pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Microstock Agency- made by photographers (by you). Let`s start?  (Read 20015 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: July 17, 2016, 08:38 »
0
deleted
« Last Edit: January 09, 2020, 10:44 by hellou »


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #51 on: July 17, 2016, 08:45 »
+3
You understand that more than 90% of all business are small business. All should close down because they can not spend millions for ads?

You understand that half of small businesses in the UK fail in their first five years?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businessclub/11174584/Half-of-UK-start-ups-fail-within-five-years.html
and 20% fail in their first year, even despite start up loans/grants/etc.
http://www.businesszone.co.uk/community-voice/blogs/colin-willman/business-start-upswhy-do-so-many-fail
And here are the top five reasons:
1. No business need
2. Not enough cash
3. Not the right team
4. Ignoring the competition
5. Pricing/cost issues
http://www.intuit.co.uk/r/small-business-survival/5-reasons-startup-businesses-fail-and-what-to-do-about-it


1. no

Please explain what business need is served by a new stock agency.

Quote
2. costs shared by all contributors a $4 (around 2000 photos)

You think you can launch a worldwide stock agency with $8000? really?

Quote
3. We are the team.

We don't really know anything about each other. Any of us could be swindlers, bankrupts etc.

Quote
4. We are the most important part of our competition. We know it.

That doesn't even mean anything.

Quote
5. see point 2

Point 5 isn't the same as point 2. It's about pricing issues of the product, compared to the competition.
Did you read the articles?
« Last Edit: July 17, 2016, 18:14 by ShadySue »

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Good New For You
« Reply #52 on: July 17, 2016, 08:50 »
+1
Your idea sounds good. However photographers have been lied by Leo and Symbiostock recently!!! You must give much more proves about your site.

Not my site. Our site. But sadly i noticed  there`s no way to start something like that at MSG.
So let`s wait for "another bruce". Maybe we just have to wait a few years.  :)

You got it. There are some nice, intelligent, and talented people here but working as a team toward a common goal hasn't been a strong point. There's little unity.

Which is why every time someone comes here and suggests a co-op, union, or anything else that requires organizing a team, this is usually how it ends up.

So yes, this group really needs a leader with a ready-made business like a Stocksy.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #53 on: July 17, 2016, 08:51 »
+3
If Yu-know who couldn't do it, and had to go crawling back to Getty, that's an indication of how difficult it would be. He's not afraid to speculate to accumulate.

« Reply #54 on: July 17, 2016, 08:53 »
0
You understand that more than 90% of all business are small business. All should close down because they can not spend millions for ads?

You hnderstand that half of small businesses in the UK fail in their first five years?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businessclub/11174584/Half-of-UK-start-ups-fail-within-five-years.html
and 20% fail in their first year, even despite start up loans/grants/etc.
http://www.businesszone.co.uk/community-voice/blogs/colin-willman/business-start-upswhy-do-so-many-fail
And here are the top five reasons:
1. No business need
2. Not enough cash
3. Not the right team
4. Ignoring the competition
5. Pricing/cost issues
http://www.intuit.co.uk/r/small-business-survival/5-reasons-startup-businesses-fail-and-what-to-do-about-it


1. no
Please explain what business need is served by a new stock agency.

2. costs shared by all contributors a $4 (around 2000 photos)
You think you can launch a worldwide stock agency with $8000? really?

3. We are the team.
We don't really know anything about each other. Any of us could be swindlers, bankrupts etc.

4. We are the most important part of our competition. We know it.
That doesn't even mean anything.
5. see point 2
Point 5 isn't the same as point 2. It's about pricing issues of the product, compared to the competition.
Did you read the articles?



1. If you do not like to start a agency for a better future, please stop waste my time. Clearly you are not interested, but please.
2. Yes, this are the costs for hosting by leading cloud-hostings.
3. And if you are an alien, who cares. If you go out of business and live on a island the agency business still continous.
4. What you talking about? If we don`t know no one does!
Please google this questions by yourself. This for BWL studies in the first year.

« Reply #55 on: July 17, 2016, 08:57 »
0
Your idea sounds good. However photographers have been lied by Leo and Symbiostock recently!!! You must give much more proves about your site.

Not my site. Our site. But sadly i noticed  there`s no way to start something like that at MSG.
So let`s wait for "another bruce". Maybe we just have to wait a few years.  :)

You got it. There are some nice, intelligent, and talented people here but working as a team toward a common goal hasn't been a strong point. There's little unity.

Which is why every time someone comes here and suggests a co-op, union, or anything else that requires organizing a team, this is usually how it ends up.

So yes, this group really needs a leader with a ready-made business like a Stocksy.

You are right. I know it was a bad idea try to collect wishes and ideas for a agency. Try to create a team. The only way is a ready-to-go solution.
But iam sure, if someone has to do everything alone or with investors the result will not be this perfect. Perfect for us photographers..
Nice try :)

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #56 on: July 17, 2016, 09:02 »
+4
I'm out of this discussion.
It's nice to be young and idealistic. I was 16 once myself!

If you are going to insult anyone who asks you reasonable due diligence questions, you're not going to get very far.
H*ll, you're even anonymous. What credibility does that give you?

You think your only start-up costs would be cloud hosting? You also need advertising and at least one international law expert employed to advise on things like IP in different countries, VAT rules etc etc etc.
How are you going to get your site translated into other languages? That costs.

As the Dragons say, "for these reasons, I'm out".

BTW, according to this article, 96% of new US companies fail in their first ten years.
http://www.inc.com/bill-carmody/why-96-of-businesses-fail-within-10-years.html
« Last Edit: July 17, 2016, 09:12 by ShadySue »

« Reply #57 on: July 17, 2016, 09:15 »
0
deleted
« Last Edit: January 09, 2020, 10:45 by hellou »

« Reply #58 on: July 17, 2016, 09:21 »
+7
Well, that was fun ( and the expected result ).

« Reply #59 on: July 17, 2016, 09:31 »
0
Well, that was fun ( and the expected result ).

Exactly.  LOL!!

« Reply #60 on: July 17, 2016, 10:14 »
+1
If Yu-know who couldn't do it, and had to go crawling back to Getty, that's an indication of how difficult it would be. He's not afraid to speculate to accumulate.
I don't think he went crawling back to Getty, I think they made him an offer he couldn't refuse.  And his site wasn't open to others, so it wasn't an attempt at a co-op.

« Reply #61 on: July 17, 2016, 10:44 »
+5
...The second thing is that it isn't just about what sales you are getting right now - it is also about making a clear wedge in your reliance on third parties. Whether that turns out to be highly profitable or just break even, your effort is going towards something worthwhile.
...

I don't understand this. Surely contributors are still relying on a third party, you. They are just having to pay for their own hosting. If I remember correctly you even exert some editorial control on content uploaded to contributors' sites if they want to be on the network.

Or this statement on your site:

"Welcome to Symzio, the first completely contributor controlled
stock photo, vector and video licensing agency
"

How is it contributor controlled exactly? let alone completely contributor controlled (the "completely" has to false right? as you actually have some (all?) control on the direction the project goes in?) Are contributors even co-owners or anything? Do contributors get to vote on terms or changes? Genuinely, I don't know as I have not been in the loop on this. What does the statement mean? is it just that contributors get to pay for their hosting?

None of these are criticisms, I just think that Symbiostock is not really an agency, I can't really see how it is different from any other third party platform that people set up sites on to sell their own work.

A contributor controlled agency that works needs to be a proper company with one site.


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #62 on: July 17, 2016, 11:29 »
+1
If Yu-know who couldn't do it, and had to go crawling back to Getty, that's an indication of how difficult it would be. He's not afraid to speculate to accumulate.
I don't think he went crawling back to Getty, I think they made him an offer he couldn't refuse.  And his site wasn't open to others, so it wasn't an attempt at a co-op.
I agree on both points, but the fact is, if he couldn't refuse Getty's offer (which I'm assuming wasn't 101%), with all his gift for publicity and apparent vast wads of cash, most of us would fall at the first hurdle. Note, I said 'most', I didn't say 'all'.

« Reply #63 on: July 17, 2016, 14:24 »
+1
What's needed is another bruce to start up a more inclusive version.

bruce who? lee? he is dead and does not know squat about running a microstock company :)
and don't say the other bruce who sold ss's only real contender
 and left everyone with the litter box :P
...
and the one ss is soon to emulate with all the ex's being parachuted to ss
who are not ruining running ss like a well-oiled machine in our you-know-where
« Last Edit: July 17, 2016, 14:27 by etudiante_rapide »

« Reply #64 on: July 17, 2016, 14:30 »
+2
What's needed is another bruce to start up a more inclusive version.

bruce who? lee? he is dead and does not know squat about running a microstock company :)
and don't say the other bruce who sold ss's only real contender
 and left everyone with the litter box :P
...
and the one ss is soon to emulate with all the ex's being parachuted to ss
who are not ruining running ss like a well-oiled machine in our you-know-where
I like to think he is is making amends having seen what getty did to his baby

« Reply #65 on: July 17, 2016, 17:01 »
0
What's needed is another bruce to start up a more inclusive version.

bruce who? lee? he is dead and does not know squat about running a microstock company :)
and don't say the other bruce who sold ss's only real contender
 and left everyone with the litter box :P
...
and the one ss is soon to emulate with all the ex's being parachuted to ss
who are not ruining running ss like a well-oiled machine in our you-know-where
I like to think he is is making amends having seen what getty did to his baby

but what's there to amend? being a deadbeat dad made him very very rich!

« Reply #66 on: July 17, 2016, 17:52 »
+2
What's needed is another bruce to start up a more inclusive version.

bruce who? lee? he is dead and does not know squat about running a microstock company :)
and don't say the other bruce who sold ss's only real contender
 and left everyone with the litter box :P
...
and the one ss is soon to emulate with all the ex's being parachuted to ss
who are not ruining running ss like a well-oiled machine in our you-know-where
I like to think he is is making amends having seen what getty did to his baby

but what's there to amend? being a deadbeat dad made him very very rich!
I don't see what he did as a bad thing.  He sold out to Getty but most people would for the money he was being offered.  He acknowledged that the low percentage istock was paying contributors was a mistake and Stocksy is about as far away from istock as it could be.  Would of been great if he had got it right the first time but now Stocksy is one of a very few sites that pay contributors a fair cut and makes them money.

« Reply #67 on: July 17, 2016, 17:56 »
+1
What I understood: We (the contributors) would be the team.
What I didn't understand: Who would do the work (administration, marketing...) in that agency? We (the team)? And who would contribute?
« Last Edit: July 17, 2016, 18:03 by ingwio »

« Reply #68 on: July 17, 2016, 18:09 »
0
What's needed is another bruce to start up a more inclusive version.

bruce who? lee? he is dead and does not know squat about running a microstock company :)
and don't say the other bruce who sold ss's only real contender
 and left everyone with the litter box :P
...
and the one ss is soon to emulate with all the ex's being parachuted to ss
who are not ruining running ss like a well-oiled machine in our you-know-where
I like to think he is is making amends having seen what getty did to his baby

but what's there to amend? being a deadbeat dad made him very very rich!
I don't see what he did as a bad thing.  He sold out to Getty but most people would for the money he was being offered.  He acknowledged that the low percentage istock was paying contributors was a mistake and Stocksy is about as far away from istock as it could be.  Would of been great if he had got it right the first time but now Stocksy is one of a very few sites that pay contributors a fair cut and makes them money.

you're full of compassion.
so if Oringer does the same thing and you will say it's not a bad thing too LOL

« Reply #69 on: July 18, 2016, 03:30 »
+4
What I understood: We (the contributors) would be the team.
What I didn't understand: Who would do the work (administration, marketing...) in that agency? We (the team)? And who would contribute?

There would have to be a team running it. Contributors/ owners would be paid per download and additionally at the end of the year profits would also be divided between contributors.

The CEO and other staff would have to be paid a basic wage and then a percentage of profits too up to certain level (performance related).

Again there are models for this out there, but it would take someone with a lot of experience and seed capital to get it started. What it couldn't be is a big group of contributors farting about pulling the project all over the place or one person trying to get it off the ground listening to every hair brained idea from every person on the forum. It needs someone with vision and a sense of where they want the project to go, as well as the will to let forum chatter wash over them, as well as a team of knowledgeable successful professionals to advise them. Again, pretty much what Bruce did with stocksy but serving the micro market rather than mid/ macro stock.

« Reply #70 on: July 18, 2016, 03:52 »
+5
You only have to look at the chart on the right to see the market is totally oversaturated with providers. It would need something game changing and inspirational to have any chance of success.

« Reply #71 on: July 18, 2016, 03:59 »
+1
What's needed is another bruce to start up a more inclusive version.

bruce who? lee? he is dead and does not know squat about running a microstock company :)
and don't say the other bruce who sold ss's only real contender
 and left everyone with the litter box :P
...
and the one ss is soon to emulate with all the ex's being parachuted to ss
who are not ruining running ss like a well-oiled machine in our you-know-where
I like to think he is is making amends having seen what getty did to his baby

but what's there to amend? being a deadbeat dad made him very very rich!
I don't see what he did as a bad thing.  He sold out to Getty but most people would for the money he was being offered.  He acknowledged that the low percentage istock was paying contributors was a mistake and Stocksy is about as far away from istock as it could be.  Would of been great if he had got it right the first time but now Stocksy is one of a very few sites that pay contributors a fair cut and makes them money.

you're full of compassion.
so if Oringer does the same thing and you will say it's not a bad thing too LOL
What's happening with SS at the moment doesn't seem like a good thing for us.  Swamped with images and having shareholders to please isn't going to work out well for us.  When they can no longer increase profits, guess who will lose out?  We have already seen a detrimental cut in the amount we get for EL's.  So if he decided to leave and start a new co-op agency paying contributors 50%, yes, it probably would be better than our long term prospects with SS at the moment.

« Reply #72 on: July 18, 2016, 05:30 »
0
Life cycle of any company is the same. Not a lot of them can resist against ageing, internal corruption etc. If one monster become rusty, then green lights for the new comer to try. And the cycle repeats. Stock imagery become a type of production which always will have its cut of market. Contributors will migrate from one agency to another one. Natural process, nothing to speak about loyalty. Agencies are loyal to their shareholders, even not to all of them, and never to contributors.
To tell shortly - why not, but not to be surprised that this process will be the same for contributor-founded agency.

« Reply #73 on: July 18, 2016, 14:30 »
0
You only have to look at the chart on the right to see the market is totally oversaturated with providers. It would need something game changing and inspirational to have any chance of success.

providers , yes!
but viable option to ss? none.
so really, there is a monopoly where most anyone can make money;
may not be alot to some, but it is true, anyone can make money with ss.

can't say the same for the others to the right ; not even stocksy, canva,or offset,
or the one that leo suggests.

before bruce ran out, there was at least , istock as a viable contender

flip flop between ss and is in top place.
the rest are really redundant.

Harvepino

« Reply #74 on: July 22, 2016, 01:09 »
+7
Agency made by photographers? That is not a new idea. Ever heard of factories owned and run by workers? It is called communism.
I come from a post-communist country and all I can tell you from what I see around me every day is NO! Leave managing to managers. We decided to be photographers, illustrators, videographers, lets stick to that and do it well.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
6090 Views
Last post March 20, 2009, 10:22
by tan510jomast
75 Replies
15934 Views
Last post November 04, 2010, 05:39
by ShadySue
87 Replies
20327 Views
Last post July 21, 2009, 22:14
by mitzrah
73 Replies
27916 Views
Last post January 18, 2011, 09:58
by Elenathewise
15 Replies
4576 Views
Last post December 17, 2010, 07:41
by ibogdan

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle