|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - YadaYadaYada
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 [54] 55 56 57 58 59 ... 64
1326
« on: August 20, 2015, 11:34 »
When I go to the DPC homepage now, I see this message:
DollarPhotoClub is now closed for new members.
Join Adobe Stock, the new creative marketplace from Adobe!
Surely this has to be step #1 in shutting DPC down completely. And I'm not really surprised. I never understood how DPC fit in with the new Adobe Stock offering.
It doesn't it competes with Adobe Stock CC subs. Closing DPC will make more money for Adobe and we're just happy to have it gone. Bad idea from the start RIP.
1327
« on: August 20, 2015, 11:23 »
Not that I care, but I imagine anything to do with the "state of RC targets and the like" to be pretty important to most people.
Yeah that's true but they've had that announcement the last few years that nothing is changing you won't go down from where you are. So it's not necessarily a big announcement.
I don't know if one can assume that is the content of the announcement this year.
I'm not, I think there will be a change this year. Still when you put something in quotes you are saying iStock said there will be a "big announcement" when nobody actually said that.
Welcome to Planet Earth Ticktock. This may be helpful translation for you. They aren't meant to be direct quotes, but are meant to be sarcastic or sceptical quotes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotesScare quotes, shudder quotes, or sneer quotes are quotation marks placed around a word or phrase to signal that a term is being used in a nonstandard, ironic, or in another special sense. They may be used to imply that a particular expression is not necessarily how the author would have worded a concept. Scare quotes may serve a function similar to verbally preceding a phrase with the expression "so-called", they may imply skepticism or disagreement, or that the writer intends an opposite sense of the words enclosed in quotes. Big Announcement is not what iStock wrote but is what the author was indicating the view was. I cringe at the next announcement from iStock. The history has not been good news. Announcing nothing happened is not announcing anything. Why would iStock "announce" no change?
1328
« on: August 20, 2015, 11:04 »
Well, there goes this thread. Politics and religion strikes again. those 2 subjects will Kill any good discussion.
SSTK bobbing between 32 and 34 maybe that's the right price. Not $75 a share that's for sure. What do the experts say it's real value should be? I don't understand all those PE ebt beta or whatnot terms.
SSTK is at $31.56 right now. Dec. 2014, Believing competition from Adobe will pressure growth, Morgan Stanley's Dean Prissman has launched coverage on Shutterstock (NYSE:SSTK) with an Underweight rating and $40 target. Prissman reports "55% of [surveyed] Shutterstock users indicated they would shift usage from Shutterstock to Adobe Stock if features were offered in the Adobe Creative Cloud that made importing images easier. His 2016 and 2017 adjusted EBITDA estimates are respectively 5% and 14% below consensus. A survey of creative pros indicated 25% of those not yet using Creative Cloud plan to adopt it, with 60% planning to do so in the next 12 months. December 2014, Adobe acquired Fotalia for $800 million. Shutterstock (SSTK) droped of over 10%, after Adobe (ADBE) announced it's buying competing stock photo marketplace Fotolia. Adobe integrated Fotolia's offerings with Creative Cloud in June 2015, opening Adobe Stock. The acquisition changes the competitive landscape for the worse and the number put on Fotalia's library made Shutterstock comparatively expensive. Adobe Stock CC subscribers can pay $10 for 1 image, $30/month for 10 monthly images (unused images get rolled over), and $199/month for 750 images. August 2015, Shutterstock plunged over 50% in the last 3 months, 57% in the last year. Boom or bust is what Microstock is all about. Shutterstock and Adobe Fotolia do not own their content, Getty does. This puts Getty and parts of iStock in the position of control over most of their own goods, while the first two are at the whim of suppliers. That could also explain the bad attitude at iStock towards contributors. They don't care about us and don't think they need to.
1329
« on: August 19, 2015, 18:40 »
1330
« on: August 18, 2015, 18:02 »
TS was the start, removing canister replaced by RC was the final insult. Consolidation, merge, cut cost. They don't care about anything but profit. iStock is losing money. Will a division be harder to sell by Getty or easier? If they merge all of iStock to the Getty servers, that's the end. It will get worse.
1331
« on: August 18, 2015, 17:50 »
Well, there goes this thread. Politics and religion strikes again. those 2 subjects will Kill any good discussion.
SSTK bobbing between 32 and 34 maybe that's the right price. Not $75 a share that's for sure. What do the experts say it's real value should be? I don't understand all those PE ebt beta or whatnot terms.
1332
« on: August 18, 2015, 17:42 »
nearly half a million a week. Crazy numbers. Which is why the pros are all pushing more into macro or niche agencies or adding exclusive images to the agencies that allow that for better visibilty.
Even more depressing to have files rejected in such a flood. They probably dont bother to train image editors for consistency. Too many files, who cares what makes it through? Individual files mean nothing.
I agree. The only thing that will impress their remaining shareholders is numbers of images. They don't give a thought to image quality or uniqueness.
I agree with both. If they didn't care about us before, they will care less now. Rejected files mean nothing.
1334
« on: August 02, 2015, 22:30 »
Year after year sombody new thinks they have the answer. Raising sales, rpi that's better then anybody else, they post big ideas and numbers, their secrets, and then find out. "Anyone who's been in microstock a while hits the wall and can no longer grow their ports at a rate that matches the growth of the agency libraries, and thus, we get a smaller and smaller piece of the pie."
This is all about the piece of the pie and that slice is smaller every month. There isn't any way to avoid the growing competition. We told you that stockmarketer. Now you are writing the same.
1335
« on: August 02, 2015, 19:27 »
The thing to keep in mind is that reviewing by skilled humans is a huge expense for SS and a very large and obvious target for cost reduction. And cost reduction is what they need, to increase profits in the short term and quiet those howling first-round investors.
They probably have big stockholders standing up in meetings and asking "why can't we automate this, or just send it all to China? I don't see why that would be so difficult". Those sorts of know-nothing questions are hard to answer, because the answers aren't simple. But that's what you're up against in a public corporation.
Paying people to review the same photos 2, 3 or more times because the reviews are inconsistant, is cost effective? Stockholders should hate that waste of money.
1336
« on: July 31, 2015, 20:11 »
Its not 12:39 everywhere in the world
12:39AM in New York is 9:39AM in New Delhi.
1337
« on: July 29, 2015, 19:40 »
http://thenextweb.com/dd/2015/07/28/why-everyone-is-a-designer-but-shouldnt-design/Why everyone is a photographer and some people shouldn't be. Look at the photo credits, Shutterstock and creative commons. Do creative commons get paid for the use. The story hits a point why some people shouldn't be in Micro. I see the same arguments about professional as here. I'll fall on the sword to start this. Everybody who is a stock photographer making money is a designer. It's part of the same work to take a good stock photo. I design it and shoot it. I make money, I'm a professional.
1338
« on: July 26, 2015, 06:36 »
Well if the problems are with automatic software at SS they don't use it a BS. Images refused for noise and focus at SS accepted at BS. last batch 90% approval at BS 50% at SS
If the software causes rejections, why do I send back the same photos in a week and they pass, with no change. The theory is flawed but useful for somebody looking for something to blame or find some conspiracy. My answer is much simpler. The reviewers are incompetent, and pressed to make numbers. SS doesn't care because they have 1 million new photos a week to be reviewed.
1339
« on: July 20, 2015, 13:29 »
Here is one of the threads on the subject that was easily found (just search on "union" or "fair", etc.):
http://www.microstockgroup.com/ranting-general-stock/stock-artists-collective-anyone/msg383812/#msg383812
Every so often someone comes in with the radical idea of banding together to tell the agencies what's what. In the end, nothing really happens.
Nothing can happen and nothing will. Everybody here and all the top people can leave all the micro agencies and nothing will change. They have 30,000 more people who will take the minimum wages. The time when this demand should have been made was when micro was new and some people started using paid models, in professional studios, and were taking 25c a download for subs. Those people caused this to be what we live with now. Now the same pros make money teaching more new people how to use expensive professional quality to make 25 cents and compete with us. Too late now. It's never going to change.
1340
« on: July 13, 2015, 16:19 »
This is getting mental 
213,557 supporters
86,443 needed to reach 300,000
Supporting what, there is nothing stated in the report on the freedom of panorama. Therefore the current situation, different in each member state, remains as it is.
1341
« on: June 24, 2015, 21:35 »
Can someone provide a link to the provision that will take away our rights or changes the current laws. I'd like to read it?
"Freedom of panorama
To the rapporteur's regret, the JURI committee chose to remove the "freedom of panorama" proposal in the draft report. This means that amateur photographers will still need permission from the rights holders of certain buildings, usually the architect, in order to share their photographs on social networks."
STILL and Remove are apparently important words in the above quote. 
http://www.euractiv.com/sections/infosociety/meps-vote-protect-geo-blocking-copyright-reform-315493
But I can't seem to find the document with anything about restricting freedom of panorama? Anyone? Where can I read the actual text of this proposal.
I usually avoid blatantly cross-promoting my "day job", but I have written a blog post on this issue for those interested: http://novarelegal.com.au/2015/06/freedom-of-panorama-copyright/
The text of the original proposal, and the amended version, are in the blog post and there is a link to the original report.
Whilst the amendment is of some concern, it is a long way off forming part of the law of any particular EU country. This is a report to be provided to the EU Commission to feed into the Commission's own report into updating EU copyright law, due later this year. History shows that the last copyright directive in 2001 was only implemented in a patchy way, differing from country to country. It is also worth bearing in mind that "freedom of panorama" is already vastly different across Europe. It is very broad in Germany, at its most restrictive in France, and somewhere in the middle for most other countries. . For those who are EU citizens (I have dual citizenship so may do the same), and are genuinely concerned, I would suggest that it would be more useful to email, write or call your EU deputies prior to the 9 July plenary session. The irony that the petition, and the original report, were prepared by the German Pirate Party MEP, ought not be lost here
I can't find the original document where something has changed. It's more like they have refused to change and the standrd as we need permission. How is no change, against saving the freedom. Nice blog. You should promote it for questions like this. The pirate party wants no rights for all of us. When somebidy fights for free use of modern archeture and works, they are also petitioning for free use of our photos. We want to use others design work for free, to sell commercially and at the same time want our works protected from free use? Seems like a contradiction. How is no change something that is threatening freedom?
1342
« on: June 24, 2015, 21:19 »
Funny how posting actual employee reviews that were copied in the order, after I signed on to the site to read them, can be construed as bashing. Employee perception is a simple reality check in regard to company moral and what is happening internally.
I simply gave examples of the reasons I would not consider going exclusive in the company's and employees own words. The main reason being the position management has taken and publicly stated in regard to their long term business road path.
Experts in libel and slander assert that defamation does not have to be widely published, merely said by one party to another and understood by the second party to be fact, when it is not. When Tyler gets sued by somebody for what the anonymous haters post here, we might see some changes made.
1343
« on: June 10, 2015, 20:36 »
I am not back in. And I stated at the very beginning when coming back here on MSG under my business name I would change my ways on the forum. I am not here to rough feathers or get into arguments, with anyone.
I did ask what the possibilities were of me coming back to FT since they are now a different company. However, I was denied a return to FT. Matt stated in this forum that FT wants to prove to us that they value their contributors. The fact that they dont consider that the past is water under the bridge, let bygones not to be bygones, etc. only proved to me that they are still far away from proving anything other than they are still the same as before the Adobe takeover.
Did you think about your blog post? I don't think you really want to be back in, you just want to start trouble. http://semmickphoto.com/2014/05/02/microstock-agency-fotolia-leads-race-bottom/
1344
« on: June 10, 2015, 20:31 »
Bring back the ignore total showing on accounts which means more then hearts or disagrees. When you see 25 people ignoring somebody you know what that means. I don't know why leaf took that away. It was a honest rank for posters.
1345
« on: June 10, 2015, 20:27 »
no one knows...
including iStock
Is the most popular girl the one with the most money, the most dates this year, the prettyiest, or something other? No one knows? Same for our photos. views, sales, dls, money, or all of that?
1346
« on: April 24, 2015, 13:01 »
My sales on DT are not flat...they are nearly dead. 2350 Online files. They used to be my 2nd biggest earner. So far February barely has a pulse. what?
When DT is same as 123RF you know they are dead from top four.
1347
« on: April 24, 2015, 12:53 »
I just got an email with a summary of coming changes, including the closing down of the istock public forums. Instead there will be a new closed, contributor area.
The whole history of istock and the original community is in those forums. I wonder if they really plan to delete it all?
Will the waybackmachine preserve a copy of istocks history? Or does someone have a forum archive before it disappears?
http://app.e.gettyimages.com/e/es?s=2768&e=932750&elq=78960d9cac004b7e9c28abf09e705865
Weren't the forums always closed minded or was that just all the locked threads from Lobo. Closed to public contributor area a way to hide the truth from the public. January 2011 rc added but pp and other don't count. Cannistser on sales totals ended. Royalty rates will no longer be associated to your lifetime download totals, represented by the canister icons. Canisters will now be separate from royalty rates and continue to reflect total lifetime downloads (but they will no longer indicate royalty rates).
1348
« on: April 22, 2015, 12:59 »
There is an Adobe logo on the web site. I feel much better seeing it. So that is an benefit.
4 months and we get a logo, nothing? "It's premature to outline the exact type of integration and pricing we could offer, however we do anticipate this will be a value-add service and there will be extra cost associated with using it for Creative Cloud members," Adobe said. Fotolia is largely a European company, but Adobe plans to increase its profile in the US, the company said. "As we integrate Fotolia, we believe our members will use Creative Cloud as the place to discover and buy great content -- and also as a place where they can sell and showcase their work," said David Wadhwani, general manager of Adobe's digital media business, in a blog post. http://www.cnet.com/news/adobe-buys-into-stock-art-business-lures-software-subscribers/
1349
« on: April 22, 2015, 12:45 »
Every king can loose his crown fast...
In this business that is very accurate. From a competitive viewpoint it's like walking on eggshells. One cracks and they all crack. In SS case, they are probably trying to accomplish two major things:
1. Shareholder wealth
2. Competitive responses/positioning
But #1 AND #2 comes as our expense, unfortunately.
Just as an aside, I now go check my SS account for a BIG sales as my subs are not in the 20-30 a day average, down from 50-60 a day my OD's are fairly rare (0-3 a day avg) and I have not gotten a $28 commission in about 8 weeks since they made their package changes. The ONLY way I am "making my month" is the random big sale. Other than that I will have taken my first pay cut at SS in 8 years since I started with them.
Everything in this business comes at our expense. You could list #1 thru #20 and we'd be #20.
1350
« on: April 22, 2015, 12:41 »
Sonds like the Exclusives are getting featured not exterminated. Dropping cash sales might be less fraud sales and clawbacks. He shows as co-founder of IS. Video aimed at Exclusive. Give it time.
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 [54] 55 56 57 58 59 ... 64
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
