Author Topic: Microstock Agency- made by photographers (by you). Let`s start? (Read 35869 times)

hellou · « **on:** June 29, 2016, 23:57 »

deleted

Harvepino · « **Reply #1 on:** June 30, 2016, 01:43 »

You need to know how to attract customers first mate.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Holmes · « **Reply #2 on:** June 30, 2016, 01:58 »

here we go again...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #3 on:** June 30, 2016, 07:35 »

Quote from: Holmes on June 30, 2016, 01:58

here we go again...

Lol.

hellou · « **Reply #4 on:** June 30, 2016, 08:01 »

Quote from: Holmes on June 30, 2016, 01:58

here we go again...

?

UKstock · « **Reply #5 on:** June 30, 2016, 08:41 »

I think it's a great idea and it is very possible. My advice would be to seek investment simply to cover marketing costs ($millions). Get your people in place and the business unique selling points first then get the backing.

Artist · « **Reply #6 on:** June 30, 2016, 08:42 »

Quote from: hellou on June 30, 2016, 08:01

Quote from: Holmes on June 30, 2016, 01:58
here we go again...
?

Such ideas have been discussed here many a times.. please do a quick search and see what community people are saying

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #7 on:** June 30, 2016, 09:07 »

The questions you're asking are operational. What about marketing and general viability?

What's the purpose of the agency?
What is unique about this agency compared to others?
Why would buyers use this agency over the dozens of other well established agencies and other general options?
What is the profile of the target buyer?
How will you attract buyers?

Maybe you're new here but you're getting a luke-warm response for a reason. Fairly regularly someone posts about starting a new agency. And it's usually the same type of post as this. Starting up a business with no mention of why the agency should exist or how it will attract buyers.

If I were going to invest time and money in someone's idea here's some examples of what would at least get me interested in talking more seriously about it.

"Hi, my name is [name] and I'm the former [title] of popular agency [company]. I successfully helped grow agency [company] from concept to multimillion dollar company. I'm planning to start a new co-op agency and would like to gauge the level of interest of MSG members in becoming contributors and part owners"

OR

"Hi, my name is [name] and I'm a stock photographer who's planning to start a new agency. My day job is [title] at [company] which is a leading SEO and Social Media marketing business. I've helped over 100 new startup company clients increase traffic by 10,000% and grow sales by 1,000% and I believe I can use my experience to start and grow a successful co-op stock agency but I'll need some help. Is anyone interested in discussing the details?"

Not sure if those example would even generate interest. But the point is if anyone wants to get attention here you need to talk about the business model and how you will attract buyers.

hellou · « **Reply #8 on:** June 30, 2016, 09:36 »

deleted

ShadySue · « **Reply #9 on:** June 30, 2016, 09:58 »

Quote from: hellou on June 30, 2016, 09:36

There could be so many good ideas. E.g. upload only 1% exclusive at our website. Send customers to our website. Place a link at your homepage to our website.

If placing a link at my homepage, or posting on social media, would make a scrap of difference, I'd be selling independently.

Quote

I realy have to say iam a little bit sad about the first replies and the expectations for a final solution.

You're sweet and naive, then. Good luck to you with that.

As has been said, if we only had $1 for everyone who has come in here with the same suggestions.

At least you didn't come in with a half-baked website already in existence. Then you'd have been shredded. The BS detectors in this group are second to none.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #10 on:** June 30, 2016, 10:02 »

Quote from: hellou on June 30, 2016, 09:36

There could be so many good ideas. E.g. upload only 1% exclusive at our website. Send customers to our website. Place a link at your homepage to our website. I realy have to say iam a little bit sad about the first replies and the expectations for a final solution.

Welcome to reality.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #11 on:** June 30, 2016, 10:23 »

Quote from: hellou on June 30, 2016, 09:36

What i do, i offer you a working and ready to go microstock agency. No costs to setup for anyone of you. Owned by us and decisions made by us.
How the agency looks like, yes, this WE have to decide. Yes i saw all the earlier post. But do we have an agency now? No.

So now we could start. Iam ready to start right now. We have to find answers for your critics but we do not need to have them right now. Because there is no business plan out there that could guarantee success.
If we setup the site and get our content online, we maybe could earn more than 30%.. this is a good reason to think about it.

The idea was a agency made by us. So i am not sure why anyone should expect all answers only from me (?). We are a team? I hope so.
I can understand everyone only wants to jump on a ready-to-go system and start selling. But come on, if WE start a agency everyone should think about solutions too. If there is some SEO guy, hey welcome. Please help us.

There could be so many good ideas. E.g. upload only 1% exclusive at our website. Send customers to our website. Place a link at your homepage to our website. I realy have to say iam a little bit sad about the first replies and the expectations for a final solution.

I'm not questioning what the final solution is. Just what about the business makes it a viable idea.

I get your approach. Some people will just jump into things, do stuff, and success just happens along the way. I've been part of a couple startups before so I'm looking for a little more than "let's do something". People here have invested a lot of time and money in new opportunitites most of which didn't work out so you may need to be a bit more persuasive.

It sounds like an exciting idea and I wish you the best of success.

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #12 on:** June 30, 2016, 10:50 »

A few new companies are actually up and running to see how well it operates before they would even dare to come on MSG. One company is paying 70% (so far two sales with just 20 images on line) to the artists and is fine tuning their business plan to include the customer base- yet not ready for MSG folks. The road to a 'successful' company is rare to say the least...

Dave · « **Reply #13 on:** July 01, 2016, 01:42 »

How about this a a bit of an alternative, Photographers that have their own online offerings gather together in a cooperative way and promote each others sites with some form of central locations where image users can go to search and then license the images they want.
Limit contributors to say less than 5000 images with NO similars.

Just my 2 bobs worth.

ShadySue · « **Reply #14 on:** July 01, 2016, 02:16 »

^^Search here for info about Symbiostock, which was/is based on that idea.

cathyslife · « **Reply #15 on:** July 01, 2016, 08:22 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 01, 2016, 02:16

^^Search here for info about Symbiostock, which was/is based on that idea.

And it didnt work either.

I think a new co-op, with the model that stocksy uses, would be welcome. There are a lot of contributors who cant get in to stocksy so an alternative would be great, but you would have to have lots of above-board credentials in order for contributors to turn over their content.

Aleutie · « **Reply #16 on:** July 01, 2016, 10:19 »

Quote from: hellou on June 29, 2016, 23:57

Please tell me your thoughts and questions.

I think (IMHO) that any new enterprise should start with asking what needs of customers are not yet met or addressed. At this stage needs or wants of contributors are irrelevant. Even if 100% of revenue goes to contributors, 100% of zero is still zero. I honestly don't know what those customer needs would be.

50% · « **Reply #17 on:** July 01, 2016, 12:29 »

It's not about making a cool site it's about marketing otherwise all your efforts are wasted no matter how good intended they are.
Problem is we don't know your background we don't know your expertise we don't know your team we don't know your financial back-up.
Stocksy started with a good financial-back-up, probably the best expertise team you get, great marketing and couple of hand-selected very good photograhper and still it took about two years to take it off.
I feel your intentions are good and honestly but unfortunately that is not enough the market has become extremly competetive for any new ageny this is why people here are hesitating. Wish you all the best and good luck!

Chichikov · « **Reply #18 on:** July 04, 2016, 10:07 »

Quote from: hellou on June 30, 2016, 09:36

[…] Because there is no business plan out there that could guarantee success. […]

This is what I call a "positive mind"!

disorderly · « **Reply #19 on:** July 04, 2016, 10:39 »

As others have said, we've been through all this many times before. It's relatively easy to get a new agency going; the technology is there and so is the pool of content. What isn't there is a customer base, something that will attract customers to pay money in large and growing amounts. What's missing is what marketing people (and I've been one of them) call a unique value proposition: something your new agency offers that clients can't get as easily from an existing player.

And even that isn't enough, unless you and your suppliers are incredibly patient. The other missing piece is advertising/marketing, so all those potential clients know you're out there and have a better solution. Word of mouth is slow and unreliable, so you're looking at spending some serious money to get attention. Most new agencies and a bunch that have never managed to take flight either don't have it, can't get it or don't want to risk it.

The last agency I saw with a unique value proposition that is seeing success is Canva. They aren't just a supplier of content; they offer tools for creating documents, and they offer imagery as part of that creation. From my own sales there, it looks like they're taking off. Few agencies I encounter show those signs of life, and without some indication that my time will be rewarded at some point, why would I bother?

In the end it's about sales and income. Show me how you can deliver those and I'll be interested.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #20 on:** July 04, 2016, 21:01 »

And it's always a bit chicken and the egg. If you haven't got any buyers buying stuff, then you'll have a hard time attracting contributors. And if you haven't got any contributors, then you'll have a hard time attracting buyers to buy stuff.

MichaelJayFoto · « **Reply #21 on:** July 05, 2016, 09:49 »

Quote from: 50% on July 01, 2016, 12:29

Stocksy started with a good financial-back-up, probably the best expertise team you get, great marketing and couple of hand-selected very good photograhper and still it took about two years to take it off

Stocksy also started with a quite large bunch of photographers who trusted the management enough from the start to submit images exclusively with them i.e. partly removing them from existing sites where they had a sales track record in exchange for an uncertain future.

I'd say this level of trust is hard to gain for someone with no track record in the industry. And actually I'd say MicroStockGroup overall seems not to be the right place to search for contributors who would put in this kind of trust into a new agency.

ccbcc · « **Reply #22 on:** July 13, 2016, 05:41 »

Where would you get the many million $$ from to let potential customers know this new site exists?

Noedelhap · « **Reply #23 on:** July 14, 2016, 09:27 »

Having an entrepreneurial spirit is good. The questions you are asking yourself (and us) however, are not. Buyers don't care about keywords, website technology and management. All they want is good images at an affordable price. Your startup agency must cater to that need, otherwise it'll never come off the ground. What can you offer them that other agencies can't?

Don't expect contributors here to blindly jump on the bandwagon without a good business plan and money to spend on marketing.

hellou · « **Reply #24 on:** July 14, 2016, 10:21 »

deleted

Noedelhap · « **Reply #25 on:** July 14, 2016, 13:03 »

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21

What is wrong with the business concept of SS IS FT?

The leading agencies of today weren't late to the game, unlike you. If you don't offer something new, customers will stick to what they're familiar with

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21

Additional you would keep all earnings. Isn`t this you all complain about every day.

100% of zero is still zero.
And how are you going to keep the site going without income?

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21

Never said you need to spend any cent for marketing. Millions? Who is talking about millions of dollars? Welcome to 2016. So many ways starting with social media to attract customers. If we would have a contributor made agency this would be a nice way to attract many people.

It's not that easy. You can't rely on that marketing 'strategy' alone.

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21

Who is buying your images? Yes people working in marketing/ design. If you offer them the same content and let them know we are "fair trade for contributors" we made the first good point. The customers are mostly design related people too. Community based content is the most favorite one.

Fair trade is of no benefit to the customer. Maybe one or two altruistic designers may give your agency a shot, but most clients will look further for a cheap subscription deal.

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21

Asked for your wishes and ideas not for you money or time. So blabla. Iam bored already. I will come back with a ready-to-go solution maybe in a half year. Mabye more/ other people are ready to join then. Thank you and good night

My wish is that you come up with a decent business plan before I spent time helping you with free advice on how to start an agency. But if you're bored already, maybe this isn't the way to go for you.

hellou · « **Reply #26 on:** July 14, 2016, 13:14 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on July 14, 2016, 13:03

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21
What is wrong with the business concept of SS IS FT?

The leading agencies of today weren't late to the game, unlike you. If you don't offer something new, customers will stick to what they're familiar with

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21
Additional you would keep all earnings. Isn`t this you all complain about every day.

100% of zero is still zero.
And how are you going to keep the site going without income?

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21
Never said you need to spend any cent for marketing. Millions? Who is talking about millions of dollars? Welcome to 2016. So many ways starting with social media to attract customers. If we would have a contributor made agency this would be a nice way to attract many people.

It's not that easy. You can't rely on that marketing 'strategy' alone.

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21
Who is buying your images? Yes people working in marketing/ design. If you offer them the same content and let them know we are "fair trade for contributors" we made the first good point. The customers are mostly design related people too. Community based content is the most favorite one.

Fair trade is of no benefit to the customer. Maybe one or two altruistic designers may give your agency a shot, but most clients will look further for a cheap subscription deal.

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21
Asked for your wishes and ideas not for you money or time. So blabla. Iam bored already. I will come back with a ready-to-go solution maybe in a half year. Mabye more/ other people are ready to join then. Thank you and good night

My wish is that you come up with a decent business plan before I spent time helping you with free advice on how to start an agency. But if you're bored already, maybe this isn't the way to go for you.

deleted

Symbiostock Official · « **Reply #27 on:** July 14, 2016, 14:36 »

What you're suggesting is mostly already in place - visit Symzio via the link in my signature. Every image there is self-hosted by contributors just like you - they retain full control over whether it is active or not, set most of the pricing, and retain 70% or more of any income generated through sales.

Now that the infrastructure is there, and you see other peers pushing for it, jump on board and push for it's further success yourself.

It's in your hands.

hellou · « **Reply #28 on:** July 14, 2016, 14:44 »

Quote from: Robin@Symbiostock on July 14, 2016, 14:36

What you're suggesting is mostly already in place - visit Symzio via the link in my signature. Every image there is self-hosted by contributors just like you - they retain full control over whether it is active or not, set most of the pricing, and retain 70% or more of any income generated through sales.

Now that the infrastructure is there, and you see other peers pushing for it, jump on board and push for it's further success yourself.

It's in your hands.

the worst timing to place your advertising

..and no, clearly it would not be the same (i do not say symbio is not good).

Shelma1 · « **Reply #29 on:** July 14, 2016, 14:50 »

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21

What is wrong with the business concept of SS IS FT? Additional you would keep all earnings. Isn`t this you all complain about every day.
Never said you need to spend any cent for marketing. Millions? Who is talking about millions of dollars? Welcome to 2016. So many ways starting with social media to attract customers. If we would have a contributor made agency this would be a nice way to attract many people. Who is buying your images? Yes people working in marketing/ design. If you offer them the same content and let them know we are "fair trade for contributors" we made the first good point. The customers are mostly design related people too. Community based content is the most favorite one. Asked for your wishes and ideas not for you money or time. So blabla. Iam bored already. I will come back with a ready-to-go solution maybe in a half year. Mabye more/ other people are ready to join then. Thank you and good night

This has been tried by a group of more than 180 of us and failed. I'm not saying it couldn't or can't work, but one thing many of us feel led to its failure was a lack of coordinated marketing. You're competing with the likes of SS and iS and Getty and Adobe and must somehow reach and convince their buyers to switch to your site. It's a very difficult and expensive undertaking. Made even more difficult by the fact that many of us already tried it and are pretty gun shy.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #30 on:** July 14, 2016, 15:00 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on July 14, 2016, 14:50

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21
What is wrong with the business concept of SS IS FT? Additional you would keep all earnings. Isn`t this you all complain about every day.
Never said you need to spend any cent for marketing. Millions? Who is talking about millions of dollars? Welcome to 2016. So many ways starting with social media to attract customers. If we would have a contributor made agency this would be a nice way to attract many people. Who is buying your images? Yes people working in marketing/ design. If you offer them the same content and let them know we are "fair trade for contributors" we made the first good point. The customers are mostly design related people too. Community based content is the most favorite one. Asked for your wishes and ideas not for you money or time. So blabla. Iam bored already. I will come back with a ready-to-go solution maybe in a half year. Mabye more/ other people are ready to join then. Thank you and good night

This has been tried by a group of more than 180 of us and failed. I'm not saying it couldn't or can't work, but one thing many of us feel led to its failure was a lack of coordinated marketing. You're competing with the likes of SS and iS and Getty and Adobe and must somehow reach and convince their buyers to switch to your site. It's a very difficult and expensive undertaking. Made even more difficult by the fact that many of us already tried it and are pretty gun shy.

shelma is correct.
but aside from the marketing, it is also due to individual greed.
you start off trying to be a coop, and end up with a handful of self-interest elitists who think only of promoting themselves.
that alone is why agencies continue to treat us like sh*t;
they know the tribal mentality is still our weakness...
too many shamans too little followers.

all in all, we are just a bunch of f@gg*t that is easily separated, due to self interest,
as the agencies consistently break us one by one like spineless firewood

hellou · « **Reply #31 on:** July 14, 2016, 15:06 »

yes you tried it with symbio? I saw many of these sites. There`s no customer friendly interface. No eye-tracking or similar. Many more reasons. You are completely right.

Symbiostock Official · « **Reply #32 on:** July 14, 2016, 22:27 »

If you painstakingly create a thread, clearly driven by a desire to assist yourself and other contributors, by suggesting an independent platform upon which you will cease being gouged on a daily basis, and someone responds to you, I suggest you take more time to assess all responses.

You respond by mentioning Symbio - I did not mention Symbio.

You mention no customer friendly interface - I have no idea what you mean.

At least have the self-interest to take 30 seconds to explore the responses you receive in your thread. Did you even click on the Symzio link in my signature to explore what I was talking about? Or is your purpose, like some others here, to simply complain without actually solving something?

And why wouldn't we promote it? You're asking about an independent stock agency, and that is precisely what we have developed, what we are growing and marketing (as a joint group), and what a number of contributors are slowly getting trickling sales through.

Try to minimize using this forum as a means of just intellectualizing the problematic situation of the average professional contributor and actually actuate change.

Leo · « **Reply #33 on:** July 14, 2016, 22:38 »

I can say having tried this idea that it does seem good on paper, but unfortunately I have to conclude as many have that you must use an agency such as the big ones or go it alone.

Be careful when you throw your lot in with people you don't know. You might end up severely downgraded by association.

There is a joke I like, maybe you've heard it before.

A man walks into a bar and says "Lets start an agency run by contributors..."

I was that man, but sadly, I'm not a drinker.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #34 on:** July 15, 2016, 15:16 »

Quote from: Leo on July 14, 2016, 22:38

I can say having tried this idea that it does seem good on paper, but unfortunately I have to conclude as many have that you must use an agency such as the big ones or go it alone.

Be careful when you throw your lot in with people you don't know. You might end up severely downgraded by association.

There is a joke I like, maybe you've heard it before.

A man walks into a bar and says "Lets start an agency run by contributors..."

I was that man, but sadly, I'm not a drinker.

yes, ... red remark,
there is a similar that goes, :keep your friends nearby; your enemies even nearer:
because many of your "friends" are usually just the nemesis watching you.

Dragomir Nikolov · « **Reply #35 on:** July 16, 2016, 15:35 »

Your idea sounds good. However photographers have been lied by Leo and Symbiostock recently!!! You must give much more proves about your site.

r2d2 · « **Reply #36 on:** July 16, 2016, 16:39 »

sounds good. One website/agency for unity!
We can promote this site all together.

Microstock 4.0 or the big agency squeeze out!

Leo · « **Reply #37 on:** July 16, 2016, 23:34 »

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #38 on:** July 17, 2016, 01:43 »

I'm sorry you've had such a rough time Leo.

The new version of symbiostock is not an agency as such. Fine for what it is I'm sure but basically a hosting platform with some bells and whistles. Taking 30% for that is too much IMHO. Especially when there are agencies bringing in sales taking the same comission.

The only contributor owned model that works is one like stocksy, where contributors are the "shareholders" but it is run like a proper business (see also john lewis or the coop in the uk). It's like a parliamentary democracy as opposed to anarchy.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #39 on:** July 17, 2016, 01:46 »

What's needed is another bruce to start up a more inclusive version. I would still be very selective about who to let in though. Use micro as an Arrakis to separate the wheat from the chaf. Take the best 10% or so of contributors into the collective. Offer image exclusivity. Micro prices, bit more for exclusive images

sharpshot · « **Reply #41 on:** July 17, 2016, 04:19 »

I think the fatal flaw with Symbiostock or whatever its called now is that we were all paying for our own sites. There's a lot of money wasted on domain names, hosting and time wasted designing all those sites and keeping them updated and secure. I don't think the sites do well enough with google or are attractive enough to buyers. There will be some people that can make that work but not many.

Nobody has really tried a large scale one site co-op that's open to most contributors. I doubt it will never happen, as it would be a nightmare to run. Perhaps Stocksy will grow and open up more but until that happens, we are probably stuck with the other sites or having an independent site that's only really viable for a tiny minority of contributors.

Symbiostock Official · « **Reply #42 on:** July 17, 2016, 05:19 »

Most contributors can probably run an independent site for less than $20 a month all in, so it's quite nominal in cost. That's the first thing.

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.

And thirdly, it has to be done properly. There is this defeatist mentality that once you launch your site and don't get sales immediately, that the platform is flawed. That's completely wrong. If you were to launch a blog today on whatever topic, it would take months to get any visitors looking at it. And there is no standard approach to marketing individual sites, because that arena is, and always has been organic.

However, the implementation of Symzio, and a strong community mindset, with a realistic approach to marketing, can, will, and is creating positive changes in the total viewership our sites are getting, including Symzio.

Again, I'm not here to argue any of you guys that get off on complaining without doing anything about it. I'm here to explain the most probable method for pro-active and new contributors to nominally create their independent online presence.

Leo · « **Reply #43 on:** July 17, 2016, 05:23 »

Quote from: sharpshot on July 17, 2016, 04:19

I think the fatal flaw with ---- or whatever its called now is that we were all paying for our own sites. There's a lot of money wasted on domain names, hosting and time wasted designing all those sites and keeping them updated and secure. I don't think the sites do well enough with google or are attractive enough to buyers. There will be some people that can make that work but not many.

Yes, and those people succeed wherever they upload. Its actually true.

ShadySue · « **Reply #44 on:** July 17, 2016, 06:12 »

Quote from: Robin@Symbiostock on July 17, 2016, 05:19

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.

All that work to 'break even', just so you're sticking the fingers up at the Big G etc? I'd rather not bother!

ccbcc · « **Reply #45 on:** July 17, 2016, 06:59 »

Quote from: hellou on July 14, 2016, 10:21

What is wrong with the business concept of SS IS FT? Additional you would keep all earnings. Isn`t this you all complain about every day.

Yes.

Quote

Never said you need to spend any cent for marketing. Millions? Who is talking about millions of dollars? Welcome to 2016. So many ways starting with social media to attract customers.

You think you can do social media better than the big boys? And SEO as well?

Quote

If we would have a contributor made agency this would be a nice way to attract many people. Who is buying your images? Yes people working in marketing/ design. If you offer them the same content and let them know we are "fair trade for contributors" we made the first good point. The customers are mostly design related people too.

Who is providing the people working in marketing and design with monthly budgets and/or subscription? People who don't care about fairtrade, that's who.

Quote

Community based content is the most favorite one. Asked for your wishes and ideas not for you money or time. So blabla. Iam bored already. I will come back with a ready-to-go solution maybe in a half year. Mabye more/ other people are ready to join then. Thank you and good night

Well it seems that our ideas are not welcome. My points are valid and deserve thought, since you asked for them. Yes I wish things were better and I wish this could work. You seem to attack people for not wanting this enough, but just the wanting isn't going to make this happen. It needs to make sense from a business point of view.
I think there are better ways in which we can bundle our strengths. If many thousands of contributors unite, for sure we can force the big guys into giving us much better royalties. Or maybe we can convince Vimeo to start selling stock, they have a payment system in place already. There could be other ideas worth pursuing more than this half baked and unrealistic plan.

hellou · « **Reply #46 on:** July 17, 2016, 07:48 »

deleted

hellou · « **Reply #47 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:03 »

Quote from: Dragomir Nikolov on July 16, 2016, 15:35

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.

ShadySue · « **Reply #48 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:25 »

Quote from: hellou on July 17, 2016, 07:48

You understand that more than 90% of all business are small business. All should close down because they can not spend millions for ads?

This really shows your naïveté.
Small businesses which can be successful on a small advertising budget are one of two things: local or extremely specialist.
I live in a small rural town. Extremely few of the local businesses even have a web presence. Why? In a small town, they only have to be good enough and not too expensive to stop people from going to a larger town. They make their reputation in the town and don't have rivals. Their business problems are specific to being a small business: they can't compete on range or price, they have to compete on service.

Extremely specialist companies don't have many competitors, they can spend little on advertising and hope to provide better service than any rivals, which they should have researched carefully to see how they can improve on what's already being offered.

Alternatively, a new company can take on the big boys if they can do something important better or cheaper. Even then, you need money for your advertising campaign to launch your company and to get it going in the first year or two, then you're hoping for word of mouth recommendations to supplement your advertising campaigns.

Stock is totally different. You need a global reach from the outset, and you're taking on well-established companies, selling products which are already easily available, often very cheaply.
You haven't made one suggestion as to what USP you would offer, or how you are going to raise the millions needed to launch and maintain your proposed site.

ShadySue · « **Reply #49 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:33 »

Quote from: hellou on July 17, 2016, 07:48

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

hellou · « **Reply #50 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:38 »

deleted

ShadySue · « **Reply #51 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:45 »

Quote from: hellou on July 17, 2016, 08:38

Quote from: ShadySue on July 17, 2016, 08:33
Quote from: hellou on July 17, 2016, 07:48
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?

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #52 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:50 »

Quote from: hellou on July 17, 2016, 08:03

Quote from: Dragomir Nikolov on July 16, 2016, 15:35
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 · « **Reply #53 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:51 »

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.

hellou · « **Reply #54 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:53 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 17, 2016, 08:45

Quote from: hellou on July 17, 2016, 08:38
Quote from: ShadySue on July 17, 2016, 08:33
Quote from: hellou on July 17, 2016, 07:48
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.

hellou · « **Reply #55 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:57 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on July 17, 2016, 08:50

Quote from: hellou on July 17, 2016, 08:03
Quote from: Dragomir Nikolov on July 16, 2016, 15:35
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 · « **Reply #56 on:** July 17, 2016, 09:02 »

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

hellou · « **Reply #57 on:** July 17, 2016, 09:15 »

deleted

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #58 on:** July 17, 2016, 09:21 »

Well, that was fun ( and the expected result ).

marthamarks · « **Reply #59 on:** July 17, 2016, 09:31 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on July 17, 2016, 09:21

Well, that was fun ( and the expected result ).

Exactly. LOL!!

sharpshot · « **Reply #60 on:** July 17, 2016, 10:14 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 17, 2016, 08:51

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.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #61 on:** July 17, 2016, 10:44 »

Quote from: Robin@Symbiostock on July 17, 2016, 05:19

...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 · « **Reply #62 on:** July 17, 2016, 11:29 »

Quote from: sharpshot on July 17, 2016, 10:14

Quote from: ShadySue on July 17, 2016, 08:51
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'.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #63 on:** July 17, 2016, 14:24 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 01:46

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

...
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

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #64 on:** July 17, 2016, 14:30 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 14:24

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 01:46
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
...
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

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #65 on:** July 17, 2016, 17:01 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 14:30

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 14:24
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 01:46
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
...
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!

sharpshot · « **Reply #66 on:** July 17, 2016, 17:52 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 17:01

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 14:30
Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 14:24
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 01:46
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
...
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.

ingwio · « **Reply #67 on:** July 17, 2016, 17:56 »

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?

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #68 on:** July 17, 2016, 18:09 »

Quote from: sharpshot on July 17, 2016, 17:52

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 17:01
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 14:30
Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 14:24
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 01:46
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
...
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

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #69 on:** July 18, 2016, 03:30 »

Quote from: ingwio on July 17, 2016, 17:56

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.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #70 on:** July 18, 2016, 03:52 »

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.

sharpshot · « **Reply #71 on:** July 18, 2016, 03:59 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 18:09

Quote from: sharpshot on July 17, 2016, 17:52
Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 17:01
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 14:30
Quote from: etudiante_rapide on July 17, 2016, 14:24
Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on July 17, 2016, 01:46
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
...
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.

skyfish · « **Reply #72 on:** July 18, 2016, 05:30 »

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.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #73 on:** July 18, 2016, 14:30 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on July 18, 2016, 03:52

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 »

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.

sharpshot · « **Reply #75 on:** July 22, 2016, 12:39 »

Quote from: Harvepino on July 22, 2016, 01:09

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.

No, communism doesn't work because the government owns the factories. There are companies earned by their employees, not the government, in capitalist societies that do very well, like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_Partnership

ppdd · « **Reply #76 on:** July 22, 2016, 14:24 »

I think there is a model for something like this that can work, but it needs to be business savvy first and realistic about transparency.

I think things like 90 or 100% commission promises doom the project from the start. Great commissions are fine, but anything over 60% will handcuff a business that relies on promotion of itself to gain customers. Using the 40% in a transparent way will get support from the contributors.

A real co-op is run by managers, who are often paid some money to run the business. There is a board of directors, often all volunteer, who have business experience and oversee the operation. Books are open and spending is transparent, and members vote on the direction of the business.

These business structures are in place to keep the trust of the members. You don't have to trust each other, per se, because you trust the structure that was established in order to even out the influence of any one person. There are a number of options for setting up.

Until something like that is formally established, this conversation will continue to crop up and then crumble.

All my opinions.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #77 on:** July 22, 2016, 21:15 »

Communism is communism. Factories run by the workers are factories run by the worker. They're not automatically the same thing, even though that may have been more the case in certain places at certain times.

And even if this venture was based on communism, one small outfit adopting a communist approach is very different to a country as a whole... it's unlikely communiststock.com would have little, if any, affect on what you see when you look around you every day.

But look at it another way... a small shop owned and run by a family. Are they automatically communists? Yes, it's a small shop and not a factory, but would an online stock marketplace really be a factory? A company owned and run by a group of individuals could just as easily be referred to as a cooperative as it could some kind of communist regime.

I still think it's not really a good idea, the whole stock photographers site made by stock photographers thing, but that's for a whole host of different reasons. None of them related to communism.

stockVid · « **Reply #78 on:** July 22, 2016, 22:00 »

Why is everything looked at in extremes? A stock agency run by photographers is not communism!

Dear god what's happened to the world?

Leo · « **Reply #79 on:** July 23, 2016, 03:07 »

This thread is funny.

This guy can make you rich here!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv1RJTHf5fk

I think its awesome how everyone is looking out for you these days and offering so many ways to succeed (at a small price, of course). Its a good time to be alive!

Guy in video is Tai Lopez and a very successful scammer. I wonder what he'd suggest if he was into Microstock? Or would he have competition with some other folks in here?

sharpshot · « **Reply #80 on:** July 23, 2016, 03:33 »

Quote from: stockVid on July 22, 2016, 22:00

Why is everything looked at in extremes? A stock agency run by photographers is not communism!

Dear god what's happened to the world?

I agree. I find unregulated capitalism just as frighting as communism. Does anyone really understand how a hedge fund can buy a debt ridden Getty, saddle it with more debt that they use to pay themselves then sell it on for a profit to another hedge fund? Does anyone think what happened in 2008 when the banks gambled away trillions but almost nobody was held to account was good? I still don't understand the size of national debt, budget deficits and personal debt around the capitalist nations. Most people don't worry about that but anything that is remotely nearer to communism scares them, even if it works very well.

memakephoto · « **Reply #81 on:** July 23, 2016, 09:21 »

The western world has vilified the term "communism" as if it's some evil thing. Mostly because of how it works in China and the former Soviet Union and also because it goes against the ideals of capitalism.

On paper, the concept of communism is beautiful. There is no rich and no poor as everyone shares ownership and the fruits of their labor. Unfortunately in practice it falls apart because it fails to take into consideration the baggage associated with it's key ingredient: human beings bringing with them human nature. We are programmed to separate into classes. All social animals are. There is the ruler, the alpha, and all others establish themselves within the hierarchy from top to bottom.

Capitalism works because it relies on this hierarchy, with those at the top controlling and profiting from those at the bottom. Until we find a way to overcome our very nature, it will always be this way. Like it or not.

Applied to this group: the owner(s) of stock agencies get rich taking the lion share of the revenue from sales and the workers (us) get just enough to keep us coming back.

sharpshot · « **Reply #82 on:** July 23, 2016, 15:36 »

Communism and a co-op are two very different things. There are lots of successful co-ops where the people running them earn more than the workers at the bottom but they don't have the problems that ruin many companies that have shareholders and are often controlled by people that don't really have anything but a financial interest in the business.

We can be in a capitalist society and have a successful co-op without having anything to do with communism. Is Stocksy a communist site? I don't know if we will ever have a successful site that is controlled by contributors but we don't have to become communists to do that.

ammit · « **Reply #83 on:** March 03, 2017, 17:45 »

Quote from: Harvepino on July 22, 2016, 01:09

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.

I`m coming from a communist country also, your response lacks substance! we should leave management to managers, but to our own elected managers. Huge difference!

If you can not convince contributors to join you, you can not convince the buyers neither!

astrn · « **Reply #84 on:** March 03, 2017, 18:49 »

Wow what an old and funny thread.

I did not read all of the entries but the fellow that opened the thread possibly learnt his/her lesson very well after that.
Openning a business is hard. And openning a new business in a already crowded market is much more complicated mumbo jumbo.

I tried to open an agency to test the waters. The only difference is I only put my own images that how far I can go without any advertisement and marketing campaign. Let me tell you; None, not an even millimeter!

The first problem to open any kind of business is, before anything else, even the product itself, is, solving the good old "marketing" issue. Without any form of marketing, even if you sell your product for free, which I did, you gain no traction.

That is the number one rule for any business. Promoting your service is the number one priority.

Moreover, discussing this kind of thing in a public forum is pretty naive act. If you want to gain the attention of the people around here or anywhere you should first built something at least at the first place, good or bad. In that way you will show others that you are really serious about it.

Then you can start to find a way how attract people to your business -buyers, sellers, you name it- then the investors who are willing to be a partner with you. No one give you a money or their time for an emtpy ideas. I can bet most of the people on this platform thought at least once to open a stock selling website in some form.

Solving a problem is a thing, but applying to a business model is something else.

EmberMike · « **Reply #85 on:** March 04, 2017, 17:03 »

So who has the multi-million-dollar marketing budget it would take to get a new agency to be visible in this already crowded market? Because that's what it would take, and "multi-million" is no exaggeration. Companies that are already highly visible still advertise regularly. Shutterstock often has the back cover of some graphic design industry magazines. Some of those ad placements are probably $20k minimum.

The only chance a new agency has, even a contributor-supported one, is to have it run like a startup, with proper funding and a solid business plan. Anything less is a failure right out of the gate.

Photodune Reject · « **Reply #86 on:** March 04, 2017, 18:56 »

I love to see the final outcome on these so called "New Company' startups- all end up being nothing more than a dream until the nightmare awakens me as I upload to iStock knowing I will get only 15%... $:-\$

Mantis · « **Reply #87 on:** March 04, 2017, 21:56 »

Quote from: Photodune Reject on March 04, 2017, 18:56

I love to see the final outcome on these so called "New Company' startups- all end up being nothing more than a dream until the nightmare awakens me as I upload to iStock knowing I will get only 15%... $:-\$

Only you can control your nightmares.

alno · « **Reply #88 on:** March 05, 2017, 02:44 »

I think that all posts about unions, business plans of starting a new little Northern Korea, dropping istock, telling Videohive is awful, Shutterstock 20 minutes long FTP upload problems should really be posted in off-topic automatically, right next to Trump thread and Happy new year everybody.

This forum had (and still having) a lot of really precious info not only for the newbies. Every time you post some hilarious BS like this just because you are bored in front of your computer and have nobody to complain to at home at the moment you bury that info deeper and deeper.

sharpshot · « **Reply #89 on:** March 05, 2017, 04:58 »

Quote from: Irina Anosova on March 05, 2017, 02:44

I think that all posts about unions, business plans of starting a new little Northern Korea, dropping istock, telling Videohive is awful, Shutterstock 20 minutes long FTP upload problems should really be posted in off-topic automatically, right next to Trump thread and Happy new year everybody.

This forum had (and still having) a lot of really precious info not only for the newbies. Every time you post some hilarious BS like this just because you are bored in front of your computer and have nobody to complain to at home at the moment you bury that info deeper and deeper.

So why do you bother looking at this thread then? I don't think these threads go anywhere but I would much rather see people complaining about sites like istock and thinking about what could be done than just putting up with it and letting them take all our money. You might be happy with the little bit they let you have now but many of us aren't and pretending everything is great isn't going to get us anywhere. I also don't understand why threads like this make it any less easy for newbies? If it did, this forum would be nothing but threads like this

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Microstock Agency- made by photographers (by you). Let`s start? (Read 35869 times)

Harvepino

Mr Nobody

Chichikov

Justanotherphotographer

Justanotherphotographer

marthamarks

Justanotherphotographer

Justanotherphotographer

Justanotherphotographer

Harvepino

stockVid

memakephoto

Photodune Reject

alno

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors