Author Topic: Pixamba - Please keep us informed! (Read 23461 times)

takestock · « **on:** July 04, 2009, 06:57 »

Hi David and all at Pixamba.
I do realise that you are busy getting the site up and running, but it would be nice, specially for those who have signed up to keep us informed of developments as we go along.
It would be good to hear when the forum will be open,maybe a few words about membership, sales, sales strategy etc.
So many other sites have opened up, got submissions and just left contributors hanging - checking in occasionally to find "zero" sales and eventually closing their account.

I believe also that keeping your members regularly informed will sustain interest and that they will continue to upload.

lurkertwo · « **Reply #1 on:** July 04, 2009, 09:12 »

Quote from: takestock on July 04, 2009, 06:57

So many other sites have opened up, got submissions and just left contributors hanging - checking in occasionally to find "zero" sales and eventually closing their account.

Of course. The market has been taken since 2005. No new site made it after that, and no new site will.

davidm · « **Reply #2 on:** July 04, 2009, 10:00 »

Quote from: takestock on July 04, 2009, 06:57

I believe also that keeping your members regularly informed will sustain interest and that they will continue to upload.

Sure, we'll do our best trying to keep you informed.

Here is the current status:

- we see a very nice stream of uploads, much larger than we expected for the first week. That's so great, thank you guys!

- we are working on making the uploads easier. Soon: PSM uploads and acceptance of DVDs, like it was proposed in this thread and by other contributors who send us emails about that. In fact, since the delivery of DVD will take a few days you are welcome to send them right away. Mail them to our postal address. FTP uploads will be implemented a bit later

- categories: we plan experimenting with shrinking them down to primary categories only, plus auto-suggestion of the first category

- 'advanced search' will be available soon in its initial version. If you have any specific suggestion for the advanced search functionality we'll be happy to hear. More stuff is on its way

- marketing, sales & business development: we are very active in this field and we have a nice marketing plan & many ideas how to do the things right. Obviously, none of them I can share in a public forum, even if I would love to hear your feedback. When the time comes you will see the things moving. We do not plan sitting for 2 years in the office waiting for the buyers, like some others micros did in the past. We are full of energy and we know exactly what we want, and how to get there.

- openness, information and service: we love to be in the direct contact with our members, listening to you, learning from you and giving you any help you might need. People who work with ProStockMaster know that we typically react very fast to any customer's inquiry and this is an important part of Pixamba customers service policy. For any matter, it's easy to reach me directly by email, Skype or phone, and it always will stay this way.

@cevapici
- there is no such thing like 'taken market', particularly when we are speaking about just a 5-6 years old microstock industry.

zymmetricaldotcom · « **Reply #3 on:** July 04, 2009, 10:42 »

David, just playing devil's advocate here, how do you reconcile the Prostockmaster service with Pixamba? I think aggregation/upload services are a fantastic idea (you know well we have been looking at supporting them as much as possible on Zymmetrical, and we hear good news from Panthermedia about your integration), but now that you have a 'birds eye view' of sales statistics via Prostockmaster, is it (I guess the rather nasty word is) 'ethical' that Prostockmaster is a paid submissions/stats service that could offer an inherent benefit to your stock agency service?

I tried looking around for a legal text or disclaimer on the Prostockmaster site regarding "how we deal with your data" but couldn't find it.

I'm not trying to single you out however I was anticipating an aggregator to try to monetize their data source (whether that's your intent I have no idea, but I bet you would find it hard to 'forget' the trends you learn as Prostockmaster admin

).

Having a live data stream is infinitely more effective than monitoring message forums or polls to see what content succeeding. I would just hope it's all been thought through with the privacy concerns. Maybe everything is encrypted and you never had even considered crossing the data over, I don't know. If it is the case of a connection, from a business POV, perhaps Prostockmaster would be better with a clear notice that Pixamba can use aggregated sales data for it's advantage.

Anyhow again, not to single your operation out, it's just a situation/discussion I haven't seen come up before: with cloud costs lowering costs daily to run an upload/sales stats service, the true competitive value may lie in the trend statistics returned - if I was a submitter I would expect that kind of data to not be utilized for free by services I use. If we can make it known what people would expect for their money and what could be done with the info about their statistics, it may help run off an 'oops' situation in the future.

lurkertwo · « **Reply #4 on:** July 04, 2009, 11:15 »

Quote from: zymmetrical on July 04, 2009, 10:42

I tried looking around for a legal text or disclaimer on the Prostockmaster site regarding "how we deal with your data" but couldn't find it.

Prostockmaster never had the guts to put a real business address or a street name on its site. That's why I never trusted them. The same with their new stock site, no real address, no company info at all. The site has an Israeli telephone number, so we have to assume it's in Israel. And that's all we know. No privacy statement, no guarantee. What is the Israeli law concerning privacy, and how can we get satisfaction when the site(s) run away with our passwords? Only Mozes knows. If the guy has nothing to hide, why does he hide his business info? I'll pass.

Keith was much too kind and diplomatic, but then, Zymmetrical doesn't operate from within the bushes.

zymmetricaldotcom · « **Reply #5 on:** July 04, 2009, 11:46 »

Well Pixamba does have a pretty standard looking legal text, defining the jurisdiction and business entity: http://www.pixamba.com/legal.html. Maybe I missed the one on Prostockmaster, or, like most software it is agreed on when the program is installed on desktop. I don't know, so that's why i'm asking.

I really am not being only diplomatic, it's just (as far as I know) the first case where an aggregator/uploader is competing directly in the field of selling.

Aggregators could be classified as the town taxi service: they know where the popular restaurants are, whose making late night visits to their affairs, and lot's of other info gained by transporting people (digital content) around town.

While I would think it would be cool and just good business (and probably already done somewhere) if a city guide service could tap into a taxi companies pick-up and drop-off addresses to offer a live stream of info about where the hotspots are, there has to be some standards and ethics involved otherwise your wife will find out about your late-night visit to your secretary.

Also you would expect your taxi fee in some way or another to be lowered due to the fact the taxi company is selling info about you.

davidm · « **Reply #6 on:** July 04, 2009, 12:02 »

Quote from: cevapcici on July 04, 2009, 11:15

Prostockmaster never had the guts to put a real business address or a street name on its site. That's why I never trusted them. The same with their new stock site, no real address, no company info at all.

I am delighted to know that being with this community just from April 2009 you already have heard about PSM, want to share your opinion about it, and can operate words like 'never' and 'always'.
However, you are very wrong telling others that there is no address or company info on our web.
The postal address and the direct phone number are listed on our site. FYI, Pixamba Ltd. registration number is 514250653.

While I respect Keith's questions and going to address them soon, your comments are ... very far from being correct

takestock · « **Reply #7 on:** July 04, 2009, 13:40 »

Quote from: davidm on July 04, 2009, 10:00

Quote from: takestock on July 04, 2009, 06:57
I believe also that keeping your members regularly informed will sustain interest and that they will continue to upload.

Sure, we'll do our best trying to keep you informed.

Here is the current status:

- we see a very nice stream of uploads, much larger than we expected for the first week. That's so great, thank you guys!

- we are working on making the uploads easier. Soon: PSM uploads and acceptance of DVDs, like it was proposed in this thread and by other contributors who send us emails about that. In fact, since the delivery of DVD will take a few days you are welcome to send them right away. Mail them to our postal address. FTP uploads will be implemented a bit later

- categories: we plan experimenting with shrinking them down to primary categories only, plus auto-suggestion of the first category

- 'advanced search' will be available soon in its initial version. If you have any specific suggestion for the advanced search functionality we'll be happy to hear. More stuff is on its way

- marketing, sales & business development: we are very active in this field and we have a nice marketing plan & many ideas how to do the things right. Obviously, none of them I can share in a public forum, even if I would love to hear your feedback. When the time comes you will see the things moving. We do not plan sitting for 2 years in the office waiting for the buyers, like some others micros did in the past. We are full of energy and we know exactly what we want, and how to get there.

- openness, information and service: we love to be in the direct contact with our members, listening to you, learning from you and giving you any help you might need. People who work with ProStockMaster know that we typically react very fast to any customer's inquiry and this is an important part of Pixamba customers service policy. For any matter, it's easy to reach me directly by email, Skype or phone, and it always will stay this way.
@cevapici
- there is no such thing like 'taken market', particularly when we are speaking about just a 5-6 years old microstock industry.

Thanks for the quick response David!

davidm · « **Reply #8 on:** July 05, 2009, 03:32 »

Dear Keith,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I appreciate your opinion, however I guess we have quite a different view on our industry.

You differentiate between the microstock 'sellers' and microstock 'aggregators' while I, for many reasons, see them all like very similar entities. Today, when people say 'microstock aggregators' they probably mean a couple of different companies that pretend to play this role, actually storing content for re-distribution. While I wish a lot of good luck to both of them, PSM is far from being in their league just because the content is delivered directly to the targeted agencies and not aggregated anywhere.
Labeling the market players on this young and unstable market is probably too early and too risky. A straight-forward division of the market players to the 'sellers' and 'aggregators' seems to me as an over-simplified business approach and that's why this approach actually did not work for you. In my understanding, the market reality is much more colorful and much more complicated than just a monochrome 'sellers vs. aggregators' vision.

Furthermore, you claim that there is a lot of value in knowing the sales stats. Let me put this statement in question too.
In fact, there is absolutely no secret what pictures sell well and what do not.
It's so simple, just browse one of the 'big 6' by 'popular' section and you get the idea.
Selling microstock for a few years do not you know what is sellable and what it is not, do you really need any stats to tell you that? No Keith, there is no secret weapon in the selling statistics. Each and every microstock editor / inspector after 1 month of work can distinguish between a 'good' (i.e. sellable) and 'not so good' (i.e. rarely-if-ever sellable) contribution, so you are looking for our competitive advantage in the very wrong place.

It definitely can be very frustrating to see that the competition is getting much tighter, so I completely understand your disappointment.
I wish Zymmetrical great sales and prosperity and I look forward to meet you in person one day, so we can continue sharing our thoughts.

Adeptris · « **Reply #9 on:** July 05, 2009, 06:03 »

Quote from: davidm on July 05, 2009, 03:32

Each and every microstock editor / inspector after 1 month of work can distinguish between a 'good' (i.e. sellable) and 'not so good' (i.e. rarely-if-ever sellable) contribution, so you are looking for our competitive advantage in the very wrong place.

David good points,
This thinking is correct and the exact reason for the amount of similar stale images out there, editor / inspectors were AD's, editors, designers etc: so they should know what sold and what styles would sell from their experience but often in their sector, but how in microstock do they keep up with current changing trends in all sectors of the business.

Microstock websites are just libraries and not collections, they only require plenty of diverse assets in each section (category), some will be the asset of the month and get lots of downloads, some will be steady sellers, other are there just make up the numbers and to stack the shelves for browsers and so the library can say they have 5 million assets, it is the same for the library as it is for the authors a percentage game, a small percentage of downloads from a large library, giving a recurring revenue, the only selling points these offer is on price.

To late to jump on the bandwagon, there is already a Microstock library in every district with an ample supply of good assets, with a loyal customer and vendor base, so any new start-up will not be able to compete or find a competitive advantage anywhere, with just a hash of the same old model.

If microstock is the library, then macrostock is the high end bookstore, exclusive, selective, high value, low distribution, the staff and inspectors here need to understand the active market and have insight as to current trends, the customers will put in a request and the stores 'personal shoppers' will select and fulfil a selection of assets for the customer, this information helps in identifying new trends.

With the Vetta collection and other similar offerings the potential of the middle ground, high street, medium volume bookstore will vanish fast, I have spoken to Keith at length and it looks like he is looking to surround himself with good people like inspectors that have a little more insight and vision, the problem as I see it for all new websites is getting the correct suppliers with their assets, and to find any competitive advantage you need to have these people supporting you, if you cannot market your agency and generate interest with the established suppliers how can you market to customer.

Offering a carrot of higher percentages has just been done to death, the initial thought is "wow 50% of no sales how much is that", that is why established artist are asking all new agencies where the customer base is coming from, and what is the unique selling point that will give a competitive advantage before joining, every new offering will still get a large number of assets uploaded, these will have a heavy cost with inspection to rejection ratio's, and may not be the expected content, and a year down the line the agency will close.

Easy uploads, slick websites, high commission, ftp uploads, ‘by photographers for photographers’, these are no longer attractive to artists, artists are waiting for a website with a unique selling point and a new potential customer base.

I do wish both you and Keith well, but the train has have already left the station.

David

zymmetricaldotcom · « **Reply #10 on:** July 06, 2009, 06:16 »

Hi David (M),

I tried to generalize as much as possible in my proposition, because I meant it in no way to be a question specifically about your business, just that you are the first entity I know of that has 'a service' (aggregator, software, whatever the name is - the service is distribution of digital content and sales statistics collection). Therefore, you have a dataset that offers you alone direct competitive analysis of your Pixamba competition.
I tried to download the free Prostockmaster demo just now but the URL www.prostockmaster.com.nyud.net/dc2/Setup_ProStockMaster_njvm.exe throws an error of some sort. Posting any included TOS on the website itself would probably be beneficial to all, but you are the experienced software dev, i'm guessing the standard is to just have it bundled in the install?

Did you mean the 'view download count at big 6' as satire?

I believe an MBA could not really work with a description of 'sillhouetted goldfish businessmen shaking hands while blowing dandelions jumping on a blue sky background with reflections' as a basis for a business plan. At any rate, i'd be more than happy to discuss these types of things offline with you.. I was just interested in your perspective on the user data collected by Prostockmaster/Isyndica/etc. services, web or desktop. No intention for a sales strategy conversation - I could say that this industry is built from the granular sales up but that's just more hot air - stats and info is where it's at so i'm curious how thing's will play out with the technical side of distribution being flattened.

Quote from: davidm on July 05, 2009, 03:32

Dear Keith,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I appreciate your opinion, however I guess we have quite a different view on our industry.

You differentiate between the microstock 'sellers' and microstock 'aggregators' while I, for many reasons, see them all like very similar entities. Today, when people say 'microstock aggregators' they probably mean a couple of different companies that pretend to play this role, actually storing content for re-distribution. While I wish a lot of good luck to both of them, PSM is far from being in their league just because the content is delivered directly to the targeted agencies and not aggregated anywhere.
Labeling the market players on this young and unstable market is probably too early and too risky. A straight-forward division of the market players to the 'sellers' and 'aggregators' seems to me as an over-simplified business approach and that's why this approach actually did not work for you. In my understanding, the market reality is much more colorful and much more complicated than just a monochrome 'sellers vs. aggregators' vision.

Furthermore, you claim that there is a lot of value in knowing the sales stats. Let me put this statement in question too.
In fact, there is absolutely no secret what pictures sell well and what do not.
It's so simple, just browse one of the 'big 6' by 'popular' section and you get the idea.
Selling microstock for a few years do not you know what is sellable and what it is not, do you really need any stats to tell you that? No Keith, there is no secret weapon in the selling statistics. Each and every microstock editor / inspector after 1 month of work can distinguish between a 'good' (i.e. sellable) and 'not so good' (i.e. rarely-if-ever sellable) contribution, so you are looking for our competitive advantage in the very wrong place.

It definitely can be very frustrating to see that the competition is getting much tighter, so I completely understand your disappointment.
I wish Zymmetrical great sales and prosperity and I look forward to meet you in person one day, so we can continue sharing our thoughts.

lurkertwo · « **Reply #11 on:** July 06, 2009, 06:34 »

Quote from: Adeptris on July 05, 2009, 06:03

I do wish both you and Keith well, but the train has have already left the station.

I had a look at Pixamba again, and I changed my mind. The site has real business info now. The guy is obviously a fighter since he can take critique and he listens. The site looks better programmed than Zymmetrical (sorry) and faster, but I'm not sure about the upload process, in which Release attach is the factor that slows most down. Anybody has experience uploading there?

Pixamba takes editorial, Zymmetrical doesn't. Traditional microstocks like Dreamstime and ShutterStock are getting very critical now about editorial. They seem to confound it with "News". I think I'll give them a try for editorial when they do something about the huge 4.7MP - 11.2MP gap in their pricing system, which excludes my (still popular) 10MP cam.

Prices at Pixamba seem more to lean towards midstock, just like Zymmetrical. I think sites like that deserve full support. The 0.25$ train has left the station but some trains are known to derail.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #12 on:** July 06, 2009, 13:15 »

Quote from: cevapcici on July 06, 2009, 06:34

Prices at Pixamba seem more to lean towards midstock, just like Zymmetrical. I think sites like that deserve full support. The 0.25$ train has left the station but some trains are known to derail.

Pixamba is leaning towards midstock??? What are you looking at???

Pixamba sells images starting from $0.75. Almost every other stock site starts selling images at $1.00. So Pixamba has undercut the other sites by 25%!

Pixamba also allows unlimited runs (which most other sites don't allow) and sells Extended Licenses starting at $3.75 (most other sites charge much much more)!

I'm not sure what you are looking at, but that definitely doesn't resemble midstock to me.

I feel that Pixamba is going in the other direction: nanostock!

davidm · « **Reply #13 on:** July 06, 2009, 14:44 »

Our credit price is on par with other microstocks.

Let's see what some other sites offer:
Site A: Credits: $0.85/image (a big package)
Site A: Subscription: Up to 300 images as low as $0.33/image
Site B: Purchase 2000+ credits and get an additional 25% for free! (i.e. the real credit price is $0.75 - they start from $1/credit)
Site B: Subscriptions starting from $0.14/image!

Are you sure you want me to continue, GeoPappas? Who exactly goes to 'nano-'?
Is that us or your trusted agencies A and B?

Whatever is the credit price for the buyer your contributors commission is still 40% of 1 credit = $1, i.e. $0.40
This is much better than you can get at many micros, so make your own calculations.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #14 on:** July 06, 2009, 16:02 »

davidm:

I. Credit Price Comparison

Quote from: davidm on July 06, 2009, 14:44

Our credit price is on par with other microstocks.

Sorry, but that is simply not true.

Out of the Big 6 (see the column to the right of this), ALL of the sites that provide a pay per image option charge $1.00 or more for the smallest size.

IS charges $18 for 12 credits (or $1.50/credit). So an XSmall image would cost $1.50.

DT charges $6.99 for 5 credits (or $1.40/credit). So an XSmall image would cost $1.40.

FT charges $10 for 10 credits (or $1.00/credit). So an XSmall image would cost $1.00.

StockXpert charges $4.99 for 5 credits (or $1.00/credit). So an XSmall image would cost $1.00.

123RF charges $15 for 15 credits (or $1.00/credit). So an XSmall image would cost $1.00.

Notice that all of the sites charge $1.00 or more for an XSmall image.

Yet you decided to charge $0.75 for an XSmall image. Not only did you undercut the competition, but you did it by a whopping 25% or more.

So your credit price isn't "on par with other microstocks" as you stated.

II. Royalty Comparison

Quote from: davidm on July 06, 2009, 14:44

Whatever is the credit price for the buyer your contributors commission is still 40% of 1 credit = $1, i.e. $0.40
This is much better than you can get at many micros, so make your own calculations.

Once again, this is simply not true.

Here are the royalty comparisons:

IS: 20% of $1.50 = $0.30
DT: 50% of $1.40 = $0.70 (NOTE: royalty amounts go up if an image has >= 5 sales)
FT: 30% of $1.00 = $0.30 (NOTE: contributors can make 32% or more if they have >= 100 sales)
StockXpert: 50% of $1.00 = $0.50
123RF: 50% of $1.00 = $0.50

Pixamba: 40% of $0.75 = $0.30

If you notice, Pixamba is once again at the bottom of the comparison (along with IS and FT). It isn't "much better than you can get at many micros" as you stated.

III. Unlimited Runs & Extended Licenses

On top of that, you allow unlimited runs (which almost all other sites require an Extended License for) and you start your Extended Licenses at $3.75 (which is ridiculously low).

Why should we support another stock site that wants to race to the bottom?

madelaide · « **Reply #15 on:** July 06, 2009, 16:38 »

Quote from: GeoPappas on July 06, 2009, 16:02

Pixamba: 40% of $0.75 = $0.30

According to Davidm's post, it's always 40c per credit, no matter how much the buyer paid for it.

IS credit can be US$0.95 in the largest package. I observe more commonly ~1.10.

gbcimages · « **Reply #16 on:** July 06, 2009, 16:40 »

it's .40 I had one xs small DL today

GeoPappas · « **Reply #17 on:** July 06, 2009, 17:31 »

Quote from: madelaide on July 06, 2009, 16:38

Quote from: GeoPappas on July 06, 2009, 16:02
Pixamba: 40% of $0.75 = $0.30

According to Davidm's post, it's always 40c per credit, no matter how much the buyer paid for it.

According to the Pixamba home page, an XSmall image costs $0.75 (or 1 credit). See here:

Additionally, another Pixamba web page (http://www.pixamba.com/prices.html) also states that an XSmall image costs $0.75.

That is what I was using for the comparison (since they provided the only info that I could find that showed the cost per image).

But it seems that this is just a marketing ploy by Pixamba. The price that is displayed on these Pixamba web pages is only valid for a buyer that purchases 500 credits!

After joining the site, I found that the cost for a base package is $4.99 for 5 credits (or about $1/credit). So this confirms that an XSmall image costs about $1.00 and that the royalty would be $0.40, but these amounts are still both near the bottom of the industry.

It has been shown time and again that buyers are not extremely sensitive to price. They will gladly pay a little more if they can find the correct image for their project. So why are new sites still trying to compete on price?

And there are still the issues of unlimited production runs and industry low prices for Extended Licenses.

How would any of you like to receive $2.00 for an Extended License and then find your image on a product for resale by an upscale company (Martha Stewart, Nieman Marcus, etc)

madelaide · « **Reply #18 on:** July 06, 2009, 17:35 »

Geo,

What Davidm said is that you get 40c per credit, and cbg received such earnings.

Probably the first sentence in the FAQ should be changed; the second seems coherent:

Quote

You get 40% of each sale of your image. For instance, if the sale price was 10 credits you get $4 on this sale.

It's not 40%, but 40c per credit.

Prices should say "as low as 75c" or something like that. In the link you sent, there is a note:

Quote

* - content prices vary depending on (...) the credits package you got.

GeoPappas · « **Reply #19 on:** July 06, 2009, 17:52 »

Quote from: madelaide on July 06, 2009, 17:35

Quote
You get 40% of each sale of your image. For instance, if the sale price was 10 credits you get $4 on this sale.

It's not 40%, but 40c per credit.

I don't think that you are correct.

I believe that the royalty is 40% per credit. As the credit price decreases (depending on the credit package purchased), the royalty decreases as well. So if a buyer purchases 500 credits, then you will receive $0.30 per credit (since a credit is worth $0.75).

This means that the contributor eats the discount that is given to the buyer. This is similar to how IS operates. If you remember, there was a lot of dissent when IS made that change.

madelaide · « **Reply #20 on:** July 06, 2009, 18:21 »

It's better have Davidm clarify this. It's his site, I haven't even signed up to it.

melastmohican · « **Reply #21 on:** July 06, 2009, 19:12 »

I just "reserved" my user name :-)

Phil · « **Reply #22 on:** July 06, 2009, 20:44 »

Quote from: GeoPappas on July 06, 2009, 17:31

Quote from: madelaide on July 06, 2009, 16:38
Quote from: GeoPappas on July 06, 2009, 16:02
Pixamba: 40% of $0.75 = $0.30

According to Davidm's post, it's always 40c per credit, no matter how much the buyer paid for it.

According to the Pixamba home page, an XSmall image costs $0.75 (or 1 credit). See here:

Additionally, another Pixamba web page (http://www.pixamba.com/prices.html) also states that an XSmall image costs $0.75.

That is what I was using for the comparison (since they provided the only info that I could find that showed the cost per image).

But it seems that this is just a marketing ploy by Pixamba. The price that is displayed on these Pixamba web pages is only valid for a buyer that purchases 500 credits!

After joining the site, I found that the cost for a base package is $4.99 for 5 credits (or about $1/credit). So this confirms that an XSmall image costs about $1.00 and that the royalty would be $0.40, but these amounts are still both near the bottom of the industry.

It has been shown time and again that buyers are not extremely sensitive to price. They will gladly pay a little more if they can find the correct image for their project. So why are new sites still trying to compete on price?

And there are still the issues of unlimited production runs and industry low prices for Extended Licenses.

How would any of you like to receive $2.00 for an Extended License and then find your image on a product for resale by an upscale company (Martha Stewart, Nieman Marcus, etc)

Maybe I'm over sensitive to that sort of thing but if saw the front page and found a nice xxl image at 9 credit image at $6.75, I really wouldn't be impressed to find it cost me around a thrid more at $9. Definetly needs some "from"'s on there

davidm · « **Reply #23 on:** July 07, 2009, 01:00 »

Quote from: madelaide on July 06, 2009, 17:35

Geo,

What Davidm said is that you get 40c per credit, and cbg received such earnings.

Probably the first sentence in the FAQ should be changed; the second seems coherent:
Quote
You get 40% of each sale of your image. For instance, if the sale price was 10 credits you get $4 on this sale.

It's not 40%, but 40c per credit.

Prices should say "as low as 75c" or something like that. In the link you sent, there is a note:
Quote
* - content prices vary depending on (...) the credits package you got.

Thanks madelaide, it is a good clarification.
Whatever is our credits selling price the contributor gets 40% of 1 credit which is always considered to be $1, i.e. $0.40
If we sell credits for less than $1 our commission is smaller, but yours remains to be $0.40
So yes, it is better to say that this is a $0.40/credit contributor's commission

Like with others, the credit price depends on how many credits the buyer buys and at the moment the credit price varies from $1 to $0.75, depending on the package size. This is on par with other microstocks, if you can read their pricing correctly - see my previous post here.

Every agency offers today at least 25% discount for the large credits bulks, so we do. Comparing the credit price for credits sold in small packages, where they cost $1 to $1.5 to the prices for credits sold in the large packages ($0.85 - $0.75 and even less) would be incorrect. Of course you will see 25% and even more price difference comparing small package credit price of agency A to the large package credit price of agency B, but it is pretty much like comparing apples to oranges.

The ad on our main page shows the lowest credit price the buyer can get, i.e. $0.75/credit for a big package. There is a text below saying that the images prices vary according to the licenses and the credits packages.

When we sell a 1-credit image your earnings are $0.40 even if the buyer actually paid us just $0.75/credit, so in fact you get 53% of the sale price for a non-exclusive contribution.

lurkertwo · « **Reply #24 on:** July 07, 2009, 04:18 »

Quote from: GeoPappas on July 06, 2009, 13:15

Pixamba sells images starting from $0.75. Almost every other stock site starts selling images at $1.00. So Pixamba has undercut the other sites by 25%!

I just looked at a shot that was on Panthermedia, then compared it with the Pixamba price. Largest size was mention 60 credits.

Quote from: GeoPappas on July 06, 2009, 13:15

Pixamba also allows unlimited runs (which most other sites don't allow) and sells Extended Licenses starting at $3.75 (most other sites charge much much more)!

Yes I saw that later. 3.75$ x 40% = 1.50$. Can't believe that's right since it's ridiculous. ShutterStock gives as much or double of it for a simple on demand, and around 28$ for an extended license, any size.

Quote from: GeoPappas on July 06, 2009, 13:15

I'm not sure what you are looking at, but that definitely doesn't resemble midstock to me.
I feel that Pixamba is going in the other direction: nanostock!

It gives at least an uncomfortable feeling, all this slickness and cleverness as to pricing tricks. Superficially looking, I had the impression that Pixamba was more midstock, then when you read all the small numbers, it turns out you can sell and extended license for just 1.50$. That will harm your EL sales a lot on other sites, as soon as EL buyers find out it's a giveaway on Pixamba. And ELs are the cream and butter of microstock. I'm also annoyed by the clever trick to make a jump from a mere 4.7MP to 11.2MP, bypassing the most popular cam formats like 6, 8 and 10. Slick. Too slick.

Time will tell when the uploaders on all new sites will report their actual RPD. If it's OK, there is still time to jump on the bandwagon.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Pixamba - Please keep us informed! (Read 23461 times)

takestock

lurkertwo

davidm

zymmetricaldotcom

lurkertwo

zymmetricaldotcom

davidm

takestock

davidm

Adeptris

zymmetricaldotcom

lurkertwo

GeoPappas

davidm

GeoPappas

madelaide

gbcimages

GeoPappas

madelaide

GeoPappas

madelaide

melastmohican

Phil

davidm

lurkertwo

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors