Author Topic: PIXYLOO Announcement (Read 29077 times)

PIXYLOO · « **Reply #25 on:** November 21, 2014, 14:23 »

Quote from: tickstock on November 21, 2014, 13:00

I don't like the name but the terms seem fair. What makes this site any different from all the other sites? By that I mean if you are offering the same content as everyone else why will buyers go there, especially when I can find that content at lower prices on other sites?

It depends on what agency a buyer is comparing us to. We're pricing by usage and not image size. With that in mind our $10 web standard license is very competitive and in many cases more affordable than quite a few of the popular credit based micros where the same file size costs up to more than double our pricing .. forgive me for not being more specific but I'm not fond of namedropping

.. When it comes to the extended usage .. yeah we're more pricy than the typical micro but we're also more affordable than many mid-stock sites. It's impossible to compete with everyone in terms of price because all the agencies have their prices just randomly scattered all across the board. However, one of our big focus points is competing on improving the buyers workflow and helping them find what they need faster. It's more difficult to see this in action right now because the site isn't loaded up with images. As it fills up this will become more apparent.

bunhill · « **Reply #26 on:** November 21, 2014, 14:35 »

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 13:44

Quote from: bunhill on November 21, 2014, 12:47
How are you dealing with the whole withholding tax issue wrt non US contributors ? Are you deducting US withholding taxes ? Also - will you be applying sales taxes (TVA, VAT etc) to customers where applicable - e.g. those in EU countries ?

No different than other businesses. I do not handle our accounting so excuse me if I don't word something properly but basically you'll need to complete a W-8BEN and there's a 30% withholding .. unless your in a country that has a tax treaty with us .. in which case it will be between 0-15% depending on the country. Yes we are also required to apply sales tax to the EUs which is built into the system. I know ... taxes suck.

Kudos ! First time I can remember that a newly announced site was able to answer those two questions straight off the bat. Good luck.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #27 on:** November 21, 2014, 14:52 »

Two things i noticed when I looked at the site today:

1) you don't show the pixel dimensions of the image. I know you have a minimum, but a print buyer will need to know how large it is to have an idea if it'll work for them. For very large applications, an 8MP image might not do but a 21MP image will

2) I can't go from a search or browsing on the home page to the detail page just by clicking on the thumbnail. I have to click inside the detail box in the center. That's massively irritating and I can't see how it adds anything useful.

I sent in an application

Maximilian · « **Reply #28 on:** November 21, 2014, 14:54 »

I will test it too with a few hundreds of images.

PIXYLOO · « **Reply #29 on:** November 21, 2014, 15:11 »

Quote from: sweetgirll on November 21, 2014, 13:16

Hi,

Pixyloo's site is looking good...

Are those photos on the site yours? They are really nice.

I didn't see any "about us" page with the name of the owners or further information.... is nice to know who are the people running a company, what country / state the company is based of.

Good luck with the new site.

Yes those are mine and thank you very much.

This is the beginning of our pre-launch phase where our time will be spent recruiting photographers, curating the initial image collection, preparing site documentation and so on. Think of it as a beta release for a new software application. All of you artists are seeing what takes place before the finished product is released to the public. About me pages and things of that nature will be added but once the technical aspects were streamlined and the business plan in place .. it was time to get the ball rolling on seeking contributors .. because the process of filling the site with images is the most time consuming. However, I have seen others in the past fall into the "these people are hiding something" simply because they were also in the pre-launch phase. With that said, I'm open to any questions or concerns during our pre-launch.

Just some quick info while I'm on the topic .. my name is Randy McKown. Photography was passed on to me by my father going on 3 decades ago, my wife is a photographer, which together we've ran one of the top studios in the area together and now our daughter is working on joining in the family tradition. We are located in a surrounding community of the Kansas City metro. We do not have any investors or plan to acquire any. Our studio has been around for a decade and PIXYLOO is the next step in expanding on our existing business model. We'll get a more appropriate about us on the website before official launch .. and hopefully it won't be too boring because I'm not a fan of talking about myself

Quote from: Tror on November 21, 2014, 13:27

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 06:29
Royalties :: 40% for non-exclusivity.

I`m out. Anything below 50% is not acceptable for a newcomer.

Further thoughts:

1. No offical information displayed: Who are you? What is your VAT number? Where is your company registered? Do you give official invoices? Hiding behind a nice website was possible 10 years ago. Today its a nogo. Looks like the domain is registered to Randy McKown.
2. Nice concept.
3. You might consider changing your name.

That's perfectly understandable. We know that we cannot be the best fit for everybody. We're still a baby company at this point and we won't be suitable for a number of photographers until we've grown and proven to be a worthy choice. It's all good.

We have not officially launched yet. All legal requirements and documentations will be made available as they are required and completed before we launch.

After Dirkr pointed out the portable DixiLoo there's no way we can change our name .. it's just too funny.

dirkr · « **Reply #30 on:** November 21, 2014, 15:31 »

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 15:11

After Dirkr pointed out the portable DixiLoo there's no way we can change our name .. it's just too funny.

The funny thing is: These "Dixi"-Loos are very well-known here in Germany. It's one of those cases where a brand name becomes a synonym for the product. If anybody in Germany refers to a portable toilette (the kind that is used at construction sites or any bigger events like concerts or festivals) they will always talk about a "Dixi-Klo" (where Klo is the colloquial expression for toilette).
Until this thread I hadn't realised that this is obviously not an international recognized brand name

PIXYLOO · « **Reply #31 on:** November 21, 2014, 15:37 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on November 21, 2014, 14:52

Two things i noticed when I looked at the site today:

1) you don't show the pixel dimensions of the image. I know you have a minimum, but a print buyer will need to know how large it is to have an idea if it'll work for them. For very large applications, an 8MP image might not do but a 21MP image will

2) I can't go from a search or browsing on the home page to the detail page just by clicking on the thumbnail. I have to click inside the detail box in the center. That's massively irritating and I can't see how it adds anything useful.

I sent in an application

Hey Jo Ann. Yes the buyers absolutely need to know that information and the EXIF automation is actually being worked on now. That's something that will definitely be in place before we begin marketing to buyers.

I agree the details box in the thumbnails does seem annoying by itself. Right now it's there because we might be adding a couple more features that will appear alongside it that will at which point it will make more sense. However, if we decide not to implement the other features on the thumbnails then that details button will either be history or restyled appropriately.

tickstock · « **Reply #32 on:** November 21, 2014, 15:59 »

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 14:23

Quote from: tickstock on November 21, 2014, 13:00
I don't like the name but the terms seem fair. What makes this site any different from all the other sites? By that I mean if you are offering the same content as everyone else why will buyers go there, especially when I can find that content at lower prices on other sites?

It depends on what agency a buyer is comparing us to. We're pricing by usage and not image size. With that in mind our $10 web standard license is very competitive and in many cases more affordable than quite a few of the popular credit based micros where the same file size costs up to more than double our pricing .. forgive me for not being more specific but I'm not fond of namedropping .. When it comes to the extended usage .. yeah we're more pricy than the typical micro but we're also more affordable than many mid-stock sites. It's impossible to compete with everyone in terms of price because all the agencies have their prices just randomly scattered all across the board. However, one of our big focus points is competing on improving the buyers workflow and helping them find what they need faster. It's more difficult to see this in action right now because the site isn't loaded up with images. As it fills up this will become more apparent.

I understand you are pricing by usage but why would a buyer go to this site and pay $10 for web usage when they could go to iStock and pay almost the same for web + print usage? Or why would a buyer spend $25 for print usage (does print usage include web usage or would you need to buy two licenses?) when they could spend about $10 at sites like iStock, Shutterstock, Dreamstime, etc... I'm not sure which sites are charging nearly double for nonexclusive content, iStock charges $8-$12, Shutterstock $9-$15, Dreamstime about $11-$15, etc... with pretty much all those sites charging less for ELs. I think you can't compare midstock or macrostock prices to these images since they are being licensed on other microstock sites, that's the competition isn't it? My question is still what makes this site better for a buyer than any of the other sites that offer the same content? You said something vague about improving buyers workflow, what does that mean?

PIXYLOO · « **Reply #33 on:** November 21, 2014, 16:03 »

Quote from: dirkr on November 21, 2014, 15:31

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 15:11
After Dirkr pointed out the portable DixiLoo there's no way we can change our name .. it's just too funny.

The funny thing is: These "Dixi"-Loos are very well-known here in Germany. It's one of those cases where a brand name becomes a synonym for the product. If anybody in Germany refers to a portable toilette (the kind that is used at construction sites or any bigger events like concerts or festivals) they will always talk about a "Dixi-Klo" (where Klo is the colloquial expression for toilette).
Until this thread I hadn't realised that this is obviously not an international recognized brand name

Yeah we'd never heard of a DixiLoo. Years ago we had a popular brand here called "Johnny on the Spot" that had such a monopoly everybody referred to all portable toilets by that name .. up until recent years. These days it's more common to just find .. I guess you'd call it generic white labeled portable toilets where companies buy non-branded toilets, slap their company logo on it which usually says something boring like "Joe's Portable Toilet Rental Service" and then rent them out to the same types of places that you find your DixiLoos. It's always interesting to find out how different things can be when you venture outside of your culture.

PIXYLOO · « **Reply #34 on:** November 21, 2014, 16:47 »

Quote from: tickstock on November 21, 2014, 15:59

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 14:23
Quote from: tickstock on November 21, 2014, 13:00
I don't like the name but the terms seem fair. What makes this site any different from all the other sites? By that I mean if you are offering the same content as everyone else why will buyers go there, especially when I can find that content at lower prices on other sites?

It depends on what agency a buyer is comparing us to. We're pricing by usage and not image size. With that in mind our $10 web standard license is very competitive and in many cases more affordable than quite a few of the popular credit based micros where the same file size costs up to more than double our pricing .. forgive me for not being more specific but I'm not fond of namedropping .. When it comes to the extended usage .. yeah we're more pricy than the typical micro but we're also more affordable than many mid-stock sites. It's impossible to compete with everyone in terms of price because all the agencies have their prices just randomly scattered all across the board. However, one of our big focus points is competing on improving the buyers workflow and helping them find what they need faster. It's more difficult to see this in action right now because the site isn't loaded up with images. As it fills up this will become more apparent.
I understand you are pricing by usage but why would a buyer go to this site and pay $10 for web usage when they could go to iStock and pay almost the same for web + print usage? Or why would a buyer spend $25 for print usage (does print usage include web usage or would you need to buy two licenses?) when they could spend about $10 at sites like iStock, Shutterstock, Dreamstime, etc... I'm not sure which sites are charging nearly double for nonexclusive content, iStock charges $8-$12, Shutterstock $9-$15, Dreamstime about $11-$15, etc... with pretty much all those sites charging less for ELs. I think you can't compare midstock or macrostock prices to these images since they are being licensed on other microstock sites, that's the competition isn't it? My question is still what makes this site better for a buyer than any of the other sites that offer the same content? You said something vague about improving buyers workflow, what does that mean?

All of our images will be equal to a max image size so on DT for example depending on how many sales the image has it will cost 10 Credits to 19 Credits which actually comes out to $13.60 to $25.84 … that price can be dropped as low as $8.80 to $16.72 but you’ll need to spend nearly a couple grand all at once buying bulk credits to get that discount. Now at IS you can get a high-res image just like ours for only $1 more .. but that is also restricted to only images in the essential collection. If the image you need is in their signature collection the price automatically triples.

Here's an earlier comment that might help give a quick idea about what I mean when I talk about buyer workflow & the customer experience.

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 08:46

Quote from: Mantis on November 21, 2014, 07:16

I went traveling after I got your email, and forgot to respond, so above are my initial thoughts. Micro stock is on a critical mass downward spiral in terms of contributor royalties and agency honesty, integrity and trust. It will be very hard to compete in this bubble in a way that drives success and good partnerships, but I am behind you.

We went with 40% because out of our commission, we’re going to be initially using 10% for core expenses and then giving the rest back to the buyers to stimulate sales. The more we give back to buyers .. the more they’re going to spend .. which goes back into the contributors pockets. We also need to have enough of a buffer between non-exclusive % and the exclusive benefits once we put those into place .. or else there would be no “real” advantage to being exclusive. Of course once the buyer base is established and stable it’s more of an issue of what’s going to make our contributors happy and still be sustainable. You can always make people happy by giving them a raise later .. it’s when a business start out too generous and has to make temporary cutbacks later that gets people steaming.

Yes, the entire subscription issue is an annoying hurdle. To be perfectly blunt, the sub model should have never been created in the first place. Obviously, not the creation of anyone who has ever worked a day as a professional photographer. Too late now .. but we will not encourage them. Not only does the sub model insult the photographer .. it rips off the buyer, who typically doesn’t max their downloads due to fluctuating workloads and the fact that 2 days of the week they’re not even in the office. The only ones who benefit are the agencies who offer them … get paid for a sale without delivering a product or paying royalties on the sale. I know we could profit a lot more by offering them but the fact that I shoot for a living and my personal ethics won’t allow it.

Honestly, those who get in from the beginning are going to have the advantage. Do buyers need that image of an isolated tomato? Most definitely and we want to make that available for them. Are we going to continue accepting thousands of isolated tomatoes for the next decade? Nope.
We’re going to bring in new photographers in phases. The ones now are going to have a lot more flexibility in what they upload than those who join a year from now.

No, we don’t expect a problem with the 40 bazillion images issue anytime in the near future. LOL .. I’ve sat down with designers and content providers and a common complaint is that they can’t find what they’re looking for quickly because there’s simply too much crap to wade through. Back to that isolated tomato .. how long does it take to find the image you want for a project when you have to sit there browsing though page after page after page of tomatoes that all pretty much look identical. We don’t want to offer designers 50,000 images of tomatoes to choose from. We want them to search tomato and be given a decently sized yet diverse selection of quality tomato shots that they can quickly choose from and get back to work on their project. The designer is happy because we’ve taken away their frustration and the companies CFO is happy because their staff isn’t wasting man hours.

I don’t want to use Stockfresh as an example because I have nothing to do with them and I don’t wish to speak negatively about any of the agencies for that matter. However, I think a great example to get my point across is simply using photography studios in general. For the last decade my wife & I have owned a portrait studio in our metro area. I don’t even bother counting the competing studios in this city anymore .. there are literally thousands of them here within a 30 mile radius who charge a fraction of what we do … we know people who have had their all day wedding shot for 50 bucks. However, we still shoot more clients every year than 99% of them and commonly have portrait clients drive up to 2 1/2 hours to get here. My point being it is possible to operate successfully without even trying to compete with everybody. One of the things that made our studio one of the top studios in the region was not entirely our skilled experience but the human experience we created for our clients .. that’s something we want to bring to PIXYLOO.

and thanks for your detailed feedback .. it's greatly appreciated.

You also have to keep in mind that price is not always a factor for many consumers .. why would I pay $15 for a small coffee and muffin at Starbucks when I could get a pretty tasty muffin and an extra large coffee at the gas station / convenience store for $3? It's about the branding and the customer experience.
We've been offering an add-on to our portrait clients for years called "Rock the Dress - Tropical" high school seniors pay us an extra $150 for a 30 minute add-on where we let them put on "their own" prom dress and we shoot them in a local waterfall. They NEVER even purchase prints from this add-on but nearly all of them upgrade to it. They could put on a dress and roll around in the water all day every day for free .. but they pay us for it because they want to have that experience ... and we've branded it to the point that's it's no longer just about having a portrait in a waterfall .. it's about us photographing them in the waterfall.
Regardless of what business you go into, wether you're dealing with business professionals, brides or teenage girls ... branding and experience are 2 vital keys to success. That's something I have always stressed on when giving lectures.

rimglow · « **Reply #35 on:** November 21, 2014, 17:03 »

I'm watching some of your YouTube videos. Very professional! Everyone should check them out.

tickstock · « **Reply #36 on:** November 21, 2014, 17:06 »

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 16:47

Now at IS you can get a high-res image just like ours for only $1 more .. but that is also restricted to only images in the essential collection. If the image you need is in their signature collection the price automatically triples.

Exclusive images are a different thing. You are offering nonexclusive images for the same price as other sites. I can't go to iStock find an exclusive image and then go to your site to buy it cheaper but I could go to your site, find an image, and then go somewhere else and buy it cheaper. There has to be a reason a buyer will go to your site. Saying that images at your site are cheaper than images exclusive to another site probably won't be a huge selling point but some other site saying they have the exact same images for cheaper seems to me to be a good selling point.
You talk about branding "It's about the branding and the customer experience." How is your site going to be branded differently than the 50 other sites that sell basically the same exact content in order for it to stand out? From what you've written it looks like you are going to be much more selective than the other sites but the images you have on there now are fairly ordinary stock photos (I'm not trying to be disrespectful, think what you see when you go to a site like Stocksy, it's something different and has unique content). Wasn't that Crestock's business model? If you are selective to the point of differentiating yourself I think you'll have a lot of angry people on this forum, they don't like rejections for bad images just wait till they get rejections for good images.

You also didn't answer if you would need a print and a separate web license if you wanted to use the content in both places? It's unclear to me from my quick browsing.

Fairplay · « **Reply #37 on:** November 21, 2014, 17:20 »

So I guess it's not that hard to introduce youself?
You are Randy Mckown: "I'm the founder of PIXYLOO & a professional photographer based out of the United States."

...based out of the United States? Where?

http://www.dreamstime.com/fotoeye75_info

cuppacoffee · « **Reply #38 on:** November 21, 2014, 17:38 »

Quote from: Fairplay on November 21, 2014, 17:20

So I guess it's not that hard to introduce youself?
You are Randy Mckown: "I'm the founder of PIXYLOO & a professional photographer based out of the United States."

...based out of the United States? Where?

http://www.dreamstime.com/fotoeye75_info

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 09:32

Quote from: rimglow on November 21, 2014, 09:21
Are you located in Ann Arbor, MI or Kansas?

just outside the Kansas City metro on the Missouri side.

PIXYLOO · « **Reply #39 on:** November 21, 2014, 18:33 »

Quote from: tickstock on November 21, 2014, 17:06

Quote from: PIXYLOO on November 21, 2014, 16:47
Now at IS you can get a high-res image just like ours for only $1 more .. but that is also restricted to only images in the essential collection. If the image you need is in their signature collection the price automatically triples.
Exclusive images are a different thing. You are offering nonexclusive images for the same price as other sites. I can't go to iStock find an exclusive image and then go to your site to buy it cheaper but I could go to your site, find an image, and then go somewhere else and buy it cheaper. There has to be a reason a buyer will go to your site. Saying that images at your site are cheaper than images exclusive to another site probably won't be a huge selling point but some other site saying they have the exact same images for cheaper seems to me to be a good selling point.
You talk about branding "It's about the branding and the customer experience." How is your site going to be branded differently than the 50 other sites that sell basically the same exact content in order for it to stand out? From what you've written it looks like you are going to be much more selective than the other sites but the images you have on there now are fairly ordinary stock photos (I'm not trying to be disrespectful, think what you see when you go to a site like Stocksy, it's something different and has unique content). Wasn't that Crestock's business model? If you are selective to the point of differentiating yourself I think you'll have a lot of angry people on this forum, they don't like rejections for bad images just wait till they get rejections for good images.

You also didn't answer if you would need a print and a separate web license if you wanted to use the content in both places? It's unclear to me from my quick browsing.

A buyer could go to Agency A and search for the image they need for the project they're working on. Once they found it they could theoretically hunt down that same image that is being offered on Agency B .. but it's a level 5 image there and costs more .. so they proceed to find that image on Agency C where they can finally get the best price. This kind of falls into a "what if" category. While a buyer could do that .. most don't have the time or they simply don't care. What they care about is getting what they need so they can complete their project and move on to the next one. When you start heading down the road of let's do this cheaper than the next guy .. whose also thinking let's do this even cheaper .. what you end up with is a whole lot of 25 cent royalties .. that's not a good direction to travel.

Naturally, there are those who try to save every single penny they can. That's fine .. those people are going to be sub buyers somewhere else no matter what. However, that doesn't mean all consumers think that way. There's plenty of other consumers who will be loyal to their favorite local store and pay well above retail prices simply because they think the store smells like fresh baked cookies when they walk in the door ... or because when they checkout the clerks are always talking to them about something they're interested in ... or because the store next door just tosses their items in a plain bag and the store that charges more uses cute designer bags and throws a lollipop inside the bag before they give it to you. It's the little things that add up. Right now we're in pre-launch so I would agree 100% that we definitely will look no different that most competitors ... but it's the little things we do over time that start adding up into something different. What you see now is not going to be the same thing you find a year from now. Nothing good comes overnight

Sorry I didn't catch the license question. That info hasn't been added to the site yet but no, buyers will not be required to by a web standard if the buy a print standard .. web usage will be included with a print sale. Before we officially launch and begin marketing to buyers, that type of information will be clearly stated and easily spotted on every product page.

Realist · « **Reply #40 on:** November 21, 2014, 18:44 »

Quote from: Tror on November 21, 2014, 13:27

1. No offical information displayed: Who are you? What is your VAT number? Where is your company registered? Do you give official invoices? Hiding behind a nice website was possible 10 years ago. Today its a nogo. Looks like the domain is registered to Randy McKown.
2. Nice concept.
3. You might consider changing your name.

+ 1.000.000.000

PZF · « **Reply #41 on:** November 22, 2014, 03:22 »

But you really MUST change your name from
TOILET!!!!!!

Seems Microstock really is going down the pan.......!

Fairplay · « **Reply #42 on:** November 22, 2014, 03:47 »

Quote from: Fairplay on November 21, 2014, 17:20

So I guess it's not that hard to introduce youself?
You are Randy Mckown: "I'm the founder of PIXYLOO & a professional photographer based out of the United States."

...based out of the United States? Where?

http://www.dreamstime.com/fotoeye75_info

For those who didn't understand my point!
I'm just wondering why the owner of a new agency is lying he's based out of the United States in his profile on PIXYLOO!
I can't trust him and won't upload my portfolio!

amabu · « **Reply #43 on:** November 22, 2014, 04:07 »

Quote from: Fairplay on November 22, 2014, 03:47

Quote from: Fairplay on November 21, 2014, 17:20
So I guess it's not that hard to introduce youself?
You are Randy Mckown: "I'm the founder of PIXYLOO & a professional photographer based out of the United States."

...based out of the United States? Where?

http://www.dreamstime.com/fotoeye75_info

For those who didn't understand my point!
I'm just wondering why the owner of a new agency is lying he's based out of the United States in his profile on PIXYLOO!
I can't trust him and won't upload my portfolio!

maybe you should brush up your English before you make unfounded accusations...

jatrax · « **Reply #44 on:** November 22, 2014, 04:15 »

Quote from: Fairplay on November 22, 2014, 03:47

Quote from: Fairplay on November 21, 2014, 17:20
So I guess it's not that hard to introduce youself?
You are Randy Mckown: "I'm the founder of PIXYLOO & a professional photographer based out of the United States."

...based out of the United States? Where?

http://www.dreamstime.com/fotoeye75_info

For those who didn't understand my point!
I'm just wondering why the owner of a new agency is lying he's based out of the United States in his profile on PIXYLOO!
I can't trust him and won't upload my portfolio!

I don`t understand what you mean? He has said several times he is in the USA in Missouri in fact which matches the address in the link to his dreamstime account you posted. So what is the issue???

stockuser · « **Reply #45 on:** November 22, 2014, 05:07 »

I'm not a native speaker but I think 'based out of USA' means 'located in the USA but doing business worldwide' for a non-native speaker this could be easily misunderstood as 'not located in the USA'. I think this is the way fairplay understood it.

ShadySue · « **Reply #46 on:** November 22, 2014, 06:06 »

Quote from: stockuser on November 22, 2014, 05:07

I'm not a native speaker but I think 'based out of USA' means 'located in the USA but doing business worldwide' for a non-native speaker this could be easily misunderstood as 'not located in the USA'. I think this is the way fairplay understood it.

Yes, Fairplay has probably misunderstood 'out of' as meaning 'outwith'.

Ranker · « **Reply #47 on:** November 22, 2014, 06:11 »

Lost in translation

Ranker · « **Reply #48 on:** November 22, 2014, 06:15 »

Quote

We prefer to see current stock portfolios on existing agencies before considering you for an invitation. If you link to a non-agency portfolio, make sure that we can evaluate your images at high resolution.

Which agency allows you to see images at hight resolution? Are you buying images to check them? What is the difference between a non agency portfolio and a portfolio on an agency?

Photobomb · « **Reply #49 on:** November 22, 2014, 09:15 »

Quote from: ShadySue on November 22, 2014, 06:06

Quote from: stockuser on November 22, 2014, 05:07
I'm not a native speaker but I think 'based out of USA' means 'located in the USA but doing business worldwide' for a non-native speaker this could be easily misunderstood as 'not located in the USA'. I think this is the way fairplay understood it.
Yes, Fairplay has probably misunderstood 'out of' as meaning 'outwith'.

And there's a word no American English speaker would ever use.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: PIXYLOO Announcement (Read 29077 times)

PIXYLOO

bunhill

Jo Ann Snover

Maximilian

PIXYLOO

dirkr

PIXYLOO

tickstock

PIXYLOO

PIXYLOO

rimglow

tickstock

Fairplay

cuppacoffee

PIXYLOO

Realist

PZF

Fairplay

amabu

jatrax

stockuser

ShadySue

Ranker

Ranker

Photobomb

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors