|
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 - donding
Pages: 1 ... 61 62 63 64 65 [66] 67 68 69 70
1626
« on: May 07, 2009, 16:43 »
Personally I feel embarressed for ever getting involved with microstock. I can see all the macro stalkers out their having their laugh and their "I told you so"
donding, no macro stalkers are laughing at this. remember they were there before... when microstock cut in on them. they too had to comply to microstock, and now, for many it 's the second time having the carpet pulled from beneath their feet.
nobody's laughing, only Getty !
Yeah I guess you're right...I hadn't really thought of it that way.. 
1627
« on: May 07, 2009, 16:31 »
I think "why bone us?" is going to be remembered for some time LOL SJ"whyboneus?"Locke 
How about a T-shirt:
Bonus! No Bone Us!
Heh you might actually get them printed up...you'd proubably make more money off it...lol
1628
« on: May 07, 2009, 14:55 »
Personally I feel embarressed for ever getting involved with microstock. I can see all the macro stalkers out their having their laugh and their "I told you so"
1629
« on: May 06, 2009, 19:27 »
The big challenge would be to get the big contributors on board, rather it would be for a new company or existing one. I don't see many of them voicing the opinions on here...maybe they are watching, but they are not speaking out except about their treatment by the stock sites...I'd really like to hear what their opinion on this is or rather we are just wasting our time even talking about it.
1630
« on: May 06, 2009, 17:46 »
My own variation would be as follows:
1. to establish a company (or unit trust) made up of interested contributors.
2. The company operates a site by either acquiring an existing site, or developing a site from scratch.
3. The company or Unit trust deeds establish the ground rules for the operation of the company - to me these should include principles such as that an individual contributor be limited to a single share or unit in the company, a mechanism for collection of commissions, a mechanism to provide for funds to market the site, and a mechanism to re-distribute profits back to shareholder contributors in proportion to the sales generated by the individual contributor.
4. New contributors to the site would receive the % commission set without a profit distribution component, unless they subsequently purchase a unit or share in the company, based on a valuation of the unit trust or share at the time - valuations would ordinarily only take place annually due to logistical difficulties.
What you describe here with share's would have to be a corporation and that would be a pain to set up. I'm not sure what the law reads exactly but if there are more than...I think 50 shareholders...it may be less than that...you have to be a C corp and publicly traded....At least this is the case in the USA. Now don't quote me on that because I'm not 100% sure some research would have to be done on that.
1631
« on: May 06, 2009, 14:30 »
Well I read the forum over there ..not many there...and I might add I couldn't figure out how to post a reply even though i was logged into my account...so I guess I just put it on here.
The gold collection sounds great but I don't know if that is what micro stockers want. Alot of them only do micro stock and if they do macro stock now they are probably already on those other agencies you mention. That really isn't the right anwer but you are on the right track. If you are already on a macro site I wouldn't consider that exclusive.
You are now forcing me to think fast - I planned that before this story about coop started...
Maybe some solution for microstockers may be that you already suggested with exclusivity on some time frame... But, that time frame is quite short if it is under 6 months as Keith said... If you want to have comparative advantage as coop group and to punish some sites who run unfair policy, you must consider all your new images waiting even more than 6 months before you upload them on other sites. Also it is clear that in 15 days and even more after you upload some image it finds first interest in this industry... So, you will be exclusive with say 5 - 10 sales before you go non-exclusive with your image... Again, that image will probably be charged more than after you take it down from exclusivity... So, plan and logic say no less than 6 months image exclusivity is enough.
I already asked and no one answered: Who has guts to not upload to SS or iStock for 6-12 months?
So, your call about that...
I do agree the six month or even longer sounds right, but if I started making sells off the exclusive image I doubt that I personally would want to add it to another site. As for rather I got the guts to quit uploading to SS or iStock for 6 months...that is a hard answer since they are two of my biggest earners. I don't make enough to live off of but there are those microstalkers that depend on those sites for their income and would proubably not consider that, but if they started getting an exclusive collection started up on another site and continued to upload to it then even while uploading to the other sites, when the collection gets sizable enough I think you would see them being more likely to lean more towards the exclusive. There has to be strict policies in place about the exclusive so they aren't uploading that same content to other sites. How that would work I don't know.
1632
« on: May 06, 2009, 14:04 »
Didn't Fotolia recently drop the contirbutors share??? Wasn't it for financial reason's...to better their marketing program?? Sounds like they are doing pretty well financially....so maybe they will increase our commision's....doubtful but I guess we can wish huh..LOL
1633
« on: May 06, 2009, 13:42 »
another thought...if you already have those shots on the other macro sites and they sale it for 250.00 but you are selling it on FuturePics for say 150.00....isn't that the same thing as you were talking about buyers being able to go elsewhere to buy the same image cheeper...only the role would be reversed as far as featurePics would be concerned...
Correct me if I am misunderstanding this.
1634
« on: May 06, 2009, 13:38 »
Well I read the forum over there ..not many there...and I might add I couldn't figure out how to post a reply even though i was logged into my account...so I guess I just put it on here.
The gold collection sounds great but I don't know if that is what micro stockers want. Alot of them only do micro stock and if they do macro stock now they are probably already on those other agencies you mention. That really isn't the right anwer but you are on the right track. If you are already on a macro site I wouldn't consider that exclusive.
1635
« on: May 06, 2009, 12:52 »
Just want to say Thank You to Milinz for doing some talking and research for us as well as Elena for coming on here to listen and being open to discussion. The gold collection sounds like just what alot of us are looking for. I will be moving on over to the other forum on FeaturePics to check this out and suggest alot of you do the same. No commitment...just observe.
1636
« on: May 06, 2009, 10:16 »
as for Fp and CC I have pics on both sites and have yet to make a sale. Of course I upload the same pics to all the micro stock sites where they do sale which may be why they don't sell there because they are cheeper some where else. As for Zym I'm never tried them out so I don't know what the results would be there.
1637
« on: May 06, 2009, 10:10 »
As for how to attract buyers from existing established agencies... That's done through content. If coop members are willing to stop updating their portfolios on other sites (not remove them, just stop uploading to them) and the coop becomes the #1 location for fresh images, the buyers will come. Either that or they just keep buying from old collections at other sites.
It's a test of will, though. Ultimately this is all about money and MOST artists won't have the willpower to stop contributing to the main players they despise because they don't want to give up what little they are getting now.
I agree. many rely on that income from the big 6 and it would be hard for them to stop uploading, but on the other hand if they would start uploading fresh images that are available on one site and that site only, then I think alot of the buyers would come. I got pics on my hard drive I just can't bring myself to sell for 30 cents therefore I don't upload them. What I do upload is mainly what I believe won't sell on a macro site because they can get something like that on a micro for less money. I wonder if we could get one of these already established sites to put up a separete section that only has the exclusive contributors on it...the fresh stuff. Leave what you have on the other stock sites alone simply because they are more likely already ready floating around out in the buyers market. that would help generate income to those who are hardly making it now untill this thing takes off.
1638
« on: May 05, 2009, 21:38 »
Well folks I'm outta here...time for bed and time for more insperational dreams. Lets hope this won't die in our sleep..
Sweet dreams all
1639
« on: May 05, 2009, 18:25 »
donding, milinz, woa... woa...
We are far from getting any kind of closure here. If you look at the names of the visitors, we're not even getting the main players, which is what we need. Until we get the same rapport as the other thread where you have a larger number of old timers, we cannot really say it's nothing but hot air. Sorry. 
Yeah I know but I was hoping to get those who checked out the other thread to come here and join in the discussion. Some people on here only read the subject line and if they don't understand what it's talking about they won't visit that thread, so hopefully in the days ahead more will jump from that one to this one to voice their thoughts and opinions. Ohhh this is far from closure and I'm totally aware of that.
1640
« on: May 05, 2009, 18:14 »
here's another quote from the other thread I will give web design services free of charge, I specialise in search engine optimisation, however, I'm not a developer/programmer, just have a good working knowledge of php/mysql, but we would need someone who specialises in programming too!
[/quote
This is what we need...more that are willing to do what is needed in that area in order to make it work. And I do think that a reasonable subscription is needed by contributors that will help finance this...it won't be free by any means and the costs need to be taken into account.
1641
« on: May 05, 2009, 18:10 »
I think it is not time to vote yet.
First of all you must define problems you have on microstock sites.
I know several. But main problem is that some microstock sites which are acting as Slave Masters to Contributing Authors.
Other problems? Prices? Sales?
What are solutions? Coop?
One month exclusivity? What is that with one month exclusivity? That is not enough to get your image noticed!
Exclusivity must be based on 6-12 months at least. But, if you wish to make it real that should be 2 - 5 years. Then all other agencies will not see your images and that will hurt them hard!
One month is nothing!
Also who of you all has so much guts to leave micro earnings behind and turn exclusive somewhere on 2 years ?
We don't need a vote..only opinions....which is what you just voiced and thank you...that's what we need...but we also need agreement on that rather than going rounds and rounds about the same thing.
1642
« on: May 05, 2009, 17:49 »
This is from the other thread Attention: Web designers, Accountants, Lawyers and Photographers Has Zymmetrical not been aiming for many of these objectives from our inception?
- 70% commission
- no free photos
- no subscriptions
- open market pricing
- truly internationalized system, one of very few agencies that uses truly international domains (this has been a key strategy from the start, each month we are tripling traffic on Zymmetrical.de, .es, etc.)
- experienced staff (Paul Melcher, veteran of innumerable startups as photo industry liason, review staff that are veterans of popular stock agencies, and humbly myself as one who has been selling digital art online since 1991)
- high editorial standards from the start
- established, scalable web system that relies on a programming framework that just got series "A" venture capital (www.dotnetnuke.com)
- made in Canada: Canadians aren't boastful but it helps to know the business you are dealing with operates from an advanced legal/copyright jurisdiction
After the pain and frayed patience levels of a year-long beta we are ready and able to support coop initiatives - we have always maintained an Artist focus, and hopefully any shortcomings in actual returns on time invested can be balanced out against our undeniably non-standard approach.
ps. I completely agree with the time-dependent exclusivity clause, however 1 month is not enough turnaround for most magazine publishers etc. 6 months would be a healthy figure.
Zymmetrical I'm not familiar with your site and I will go check it out, but the main question would be if you would back a co-op? Would you be willing to listen to what those of the co-op want and change accordingly? I think what everyone is voicing their opinions about right now is the terms and conditions of the big sites. You could be a great benifit if you would be willing to listen. As for rather you would be willing to do these things that would be left totally up to you. Voice your opnions on this....we need feed back.
1643
« on: May 05, 2009, 17:44 »
Plus if contributors are getting 100% from us, it makes sense that we can get a helluva lot of referral business, as people will refer buyers to the place that makes them the most money everytime.. the more links back to us from web sites/blog/various profiles, the better our page rank with google..
That's another important part to success...that Google ranking. I always go to the first few when I make any kind of search. It would be important to get up there with all the hits.
1644
« on: May 05, 2009, 17:42 »
Has Zymmetrical not been aiming for many of these objectives from our inception?
- 70% commission
- no free photos
- no subscriptions
- open market pricing
- truly internationalized system, one of very few agencies that uses truly international domains (this has been a key strategy from the start, each month we are tripling traffic on Zymmetrical.de, .es, etc.)
- experienced staff (Paul Melcher, veteran of innumerable startups as photo industry liason, review staff that are veterans of popular stock agencies, and humbly myself as one who has been selling digital art online since 1991)
- high editorial standards from the start
- established, scalable web system that relies on a programming framework that just got series "A" venture capital (www.dotnetnuke.com)
- made in Canada: Canadians aren't boastful but it helps to know the business you are dealing with operates from an advanced legal/copyright jurisdiction
After the pain and frayed patience levels of a year-long beta we are ready and able to support coop initiatives - we have always maintained an Artist focus, and hopefully any shortcomings in actual returns on time invested can be balanced out against our undeniably non-standard approach.
ps. I completely agree with the time-dependent exclusivity clause, however 1 month is not enough turnaround for most magazine publishers etc. 6 months would be a healthy figure.
Zymmetrical I'm not familiar with your site and I will go check it out, but the main question would be if you would be willing to back a co-op? Would you be willing to listen to what those of the co-op want and change accordingly? I think what everyone is voicing their opinions about right now is the terms and conditions of the big sites. You could be a great benifit if you would be willing to listen. As for rather you would be willing to do these things that would be left totally up to you. The way the site would be run would have to be agreed upon by all members.
1645
« on: May 05, 2009, 17:13 »
Donding you have GOT to be chairperson!! I will give web design services free of charge, I specialise in search engine optimisation, however, I'm not a developer/programmer, just have a good working knowledge of php/mysql, but we would need someone who specialises in programming too!
Thank you hqimages, but I'm not sure that would be what everyone else would want me to do. I think you might do a better job at that than I after reading your posts in the other thread. You make some very good points. We do need someone like you. Search engine optimisation is very important. The searchs have to be relevant to the keywords. It has to be a eye catching web page also to draw people back. That takes alot of work I know and I thank you for making the offer.
1646
« on: May 05, 2009, 15:07 »
I have been folowing this thread but it is still missing the key information.
What is the Added Value for the Buyer?
What is the Unique Selling Point?
I agree with the exclusive idea and I think that is a added value for the buyer as well as a unique selling point. We as contributors need some input from buyers as to what is missing in the stock today and see if we can supply that for them. That would also be a unique selling point..
1647
« on: May 05, 2009, 13:57 »
If you're any of the above...read this thread. It's important.
Contributors' Collective
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/contributors'-collective/
Come and voice your thoughts and opinions.
donding
(Marketing and Promotional Representative)
Thanks tan but I don't know the first thing about marketing...that's why I hope some of these members here will get on that thread and come up with suggestions.
1648
« on: May 05, 2009, 13:48 »
I just finally after two years with them made it to the $50.00 payout....whoo hooo!!!
that makes me feel better, dongling, as I'm at $26.67 after a year. Guess I right on schedule!
Oh you made me feel better..  I actually just sold another one today...my canned vegetables which it seems is the only hot seller I have on there. It's only on one other microstock site and sells well there also. If I were to upload today they would proubably reject it for copyright infridgement which was why it got rejected on all the other agencies even though the brand names are edited out. That's proubably why I sell it so much because it's in limited supply on all the stock sites.
1650
« on: May 05, 2009, 12:18 »
Warren exactly because you are doubtful means if you are won over by the idea, you could become one of it's greatest advocates.. plus the more people say something can't be done, the more we have to come up with ideas of why it will, and how to make it different.. everyone's opinion counts whether good or bad..
And anyone outright slamming the idea, just take that to drive the idea further, prove them all wrong.. work for me in business anyway, always has, I want more people to tell me I can't do something because it makes me even more determined to do it!!
Doubtful??? Are we reading the same words? I was offering an idea, not doubting an idea?
I read the same recommendation in several other posts. It was praised. Are we speaking the same language? 
Sorry I meant to put a comment and hit the reply button... anyway Warren if it's any consulation I don't believe you are being doubtful. We need to look at what was done in the past and make sure the same mistakes aren't made again. He isn't being doubtful. Any business has to look at the failures of the past and don't make the same mistakes...that's just smart business. I don't believe he is saying it can't be done and he is a believer, just has to find the solution which I believe is what we are doing here now. It's the ones who say "It can't be done" who are doubtful and the non believers.
Pages: 1 ... 61 62 63 64 65 [66] 67 68 69 70
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
