Author Topic: Other potential new markets and how to open them up ....... (Read 8695 times)

DWL · « **on:** June 26, 2009, 09:55 »

I posted some thoughts on my blog about potential new markets and how we can open them up, then I posted some comments in another thread, but did not want to hijack it so here are some thoughts.

The Blog Text:
There are many services being launched around the Digital Artists Assets, many are just new sites that are just mirrors and mimic the existing big players business models, many of these services will fail quickly, because the market is already saturated with these services which do not have a unique selling point, all are trying for a share of the existing revenue pool which causes dilution and artists commission or royalties to be cut, where are the new ideas and markets going to come from?

Lets look at potentially the biggest untapped market, blog and article writers, I wrote the blog entry offline with Microsoft’s Live Writer, a picture replaces many words and will attract the viewers attention, so what if I needed an image to emphasise that many of these new services will fail?

I will need to join a stock imaging site buy credits or a subscription package for a couple of web sized images.

Ok off I go to Istock and enter the search “Failed Online Business”, the search returns 108 search results for Failure AND The Internet (Technology) AND Business.

After registration I choose a “Pay as you Go” plan, the option I choose is the lowest available, 12 Credits for £14.00, so that is £1.16 a Credit, I now download two images I had added to a lightbox, to be used in my post on the future of many of these new and existing services and their programmers.

These are the two I have chosen all I needed was XS and paid 1 credit for each.
<<< Blog with the Images http://tinyurl.com/mxtr9f >>>

But what if I did not have £14 to spare, or could not be bothered to go to the website, login, search and download, the Digital Artists and website owners have lost a needed Sale.

How could this be addressed when what I really want as an article writer or blogger is a simple way to add an image to my post with the least effort.

A “Pay as you Go” system that uses the PayPal micropayments system for verified users in real time, with a plug-in for my browser and desktop applications like Live Writer and Microsoft’s office suite to deliver the Digital Assets in real time.

I would gladly pay £2.32 instantly to enhance a presentation, article or blog post, but I am not always up to paying £14.00 up-front for credits I will use over a period of time.

Think of the potential asset use with this untapped market waiting for a simple asset delivery system, one which is fair to all artists and end users alike, and how much illegal use would such a system quickly stop?.

Phil asked this question on the other thread

Quote from: Phil

hi, just read your blog and I think integration with software will have to come (with a cut for the software producer), but then fotolia has agents / partners etc how hard would it be for software producer to get the agents cut. Thinking about I bet there are some software producers who would definetly be keen.

The question springs to mind, how much extra would you be willing to pay to buy a single (or two) credits? (I'm not a buyer so dont know) would you, knowing you only want xsmall say pay 1.5 or 2 rather than 1.16 (sorry cant do the symbol ) knowing that buying 12 credits gets them at 1.16 each. Would this cover the extra costs to the agency?

Phil

I would be happy to be able to insert an image for £1.5 into a presentation, article or blog, via a software or browser plug-in, what do others think?

PayPal have a business relationship with Ebay, why not have somthing to deliver Digital Assets with the same PayPal relationship?

David

astrocady · « **Reply #1 on:** June 26, 2009, 11:07 »

Interesting concept. As a part-time web designer, I understand where you're coming from. As an istock contributor, it is ease for me to go there convert my account balance to just the number of credits I need for that small pix I need for a web site. But as it may be some time before I need another one, I would not purchase 12 credits at a time.

I may be the "hassle" factor, rather than the cost, that drive people to swipe pix from google image search for their blog or website.

Adeptris · « **Reply #2 on:** June 26, 2009, 12:57 »

Quote from: astrocady on June 26, 2009, 11:07

I may be the "hassle" factor, rather than the cost, that drive people to swipe pix from google image search for their blog or website.

I agree, there will always be some that will rip off an image, if there was a plug-in promoted by companies like Microsoft for their software and browsers plug-in's for firefox etc many would follow, it would be harder for users to say, "I did not know", there is far less ripping off music now and with a $1m fine last week for a file sharing user many more should be aware.

I do think the "hassle" factor is one element but also many users have never heard of microstock, why should they have?

With a plug-in it would be part of the application or software rather than somewhere you have to find out about, how many photographers were aware or had heard of microstock before they read the "upload your snaps and retire" articles?

David (is Adeptris and DWL)

PixelBytes · « **Reply #3 on:** June 26, 2009, 13:01 »

This sounds like a really good idea David. What are your plans to follow up and market the concept?

I would say approaching browser manufacturers and micro sites would be a start.

As you mentioned, microsoft already includes some Fotolia images in its office suite. Unfortunately those are freebies donated to the application. It would be better to work something out like you are suggesting where artist and agency both benefit from a micro payment.

Adeptris · « **Reply #4 on:** June 26, 2009, 13:21 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on June 26, 2009, 13:01

This sounds like a really good idea David. What are your plans to follow up and market the concept?

None just to act as a think tank and to discuss the concept and see what other think, there are many clever business people that read these forums, maybe one of these will pick up the idea and run with it, agencies have the tools to make it happen quickly and for a smaller investment, but it would be bad if just one smaller agency was involved, we are only talking web sized images.

The problem is the industry is too fragmented and there are organisations for the traditional stock sites that will not include the microsites, let’s hope sooner or later they will not be able to ignore them and give them a voice.

To make life easier there needs to be some standard rules for images, as much as some photographers hate categories and the controlled vocabulary, if there was a globally accepted format then this would benefit all photographers and agencies, acceptable image sizes should also be standard, so some sort of regulation would be a good thing as photographers and their customers would know what to expect.

Until this happens we can only float ideas and hope someone that can action them is watching.

David

Phil · « **Reply #5 on:** June 26, 2009, 15:53 »

Hi,

thought some more.

re buying 1 credit, David had mentioned that it was prohibitive to do so with fees etc. I had assumed (obviously wrongly) that the buy 10 credits type thing was to, make sure the agency got a decent sale, encourage people to come back as they had credits left etc. Arent the fees just a percentage? so it would be the same whether you buy a single credit or a thousand?

re software integration, the agency I see really set for this is veer as they have offerings from both micro and macro and could do it without offending so many people from either schools of thought (but then I suppose does it matter if you offend them, its the buyers that matter, and I dont see too many people paying macro prices for blog images).

re what to do, I think every agency reads this forum? should be enough to post here and let some smart agency say thats a good idea

Phil

Adeptris · « **Reply #6 on:** June 27, 2009, 03:01 »

Quote from: astrocady on June 26, 2009, 11:07

As an istock contributor, it is ease for me to go there convert my account balance to just the number of credits I need for that small pix I need for a web site.

The website owners just love these transactions, Istock have a basic commission of 26% and an earnings conversion rate of $1 = 1 Credit, but for ease lets round things and say your $1.00 of earnings came from 4 x $1 sales so we have the $4 of sales revenue, you then convert earnings and download an image, Istock now have $5 of transaction revenue after moving the $1 commission liability to sales revenue, and they will now only ever payout just $0.26 for $5 and not $1.30, a real commission of just over 5%.

David

astrocady · « **Reply #7 on:** June 27, 2009, 08:36 »

Quote from: Adeptris on June 27, 2009, 03:01

Quote from: astrocady on June 26, 2009, 11:07
As an istock contributor, it is ease for me to go there convert my account balance to just the number of credits I need for that small pix I need for a web site.
The website owners just love these transactions, Istock have a basic commission of 26% and an earnings conversion rate of $1 = 1 Credit, but for ease lets round things and say your $1.00 of earnings came from 4 x $1 sales so we have the $4 of sales revenue, you then convert earnings and download an image, Istock now have $5 of transaction revenue after moving the $1 commission liability to sales revenue, and they will now only ever payout just $0.26 for $5 and not $1.30, a real commission of just over 5%.

David

That is true, but how would it be any different if I took a payout and then used that money to purchase credits from istock to buy the pix I need? They still make the same profit and I still make the same piddling commission.

The only advantage is the hassle factor. It's easy and quick for me.

Or course I don't buy very many -- I usually shoot my own -- but often it's cheaper for the client if I use microstock.

Microbius · « **Reply #8 on:** June 29, 2009, 05:25 »

Isn't this what Adobe Bridge does for designers using Dreamweaver or InDesign? you can search and download stock images right into your design software (users please chime in if i'm wrong)

astrocady · « **Reply #9 on:** June 29, 2009, 09:50 »

Bridge only lets you search for pix on your own computer (or local network, if you have one). It does not reach out to stock agencies.

Phil · « **Reply #10 on:** June 29, 2009, 19:49 »

Quote from: Microbius on June 29, 2009, 05:25

Isn't this what Adobe Bridge does for designers using Dreamweaver or InDesign? you can search and download stock images right into your design software (users please chime in if i'm wrong)

adobe canned it. It linked in only JI and Getty (I think) and there were lots of issues (but I didnt follow what they were)

Microbius · « **Reply #11 on:** June 30, 2009, 07:22 »

That explains it! I clearly remember a you tube video that showed someone using it to search for stock photos. I've only ever used it as a browser for searching my computer so didn't know how to do it in any case, now it's been canned I don't need to learn

Edit. update: defo canned 1st April 2008

Phil · « **Reply #12 on:** July 08, 2009, 00:39 »

just been looking at panthermedia they have put you image in your shopping cart and go to checkout without buying a credit package. around $2 for this or credit package is around $1.40 per credit for 10 credits.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors