|
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 - PeterChigmaroff
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 72
151
« on: November 18, 2015, 00:36 »
Exactly why I don't sell at VB. Encouraging buyers to think $49 is an appropriate price is a mistake.
For me, only thing that matter is how much I get per clip sale. So, VB is all good because I don't sell directly at $70-80.
You have a very short term outlook for your business. I find your philosophy on what to price your clips at on P5 laughable.
Selling a clip at $79 doesn't mean anything if you only get $23 versus selling at $49 and get double the $23. Good luck.
I understand percentages. I also understand that they aren't locked in place and that the usual trend for them is downward. I also understand that the buyer doesn't care what percentage you get. Ask yourself why a company has chosen to host and sell your clips and not retain any of that earning. As if it all just happens for free.
152
« on: November 18, 2015, 00:11 »
Exactly why I don't sell at VB. Encouraging buyers to think $49 is an appropriate price is a mistake.
For me, only thing that matter is how much I get per clip sale. So, VB is all good because I don't sell directly at $70-80.
You have a very short term outlook for your business. I find your philosophy on what to price your clips at on P5 laughable.
153
« on: November 17, 2015, 20:00 »
154
« on: November 15, 2015, 13:50 »
The terrorists have enough people with european or us passports and enough money to take a plane to go wherever they like. Isis is taking in over 1 million dollars a day just from selling syrian oil.
Their people dont need to treck across europe in sandals with babies.
Much easier to go the legal route.
Ask yourself, why Greece hasnt had extremist attacks although they have been flooded for years with refugees.
I totally agree, the refugees hide terrorists argument is perfect for those opposed to immigration. Just like Donald Trump standing on his high horse bellowing out the need to arm the entire population of the world with guns. MORE GUNS, that would fix this problem.
155
« on: November 15, 2015, 00:21 »
The refugee crisis is just a vehicle. It's a bus for these callous murderers. You can stop the buses from running, but it isn't the only transport to get into whichever country they want. It's convenient. But don't think for second that if you cut off all immigration that there are no other means of access.
156
« on: November 13, 2015, 12:18 »
I would say PayPal is broken right now. I have money in my account, but it tells me I have nothing and to try again later. It's sluggish.Something is not right.
157
« on: November 12, 2015, 13:53 »
You'll now see articles like The Heady Rise of Republicunus Erectus and Why All Other Species are Inferior
Did it ever occur to anyone here that all species not dancing with the brain-dead bi-partisan cacophony are "inferior"? Apparently not.
So everyone here seems to think NPR or HuffPost would be better for NG?! And back we are in that old black-and-white thinking again. I thought, we are grown-ups here, seriously, and are also capable of understanding a bit more of the news than the mainstream mass-media boneheads usually give us. Not? Must still be a matter of Republicans or Democrats for some. Very disappointing.
The REAL problem is that they've been sold AT ALL! Let us watch and see how that one turns out...
I should say I am not an American just someone who watches the political antics in America. I stand by my original tongue in cheek statement. If there is a way for this to stay non partisan I'd love to hear about it, but I really doubt its the case.
158
« on: November 12, 2015, 13:43 »
You'll now see articles like The Heady Rise of Republicunus Erectus and Why All Other Species are Inferior
so everyone here seems to think NPR or HuffPost would be better for NG?! I thought, we are grown-ups here, seriously  The REAL problem is that they've been sold AT ALL! Let us watch and see how that one turns out...
Google it, I don't make this up.
159
« on: November 12, 2015, 11:04 »
Rare footage of hurricane eyewalls, tornadoes, volcanic eruption, car crashes in blizzards etc can easily fetch $50 USD or more per second for broadcast. In Pond5 pricing I find $299 is the sweet pricing spot since that equates fairly roughly to $50/s given buyers rarely use a shot for longer than 6 seconds.
Anyone can shoot campus life and general environment footage so that won't command nearly as high a price - too much competition.
Thanks, so maybe a price adjustment is in order at least for the weather stuff, not all of my weather content is award winning of course but my winter weather and my traffic gridlock clips are the best sellers followed by campus life.
In general maybe it is time to raise prices and move into a different space as my current low prices don't seem to be attracting the volume of sales needed. I love the pricing debates but only when backed up by stats, would love to see some stats from other producers on this as well.
You need to at least be somewhat proactive in this. You can't wait for others to blaze the trial. You can easily change the price of 50% of your weather clips from $58 to $158 and it doesn't matter which 50%. Then come back and give a general report on your bottom line.
160
« on: November 11, 2015, 23:56 »
Considering they don't know how to use apostrophes, I wouldn't put too much "stock" in it (and it's three years old).
Not sure about the connection between apostrophes and stock? Its an unusual analogy, I cant see what difference it make's.
161
« on: November 11, 2015, 21:56 »
I am no doubt a geezer when it comes to this stuff so I have to ask, who in their right mind signs up to be pestered with irrelevant drivel? Now an app that automatically keeps me from receiving all that crap would be much more useful.
Agree. I already love AdBlock, and can usually - but not always - avoid all the celebrity clickbait. If I want news, I go to the Beeb, which I happily pay for.
Looks like this notify thing might be an opt-in app, hopefully.
I have a folder on my iPhone labeled WORMS, that's where I keep the things that clog up my device that I can't get rid of. Slimy little creatures that do nothing but displace useful space.
162
« on: November 11, 2015, 20:25 »
I am no doubt a geezer when it comes to this stuff so I have to ask, who in their right mind signs up to be pestered with irrelevant drivel? Now an app that automatically keeps me from receiving all that crap would be much more useful.
163
« on: November 11, 2015, 19:12 »
The partnership will actually double the size of the society's endowment and increase its ability to fund scientists, says Goldberg. (Also worth noting: 21st Century Foxs day-to-day operations are now headed by Rupert's son James Murdoch, whose wife works for the Clinton Climate Initiative.) Fox will effectively own National Geographic's media brands, not the National Geographic Society.
are those the type of scientist that still believe the world is flat? L
164
« on: November 11, 2015, 15:34 »
You'll now see articles like The Heady Rise of Republicunus Erectus and Why All Other Species are Inferior
165
« on: November 11, 2015, 14:03 »
well...who knows...maybe some serious bargaining will make someone happy.
you are a very optimistic person. Not bad thing at all really
166
« on: November 11, 2015, 11:06 »
How many times has the phrase show me the money been used in our culture. I think it's quite appropriate here. I don't care how but show me the money and I'll be a believer, otherwise its just hot air.
167
« on: November 11, 2015, 11:03 »
"We are currently working on securing a partnership for both our RevoStock producers and customers with one of the many other quality media marketplaces that will honor your current relationship with RevoStock in the best way possible..."
Contributors late payments should get into that deal of taking over RevoStock.
Who is going to buy them?
No one will buy them.
That is the correct answer.
168
« on: November 10, 2015, 23:13 »
I like all the analysis but in the end all I have to do is look at my royalty report. It's like a fractal, same shape and character as the big picture.
169
« on: November 10, 2015, 20:08 »
I've recently been trying to design a watermark for my images and it's actually tough to get one that works well in all circumstances. Seems to be a case of now you see it now you don't depending on the image makeup.
170
« on: November 10, 2015, 11:56 »
Corbis is in big trouble too, executives are running out like mice out of a sinking ship
Corbis has a very talented shipwright below decks. If he chooses to plug some of the holes, he will.
171
« on: November 10, 2015, 11:29 »
If they go bankrupt, can they still sell images without paying the contributors?
Of course, see Revostock posts on this site.
172
« on: November 10, 2015, 10:04 »
Let's see what they can do with that money. They're burning roughly $15 million per quarter, which means this money will last them roughly 1.5 years from today...assuming they keep the currently burn rate. If they spend more on marketing and it's ineffective, we're looking at about 1 year of run rate before they need more money again.
I feel like Getty is becoming a bit of a zombie company. An old dog trying to keep the status quo in a changing industry. If they don't make some drastic changes, they'll have one foot in the grave in a year.
They a profitable company saddling an atrocious debt load.
http://petapixel.com/2015/02/26/getty-images-is-burning-through-cash-as-its-earnings-shrink/
According to his report, it doesn't seem like they're profitable at all.
Shrink is a relative term. There is nothing about what their payment to creditors is. People go bankrupt with good jobs and income, not much different.
173
« on: November 10, 2015, 01:39 »
Let's see what they can do with that money. They're burning roughly $15 million per quarter, which means this money will last them roughly 1.5 years from today...assuming they keep the currently burn rate. If they spend more on marketing and it's ineffective, we're looking at about 1 year of run rate before they need more money again.
I feel like Getty is becoming a bit of a zombie company. An old dog trying to keep the status quo in a changing industry. If they don't make some drastic changes, they'll have one foot in the grave in a year.
They a profitable company saddling an atrocious debt load.
174
« on: November 10, 2015, 01:29 »
"Bulk up" is exactly like it sounds, get as fat as possible, preferably on someone else's dime.
175
« on: November 08, 2015, 12:35 »
But they just rejected a submission of a few hundred images and gave me a timeout for a month from submitting which I think is pretty lame. From what
More than pretty lame. Alamy must have hired the photo curator from Pond5.
Although it's daft, it is their officially-stated policy.
However, their managing images system is such a PITA that having any more than a dozen files waiting to be managed would be like a black cloud hanging over me, so now I drip up really small numbers at a time anyway.
I've got something like 11,000 images on Alamy so understand their process. I just don't understand the "why" of the process. I've had the pleasure of looking at some of Paulie's work and I don't see someone who is at all careless. If he is getting rejections, then the process is broken and flawed.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 72
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
