Mat,

Could you pass on the request for Fotolia management to come here to discuss their latest price change, I'm sure I'm not the only one with some important questions.

RT:  This is by far a better forum to post a rant or to vent your frustration vs.  the FT forum.  Your post in the Fotolia Forum implied that people should consider going exclusive to I-stock.  It should be incredibly obvious why it was deleted.  Sorry for your frustration though.

As for the other stuff.  I guess the best thing to do would be to take your sales month to date or maybe pull them from last month and apply the new rates to those sales.  Find out what your net profit would be.  I'm guessing you would have made more money assuming you have more than a couple of sales per month.  

As I said you're allowing your personal opinion to judge your moderation, I did not imply that people should consider going exclusive to iStock, I said that Fotolia's latest announcement might be the incentive that those who were considering going to iStock as an exclusive needed. As a moderator you should be very careful making assumptions and twisting peoples words because it may get you in trouble. (And note I used the term competitor, at no time did I mention iStock because that's against forum rules)

As for the other stuff, again you don't seem to grasp the finances of running a businesss, when the costs of running a business go up you need the businesses income to go up in line, it's irrelevant whether the same figures now applied to sales figures last year are more because last year your overheads were different, run a business based on your equations and you'll go bust. As for having more than a couple of sales per month, judging on our two portfolios and downlaod figures I'd estimate that I sell a fair bit more than you so yes I sell more than a couple a month, unfortunately I haven't been given back door bump up the rankings and like many others got screwed over last year in Fotolia's ranking re-structure.

I'm not sure you are the best person to try and convince people that Fotolia's latest offering is a blessing from above, you've kind of made a name for yourself, but it would be nice if you could ask a member of Fotolia's mangement to come here so we could have an open and uncensored discussion, whenever I've dealt with the Fotolia mangement team I've always found them to be easy to communicate with which was what I was hoping to do on the forum over there, obviously if you keep censoring threads to your own liking they may never get to see what the contributors really think.

I also know one institution which desperate need our money
send it at

imaprick_dot_com

Sorry for offtopic but I cant help myself for this 

I corrected your typo for you

You don't have to agree, but giving away a few free samples to attract customers and boost overall sales is a time honored tradition in business.  

I agree with this, it's an old retail trick that microstock sites have adopted, but in typical fashion they've adopted it with a few twists.

In retail it's generally the retailer that takes the hit not the supplier because the idea of loss leaders is to introduce the consumer to more profitable lines irrelevant of the supplier and thus boost the retailers nett profit. The microstock version still enables the retailer (or agency in this case) to introduce buyers to a more profitable line the main difference is they expect the supplier (i.e. us) to take the hit whilst they take none.

Here's something that anybody considering offering free images in order to boost their sales should try and it will help reinforce my point, go onto any site offering free images and download one, you will get the image and the title will be the agency name followed by the file number, in the exif data will be the creators name which in 8 out of the 10 examples I tried were different to their username on the site, now wait a week and go back to buy an image from the person who's free image you downloaded, you'll know which agency it was because their name is the first part of the title, good luck finding the contributor!

Don't get me wrong I'm no saint and did offer a few images when I started out, I didn't notice any boost whatsoever but I accept that some may have.

Edited to add: I would go for the iStock (not that I'd ever get it) or Shutterstock free image deal where it's featured on the front page, that to me is like good value for money advertising.

5 days or 5 years .. this shouldn't even be a discussion .. give your pictures away for free and you are not going to make more sales .. only encourage the social/business acceptance of free stock photos in the industry ... this is a business people .. don't screw it up for serious photographers because you just think it's a fun hobby .. go start a personal blog and give your stuff away for free there.

Well said

Actually I do use private lightboxes and link to them in some of my shots, but the Deepmeta thumbnail creation is a brilliant way of linking one or two images from a series that wouldn't fit into my lightboxes.

I'd also like to point out that it's all down to the guy that wrote that great piece of software and then let's us use it for nothing, I genuinely hope he has a Happy Christmas.

Maria did you get the money I sent?

How is this done in DeepMeta?
I'm a DM newbree.

Once the images have been approved and you've refreshed your statistics all you need to do is select all the images you want to link together then right click and you'll see an option to 'create thumbnail links' do that and then go to the iStockphoto tab on the left in DM and hit send updates, It's as simple and easy as that.

Quote from: RT on December 15, 2009, 05:15

I'd be pretty certain that the model release policy on Dreamstime loses them sales, buyers are too savvy these days and they're concerned of any possible legal implications, if you were a buyer who wanted a shot that contained a body part would you buy it from the site that says it has a model released attached or the one that says it hasn't?

On the other hand - what possible cause of action does a model who has an unrecognisable body part used commercially have against an image user?

The ridiculous thing about microstock is that there is a requirement for all sorts of releases that just aren't necessary.

Whether a release is necessary is subjective, likewise as to whether a body part is recognisable or not, and as there is no law dedicated to model releases it is also dictated by individual agencies as to when one is required, ridiculous or not that's the way it is.

The point is by Dreamstime not allowing images such as this to have a release attached when one is available and provided by the contributor only makes purchasing that image through them less appealing to a buyer, who could buy the same image at another agency with the assurance that there is a release should there be any legal implications in the future.

Marble Arch RT about a 1 min walk from Park land and oxford street.

I have already selected my equipment and the facility im just doing this research to see how accurate ive managed to get too seeing what the majority of people like

thats why im asking what people personally like not what people think other people will like

Anton I was just trying to help, asking people on this forum is all well and good but if they're not your customers I can't see the point. You're setting up in a diverse location where the footfall is a combination of office workers, blue collar workers and tourists and each would have they're own preferences in a gym, you're also in a location with lot's of competition.

If it were me I'd make up a questionnaire and get a student to get out and target the people you want to join with some form of incentive for filling it out, that way you'll find out what people personally like from the people that will be coming to your gym.

 I worked in London for 21 years in different locations and the needs of each area are very diverse, if you're targeting the office workers then things like the facilities would probably be the most important thing because they're likely to be visiting before, after or during a work break and their incentive for going to a gym would most likely be to tone rather than to exercise.

Either way I wish you the best of luck and I shudder of the thought of what the business rates must be!

Where in London?

If it's in the city I'd suggest lots of mirrors, coffee machines, steam rooms, hair dryers and an area to sell designer gym wear, if there's any space left over stick in a couple of bikes and maybe a treadmill.

If it's in an area where people go to a gym to actually exercise I'd suggest punch bags and lots of free weights, don't worry about a treadmill or bikes because if they want to run they'll go outside and they probably rode a bike in order to get to the gym anyway.

Like most businesses you need to work out who your target audience is, if you're going after the city workers with money they're more interested in the aesthetics and creature comforts than actually exercising, if you're opening it up in the east end I'd have thought the shittier it looks the better.

As for using a power plate, I think I know which audience you're targetting 

With old age, memory is always the second thing to go. 

Old jokes never get forgotten though.