it would be great!)

It has been hinted at and discussed endlessly for years.  For example Vetta are openly admitted to have better search positions than non-vetta, and it has been suggested that in time E+ will also have better best match placement.  Both of which amount to a best match bump for exclusive files, if not actually exclusive contributors.

The best match is constantly changing, and sometimes it is quite obvious that the front pages are dominated almost entirely by exclusive images.  I keep a number of public lightboxes with a good mix of exclusive and nonexclusive files.  Usually they are pretty evenly spread out, but there have been certain incarnations of the best match where it is REALLY obvious that ALL the exclusive files in them are in the front and all the non-exclusive ones are in the back.  

At the moment, beyond the Vetta placement, there doesn't seem to be much exclusive bias, but it is still very good to hear from someone who would actually know first hand.

« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2010, 11:29 »
0
Thanks for this feedback! Nice to know that there has been an overall benefit for you.

lagereek

« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2010, 12:39 »
0
Images should get a best match position based ONLY on merit, the more commercial, the better and the more DLs,  only then does an image deserve to jump in best match. Never because it exclusive or non-exclusive, this and that.
Buyers dont care one way or the another,  the prime and most important aspect is that buyers find their shots, quick, nice and easy and without having to wade through pages or irrelevant rubbish only for the sake of it.

« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2010, 12:43 »
0
Images should get a best match position based ONLY on merit, the more commercial, the better and the more DLs,  only then does an image deserve to jump in best match. Never because it exclusive or non-exclusive, ...

That is what I have always thought and I think it's bad business that exclusives get rewarded just because they are exclusive, not because their files are any better. Which to me seems so totally ridiculous because Getty makes more profit on independent best-selling photos than they do mediocre-selling exclusive photos. But hey whatever, they have all the big bucks and they know what they are doing. <cough>

« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2010, 12:48 »
0
It looks like the new best match may intend to increase the downloads for the non-exclusives and keep the non-excl prices affordable for buyers. The change of the non-excl cannister levels won't cost Istock more money while it wants to please the exclusives by giving them even more money by selling their images at higher prices.

« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2010, 12:50 »
0
... Getty makes more profit on independent best-selling photos than they do mediocre-selling exclusive photos. But hey whatever, they have all the big bucks and they know what they are doing. <cough>

No, that's not correct. iStock profits the least  amount from licensing a non-exclusive image, albeit the difference in is marginal.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2010, 12:55 by sharply_done »

« Reply #17 on: May 17, 2010, 13:01 »
0
Images should get a best match position based ONLY on merit, the more commercial, the better and the more DLs,  only then does an image deserve to jump in best match. Never because it exclusive or non-exclusive, ...

That is what I have always thought and I think it's bad business that exclusives get rewarded just because they are exclusive, not because their files are any better. Which to me seems so totally ridiculous because Getty makes more profit on independent best-selling photos than they do mediocre-selling exclusive photos. But hey whatever, they have all the big bucks and they know what they are doing. <cough>

Mmm...  Exclusives are making a huge sacrifice and commitment to IS.  Don't they deserve an advantage over non-exclusives? I think they do.

« Reply #18 on: May 17, 2010, 13:02 »
0
Well OK, that might be correct. BEFORE the last big price jump on exclusive files, I was correct. Now that Getty is charging more for exclusive files, they have offset the extra 20% they pay exclusives over nons.

And if your/IS's chart is correct, Getty isn't wanting to be keeping non-exclusives around much longer, will they?

« Reply #19 on: May 17, 2010, 13:09 »
0
Mmm...  Exclusives are making a huge sacrifice and commitment to IS.  Don't they deserve an advantage over non-exclusives? I think they do.

Oh boy here we go again. I never said exclusives didn't deserve an advantage. Explain to me what business sense it makes to put a best-selling non-ex photo in the best match behind a non- or mediocre-selling exclusive file? Exclusive perks can come in many ways, but seeings how Getty is all about profits and bottom line, to me, that doesn't make sense. Does it to you? If so, please explain. And your chart clearly shows they make way more profit on larger sizes non-ex than ex. What if they compare Diamond non-ex to Diamond ex? Doesn't seem like they are comparing apples to apples.

ETA change ahead of to behind, sorry about that, mispoke
« Last Edit: May 17, 2010, 13:18 by cclapper »

« Reply #20 on: May 17, 2010, 13:10 »
0
No, that's not correct. iStock profits the least  amount from licensing a non-exclusive image, albeit the difference in is marginal.

Interesting. The minute difference in profit margin between Exc & Non-Exc images suggests that the price structure was specifically designed to create that effect.

Of course IS make an even higher margin on Exc images from contributors with lower canister levels.

« Reply #21 on: May 17, 2010, 13:56 »
0
Rene, at least you don't have to deal with many agencies. You just have to work with IS, and you can focus on your portfolio to make it perfect looking with lightboxes and other nice things.

« Reply #22 on: May 17, 2010, 15:20 »
0
Just wanted to point out two things that have been going on over the last few weeks - a big ripple in the best match (nothing like best match 2.0, but some people have felt a big change in downloads) and seasonal changes (that March was acknowledged to be the Spring high point for the site as a whole when an admin said that although April was below March, as it had historically been, April '10 was up from April '09)

One of the things I contended with back when I went exclusive was the chaos of search engine changes prior to best match 2.0 and things were just awful for a few months. If I hadn't been committed to give exclusivity a serious effort, I'd have bailed after two month. Until you can compare a month with the year prior, it's really hard to make comparisons.

I don't know how long you've been building a portfolio on IS, but I've seen lots of oldies but goodies resurfacing in the last best match jiggle. People with newer portfolios seemed to be overly represented in the group who were hit negatively by the best match changes.

« Reply #23 on: May 17, 2010, 15:46 »
0
My theory on the best match search is that if they screw it up too much, people will just use the other search options. That's what I used to do when I didn't like its results, but maybe I'm a rebel. I also like to color outside the lines.  ;D

« Reply #24 on: May 17, 2010, 16:07 »
0
Thanks for this feedback! Nice to know that there has been an overall benefit for you.

there you are.  I was hoping you would see this thread :)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
59 Replies
27349 Views
Last post August 30, 2012, 15:20
by graphxt
2 Replies
3088 Views
Last post January 23, 2013, 16:14
by CD123
23 Replies
7478 Views
Last post September 24, 2013, 17:20
by ShadySue
Sales on Stock Fresh

Started by Goofy StockFresh

16 Replies
8129 Views
Last post July 31, 2014, 22:54
by PixelBytes
6 Replies
8310 Views
Last post May 22, 2017, 06:06
by zsooofija

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors