|
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 - gostwyck
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 210
276
« on: January 18, 2014, 19:55 »
I have no doubt that contributors with a larger percentage of older images got hurt more by the search change. I had an image that I shot in 2010 when I first started that had 1,600+ downloads. It was on the top of the search for "child." For almost three years, it generated 5-10 sales a day all by itself. They changed the search and it disappeared into the middle somewhere. So I can imagine that if you had a lot of images that were best sellers in that age range or older, then they lost popularity, which would naturally affect your sales to a large degree. Meanwhile, about two-thirds of my port is less than two years old. While I lost out on a couple of good sellers, the rest are holding up better because they're newer.
Oh, for crying out loud. Why do people always blame 'search engine changes' when one of their images ceases to generate the same level of sales? You know it just might have something to do with the 10M new images that are currently being accepted each year. When I'd been at SS for a month I think they only had about 60 images corresponding to the keywords 'new zealand' of which about 45 were mine. Back then they sold quite nicely. Nowadays ... not so much. I'm absolutely sure it must be due to a 'search engine change'. It cant possibly be anything to do with the additional 33,150 images of 'new zealand' that have arrived since. It has to be SS conspiring against me and the higher royalty rate they have to pay me.
277
« on: January 18, 2014, 12:11 »
... however the second half of January is always much better than the first.
Woow, I hope you're right! 
It's over half of Jan. and it's already my best month ever (x2). So, you say, second will be even better? Love it! 
Yep. Your sales should increase steadily over the next few weeks and will probably peak in March before tailing off somewhat in April and then remaining fairly static through the summer months.
278
« on: January 18, 2014, 05:18 »
I'm wondering if they did something to the search when they changed the presentation page about a week ago. January was looking quite normal until then.
I think you may be right. Normal for January until yesterday, but miserable yesterday and today.
I hope gbalex is wrong and Shutterstock aren't following in Fotolia's footsteps and shafting their long-term successful contributors.
My January earnings are currently projected to be similar to last year (according to Yuri's calculator) however the second half of January is always much better than the first. I don't see any change in the pattern of sales either. Roughly half of my daily sales are from images uploaded in the last 2-3 years (probably about 15% of my portfolio) and the other half from images uploaded in the 6 years before. I've been fairly lazy in uploading new images in the last 2-3 years however I have tried to concentrate on quality rather than volume. I don't think SS goes in for sweeping changes to the default sort-order, just subtle tweaks. In over 9 years I've certainly never noticed their effect __ totally different to my experience at IS where sales have literally dropped 30-40% overnight as all your best-sellers are condemned to the bottom of the sort-order.
279
« on: January 16, 2014, 18:36 »
Useful megapixels for most of us has plateaued. The race should now be sensor quality.....dynamic range....noise reduction.etc.
Someone talking some sense at last! Extended dynamic range is the advancement that will most likely get me spending my money to upgrade.
280
« on: January 15, 2014, 09:23 »
So far I'm about 12% up January but that's as much due to a chunky SOD yesterday as anything else. Volume-wise, downloads are almost identical.
281
« on: January 12, 2014, 18:30 »
Quick fix for this: Put Herg on 'Ignore' mode. See how easy that was to fix 
Wouldn't it be better if Herg could simply learn some basic manners?
282
« on: January 12, 2014, 09:42 »
I also find a bit unfair that Shutterstock employees have all the perks:
We know that the trick to keeping awesome people happy is by creating a fun, comfortable environment. This includes competitive pay for top talent, full medical benefits, plus:
Stocked beverage fridges, free breakfasts & snacks
Lunchtime Yoga
Pizza & Massage Fridays
Happy hours and killer Summer & Holiday parties
And we, photographers (especially the top tier, that has given SS the most) are treated as crowd, not individual employees as we deserve.
As far as I'm concerned we contributors already have the greatest 'perks' of all. We get to work from our homes, at whatever time we choose and for as many or few hours as we feel like. We don't waste time and money commuting and are not subject to the controls, restrictions and assessments of employees. Would you really give all that up for a free slice of pizza and a 5-minute massage once a week?
283
« on: January 11, 2014, 13:22 »
This discussion just reinforces my conviction that microstock is no longer worth the hassle and the aggravation, given the ever-shrinking returns. I got out of IS back on D-Day and never looked back. I still have my stuff at a couple other places but I no longer submit anything.
No idea where this company thinks it's going. They can't rely on enthusiastic but clueless newbies for all their future submissions. Or can they? I've stopped caring.
You say you've stopped caring but you certainly haven't stopped posting! By my calculations there will be something like $200M to be shared amongst microstock contributors during 2014. It just depends how hard you are prepared to work for your piece of the action.
284
« on: January 11, 2014, 08:52 »
Is there no way to get a list of downloads sorted by "last download"?
Not as far as I'm aware of. Just the daily sales sorted by age. The map is the only thing that allows you to see the last 10 downloads as and where they happened.
285
« on: January 11, 2014, 07:03 »
Well there is no plausible reason why friday of all days should be dead.
Reread the replies in this thread. You've been presented with several plausible reasons.
Herg asks for lots of advice on MSG. However he mostly ignores or argues the toss against any advice offered ... and he never, ever has the courtesy to thank anyone for their time in replying to his concerns. I wouldn't bother.
286
« on: January 10, 2014, 14:59 »
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
Do now mechanics wear fucsia overalls and page haircuts? I don't see great differences with Sean's images on SS: most could have been shot last year. With his backlog I don't see any need to shoot new stuff just for SS; as I understand (maybe wrongly) Sean's new and far better stuff goes to Stocksy.
Exactly. My older images still sell regularly on all agencies that they appear on. Of my last 20 downloads at IS for example, 12 of them were uploaded between 2005-8.
287
« on: January 10, 2014, 11:25 »
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad. I like the map interface on the home page for sales. Not crazy about using description meta as the title because I have to retype all my titles. The model release manager would be more useful if you could do multiple releases for people. I have to add the date of the release to the name to tell the difference.
Downloads at SS are not yet up to full speed after the festive season __ I'd say they are only about 75% of what I'd consider 'normal'. On a normal weekday I'd expect about 2% of my portfolio to be downloaded. I seem to remember you out-selling me on IS by about 5x so I'd expect you to sell up to 10% of your portfolio on a given day when things are busy. Early sales on new images are to be expected although not as much as they once were. I'm sure long-term subscribers regularly trawl for new images in the subjects that they have an interest in. Generally speaking however it can take an image up to 6 months to attain its optimum sort-order position. Sort order position is entirely driven by the keywords actually used when an image is downloaded. Therefore similar images from the same series often prove popular in different keyword searches. For example a series of a family camping might have one image popular on a search using 'camping', another image popular with 'outdoors' and another with 'family vacation'. I'm sure you have a made a good move with Shutterstock. Stock images by their nature are a depreciating asset and you might as well have them earning you good money whilst they are depreciating rather than hidden away on a hard drive somewhere. I'd recommend DT for further exploration next. Earnings at DT, for a given portfolio, might be expected to earn at roughly 20-25% of the same portfolio at SS. However earnings tend to be particularly stable at DT because RPD increases as images ascend Levels. Don't forget to stuff titles and descriptions at DT with the most important keywords (NB: they don't have to make perfect grammatical sense). Btw __ have you tried the SS Contributors' App on your iPad yet? If you like the map you'll love the app! It's brilliant for quickly checking daily/weekly sales, total earnings for each image and the keywords used by buyers.
289
« on: January 09, 2014, 12:08 »
All you can do is wait until Getty buckles under their massive debt and they will be declared bankrupt. Once the cancer is removed from the patient, we will see a healthy growth in royalties again.
As long as key microsite players like SS use price undercutting as a long term growth strategy to capture market share, site like IS are under pressure to cut or keep image pricing ultra low and that does not beget healthy royalties.
Snip
Jonathan Oringer - Founder, CEO & Chairman of the Board
It still multiples. So it's order of magnitude whether it's if you look at us compared to other stock marketplaces like an iStock or others, it's two or three or four times more expensive to not use Shutterstock. If you look at the higher end sort of more traditional marketed might be 6 or 8 or 10 times more expensive.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1841072-shutterstocks-management-presents-at-the-goldman-sachs-us-emerging-smid-cap-growth-conference-transcript?page=2&p=qanda&l=last
Why did I just know that your post on a topic about an Istock mistake ... would be to blame SS for it. Classic!
290
« on: January 08, 2014, 20:43 »
once upon a time a photographer really needed to know what they were doing to even be considered a stock photographer. oh the times they are changing changed.
Nonsense. Stock photography is way more competitive now than it has ever been before.
sure, cause now everyone and their cat is a photographer and can submit to any microstock agency and not even know what they are doing and not even have to deal with a true editing process. it's a sad day for stock photography as an industry when your agency sends you a "how to" take photos course.
my original post was not about being more or less competitive, it was related to skill level, we never had the "how to" courses cause the only way into any agency was "know how".
hence the often mentioned view of the traditional agencies were "closed shop", they were never closed shop - ever- ever- ever, but if you did not know what you were doing, they's slam the door in your face.
We'll obviously, with your vast experience and superior skills, you'll be cleaning up with the much bigger market available to you nowadays. How come you keep complaining about the increased competition when you are so much better than them?
291
« on: January 08, 2014, 18:01 »
I dont feel its right for ss to charge us for a service which finally benefits them with better photographers and better stock photographs. I believe it should be free and considered an investment in their workforce (which is us), ultimately their business is to sell our stock images not make money giving courses.
Bollocks. It's a service they offer. Either pay for it, or leave it. They don't owe you anything. Why should they give lessons away for free? These lessons are not necessarily an investment for them, since you can also use your newly acquired knowledge tp upload better photos to other agencies.
Well said. Why do some people think everything should be spoon-fed for them? Should SS buy us all cameras and lights too? What about a PC to process the images and maybe a house to live in whilst we do it "for them"? Some people need to grow a pair and learn to stand on their own two feet.
292
« on: January 08, 2014, 17:54 »
Not sure if it added my email to the draw for the prizes. When I added my email it said: xxxx @ semmick.com is already subscribed to list MicrostockGroup. Click here to update your profile. When I clicked the link it opened a new page and I am not sure if it registered my email for the draw. Can you check this?
Thanks.
Yeah, I wish there was a better way for things to work when someone is already on the list.
If you get the message you are already on the list, you need to ...
- click that link that to update your profile
- then, an email will be sent to you
- find that email with another link to update your profile
- then FINALLY you can update your profile with the 2013 survey box checked.
I'll also be sending out a reminder at the end of the month to those who haven't responded to the survey (checked the box). If you get that email you know you missed checking the box. Or... if you are unsure, send me a pm or email and I'll double check it for you.
Thanks for that Leaf. I should be 'in' now too. Great work on the Survey once again. Looking forward to seeing the results. I never fail to be surprised how closely the fortunes of the masses tend to match my own experiences.
293
« on: January 08, 2014, 14:03 »
Can I offset* the monthly fees as a business expense for my tax returns? If not I'll carry on getting (most of) the skills I currently need for free on the interthingy.
* excuse the pun
Yes, definitely.
294
« on: January 08, 2014, 13:10 »
once upon a time a photographer really needed to know what they were doing to even be considered a stock photographer. oh the times they are changing changed.
Nonsense. Stock photography is way more competitive now than it has ever been before.
295
« on: January 08, 2014, 13:07 »
All you can do is wait until Getty buckles under their massive debt and they will be declared bankrupt. Once the cancer is removed from the patient, we will see a healthy growth in royalties again.
Wouldn't bet on it. They are likely to be acquired by a private equity firm. (private equity is just the new name for hostile leveraged buyout firms, worst of worst corporate raiders)
Hasn't that already happened? Didn't Carlyle buy Getty and then borrow most of the money against Getty to pay themselves back? I don't think that there is any room for more 'leveraging'.
296
« on: January 08, 2014, 13:04 »
To be honest the biggest fools were probably us the contributors for ever accepting 20%.
297
« on: January 07, 2014, 16:37 »
As far as I'm concerned Sales and Revenue are the same thing, both being common accounting terms expressed in $'s, whereas Downloads are another thing entirely. I see what you mean though, the OP does need to clarify what he is referring to.
I'm not sure that these extrapolations ... upon guesstimates ... upon 3-year-old data are particularly helpful anyway. I think most of us have a fair idea from our own numbers and the monthly reports from others how agencies are generally doing.
I'm not even sure I care much any more about how IS is doing. Last month they dropped to below 10% of my microstock earnings for the first time ever and were beaten into 3rd place by DT, also for the first time in over 9 years of microstock. After the latest series of price increases I can only see them accelerating downwards ever faster.
298
« on: January 07, 2014, 15:31 »
The 70% and 75% came from investors considering investing in Getty debt.
It seems almost incredible that corporate investors at that level would would be sharing inside gossip with a blogger whilst, presumably, under NDA. But okay.
Straight question: How did it go from being 70% of revenue to being 70% of sales ? Previously you said revenue. Now you are saying sales.
Revenue and sales are the same thing for Getty aren't they?
300
« on: January 06, 2014, 17:23 »
^^^ Nice work Jim.
It all ok though __ IS have just increased prices of both credits and also non-Main collection images to compensate.
It's really good business practice that. Whenever people are buying less of your product ... it can only be because it is too cheap ... therefore a price increase is essential to bring those buyers back. I think that's how it works anyway.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 210
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
