MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: What a "nice" surprise  (Read 29414 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #75 on: February 22, 2017, 11:32 »
+2
The music industry analogy is great, people love paying 99 cents for a song or maybe a bit more for a higher bitrate version of that same song vs $15 for a whole CD but with video it seems unless price high you don't sell.

One could have the same file sze and format and priced for a couple of dollars and a few hundred dollars and the high priced one will always sell.

This also blows the theory of demand from YouTubers right out of the water...

That might be how it is for you. It's not how it is for me. So how it is for one person is unlikely to blow anything out of the water. Take this clip...

https://videohive.net/item/global-network-orange/12004875

The high priced versions (at SS, iS, FT, VB, P5 etc) do sell, don't get me wrong, but I don't get $43 a month, every month, like I do on VH. 'Selling' doesn't automatically mean selling more, or earning more profit. One or two sales a month means one thing... fifteen sales a month means something different.

« Last Edit: February 22, 2017, 11:50 by SpaceStockFootage »


« Reply #76 on: February 28, 2017, 09:29 »
+3
After more than 5 years being contributor and according to their site still among the top 50 authors ...

Wish you all the best and see you in the next life ENVATO!

And now they're not paying if you've a leftover of unpaid royalties if they're less than 50$. I've made a withdrawal BEFORE being screwed out of their system.

How do you say when someone takes something without paying?

Maybe STEALING is not the correct word but it's the first that comes in my mind.

« Reply #77 on: February 28, 2017, 10:18 »
+1
After more than 5 years being contributor and according to their site still among the top 50 authors ...

Wish you all the best and see you in the next life ENVATO!

And now they're not paying if you've a leftover of unpaid royalties if they're less than 50$. I've made a withdrawal BEFORE being screwed out of their system.

How do you say when someone takes something without paying?

Maybe STEALING is not the correct word but it's the first that comes in my mind.
Do you have the link where they say this....Its not their money so as far as I'm concerned it is stealing.

« Reply #78 on: February 28, 2017, 10:56 »
+3
From my perspective

You need to realize that telling someone they don't value their work can be a condescending insult when the bottom line answers are right there.

That's why John Lennon's personal tape master of Imagine may cost $1 million while the digital copy is $0.99. I'm sure you understand the difference but just want to be difficult.


If seller 'A' sells for a fair market price or more, then they literally hold value in their work. If seller 'B' can only make an equal amount by selling well below market price, undercutting seller 'A' in the process, then seller 'B' is demonstrating that they do not value their own work. Sure, I'm pointing that out, but you are the one doing it. The normal market price for HD video at this time, set by the leaders of the industry, not me or you, is $50+. $8 is substantially lower than market value. And since no one put a gun to your head, that you choose to sell for that price, you are valuing your work low all by yourself. Plain but apparently no-so-simple for some of you.

Since this is all about undercutting, your comparison of stock video to iTunes is irrelevant, because the normalized market price of a digital download is now $0.99, so you, me or the Beatles selling tracks at $0.99 is not undercutting. The two markets are not logically comparable, in many ways. As sad as that may be, it's how it is. Why would you want to push the video market that way anyways?

Why is it that the only option for adaptation in some of your minds, is dropping price?

And then, the irony of using John Lennon as an example, is pretty solid. That man embodied ethics, philosophy, principles, having some respect for yourself and those around you, the greater good, I mean like, you know, essentially a perfect example of what I've been suggesting more of us should emulate.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 11:06 by Daryl Ray »

« Reply #79 on: February 28, 2017, 11:06 »
0
If seller 'A' sells for a fair market price or more, then they literally hold value in their work. If seller 'B' can only make an equal amount by selling well below market price, undercutting seller 'A' in the process, then seller 'B' is demonstrating that they do not value their own work. Sure, I'm pointing that out, but you are the one doing it. The normal market price for HD video at this time, set by the leaders of the industry, not me or you, is $50+. $8 is substantially lower than market value. And since no one put a gun to your head, that you choose to sell for that price, you are valuing your work low all by yourself. Plain but apparently no-so-simple for some of you.

Since this is all about undercutting, your comparison of stock video to iTunes is irrelevant, because the normalized market price of a digital download is now $0.99, so you, me or the Beatles selling tracks at $0.99 is not undercutting. The two markets are not logically comparable. As sad as that may be, it's how it is. Why would you want to push the video market that way anyways?

Why is it that the only option for adaptation in some of your minds, is dropping price?

And then, the irony of using John Lennon as an example, is pretty solid. That man embodied ethics, philosophy, principles, having some respect for yourself and those around you, the greater good, I mean like, you know, essentially a perfect example of what I've been suggesting more of us should emulate.

You don't seem to understand what markets there are, or know that you are in fact selling digital goods that never run out, not physical stock.

Do you know about YouTube? Do you know how creators work there? Do you know that many upload 1, maybe 3 videos EVERY single day.

"Fair price" is just a made up number like anything else. It depends on how many buyers you can expect to have for a clip. 20 years ago you could not expect many buyers for a clip, just maybe a single production. Today you can expect hundreds or thousands of smaller buyers for a single clip. THE MARKET HAS CHANGED.

If I get $5,000 selling my work for $10, instead of $1,000 selling it for $500. Is that not more fair to me since I'm selling digital goods and after upload there is no additional work?

It's perfectly fine if you don't want to sell to the YouTube market, which is in fact the biggest market there is, and growing each day. But others want to capitalize on this opportunity, and will do so.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 11:08 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #80 on: February 28, 2017, 11:12 »
+2
If seller 'A' sells for a fair market price or more, then they literally hold value in their work. If seller 'B' can only make an equal amount by selling well below market price, undercutting seller 'A' in the process, then seller 'B' is demonstrating that they do not value their own work. Sure, I'm pointing that out, but you are the one doing it. The normal market price for HD video at this time, set by the leaders of the industry, not me or you, is $50+. $8 is substantially lower than market value. And since no one put a gun to your head, that you choose to sell for that price, you are valuing your work low all by yourself. Plain but apparently no-so-simple for some of you.

Since this is all about undercutting, your comparison of stock video to iTunes is irrelevant, because the normalized market price of a digital download is now $0.99, so you, me or the Beatles selling tracks at $0.99 is not undercutting. The two markets are not logically comparable. As sad as that may be, it's how it is. Why would you want to push the video market that way anyways?

Why is it that the only option for adaptation in some of your minds, is dropping price?

And then, the irony of using John Lennon as an example, is pretty solid. That man embodied ethics, philosophy, principles, having some respect for yourself and those around you, the greater good, I mean like, you know, essentially a perfect example of what I've been suggesting more of us should emulate.

You don't seem to understand what markets there are, or know that you are in fact selling digital goods that never run out, not physical stock.

Do you know about YouTube? Do you know how creators work there? Do you know that many upload 1, maybe 3 videos EVERY single day.

"Fair price" is just a made up number like anything else. If I get $5,000 selling my work for $10, instead of $1,000 selling it for $500. Is that not more fair to me since I'm selling digital goods and after upload there is no additional work?

It's perfectly fine if you don't want to sell to the YouTube market, which is in fact the biggest market there is, and growing each day. But others want to capitalize on this opportunity, and will do so.

Saying "Fair (market) price" is just a made up number like anything else, shows a pure lack of understanding of basic economics.

« Reply #81 on: February 28, 2017, 11:21 »
+4
There will always be "markets" full of customers who want to have something for less than it's value, just because they want it, doesn't mean it's a smart move to contribute to lowering the market value as a whole to cater to them. Just because Billy wants to make a living making Youtube videos daily, doesn't mean the market now needs to drop to his standards. If he doesn't want to make the content himself, well then he can put on his big boy pants and earn the money to pay me what my time and effort is worth. The markets are there and will adapt one way or the other, either we stand our ground and keep our prices fair, or you give in to Billy's demands for cheap high quality content.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 11:25 by Daryl Ray »

« Reply #82 on: February 28, 2017, 11:26 »
0
Saying "Fair (market) price" is just a made up number like anything else, shows a pure lack of understanding of basic economics.

If I see that I get $3 per clip per month at a certain price point, but $1 at another, higher price point, which one is more fair?

To me, it is more fair to see a higher number in my bank account for the time spent. If a lower price (say, 1/10) reaches an audience that is a thousand times bigger, it results in a bigger payment. I sell clips for $199, but I can't sell 5-10% of my portfolio for that price every day...

You are selling digital goods that have zero cost for you after upload and can be sold an infinite number of times. This is not milk where each unit sold has a production cost.

The only thing that determines fair or not is what you see in your bank account versus clips in your portfolio. Not price per clip.

I think I should repeat again: The market is not the same as even 5 years ago. It is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH bigger with a whole new world of buyers.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 11:30 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #83 on: February 28, 2017, 11:32 »
0
Saying "Fair (market) price" is just a made up number like anything else, shows a pure lack of understanding of basic economics.

If I see that I get $3 per clip per month at a certain price point, but $1 at another, higher price point, which one is more fair?

To me, it is more fair to see a higher number in my bank account for the time spent. If a lower price (say, 1/10) reaches an audience that is a thousand times bigger, it results in a bigger payment. I sell clips for $199, but I can't sell 5-10% of my portfolio for that price every day...

You are selling digital goods that have zero cost for you after upload and can be sold an infinite number of times. This is not milk where each unit has a production cost.

The only thing that determines fair or not is what you see in your bank account versus clips in your portfolio. Not price per clip.

Serious question, How low is too low? Is there a bottom, or is it inevitable that HD footage will be under $1 eventually? And does that mean, in your chain of logic, that 10's of thousands more customers will be waiting to scoop them up and you'll be making even more?

« Reply #84 on: February 28, 2017, 11:34 »
0
If he doesn't want to make the content himself, well then he can put on his big boy pants and earn the money to pay me what my time and effort is worth.

What if there are one million Billys?

I think I must say it again... Since you don't understand. You are selling digital products with unlimited stock. An infinite number of purchases is possible.

If you reach a market that is 10,000 times bigger with a price that is 1/10th you earn more. Then your time and effort is worth more.

Surely that's quite simple to understand.

Of course there are prices that are too low. All I can see is that $79 is too high to maximize revenue for common subjects. $8 might be too low and I think the ideal price today sits around $15-25 or so in order to maximize revenue, IF you sell where the YouTubers go.

Other buyers are happy to pay $100 per clip and I am happy to sell to them to on P5.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 11:39 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #85 on: February 28, 2017, 12:04 »
0
I really just find it incredible how people know which buyers are part of which markets, sight unseen. I mean, that massive youtube market that just can't afford to pay fair market prices, how some people know when they're not just traditional buyers with real budgets who would have otherwise happily bought a HQ clip for $50+ on Pond5 or Videoblocks, but then actually took the 10 seconds to shop around and go to the low-priced outlet Videohive that the same clip sells at. I mean, as a buyer, if it saves me $42, well yeah, I'm gonna do it, doesn't matter what my budget is or market I'm in.

Is it really a mystery why Videohive guys are complaining about sales at Videoblocks?

While your theories on markets are interesting, without a way to separate them, you are simply just devaluing yourself to all markets.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 12:14 by Daryl Ray »

« Reply #86 on: February 28, 2017, 12:13 »
0
Yes, of course there will be overlap. That is inevitable. Also know that the P5 license is not the same as VH's.

I sold 2 years without VH so I can see my personal data before and after. All I can say is that my bank account is happier and $/clip/month is higher.

About 30% are 4k sales. For me, that's about 3-5% on other sites. That tells me $199 for 4k is too high and even the bigger buyers settle for HD.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 12:16 by increasingdifficulty »

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #87 on: February 28, 2017, 16:04 »
0
And now they're not paying if you've a leftover of unpaid royalties if they're less than 50$. I've made a withdrawal BEFORE being screwed out of their system.

How do you say when someone takes something without paying?

Maybe STEALING is not the correct word but it's the first that comes in my mind.

Not quite. This isn't something new they've implemented or some change they've just come up with. The rule is, and always has been, that you need to reach $50 before you can withdraw your earnings, so nothing has changed in that respect. They are, however, allowing anybody who hasn't got a balance of $50 or more, when their photos are removed, and who doesn't sell on any of the other Envato marketplaces... to still withdraw all of that money.

Photos haven't been removed yet and they're still figuring out the details from what I can tell, so they're not paying out yet... but it will happen.

As for it being stealing... I guess you could say all of the sites 'steal' your money for a month... or longer if you've not met the threshold. I.e. it's not actually stealing, as there's no intention to permanently deprive you of the money.   

Chichikov

« Reply #88 on: February 28, 2017, 16:20 »
0
And now they're not paying if you've a leftover of unpaid royalties if they're less than 50$. I've made a withdrawal BEFORE being screwed out of their system.

How do you say when someone takes something without paying?

Maybe STEALING is not the correct word but it's the first that comes in my mind.

Not quite. This isn't something new they've implemented or some change they've just come up with. The rule is, and always has been, that you need to reach $50 before you can withdraw your earnings, so nothing has changed in that respect. They are, however, allowing anybody who hasn't got a balance of $50 or more, when their photos are removed, and who doesn't sell on any of the other Envato marketplaces... to still withdraw all of that money.

Photos haven't been removed yet and they're still figuring out the details from what I can tell, so they're not paying out yet... but it will happen.

As for it being stealing... I guess you could say all of the sites 'steal' your money for a month... or longer if you've not met the threshold. I.e. it's not actually stealing, as there's no intention to permanently deprive you of the money.

No, only of our interests in bank

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #89 on: February 28, 2017, 16:53 »
0
And how's that any different to any other site?

« Reply #90 on: February 28, 2017, 17:07 »
0
And now they're not paying if you've a leftover of unpaid royalties if they're less than 50$. I've made a withdrawal BEFORE being screwed out of their system.

How do you say when someone takes something without paying?

Maybe STEALING is not the correct word but it's the first that comes in my mind.

Not quite. This isn't something new they've implemented or some change they've just come up with. The rule is, and always has been, that you need to reach $50 before you can withdraw your earnings, so nothing has changed in that respect. They are, however, allowing anybody who hasn't got a balance of $50 or more, when their photos are removed, and who doesn't sell on any of the other Envato marketplaces... to still withdraw all of that money.

Photos haven't been removed yet and they're still figuring out the details from what I can tell, so they're not paying out yet... but it will happen.

As for it being stealing... I guess you could say all of the sites 'steal' your money for a month... or longer if you've not met the threshold. I.e. it's not actually stealing, as there's no intention to permanently deprive you of the money.
Thanks for the clarification

« Reply #91 on: February 28, 2017, 17:18 »
+2
Just received this reply when I asked about payout of my earnings.

Thank you for your message to Envato Help. I'm sorry to hear that your portfolio has not been accepted. Regarding to your question, that's correct, you cannot withdraw less than $50, however, you can make purchases on any Envato Market site with your current balance.

More information about this can be found via the following link:

newbielink:https://help.market.envato.com/hc/en-us/articles/202499864-How-to-Withdraw-Earnings [nonactive]

I hope this information helps, but please let us know if there is anything else we can do to assist you.


I will not be buying anything from them......

« Reply #92 on: February 28, 2017, 17:30 »
0
No so clear after all then

Chichikov

« Reply #93 on: March 01, 2017, 03:18 »
0
And how's that any different to any other site?

Have I told (wrote ) that it was different from any other site?

« Reply #94 on: March 01, 2017, 03:46 »
0
from the linked page:

"For earnings of less than $50 you can make purchases on any of the Envato Market sites. If your balance is still below $50 after 12 months, you can withdraw the balance to a PayPal account"

« Reply #95 on: March 01, 2017, 05:04 »
0
 
from the linked page:

"For earnings of less than $50 you can make purchases on any of the Envato Market sites. If your balance is still below $50 after 12 months, you can withdraw the balance to a PayPal account"

That is what I was trying to do. My earnings are all over 12 months old.

« Reply #96 on: March 01, 2017, 08:27 »
0
The question is:"12 months starting from when?".

I started uploading there in August 2016, my last sale was last week and they are going to remove my portfolio sometime in the near future...
Will I receive my money in August 2017? or 12 months after last sale? 12 months after they remove my account?

« Reply #97 on: March 31, 2017, 12:55 »
0
And... it's done.  My portfolio on PhotoDune is gone, aside from a handful of images they decided belong on GraphicRiver.  Funny that I made payout in March from a zero balance after February, but that doesn't cut any ice with Envato.  Wonder if I'll see any sales from the few images they left around.

« Reply #98 on: March 31, 2017, 14:26 »
+4
I got the "weekly top seller" badge sometime in the last month with one of my unsuitable images. Everything is still up for sale. Sometimes I don't understand these sites (by sometimes I mean often when it comes to Envato).

« Reply #99 on: April 02, 2017, 16:13 »
0
I got the "weekly top seller" badge sometime in the last month with one of my unsuitable images. Everything is still up for sale. Sometimes I don't understand these sites (by sometimes I mean often when it comes to Envato).

My stuff is still there too and still made me decent income in March.  I'm wondering if they sent those letters to more people than they were actually deleting.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
7672 Views
Last post December 01, 2010, 18:38
by ShadySue
5 Replies
7484 Views
Last post September 17, 2011, 22:33
by PeterChigmaroff
25 Replies
34639 Views
Last post May 26, 2015, 05:40
by cathyslife
8 Replies
4297 Views
Last post August 21, 2013, 23:16
by stockphoto-images.com
22 Replies
6289 Views
Last post November 19, 2013, 21:34
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle