|
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 - cthoman
Pages: 1 ... 84 85 86 87 88 [89] 90 91 92 93 94 ... 145
2201
« on: February 06, 2012, 00:05 »
Not sure if it's supposed to be this way but it looks like the CSS is missing. It's a white page with a bunch of links. if this is intentional they should have waited until they had the GUI sorted out.
I had the same problem when I first looked at it, but it seems to be working now. It looks decent. It probably could be a little slicker looking aesthetically. What are the "wow" features supposed to be for the new version?
2202
« on: February 02, 2012, 21:49 »
I for one would be satisfied with earning 2,3k/month...
Wait until you get there, then you'll want more. Or you can get all weird like me and realize that everyone is ripping you off. 
2203
« on: February 02, 2012, 17:55 »
Wow! That was 5 minutes I'll never get back. Oh well, off to keyword.
2204
« on: February 02, 2012, 17:40 »
That's only because they don't want to take the time to check if it is a copyrighted font.
I think the silliness of it is what they accept on the raster side (photos of text or 3D font images), but if you submit a sketch that shows the text was hand lettered on the vector side, you get a rejection. Their policy doesn't seem to make a lot of sense or be very consistent.
2205
« on: February 02, 2012, 11:55 »
Stop grumbling and get back to work. There will be no revolution today.
2206
« on: February 01, 2012, 18:39 »
I really don't understand why I have to go over this every month with some exclusive or other, trying to persuade me to go exclusive with Istock. 
I have to say, I was tempted to start a facetious thread congratulating you on your decision to finally go exclusive after many years on the fence. Maybe, next month.
2207
« on: February 01, 2012, 16:16 »
Yes I'm serious that's why I did the math and I would guess she would have made 10-25% more income for the month (if not much more since non exclusive were hit pretty badly these last two months). Obviously there are other issues besides money that can affect ones choice but those are secondary to how much income I'm making. The point is that if she makes 25% of her income as a nonexclusive then as an exclusive all things being equal she should do about the same, all things aren't equal though and those things favor exclusives so she should do much better.
I'm with you. I don't think it's the worst idea either. When you start getting excited about what Photodune is offering, it may be time to reevaluate. Seriously though, it would be hard to make the leap of faith.
2208
« on: February 01, 2012, 14:43 »
You could always get one of those job things. I hear those are popular with the kids.
2209
« on: February 01, 2012, 12:49 »
It was a solid month. I'm still coming back from the IS breakup.  1. Shutterstock 2. Clipartof 3. Mystockvectors 4. Dreamstime 5. Can Stock 6. 123RF 7. GL 8. Drawshop 9. Bigstock ...and the rest.
2210
« on: January 31, 2012, 13:32 »
December 21st, 2012?
2211
« on: January 31, 2012, 12:42 »
20 million! Wow! Is a giant black hole going to form there?
2212
« on: January 30, 2012, 22:16 »
Nice find. Very funny.
2213
« on: January 30, 2012, 13:58 »
They sold OK, but I gave them up. The prices were just too low. It just didn't make sense to let them get a foothold. Don't want to give the other sites any ideas.
2214
« on: January 30, 2012, 13:53 »
FT, is selling better then ever for me, got no complaints there.
Just wait a couple months. It's almost that time of year when they cut royalties.
2215
« on: January 30, 2012, 12:48 »
...IS, at the moment is the most unstable and untrustworthy place in the stock-business...
I guess you've never been to Fotolia.
2216
« on: January 28, 2012, 02:31 »
I agree with you, you are an intelligent businessman thats for sure but my point is that getting 1.56$ from a 1.4MP picture doesnt look any bad, actually I would love to sell this way many times a day
I don't know about the intelligent part. I think it's mostly trial and error. I do agree though. Even with the lower priced small files, it's still better royalties than a lot of sites. Off topic: Hey Leaf, can we get these two threads merged?
2217
« on: January 28, 2012, 02:24 »
The logic here seems a bit wonky? if they dont buy the pic for 6 bucks, why should they buy them for 12 or even 15? I must have missed something.
Yes, same as Lisa, I had great hopes for GL, run by grpahic people who knows their way around, etc. Obviously these elusive buyers dont appreciate that.
To be honest, I didn't see a dip in sales when I moved my prices from $10 to $15. In fact, my overall revenue has been up since I made the switch. I can't claim to know the reason why or say it's the best move for everyone, but I think it's crazy that people are selling at $6 though. That just seems too low. I guess everyone has their own strategies on how things work best though. I guess if nothing else, you can use the price setting as your own personal laboratory.
2218
« on: January 27, 2012, 19:42 »
An adjustment of pricing is something they probably had to try because the old structure just wasn't working.
I hope it works for them and improves contributor returns.
I find that hard to believe. Their sales volume is low, but the higher price per sale easily catapults their (or at least my) monthly earnings above more well known names like Big Stock. Also, wouldn't it make more sense to raise prices to get more money, rather than lower them and hope more buyers magically show up. Finally, the idea of a one size/one price has been used for vectors at iStock for a long time, and they are still (even with dipping sales) one of the most successful microstock companies. Sorry for the rant. I'm just concerned this is a step in the wrong direction.
2219
« on: January 27, 2012, 13:36 »
Not sure if this has already been mentioned somewhere, but they have also changed their pricing structure. Now, instead of all images being $6, with us receiving $3.12, it goes from $1, $3, $6.
With the minimal volume there (I average about 4 sales a month or around 6k images!) I don't think .52/sale is worth uploading for. If I don't see a BIG increase in volume it might be time to pull the plug on GL.
Too bad, because I had high hopes for them in the beginning...
I'm concerned about this as well. Hopefully, the volume compensates for it, but it would be nice to be able to adjust the prices on the smaller sizes too. Like others have said you can increase the max price. The max now is $15 instead of $20 ($15, $7, $3 price structure) which is what I have mine set at. I wrote to support last year to have them change all my files at once.
2220
« on: January 27, 2012, 10:54 »
Very educational.
2221
« on: January 25, 2012, 21:44 »
Interesting. I'm curious to see what the features and upgrades are.
2222
« on: January 25, 2012, 11:23 »
2223
« on: January 25, 2012, 10:56 »
I'm a little unhappy about the various sizes instead of just the vector sales. It would at least be nice to be able to set the prices on those as well. I woke up this morning to a $1.56 royalty on a small size which is much lower than the usual $7.8. I'm just not sure why everyone has to compete so viciously on price and undercut the large sizes. 
2224
« on: January 24, 2012, 17:30 »
Well I hope that answers a lot of the burning questions. 
It certainly answered all my questions... Oh wait, I didn't have any.
2225
« on: January 24, 2012, 15:29 »
I suppose anything is possible, but microstock is about as cheap and easy to use as it could be. So, I'm not sure how much it would be worth it to try to reinvent the wheel.
I guess there was some effort to incorporate images into some blog software or MS Word a while back (from what I remember), but it didn't seem like much came of that collaboration.
Pages: 1 ... 84 85 86 87 88 [89] 90 91 92 93 94 ... 145
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
