|
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 - SNP
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 54
151
« on: January 11, 2012, 21:22 »
like Edstock, what really gets me is what garbage the files are. I'd be okay with it I guess if they admitted they were just sloppy seconds from past Getty assignment series, but new editorial shooters are supposed to look to some of this stuff as an example of what to do. I wouldn't even have given most of those shots to editors. I guess the Nelson Mandela shot is okay, but there's certainly no story to it.
in any case, I don't think Edstock poses a sales threat. it is the principle of it, and the double standards that really irk me.
152
« on: January 11, 2012, 15:47 »
actually, these days it feels like you're more of a pariah if you remain exclusive
153
« on: January 11, 2012, 14:14 »
Your press release is pure class - it says what needs to be said, without sugarcoating or any hint of animosity. Hope 2012 as an independent is a good one for you.
despite the spelling mistakes.....it needs a good proofread.... I question the wisdom of eyeidea going non-exclusive after such success with iStock. but I certainly wish Chad the best of luck. His work is so good.
154
« on: January 11, 2012, 14:12 »
the site seems slow today, or is it just me? and sales are a mess of strange files. I'd like to see a more comprehensive best match than this.
155
« on: January 10, 2012, 12:39 »
sales are hitting normal levels, but they are older files, a weird mix....so IMO the best match is unfabulous right now
156
« on: January 10, 2012, 12:35 »
I shoot D3X and I'm a girl.....Nikon was simply my first camera. when it came to going full frame, I considered switching, but I've just never connected with Canon. If I had switched, I'd have started with the 5DMKII....it's a solid full frame camera.
as for the D4....to me it's of little interest. but for pro shooters using the D3S I think it will be attractive. HD video and higher MP will be a big draw for editorial video shooters
157
« on: January 09, 2012, 17:07 »
Give them a 10K shopping list.
yeah, that cuts their interest short pretty quickly. and if it doesn't, the few family members and friends who have thrown a few photos up on iStock lost interest when their first five files didn't garner sales. people don't realize how much work it takes to establish yourself.
158
« on: January 08, 2012, 23:21 »
A combination of both. Too many diamonds making 40% who were performing poorly.
Yes, I've seen some diamonds say that they've dropped from 2-3 canister % levels under the new RC system. What does that indicate? For some probably that they've been there for a long time and aren't selling a whole lot. For others, maybe IS overall sales are down. It's a hard truth but not everyone performs equally. Should everybody get a trophy no matter how they perform?
I don't know of any company that pays their sales team or even their distributors based on how long they've been there. There's a monthly quota and it's all about performance. Those who don't hit quota either make a lower percentage or don 't get paid at all. Weaker salespeople leave because they can't afford to stay. This is sales 101.
Taking IS's overall sales performance out of the equation, who's more valuable?
- Someone who started in 2002, has 25,000 files, and just hit 25,000 downloads to reach diamond ten years later?
- Or someone who joined in 2010, has 100 files, and already hit 25,000 downloads to reach diamond in a year?
Which one is more profitable? Which one is producing what buyers want? Should they be compensated equally?
good post and I almost completely agree....except that it still doesn't explain some of the top performers getting stung. if what you are saying is true (and for the most part I think it is), I'd think iStock would be taking special care to continue to incentivize the top performers like Sean, but a number of those major sales generators are also reporting losses. iStock aren't providing incentive to produce, so I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.
159
« on: January 05, 2012, 15:55 »
Not bothering to analyze the best match, they always seem to mess with it year end/early Jan...but I sure wish buyers would get back to buying. My asked are slllloooooooow. Crumby sales start to the year.
Maybe this is the new 'normal' for sales? I've continually had to re-adjust my expectations from IS over the last couple of years. What I consider a 'good day' now would have been a disaster back in the day.
I notice that Istock didn't present the buyers with the usual festive huge price increase this year. I wonder why?
any new normal is usually short lived in terms of the best match. it is very early after the holidays to jump to conclusions....
160
« on: January 05, 2012, 14:15 »
Not bothering to analyze the best match, they always seem to mess with it year end/early Jan...but I sure wish buyers would get back to buying. My asked are slllloooooooow. Crumby sales start to the year.
161
« on: January 03, 2012, 13:10 »
Yes! not great but much better. Best sellers are now push forward again and today I'm getting more sells of images older than 24 months.
glad for you. I'm barely getting sales.....pretty darn crappy here.
162
« on: January 03, 2012, 12:24 »
remind me what the week after new year's is usually like....because sales are pitiful.....I forget how quickly business ramps up
163
« on: January 02, 2012, 19:41 »
same thing for me....but survey completed. looking forward to the results
164
« on: January 02, 2012, 19:35 »
iStock exclusive, compared with 2010:
DLS - 3% drop
$ - 20% increase
Well done Stacey on the $$ increase. I am also exclusive, with 5% reduction in both DL and $$. Can you tell us what you did to achieve the increase in earnings when your DL reduced?
I didn't do anything special this year, other than learning a ton. I went to London for the iStockalypse and took a lot away from that experience. including some really great creative images that have continued to sell fairly well. I didn't upload as much this year as past years, instead focusing on uploading better rather than more content. more important than the number of files I added to my portfolio is the total number of files added to the collection over the year. this number would be hugely greater than anything each of could add to our ports. I had pretty good Vetta and Agency sales, more ELs and a couple of big BME...e+ is also doing very well for me. all in all I'm okay with how 2011 went, but I would have preferred to see download numbers higher, not just income
165
« on: January 02, 2012, 13:26 »
iStock exclusive, compared with 2010:
DLS - 3% drop
$ - 20% increase
166
« on: December 29, 2011, 20:05 »
I think we have to wait and see what the best match looks like as the new year business ramps up again. you can't really judge anything this week. for me this is pretty much the worst week of the year for sales. let's see what happens when buyers come back to work after the holidays and where the best match is then.
167
« on: December 29, 2011, 12:14 »
I don't think there is any logic in that statement. I tend to agree with you Baldrick
168
« on: December 29, 2011, 01:11 »
Istock is neither a family, nor a goverment. I particularly liked  the assertion that istock is a rapist. Some absolutely absurd analogies and metaphors being thrown around. Maybe it is the post holiday sugar hangover, there are more cranky pants in here than usual. Which is fine in itself, but please, some better analogies. The current best match strikes me as a temporary means of sorting. My guess is some quick means of relegating indie files en masse to TS. I think exclusivity is an integral part of the iStock brand, but I can't see this remaining the new best match normal.
169
« on: December 28, 2011, 12:55 »
as said above, what happens when independents get fed up and leave iStock altogether? maybe that's a non-issue since those upset here represent a tiny percentage of the overall non-exclusive contributor base. for the record, this latest best match incarnation certainly isn't doing anything magical for this exclusive's sales. but there is no denying that the search results are absolutely dominated by exclusive content this week. seems different from the usual type of best match tweak.
170
« on: December 28, 2011, 00:27 »
gotta love the argument that selling subs at SS is more noble somehow. silly.
171
« on: December 27, 2011, 11:46 »
This best match will give a boost to exclusives but also will makes life harder who plans to throw their crown.
If there is a cunning plan behind this, this could be it.
Anyway, whatever it means, my sales seem normal for the time of year. Go figure.
mine too. nothing fabulous, nothing scary. typical Christmas week here
172
« on: December 26, 2011, 12:27 »
isn't it better that most buyers don't use the slider? it's there to appease buyers that are price conscious and want the ability to sort by price. good that most buyers don't use it.
as for exclusive only content - this is a smart and proven differentiator in commercial business models. iStock should probably go all-exclusive as part of the Getty-family brand, it's a smart move. I definitely feel for independents, especially those I call friends who are affected by this. But independents have the option to go exclusive. (gostwyck, I can hear your guffaw from Canada). where Getty gets a FAIL on their annual report card is contributor relations. undervaluing suppliers is bad business. no work = no success for Getty. all it will take is one pi55-off too many before contributors start divorcing themselves from the Getty family. the RC adjustment was a good move in the right direction.
173
« on: December 22, 2011, 02:19 »
Sales usual for a few days before xmas...if there is a big exclusive boost, it's not doing much for me
Maybe it is Edstock who is benefiting, "he" certainly dominated my Qatar search. No doubt the management will be buying in champagne if the sales are going there.
As for the iStock forums, obviously Lobo has won. The last thread I opened there, helpfully informing them of the reappearance of a bug and which I carefully put in the forum where Joyce discusses bugs, was slammed shut by Lobo with the comment "this isn't the help forum". My unwritten response was "Well, feck you, you uncouth ar$e'ole. I didn't want help, I was simply trying to give your company early warning of the reappearance of a bug. If you don't want my help then I won't fecking bother, you winker". So I see no point in posting what would be a "oooh-nay" thread when they deliberately shift the search. We know the wolfman doesn't like it.
I know you're partly kidding...but I gotta say, I think Edstock is getting way too much press. I don't like Edstock, and I really don't like how they've trucked it all in and locked us out. having said that, Edstock is just a dumping ground for archival editorial images that Getty had laying around gathering dust--so they might as well make a few bucks off the images. Edstock is a threat to editorial contributors mainly because it represents a thoroughly insulting double standard. The Edstock collection doesn't pose any serious sales threat nor is it stealing all the best match window space.
174
« on: December 22, 2011, 00:15 »
Sales usual for a few days before xmas...if there is a big exclusive boost, it's not doing much for me
175
« on: December 17, 2011, 11:10 »
... but you are wrong, the succes is coming ONLY from the images I uploaded in 2011. More than 65 % (!!!) of my royalites made this year are coming from images uploaded in 2011.
What you fail to mention is that you have increased your portfolio size by 138% (!!!) in 2011.
More specifically you've done 138% more work in the last 10 months than you had previously achieved in the preceeding 3.3 years combined. Hardly surprising that you are experiencing growth.
Let's see how long you can keep it up for __ you'll need to upload nearly 2500 new images in 2012 and 6000 in 2013. Good luck with that.
you have an uncanny ability to make increasing your portfolio size seem like a bad thing...as Sean said, uploading alone doesn't do much...however, uploading good content and diversifying your portfolio seems to create conditions for consistent sales. adapt or die (within reason). some of iStock's "evolutions" can stick it up their noses as far as I'm concerned. but contributors like Guenter seem to have learned to fill holes, diversify, upload and grow. nice to see you here Guenter. I've always loved your bear shots...not to mention all your travel images.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 54
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
