MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: No regular sales in stats  (Read 20306 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #125 on: November 27, 2013, 06:55 »
+2
I agree, I remember you saying that they weren't worth your time etc you even reported very low sales on those newest files, are you back resuming because of ThinkStock?

Yes.

There's also the unknowable: if things change and recent files start to sell, then I'd miss the boat if I didn't have them there (that's been the rationale for some minor sites down the year... not that it's really paid off).

With TS performing, it looks as if the return on uploading effort should at least be tolerable.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2013, 07:00 by BaldricksTrousers »


Ron

« Reply #126 on: November 27, 2013, 07:05 »
0
I couldn't agree more with Lisa's post above.

And in addition to that, I would invite everyone to calculate their RPD in October - calculated as total earnings / no. of downloads including both regular sales and subscriptions, and pp where available.

In my case, it is surprisingly similar for the 3 major sites (SS, IS, FT); and actually lower for many of the smaller sites. And RPD seems like a quite objective index to me, not subject to easy manipulation as RPI.

So it's neither moral nor immoral, it's simply irrelevant - for me at least - to continue to hate or love any particular site based on what we repeat over and over to ourselves on forums: a reality check - updated at regular intervals, as things change over time - is needed if we wish to make sound business decisions instead of keep quarreling with fellow photographers.

Completely agree!

Morality has nothing with your or my business,especially in microstock, we are not taking someone's land to build there our own business...
But the attitude that we present here is something quite different...
Attitude with interest on first place is visible today in many aspects of society... That is main cause of crisis...
You were  one of several people to link uploading with ignoring our principles !

Ron

« Reply #127 on: November 27, 2013, 07:05 »
0
It had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with morality. It was always about self-interest. There have really only ever been two considerations: can I (or we) put sufficient pressure on iStock to persuade them to stop doing things that we consider are against our interests; and does making our work available to iStock risk destroying the value of that work (e.g. if it is effectively orphaned on Google Drive, devalued by price changes or whatever).

It is perfectly rational to decide to try to protect your interests by not uploading if you conclude the effort is not worth the return, and it is rational to resume uploading if the apparent rate of return changes. Similarly, if you calculate that any loss you might suffer from Google Drive is less than the profit from remaining with iStock, it is rational to stay on.

I think people are confusing morality with indignation. There's been a lot of anger and indignation over perceived injustices towards suppliers, such as cutting commissions or forcing images into one collection or another, but that's purely the reaction of people who feel they are being exploited. Nobody is making sacrifices for the sake of others, though a few may be sacrificing potential earnings because they feel insulted and abused, and have other income so they can afford to tell GI where to shove it.

For most of us, I'm pretty sure it's not love or hate, it's just about the money.
Well said, thank you.

« Reply #128 on: November 27, 2013, 09:00 »
+2
I couldn't agree more with Lisa's post above.

And in addition to that, I would invite everyone to calculate their RPD in October - calculated as total earnings / no. of downloads including both regular sales and subscriptions, and pp where available.

In my case, it is surprisingly similar for the 3 major sites (SS, IS, FT); and actually lower for many of the smaller sites. And RPD seems like a quite objective index to me, not subject to easy manipulation as RPI.

So it's neither moral nor immoral, it's simply irrelevant - for me at least - to continue to hate or love any particular site based on what we repeat over and over to ourselves on forums: a reality check - updated at regular intervals, as things change over time - is needed if we wish to make sound business decisions instead of keep quarreling with fellow photographers.

Completely agree!

Morality has nothing with your or my business,especially in microstock, we are not taking someone's land to build there our own business...
But the attitude that we present here is something quite different...
Attitude with interest on first place is visible today in many aspects of society... That is main cause of crisis...
You were  one of several people to link uploading with ignoring our principles !

Who is ignoring those principles today, me or people who claimed that they had stopped upload ...?

My facts:

1. I've stopped upload to iStock this July. My plan was to upload eventually old pictures to them, one year later.
2. I was against deleting of iStock's portfolios because I think it is not effective and won't harm iStock, my portfolio is my effort and even without uploading of new images will bring me some money, it is my passive work.
3. My idea was to promote stronger other "friendly agencies" with better deals for us, and on some indirect way a possibility how to redirect buyers from iStock, so some kind of "positive antimarketing" for IS... If we act together it could be some results...


So, how could I be a traitor to your principles, that was not even my principles, and who is resuming these days upload again to iStock,? Is it me or some big iStock enemies who supposedly were deleted their portfolios?

Good old cynicism maybe would kill each good debate here in the future ...
But surely, every action together!

P.S.
I don't blame anyone for resuming upload to IS... Only attacks full of cynicism on others...
« Last Edit: November 27, 2013, 09:38 by borg »

Ron

« Reply #129 on: November 27, 2013, 10:03 »
+1
No, you are missing the point or not understanding me. It has nothing to do with principles or morals, but you made it sound it was. I said it was about making money, you said money was related to principle. You made it about morals, not me.

lisafx

« Reply #130 on: November 27, 2013, 11:01 »
0
It had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with morality. It was always about self-interest. There have really only ever been two considerations: can I (or we) put sufficient pressure on iStock to persuade them to stop doing things that we consider are against our interests; and does making our work available to iStock risk destroying the value of that work (e.g. if it is effectively orphaned on Google Drive, devalued by price changes or whatever).

It is perfectly rational to decide to try to protect your interests by not uploading if you conclude the effort is not worth the return, and it is rational to resume uploading if the apparent rate of return changes. Similarly, if you calculate that any loss you might suffer from Google Drive is less than the profit from remaining with iStock, it is rational to stay on.

I think people are confusing morality with indignation. There's been a lot of anger and indignation over perceived injustices towards suppliers, such as cutting commissions or forcing images into one collection or another, but that's purely the reaction of people who feel they are being exploited. Nobody is making sacrifices for the sake of others, though a few may be sacrificing potential earnings because they feel insulted and abused, and have other income so they can afford to tell GI where to shove it.

For most of us, I'm pretty sure it's not love or hate, it's just about the money.

Excellent summation!  I agree 100%

« Reply #131 on: November 27, 2013, 13:12 »
0
No, you are missing the point or not understanding me. It has nothing to do with principles or morals, but you made it sound it was. I said it was about making money, you said money was related to principle. You made it about morals, not me.

Ok! Thank you for clarification...

I remember only several attacks on my opinion when "iStock problem" was actual... Now many of those people who blamed me, are again close to iStock, "just because of money"...

So we can agree that money could not be related with principle but in this case I feel that is more related with personal guilt, and money comes just a comfort or an good explanation...
Fortunately this is a business where your or my decision won't harm others... We can lose only confidence among us...

P.S.
Many times in my job I've seen  how greed can find justification in term "caring for the family"!
Hopefully in this business there is no directly enough space for such undercover "dark side" of people!

True danger is that MSG forum might be good only for topics such as "How was your last month"!?


« Last Edit: November 27, 2013, 13:25 by borg »

lisafx

« Reply #132 on: November 27, 2013, 13:24 »
+1
No, you are missing the point or not understanding me. It has nothing to do with principles or morals, but you made it sound it was. I said it was about making money, you said money was related to principle. You made it about morals, not me.

Ok! Thank you for clarification...

I remember only several attacks on my opinion when "iStock problem" was actual... Now many of those people who blamed me, are again close to iStock, "just because of money"...

So we can agree that money is not related with principle but in this case I feel that is more related with personal guilt, and money is just a comfort or good explanation someone, because of that...
Fortunately this is a business where your or my decision won't harm others... We can lose only confidence among us...

Many times on my job I've seen how thievery or greed can find justification in term "caring for the family"!
Hopefully in this business there is no directly enough space for such undercover "dark side" of people!


Borg, I am really confused by your posts.  Ron suggested you were making this about morals, or principles, and you claimed you weren't.  Now you post the above highlighted opinion.  Terms like "dark side of people" along with "thievery" and "greed" are very loaded terms.  They certainly sound judgmental. 

You are entitled to your opinion, but if you are going to keep handing down moral judgments on the actions of others, then why keep denying that's what you're doing?   

« Reply #133 on: November 27, 2013, 13:35 »
-2
4
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 00:30 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #134 on: November 27, 2013, 13:39 »
+1
Lisa I don't blame anyone but I don't like double standards...

P.S.
Sorry on extreme terms, that was just as an example how far it can go... We all feel greed of agencies as an other example...
I just don't want to be like them...
I don't judge anyone, it's your business, so please forget this all...

In future I will talk only about "practical" information... :-\
Now I'm glad that I did not, because solidarity, wipe my iStock portfolio ...
I will avoid every collective action here...
« Last Edit: November 27, 2013, 14:15 by borg »

lisafx

« Reply #135 on: November 27, 2013, 17:08 »
0

Now I'm glad that I did not, because solidarity, wipe my iStock portfolio ...
I will avoid every collective action here...

I'm glad you didn't "wipe" your Istock portfolio because of solidarity too.  A good reason to take any action, collective or otherwise, is if you are strongly in favor of it and/or think you can affect some change that you will ultimately benefit from. 

Baldrickstrousers expressed it perfectly a couple of posts up. 
« Last Edit: November 27, 2013, 17:10 by lisafx »

« Reply #136 on: November 27, 2013, 17:15 »
+1
Have to agree with Ron et al.  If some element of the site produces a return it would be nuts not to put your stuff up there.  Why does it have to be such a complete pain though?  Even with full IPTC and deep meta it is such a chore that I haven't got around to recent material or the very small number of images that actually sell well, never mind about the rest...

« Reply #137 on: November 27, 2013, 18:47 »
+1
I agree, I remember you saying that they weren't worth your time etc you even reported very low sales on those newest files, are you back resuming because of ThinkStock?

Yes.

There's also the unknowable: if things change and recent files start to sell, then I'd miss the boat if I didn't have them there (that's been the rationale for some minor sites down the year... not that it's really paid off).

With TS performing, it looks as if the return on uploading effort should at least be tolerable.

One of the key questions that needs answering is can we expect the same boost in sales each month or was this an isolated deal....Getty 360 that is.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #138 on: November 27, 2013, 18:54 »
0
^^ Getty 360 is an ongoing deal, which has been operational since August at least (that's when I got my first and only G360 sale).

« Reply #139 on: November 27, 2013, 18:55 »
0
4
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 00:30 by Audi 5000 »

mlwinphoto

« Reply #140 on: November 27, 2013, 19:47 »
0
And it's a terrible, terrible deal for contributors.

Well, if you're being serious rather than sarcastic, I actually agree with you.

« Reply #141 on: November 27, 2013, 19:52 »
0
4
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 00:29 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #142 on: November 28, 2013, 04:57 »
0
And it's a terrible, terrible deal for contributors.

Well, if you're being serious rather than sarcastic, I actually agree with you.
If you are making 15% at iStock then it seems like a good deal, if you're making 20% maybe it's not so great a deal?

Maybe that could be a "syndrome of kidnapping", known as the Stockholm Syndrome ...

The kidnapper took everything to the abducted individual, from freedom to food, but after some time kidnapper give him a crust of bread for example, but still in captivity ...
After that act the hijacked person began to love his kidnappers strongly...

Sorry on sarcasm and tough comparison!
« Last Edit: November 28, 2013, 04:59 by borg »

« Reply #143 on: November 28, 2013, 05:25 »
+2
I might just be a hobbyist at best but, I'm not sure why we'd be arguing about the policies of istock. We're all in the same boat are some people naive?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #144 on: November 28, 2013, 07:18 »
+1
The loupe is back just as annoying as before (e.g. popping up when I'm trying to do something else, making it difficult to click on a file if you want to, etc).
I hope buyers know they can switch it off.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2013, 07:44 by ShadySue »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #145 on: November 29, 2013, 15:24 »
+2
Stats due to come back later, but in phases. Seems they're going to be updating totals for all years over the next few days  ???:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=357892&page=1#post6962956
A bit scary, but I'll hope for the best. :-\

« Reply #146 on: November 29, 2013, 16:13 »
0
Stats due to come back later, but in phases. Seems they're going to be updating totals for all years over the next few days  ???:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=357892&page=1#post6962956
A bit scary, but I'll hope for the best. :-\


Does that mean there is something wrong with what is reported before Oct 2013?

It will be nice to have things working properly if/when that is the case.

« Reply #147 on: November 29, 2013, 16:26 »
0
I hope there's nothing wrong with earlier stats, because they are talking about going back right to the start. My wild and unfounded guess is that they have rewritten some code and want the whole data set to be organised in the same way.  Mind you, I wouldn't mind if they decide to stick a few thousand dollars in missed sales into my account.

I'm waiting with bated breath...

« Reply #148 on: November 29, 2013, 18:47 »
0
When is "afternoon" at iStock?

« Reply #149 on: November 29, 2013, 18:52 »
0
I think now :) Sales posted till November 27th


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
6200 Views
Last post February 28, 2007, 16:06
by madelaide
5 Replies
5099 Views
Last post March 12, 2011, 05:41
by Niakris
Sales Stats on 123

Started by dbvirago 123RF

22 Replies
4118 Views
Last post April 04, 2013, 05:34
by fotografer
23 Replies
6073 Views
Last post February 12, 2016, 02:26
by skyfish
1 Replies
1432 Views
Last post July 22, 2016, 12:42
by FloridaPhotos

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle