|
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 - topol
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20
351
« on: October 02, 2013, 02:06 »
this is a nice and often useful forum but that poll is worthless. a handful of ppl and they click in whatever they want. represents just 'bout nothing.
Nope. You can take from it want you want ... but there is undoubtedly a measure of truth in the relative incomes from each agency.
undoubtedly  It undoubtedly doesn't match my data at all, at two more stockers I know IRL and seen their stats. Facts
352
« on: October 01, 2013, 17:19 »
this is a nice and often useful forum but that poll is worthless. a handful of ppl and they click in whatever they want. represents just 'bout nothing.
353
« on: September 30, 2013, 16:07 »
But if he doesn't hold the majority of shares, can't someone else buy them and remove him as CEO? Just trying to bring back the insomnia
Theoretically yes. But in reality they would need to buy almost all other shares - which means they would have to convince all other existing shareholders and would have to pay a huge premium.
With Oringer still holding above 45% that is very unlikely to happen.
There's still a risk though and the way Getty has been bought twice, I'm finding it hard to understand why he would risk losing SS when he could of sold some shares, made millions and kept 51%?
Maybe he is just taking out part of the money he has in the company to hedge his position. He may be a billionaire by the current share price of Shutterstock, but that's paper money. Unless Shutterstock pays out part of their earnings as dividend (I don't know, haven't really followed the stock) he can't buy anything with his billion.
So now he has the opportunity to sell a (small) part of his total shares and have 140+ million in the bank - real cash, not "just" shares.
If the stock moves further up - he still has close to 16 million of it.
If it goes down - with 140 million in the bank, he still will not have to ask for social welfare.
Sounds like a wise decision to me.
You can buy stuff for shares no problem, especially premium stuff, so you din't have to cash out just buy f.e. luxury house at all.
354
« on: September 30, 2013, 06:42 »
If you look at how much the hedge funds paid for Getty, I think he could of easily made as much or more selling SS privately as he has from selling shares.
Nah, taking a company public can be turned into (and it very often is) an enormous scam that can bring you more money then the company would make in several hundred years of constant growth... but SS turning public up ot now looks like to be just a regular scam free business move.
355
« on: September 30, 2013, 06:38 »
According to people in the know (a hell of lot more than us) the institution of 'shareholder' have long become meaningless, so much so that it should be 'renamed' or even abolished. Shareholders have little to no influence on how the company works, it's controlled by the technostructure and the CEO(s). Watch "age of uncertainty", very well explained and presented with examples... and it explained to me perfectly the economic nonsense I see day to day.
356
« on: September 27, 2013, 10:00 »
So what's new about it? They haven't even changed a thing not even the design, only the logo became even less memorable. It's the same dysfunctional junk site.
357
« on: September 19, 2013, 15:16 »
how can everything be covered? 2 years ago no one was talking photos of kids doing selfies, quinoa fritters, or hipsters with film cameras.......
fashion changes, technology changes faster, those 2 alone mean we get to keep shooting new stuff.
Actually it means ppl should avoid those because they are fads that go away as quickly as they came, and the pictures will be mostly worthless. The best is to try and do (pseudo)iconic type of shots that have longevity (like yuri's #1 handshake shot f.e.) and I have to say, micro agencies are far more likely to accept those than stocksy, and they have far more of them, and this bothers me a bit.
358
« on: September 19, 2013, 03:37 »
alamy has a lot higher prices than SS. It helps me to make less there in half a year than in a day on SS.
359
« on: September 15, 2013, 18:31 »
Nothin'
360
« on: September 15, 2013, 10:54 »
Since there are hardly any sales there, it doesn't matter, doesn't much influence anything.
it will influence the whole industry.
this is nothing more than a race to the bottom.
isn't this whole thing the industry influencing them?
361
« on: September 15, 2013, 03:27 »
Just don't get it or see how it can scale up to worth the time.
Ask a few internet billionaires...
Also ask the thousands of cock-eyed start-ups with half baked business plans with no sense of monetizing a product or service.
Why ask them? They are the people who didn't get it.
So are you assuming this young recently married couple who are graphic designers have it all figured out? How so?
How did that come out my posts?
362
« on: September 15, 2013, 03:26 »
Since there are hardly any sales there, it doesn't matter, doesn't much influence anything.
363
« on: September 14, 2013, 13:47 »
Just don't get it or see how it can scale up to worth the time.
Ask a few internet billionaires...
Also ask the thousands of cock-eyed start-ups with half baked business plans with no sense of monetizing a product or service.
Why ask them? They are the people who didn't get it.
364
« on: September 14, 2013, 12:27 »
Just don't get it or see how it can scale up to worth the time.
Ask a few internet billionaires...
365
« on: September 13, 2013, 14:39 »
#14 - you need guidebooks from others to your trivial self (=you are stupooeeed).
366
« on: September 11, 2013, 04:51 »
If I understand well microstocks:
(But as I am new I surely don't understand well)
- Summer is bad because customers are in vacation
- Fall is bad because customers are tired of the vacation and they need to take time to take back some energy.
- Winter is not so good because it is cold and customers are frozen
- Spring aaah spring is fantastic but some have allergies Achoo!
Seriously: I don't think that seasons have a lot of effect on sales.
But I am sure that the general trend on microstock is worse every day.
Summer is supposed to be the worst, and that's perfectly logical because it's vacation time all over the world. Then it picks up again at autumn... but I was getting BME after BME in the summer months this year without uploading, and now with fall coming, my sales are actually lower, despite uploading lots of good stuff. The answer is in all kinds of search shuffles I guess. SS definitely has some kind of cycles / balancing act for old/newer stuff, and contributors.
367
« on: September 07, 2013, 13:19 »
Actually if you come from a background of classical art, extensively learned drawing, painting, the whole of photography is bit of a 'cheap art' as for talent needed, time and effort invested...
368
« on: September 05, 2013, 04:25 »
... what was normal before microstock came along and allowed every photograph taken to be accepted. it's a concept the micro crowd does not understand with 89% acceptance rate. its called rejection 90% of the time, editing accepting 10% of the work submitted.
i think the premiere agency that really got into it was before GI even existed. not sure if you have ever heard of Tony Stone Images, now called Stone. They also got bought out by GI. all agencies used to edit tight, but i seem to recall it was Tony Stone Images that were really 'contemporary' and had a style that most other agencies did not have...
Thats bs. A micro sites actually became extremely picky after just a few years, both on subject matter and especially on technical quality. They don't seem to care about aesthetics, which bothers me too, but that doesn't mean they are not very-very-very picky. As for stone and other old getty cr*p, we were buying images for them for years, and boy were they a disappointment 'bout 50% of the time. We were getting pisspoor quality unusable junk from them all time... and that's really bad when you got a tight deadline and it's 24-48 hours for some kind of a replacement. Theye were (and still are) selling lame slide snapshot that only look ok as a print thumbnail, and they were also loaded with lame ugly shots, just like now. (like that infamous on-camera-flas toilet shot in one of istock collections). I remember sitting in front of the comp in cold sweat after receiving some discolored OOF ultragrainy junk that wouldn't even work at desktop size, while the deadline for a shiny full page ad was next morning with the printing shop on hold waiting for me... so plz.. keep your fairytales for granma'
369
« on: August 30, 2013, 08:14 »
... That means that we know for certain that things will change. ...
Their analytical skills of reality are stellar. 
The universe is in constant motion!!
370
« on: August 29, 2013, 14:05 »
I don't think veer has much of a future.
371
« on: August 24, 2013, 00:33 »
Good week. Just about every month is BME, tho I uploaded very few things in the last few months.
372
« on: August 22, 2013, 10:14 »
I see some people have this naive 6yearold's concept of business, thinking if they sell something for twice as much, they will earn double. In reality of course they usually can hardly sell anything at all To turn this around for better understanding by the mentally impaired: in a digital economy it doesn't matter how low the price is as long as it pumps up the volume. SS has low prices and large volume. IS is converging towards low prices WITH decreasing volume = that is destructive for the business... and threy top it all off by giving the lowest of low commission anywhere - 8 - 9 cents (!!!). They suck and should be wiped into the trash as soon as possible.
Is it absolutely necessary in the year 2013 to deride someone's opinion in a public forum by using descriptors such as "naive" and "mentally impaired"?
More than ever. That's what society is heading for.
373
« on: August 21, 2013, 16:41 »
On the down side, "If it's good enough for the royal family..." - why pay for a pro?
oh my goddd ... if even the royal family can't pay for photographers, WHO WILL ??
taxpayers
374
« on: August 21, 2013, 09:35 »
It's amazing to me that people will sell the same image in every market and then complain about commodity pricing. As an exclusive I don't have to worry as much about commodity pricing and I don't care if half my images hardly sell as long as my best selling images are Vetta and S+. Non-exclusives also tend to discount the additional earnings exclusives get on Getty., which is quite substantial. The fact is that there are many buyers that will pay a lot for the right image and not all images will sell much better at dirt cheap prices.
Are you a well known highly regarded artist? If not ( : > ), your images are commodity. The rest is only a matter of time.
375
« on: August 21, 2013, 06:23 »
"I'm glad that I'm not an exclusive iStock contributor."
Take a look at the earnings ratings, there are plenty of people happy to still be exclusive and earning considerably more than the 25 cents a pop that SS pay.
There is no one I know on SS who has an RPD of 25 cent... so I dont know where you got that from.
Ron, you are so in denial. Here is the 'Shutterstock Earnings Schedule' for you...
http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml
and also notice how you can get paid 'up to $120' so that makes me wonder how it is common to get $150 as per your other post let alone $231.
I see some people have this naive 6yearold's concept of business, thinking if they sell something for twice as much, they will earn double. In reality of course they usually can hardly sell anything at all To turn this around for better understanding by the mentally impaired: in a digital economy it doesn't matter how low the price is as long as it pumps up the volume. SS has low prices and large volume. IS is converging towards low prices WITH decreasing volume = that is destructive for the business... and threy top it all off by giving the lowest of low commission anywhere - 8 - 9 cents (!!!). They suck and should be wiped into the trash as soon as possible.
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
