|
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 - stockmarketer
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 35
251
« on: July 11, 2013, 10:20 »
What page are you looking at? Is it the Image Earnings page showing your sales for the last few days? If so, that range is going to change based on your most recent range. For instance, mine currently shows $10-$40. Or are you looking at something else?
You're right. Just realized that it has been more than 30 days since I had sales for more than a dollar.
The chart is constructed around sales of last 30 days.
My bad.
My chart is only showing the last three days... July 9, 10, 11. Looks to me that you can change the range above the chart, and it will update the total dollar amount appropriately, but the chart still shows just three days. Am I missing something?
252
« on: July 11, 2013, 10:07 »
What page are you looking at? Is it the Image Earnings page showing your sales for the last few days? If so, that range is going to change based on your most recent range. For instance, mine currently shows $10-$40. Or are you looking at something else?
253
« on: July 01, 2013, 16:25 »
If you try to order Coke at a Taco Bell, KFC or many other chain restaurants, you won't get it. You'll get Pepsi. Those two companies are fiercely competitive in locking in deals with restaurants, movie theatres, etc... and you can bet the beverage company that offers the best deal gets the contract.
But you're right, every store want to sell Coke. They have to carry it. But Coke wants the end caps and premium shelf space. If Pepsi offers WalMart a better deal, guess who gets the endcaps, freezers at the checkout lanes, etc... and guess who moves more product?
Coke still has to be prepared to deal with its customers and can't dictate its pricing, because it knows Pepsi is in the hall waiting to offer a better deal.
Read up on Rubbermaid, what happened when it stood up against WalMart. I'm not saying one side is right or wrong. Just pointing out the reality of business.
254
« on: July 01, 2013, 16:17 »
I won't be complaining about it in a forum, while in another browser window I'm simultaneously uploading my next batch to the hated behemoth and saying my prayers for 100% acceptance.
I have stopped uploading to SS and all other agencies. But not because of what is being discussed here.
So in your example WalMart goes shopping for coca cola elsewhere if the price coca cola sets is too high. lol
This is not about coca cola, your example was flawed. Thats all.
So you've decided that microstock isn't worth your time and have stopped uploading. But getting into debates in a forum focused on the activity you have sworn off is a good use of your time? You can bet Jon Oringer didn't get where he is with that kind of work ethic.
255
« on: July 01, 2013, 16:12 »
That link to wiki proves nothing. Clutching at straws.
Here listen to this. Maybe it calms you down http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9135BDEFC471E083
From USATODAY... http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2003-01-28-walmartnation_x.htm"History has shown that suppliers suffer if they run afoul of Wal-Mart. Rubbermaid raised the prices it charged Wal-Mart in the mid-1990s because of an 80% jump in the cost of a key ingredient in its plastic containers. The retailer responded by giving more shelf space to lower-priced competitors, helping drive Rubbermaid into a 1999 merger with rival Newell, says John Mariotti, a former Rubbermaid executive. "Rubbermaid earned Wal-Mart's wrath by not giving it the best deal," he says."
256
« on: July 01, 2013, 16:08 »
I can't believe there are still people saying that because Jon's stock is worth so much, and because the company's revenues are up, then we should get our commission raised. This just shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how business works.
We are suppliers to a company that sells our product. We're like sellers of widgets to The Store. If The Store sells 20% more of your widgets this year than they sold the prior year, are you going to raise your per-unit cost to The Store? Should they voluntarily give you some kind of bonus for selling so many of your products? Your bonus is the fact that they sold 20% more of your product than the year before!
Oh, but your widgets didn't see a 20% increase in sales in line with The Store's 20% revenue increase? Then that means customers were buying a wide variety of products, and fewer were buying yours. Should The Store reward you for that achievement? If anything, if your product is being bought less frequently in relation to the other widgets, you would lose favor with The Store and maybe be taken from the shelves. And you think you should get a raise!
Very true and good example. Of course if The Store did sell 20% more of a supplier's product they'd actually be looking for a volume discount the following year. They'd want to pay less for it not more.
That is completely flawed. We are suppliers as well as manufactures. A manufacturer sets the price. What you two are saying is Coca Cola sell their product to Wall Mart and Wall Mart dictates the price Coca Cola can sell it to them for.
That's exactly how Wal-Mart does business.
Can you back that up? Because I just read that coca cola determines the price of their product.
It's Business 101. A huge corporation like WalMart (or SS in our case) has the LEVERAGE to set the prices they want to pay their suppliers, and if the suppliers don't agree, they can take the next supplier waiting in line who will gladly supply at the price you were unwilling to accept. Coca Cola sets the price for the mom and pop store on the corner. But 99.9% of Coca Cola's sales are going through WalMart, McDonald's, etc... places where they can't easily dictate their price to the customer. Now you'll say this is an example of SS becoming a corporate behemoth like WalMart and McDonald's. Like it's a bad thing. I'm pretty happy being a supplier to a corporate behemoth as long as what I'm earning makes sense for my personal business model (in my case supplying SS, I'm making money hand over fist, with very little costs.) The moment I decide the price SS is dictating I get compensated isn't worth my while, I will find another customer or another line of work. I won't be complaining about it in a forum, while in another browser window I'm simultaneously uploading my next batch to the hated behemoth and saying my prayers for 100% acceptance.
257
« on: July 01, 2013, 14:30 »
I can't believe there are still people saying that because Jon's stock is worth so much, and because the company's revenues are up, then we should get our commission raised. This just shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how business works.
We are suppliers to a company that sells our product. We're like sellers of widgets to The Store. If The Store sells 20% more of your widgets this year than they sold the prior year, are you going to raise your per-unit cost to The Store? Should they voluntarily give you some kind of bonus for selling so many of your products? Your bonus is the fact that they sold 20% more of your product than the year before!
Oh, but your widgets didn't see a 20% increase in sales in line with The Store's 20% revenue increase? Then that means customers were buying a wide variety of products, and fewer were buying yours. Should The Store reward you for that achievement? If anything, if your product is being bought less frequently in relation to the other widgets, you would lose favor with The Store and maybe be taken from the shelves. And you think you should get a raise!
258
« on: June 28, 2013, 20:58 »
I don't understand why some people are whining. SS haven't changed their terms (unlike almost every other agency). If you didn't like SS's terms when you started with them then why did you ever contribute to them? SS's discipline in keeping their heads and sticking to the original business plan (when all around them were losing theirs) is precisely the reason for their success.
I have made a lot of very easy money through SS over the years and it continues to rise, month by month, year by year. This evening I am raising a glass (of an excellent Jack Daniel's Tennessee Honey) in honour of Jon and his extraordinary success. I hope he goes on to make $10B and also wipe the floor with Getty in the process.
Cheers to Jon!
Couldn't have said it better myself. Jon created a platform that richly rewards people who understand what his customers want. He built it, we participate in it and reap rewards based on our ingenuity. I supplied him with pictures that were fairly easy for me to create, and he's paid me handsomely. SS (and to a smaller extent, the other agencies) has made it possible to take my family on lavish vacations every year, drive new cars, and move into a larger home. To anyone who cries about his success, feel free to demand your raise, and if they don't see fit to grant it to you, feel free to walk away. Build your own site, make your own rules and build your own wealth.
259
« on: June 17, 2013, 15:36 »
I have to admit I'm intrigued by the whole Sy thing, but for the time being I'm watching from the sidelines. It looks like it's a fair amount of work for a payoff that, at the moment, isn't there yet... unless I'm missing something? When the threads start popping up with people saying they're getting daily sales, I'll be motivated to jump in. For now, I'll watch and wish everyone the best.
260
« on: June 17, 2013, 15:19 »
However, IMO, if he spots "something fishy", but "would just smile and move along" he's letting them off with it and doing all of us a big disservice.
A disservice was done to all of us in this case. Someone spotted what he was sure was a misuse, decided he had to shake down a customer, and it turned out he was wrong, making the whole microstock community look bad.
261
« on: June 17, 2013, 15:13 »
somebody is jealous, giving SM a minus for having 500 downloads a day 
That's ok. I'll give you a plus for fessing up to it. 
262
« on: June 17, 2013, 14:59 »
Reaching out to the customer after the sale and demanding to know where the image was purchased and what type of license it was is unprofessional, no two ways around it. The agency looks bad, the contributor looks bad, and all of us are damaged. You placed your bet on the customer being in the wrong, and you (along with Dreamstime and all of microstock along with you) ended up looking foolish. Thanks.
Assuming you're indie, if you found one of your images being use for resale, and you see it was sold from more than one agency, but there is no EL, would you just 'let it go'?
Yes, I'd let it go. If I wanted to invest the time and effort into chasing down a retroactive EL, what would it get me? $20? $30? My time is MUCH more valuable than that. But you'll say "it's not the money, it's the principle!" As I've said before, we knew the risks when we signed up. I'm a microstocker first, artist second (or third or fourth). I sell probably 500 or so downloads across the various sites every weekday. By the odds, I'm certain I've been "wronged" multiple times, with my images on items for commercial use, high volume, etc. without a proper EL. But even if I spotted something fishy, I would just smile and move along. I have a daily quota to hit, and if I miss it because I want to chase down a $30 EL or fight for the "principle," then I'm a bad business person.
263
« on: June 17, 2013, 14:18 »
Here's my estimated daily breakdown, for what it's worth...
The bigger your port and volume of sales, the more of a pattern you see in the days of the week. Of course, these numbers would represent a "normal" week with no major holidays, and in the summer, Fridays are typically a little worse as people start the weekend early...
Each day's sales as a percent of the total:
Sun: 8%
Mon: 15%
Tues: 20%
Wed: 20%
Thurs: 20%
Fri: 12%
Sat: 5%
264
« on: June 16, 2013, 15:01 »
Reaching out to the customer after the sale and demanding to know where the image was purchased and what type of license it was is unprofessional, no two ways around it. The agency looks bad, the contributor looks bad, and all of us are damaged. You placed your bet on the customer being in the wrong, and you (along with Dreamstime and all of microstock along with you) ended up looking foolish. Thanks.
265
« on: June 16, 2013, 08:09 »
Ultimately the thing that matters to me is the black eye we all take when one of us does something unprofessional. Put yourself in the customer's shoes. The designer bought an image through DT and used it appropriately, within the terms of the license. Then months later a person claiming to be the creator of the image seeks you out wanting to know how you obtained the image and what type of license you bought. This would put a sour taste in my mouth about using microstock again in the future. Will every image creator hunt me down and demand answers? I don't need that kid of aggravation.
266
« on: June 13, 2013, 22:38 »
I wouldn't count GL out just yet. My sales are definitely down, but flatlined? No. Had two sales today. But for the month, GL is probably down about 50% for me.
GL's upload process is the easiest in the business, and their commissions are more than fair. They're run by good people, and it sounds like they've been hit pretty hard by the recent changes at Google. But we all know the Google gods can giveth and they can taketh away... and sometimes give back again. GL may yet have its second wind.
I'll continue uploading there every day, because it's easy, I believe in the company, and you never know when an agency may rise.
267
« on: June 12, 2013, 09:26 »
Seems to me that...
1. Your time could be MUCH better spent just focusing on creating new content.
2. Many people here told you that the usage was most likely covered by a regular license, yet you pressed on making noise with the customer, DT and the ms community over nothing.
3. If I ran DT I would see this as extremely unprofessional behavior and I would sanction you. You contacted the customer implying they did something wrong, when they were perfectly in the clear. I would be hesitant to buy from DT again for fear one of its contributors would come after me later questioning my legitimate use of an image. So not cool, man.
4. What's next, you're going to go after every third party poster reseller or eBayer who is offering the poster for sale? For god's sake, let it go.
When I jumped into microstock, I had to swallow the fact that sometimes my work will be used in ways the license doesn't allow, or worse yet, outright stolen. I can try to monitor every usage and go after people I think are infringing, or I can keep my nose to the grindstone. I don't have to like the misuse or theft, but I know I will not move forward if I keep looking back.
268
« on: May 31, 2013, 13:20 »
Sorry... double post.
269
« on: May 31, 2013, 13:18 »
On a typical day I might see around 15-20 downloads at DT. But the past few days, DT seems to have fallen off a cliff. After a normal start to the week, I had ONE download yesterday and TWO so far today.
New search change? Something else going on? Or is it just me?
(Other sites are pretty normal all week, including today, so I won't buy a "it's the start of summer" answer.)
270
« on: May 31, 2013, 08:47 »
Dare anyone say that their marketing ploy and price strategy for 2013 is working........... 
Their marketing ploy and price strategy for 2013 is working.
omg, some positive feedback on the MSG forums!! good to see.
might push them up a little further on my upload list.
Well, especially if the rise in sales could have been caused by reduced pricing (especially coming from a reduction in commission), IT IS A HIGH RISK STATEMENT!!!!
It could be that the people who do well there are selling even more, and the ones who never did well there are selling less and less. Those who do well probably saw a rise up to Level 6, so the increase in commission coupled with an increase in downloads is leading to a very nice rise in earnings. I know this is my case, and I'm betting it's true for a number of others.
271
« on: May 30, 2013, 21:34 »
Dare anyone say that their marketing ploy and price strategy for 2013 is working...........
Their marketing ploy and price strategy for 2013 is working.
272
« on: May 30, 2013, 15:48 »
I'll say it again... 123RF is top tier. They'll officially be one of the "Big 4" in four to six months.
273
« on: May 29, 2013, 09:58 »
Well I'm out too, bye
Me too
Leaf, I think it's not a bad idea. In general, I think openness is a good thing. At the same time, I'm seeing my work get copied more and more on the major sites, with quite a few people following me on SS, and I just know many or all of those are copycats who like to get convenient updates on my newest stuff to copy. I've been vocal here on how my earnings have grown, and how I've gotten there. I've tried to help others with my views on how to think of ms as a business, be marketing-focused, etc. But linking people right to my pictures to show them exactly what subjects and styles have earned a sizable income for me would be pure insanity. So I'd be out as well.
274
« on: May 25, 2013, 14:14 »
I'll pass on the best advice I ever got. It came from a wealthy man who told me, "What you should do is find the thing that ignites your passion. It would be something that you'd pay someone to do if you had to. Then do it so well that people will pay you good money to do it. If you'll do that, you'll never work a day in your life."
Was the wealthy man Confucius? It's a well-known quote from him: Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life. But I think you're taking it out of context. If you love your job, he's basically saying, then it's not really work. I could love pulling the lint out of my navel, and get so good at it that I made it an art form, but I don't think anyone will pay me to do it. No, it still has to be something that fills a need someone has. If I loved shooting watermelons and became the best in the world at it, I still wouldn't become rich. Find a need, and fill it well. That's the winning equation.
275
« on: May 25, 2013, 07:45 »
Imagine you live on an apple farm, have daily access to all things in the apple market. Although there must be many apple and apple farm images, if you look at what is available I am sure you can build a huge collection of authentic imagery about a subject you truly understand.
Of course you could. No laws against it. The difference in our philosophies is that first I ask, is there demand? Enough demand to make such an endeavor worthwhile. I'm sure a talented ARTIST could come up with lots of creative ways to show apples, but the talented BUSINESS PERSON would realize it's a dead end before he/she even began. The OP's stated goal is to earn a certain income, and that requires BUSINESS thinking first. If your spouse was a highly specialized type of medical technician, giving you access to lots of unique imagery, that would certainly give you a unique port, but if it's so niche that the number of buyers would be few and far between, then you've only addressed the SUPPLY part of the equation, ignoring the DEMAND. They're both equally important considerations.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 35
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
