|
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 - Noedelhap
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 [76] 77 78 79 80 81 ... 90
1876
« on: October 07, 2013, 21:18 »
I had submitted an application to them to become a video contributor, but it's pending for over 4 weeks now.
1877
« on: October 06, 2013, 16:51 »
They run a few subsidiary websites, such as iClipart.com and iPHOTOS.com.
1878
« on: October 03, 2013, 11:52 »
My last sale was in June(!), and now I'm seemingly forever stuck at just $1,50 short of a payout. Unbelievable.
The opportunity to gain some market share and use the momentum has passed long ago. Sales are horrible, there's no marketing campaign so the site doesn't attract new customers.
They're almost 3 years old now, and they haven't grown at all in terms of sales.
1879
« on: October 02, 2013, 16:40 »
Still not interested, partly because of:
"If your educational institute has a Basic, Plus or Unlimited subscription, you can also order Colourbox Educational at no additional charge. It gives all of your faculty, staff and students access to the entire Colourbox database for non-commercial purposes."
1880
« on: September 28, 2013, 14:06 »
I can't be bothered by adhering to sites' individual rules regarding keywording images. I just keyword with what I consider relevant and appropriate for a certain images. Sure, the most important keywords first, but other than that, I follow my own methods. I keep it below 50, but at least 20 or so, without being spammy.
And I consider 'nutrition' for food images a relevant keyword. Plenty of buyers using that word to find food images, so why not? Same goes for healthy (for fruit) and beautiful (for woman). If a buyer doesn't know what kind of health-conveying image he's looking for, he might notice my 'healthy apple' image and think: "yeah, THAT'S the one!"
1881
« on: September 28, 2013, 09:03 »
1 sale in 5 months, 450 images. not worth my time, not even if its a 1 second uploading process.
50% of nothing is nothing.
Not sure why peeps keep uploading. How do you justify that 1 or 6 or whatever pathetic sales number is enough to compensate your time and effort. Honest question.
Using Stocksubmitter, I upload to many sites simultaneously with a single click, and GL is simply one of these. So there's no extra effort involved. Any money made at this site is a bonus.
1882
« on: September 23, 2013, 18:39 »
tardy. very tardy. slipshod even.
Why? The terms of the agreement are that payments will be made in the following month. They've still got a week to complete it.
I'm no fan of iStock's treatment of us but I don't understand why they get criticised for adhering to the payment terms.
Because Lobo assured in the PP forum that the royalties would be paid today.
They still have 7 1/2 hours in iStock's 'today', don't they?
You never know, they might manage it!
You're right, it has begun!
1883
« on: September 23, 2013, 17:06 »
tardy. very tardy. slipshod even.
Why? The terms of the agreement are that payments will be made in the following month. They've still got a week to complete it.
I'm no fan of iStock's treatment of us but I don't understand why they get criticised for adhering to the payment terms.
Because Lobo assured in the PP forum that the royalties would be paid today.
1884
« on: September 23, 2013, 13:31 »
Submitting to Veer doesn't seem to work. It keeps being stuck on 'Downloading list...'
1885
« on: September 21, 2013, 17:39 »
It's taking too long already. I don't expect PP sales tomorrow, so that'll be next week, around 28-29 September...Again, very late.
Edit: Lobo stated "We will push August PP royalties Monday. Have a good weekend."
That's when I want to cash out, what a bad timing :\
1886
« on: September 20, 2013, 10:40 »
Well rebranding does have its advantages. If the old brand doesn't convey a good message anymore, a new look, logo and website design may spark renewed interest from potential buyers.
I don't dislike the logo per se, but I've yet to notice increasing sales.
1887
« on: September 17, 2013, 12:19 »
The only thing that worries me is the social media marketing, if the images are not watermarked. The reactions below the TOS article state that images are available for grabs at a pretty high resolution. SS should try to prevent image theft by watermarking or showing smaller images, or both.
The request not to talk about earnings is fine by me. Most people aren't keen on telling what they are earning anyway. I believe you can still mention your total earnings, but not to publicly disclose more specific details about the number of SDs or ODs. I think it's good to be a little secretive about it, since any of SS's competitors may use the information to devise new strategies to compete with SS, which could turn out bad for us.
1888
« on: September 16, 2013, 15:46 »
Do you really think that if a buyer takes the time to find the image they need on one site that they look at other sites to see if the same image is cheaper? I'm not trying to be a wise a$$ but asking this as a hypothetical. I'm wondering if anyone has evidence that this is a common practice - checking multiple sites for the same image just to get it at a cheaper price? If you only offer your images at one site will the buyer come looking for you or will you miss out on the buyers that only buy from one site?
Great post. Personally, I don't think you're 'undercutting' yourself if you sell your images at different price points, because it's like you say, most people don't take the time to hunt for bargains.
1889
« on: September 16, 2013, 13:27 »
$5 for an HD clip is a big no-go.
1891
« on: September 14, 2013, 07:25 »
$2,14 per file is an extremely low amount.
$15,000 as a whole is a nice sum, but think about what they'll earn. Even if HALF of your portfolio sells for $5 an image/year (which seems likely), they'll make $17,500 a year. That's a $2,500 profit in the first year alone. Then think about how they can distribute your portfolio forever. Compared to that, your $15,000 looks like a cheap bargain.
1892
« on: September 13, 2013, 17:58 »
How much would you be willing to pay for 6 freshly produced cg video files that haven't garnered any sales yet?
1893
« on: September 11, 2013, 07:14 »
I have a batch of uploaded images pending there for TWO whole months. Ridiculous. Are they even alive?
1894
« on: September 04, 2013, 14:09 »
I am constantly receiving down votes for what I am saying, to a point I no longer enjoy this forum. I am being accused of posting comments just to argue with people. I dont, period. I dont want to argue, its draining me. So I am going to take a break from the MSG forum. I am here to offer help and to give my point of view. But my words are often twisted and I end up defending myself over nothing. I cant deal with it. I dont lace my comments with smileys, I am just posting my comments. I am Dutch, we are quite direct in what we say, but that doesnt mean we want to argue. I am not a troll either, I am not even anonymous, trolls dont pay for images to test someones checkout on their own site. Trolls dont spent their time helping people. This thread is the straw, the OP agrees with me, yet, I get 5 down votes. there are some trolls here that dont even get as much down votes. And when I am called a troll, the comment gets up votes. Its fine, I just need to take a break from here.
Seriously, who gives a crap about pluses or minuses? They mean nothing, stop making such a fuss about it.
1895
« on: September 01, 2013, 19:42 »
I emailed them if I could upload them quickly, but as they don't have a decent uploading system yet which takes IPTC data from the JPEG, I'm not going to bother.
1896
« on: September 01, 2013, 13:28 »
Videoblocks is not a normal footage site. You can`t contribute as a normal contributor and than get a commission on every sale.
They are buying the copyrights to the footage from the artist. They pay you once and then they can do what ever they like with your footage in future.
How much do they pay for the copyrights?
1897
« on: September 01, 2013, 12:32 »
They don't reset it, actually. If you look at the dropdown menu and go back to the month August, you'll find the monthly total again.
1898
« on: August 31, 2013, 09:00 »
I ran into the same problem with my own website script, how to properly register my customers based on whether its a business (VAT-registered) or not, and whether they're located in the EU or outside of the EU.
That means I can't let a customer buy something by letting him log in on his Facebook or Twitter account, because I wouldn't know where the customer is located. That means that I wouldn't know whether I should charge VAT or not.
I wish they didn't make VAT laws so terribly complicated in the EU. Especially because no one can give me a straight answer on how to handle this, not even the government itself. That makes me think I shouldn't really matter anyway, but I don't want to risk a fine.
1899
« on: August 29, 2013, 18:12 »
And
"IPTC for Vector Submissions:
It's coming. We are really close."
Omg, the technological progress in the microstock world today, it's a-ma-zing!
1900
« on: August 29, 2013, 17:59 »
I had to read the first paragraph 8 times and I still don't understand a word of what they're saying.
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 [76] 77 78 79 80 81 ... 90
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
