|
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 - bunhill
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 62
301
« on: December 20, 2014, 06:48 »
Added to balance. Thanks Alamy.
302
« on: December 19, 2014, 12:16 »
I guess there's a chance someone important is still reading it then.
Of course. It makes sense because sometimes important support issues are going to come up here (rather than because anyone cares about our pontifications). Investors and corporates sometimes read this forum too. There are not so many sources of information and opinion about stock/microstock.
303
« on: December 19, 2014, 11:37 »
most of the people that have any say on the sites have been run out of here a long time ago. Very few admins and influential contributors come onto this forum compared to a few years ago.
This forum is still read most days in Calgary. You can prove that for yourself by putting a small invisible image in your signature. Similar to how flagcounter works.
304
« on: December 19, 2014, 11:11 »
The IS/Getty exclusive contract also allows you to sell non-similar RM images elsewhere.
I sell non similars RM at Alamy. My Alamy images are completely different (much better today IMHO!) than my mostly old RF stuff at iStock and mirrored at Getty. I am very careful not to do similars. But - does the iStock Exclusive contract actually say anything about "similars" ? It certainly never used to. I haven't combed through it lately. Is there a tight definition of similar ? I seem to find lots of what I would have called similars without looking too hard.
306
« on: December 19, 2014, 05:56 »
So technically it is possible for someone to claim that they are running a "business" but if they have to EU VAT ID to confirm their status, I have to charge them VAT as consumers.
I suspect that the arrogant EU technocrats simply cannot believe that many perfectly viable small businesses are one person operations with a turnover small enough to make them exempt from the requirement to register for VAT - and they have previously done their own accounting etc. For example, this article at The Guardian (by Carol Tricks - partner at tech City law firm Temple Bright) explains how the poorly drafted and badly implemented EU legislation will negatively affect many small companies in the UK. The effect of this legislation will be to restrict economic growth. IMO the EU needs to be reinvented as a tax competitive free trade area - instead of designing legislation which favour corporations and makes trade more complicated for everyone else. ETA: and we're broadly pro EU here btw. So goodness knows how this mess is going to be interpreted by those who are anti EU. It's an own goal for the EU.
307
« on: December 19, 2014, 04:45 »
The new rules (just like the old rules) only apply if you deliver electronic goods to consumers in EU countries.
Surely that depends on whether the client business is registered for VAT ? In some countries thresholds and exceptions apply/applied. So small turnover businesses may not be registered but then need to be charged. No ?
309
« on: December 18, 2014, 18:45 »
I just keep thinking about 2009 iStock where they did stuff like making vague adjustments to royalties and telling everyone it shouldn't affect contributor earnings because of the increased sales volume.
There are big differences however: Getty bought iStock because it had to (do something about microstock). They did not have a lot of choices, because they were primarily about selling pictures and microstock was changing the model. And today the company still faces many issues (as we know from the Nov 2014 Moody's analysis which Jo Ann Snover has posted here). Even Shutterstock, for all of its success and the amazing IPO, is still only in the stock photo business. Everything depends upon them selling pictures. Adobe by contrast has bought into the stock business because it wants to. I think because it sees stock as being something which it can use to add value to a family of subscription services which are already doing tremendously well. It is not today under the same sorts of pressures to cut costs and compete so ruthlessly. It has much more freedom to shape the thing how it wants it, even to gold plate the service perhaps, to some extent. Perhaps I am naive, but I actually believe that they really are about building out a marketplace around the Adobe subscriptions.
310
« on: December 18, 2014, 18:17 »
Based on the thread from last year I predict this forum will disappear. A lot of people have left here since then haven't they.
Yeah after looking at it there are a few greyed out people and a lot of other people that don't seem to be active
Some of those who left have been through one and sometimes two alternative usernames since then. And I have noticed that some people are running more than one username.
312
« on: December 18, 2014, 11:48 »
AFAIK, This new law applies to when you're buying something as an EU consumer from a business, also located in the EU. VAT regulations on B2B purchases are unchanged.
Yes US (eg) sites already needed to add VAT at the various different rates. Because EU business customers of (eg) US sites typically need to demonstrate that VAT had been paid when doing their accounts - which is why US stock sites add VAT charges to EU customers.
313
« on: December 17, 2014, 09:49 »
(according to Lobo):
"In only a few months, these subscriptions now represent a meaningful percentage of total iStock sales and materially increased spend-per-customer" That's an interesting quote. It could be technically true even if they had only one remaining customer. But their language has always been strangely Sovietesque - like trying to understand Kremlin reports of factory machine parts output during the Brezhnev era  Their "plans and pricing" page still deliberately creates the first glance bold impression that subscription is a one year commitment. Not sure why they cannot see that is a mistake.
314
« on: December 16, 2014, 15:21 »
which are likely to be offered "free" with the package. How low will they go?
Interviewed here, Adobe Creative Cloud "Evangelist" Michael Chaize is quite specifically talking about integrating the purchase of content. He goes on to say that the vision is that the Adobe CC will become a place where creatives also sell their content.
315
« on: December 16, 2014, 14:36 »
Those who have applied their claim over Alamy, please post here when your money arrives to your balance...
I haven't got anything yet...
OK But I think you would be better following the thread which I linked to above. FWIW I applied via Alamy. Nobody who applied via Alamy has received the money yet - because Alamy have not received it according to this post from them in the thread which I linked to above. We have not yet received the funds from DACS but when we do, these will be placed onto the appropriate photographer's balance.
316
« on: December 16, 2014, 11:50 »
317
« on: December 16, 2014, 05:04 »
I really know nothing about the details of EU tax laws, let alone how they apply to a US seller.
It will be broadly the same as you have to do with eg Symbiostock sites. There have been some recent changes and clarifications but the requirement to add TVA is not new. The EU based client needs an invoice which shows that the proper taxes have been paid. Effectively the same as with any other import duty.
318
« on: December 15, 2014, 14:10 »
I don't really care about speculation of the impact on the financial markets or convenience to buyer experience unless it puts more money in my pockets.
I do not believe that one can consider the potential implication for contributors, particularly those predominately shooting for microstock, without seeing this primarily in terms of the financial markets and the buyer experience. Because those are the two most significant factors. In that context I thought it was an excellent interview since, whilst obviously not providing unavailable answers, it does a good job of framing the arguments.
319
« on: December 14, 2014, 13:34 »
320
« on: December 12, 2014, 12:15 »
Looks like Adobe has money they don't know what to do with.
I disagree. It looks like a very deliberate investment which is about growing or ultimately maintaining the value of their subscription offering. Adobe is always going to be looking to put back the day when the number of people subscribed to their cloud service peaks and begins to decline. And therefore they have to continually add value. Because the stock price is everything - and the stock holders will freak the day they announce that the number of subscribers has begun to decline. Though that market has a definite ceiling (especially given the increasing use by business of social media and shared user content etc). Depending how they do it, their marketplace vision has the potential to work both ways for them. Potentially people subscribing - and more important renewing - both to sell and to buy.
321
« on: December 12, 2014, 09:13 »
His name begins with a * and ends in an *. I don't know why I'm being so coy really, but there you go.
Yes it is strange and makes no sense - given that to all intents and purposes you just named them. But I am guessing that it has to do with you knowing in your heart that anonymously having a public go at someone on a different forum is nasty.
322
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:20 »
Am I right in thinking that the Envato businesses have a very different model vs most of the stock photo sites ? i.e. that they effectively connect sellers (authors) and buyers and then add a fee ?
The point being - that (as with Google Play) it would then be significant where the author is. Because the interaction takes place between the author and the buyer and is simply hosted by the marketplace. Where as at most stock sites the interaction takes place between the stock site and the buyer.
323
« on: December 12, 2014, 06:10 »
People here have been arguing one way and another for ever that what photographers really need is something more like a marketplace. And Adobe seem keen to pitch this to creatives as being about the marketplace - that they see their CC as being a marketplace. It seems like a positive message. Perhaps they can help to reinvigorate the idea of marketplace. http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2014/12/building-a-vibrant-marketplace-for-the-creative-community.htmlGrow your careers and increase your earning potential: As we integrate Fotolia, we believe our members will use Creative Cloud as the place to discover and buy great content and also as a place where they can sell and showcase their work This is Adobe's second try at offering stock images. The only thing that's changed (other than prices) is that they now have subscription buyers for their software. Isn't that everything though ? The previous offering was about selling stock photographs - priced $150 - $500. In the days when Adobe lived in a world which was about selling product. But today they are about services. 2/3 of significant RF is now publicly listed again. Also interesting.
324
« on: December 11, 2014, 17:38 »
In order for this to work for Adobe it will surely mean offering bundled stock as part of the cloud subscription package. In which case that will help Adobe hold off the inevitable decline in Cloud subscriptions and will therefore help to support the stock price some while longer. Investors are most focused on the number of subscriptions - at almost any cost. Other stock companies will inevitably lose subscription revenue to Adobe. The press release says he "will continue to lead the Fotolia team as part of Adobe's Digital Media business".
3 years typically.
325
« on: December 11, 2014, 17:15 »
what will the other players do now?
Well I've heard a rumour that the Gimp is planning to buy Dreamstime.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 62
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
