|
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 - PaulieWalnuts
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 120
451
« on: November 07, 2015, 23:54 »
Moving back on topic a bit...
My only macro experience is with Alamy and Getty.
Alamy so far I'm on the fence about. I got four images accepted a couple months ago and just had a $100 sale. But they just rejected a submission of a few hundred images and gave me a timeout for a month from submitting which I think is pretty lame. From what I've seen most people say they earn $1 per image year with them. So if I had 5,000 images I'd expect $5,000 in a year. Not real good. And with this goofy one-bad-image-everything-gets-rejected model I'm leaning toward pass. I just did another smaller submission and if they fail it again I'm probably done.
Getty is kind of difficult to give an opinion on for me because I never really fully committed to them. I hear some people there make big bucks while others make micro money. My experience was a little of both. One thing to note is once you submit images there about the only way to deactivate any of them is to cancel your contract. So Getty still seems to be the macro leader and you'd probably need to try them to see if it's right for you.
452
« on: November 07, 2015, 19:00 »
Who in their right mind would still pay $5 to a local video store? Nobody which is why they no longer exist.
Off topic: I still rent from the video guy down the street. He's the last shop of it's kind in my area and he will close his doors once the lease is up. But still, it's a much nicer experience to go to this guys store. You get out of the house, talk to some people and support an independent businessman. It's good for the world and for me.
I'd agree. I live in a small town. We still have independent small businesses. Unfortunately they're slowly being replaced by the same franchise businesses you see in every town across the United States. Uniqueness is going away and nobody seems to care. People flock to the new Whatever Bread Company and avoid the independent sandwich shop that has better food. It's just brand marketing and people flock to it like bugs to zapper lights.
453
« on: November 07, 2015, 18:54 »
So, you, me, and everyone else here in microstockland are responsible for the current market.
That's a very good analysis, Paulie, and a correct conclusion quoted above.
The question is now that we're in this pickle, what do we do about it? Some of us tried hard with the Symbiostock model, and we know how that turned out. A few of us (like you) are successful selling directly through our own websites, but most of us (like me) don't make enough that way to cover the site-operation costs.
What other options do we have at this point?
Now what? Well you can wait for the crash where the majority of people abandon microstock and due to lack of supply prices rise. I think we're a long way off from that. Or you can wait for more sites like Stocksy or 500px to come along and pull prices upward. Also a long way off. Or you can figure out what you're not doing right with your own direct selling and fix it. Regarding selling direct, Symbiostock isn't part of the problem. Neither are most of the other stock software or websites. I see a lot of people blaming the software. It's rarely the software. I also have a Photoshelter website which in my opinion isn't very user friendly and I just got a $250 RM license sale. It's the strategy behind the direct selling model that matters most.
454
« on: November 07, 2015, 15:03 »
There are a few, but Corbis and Getty is struggling.
It may seem like SS is giving away images for free, but we must understand that it's not SS that determines the market...it's the buyers. And the buyers are disagreeing with the macro stock business model.
It's not just the buyers that determine the market. By submitting our images to the various distributors we are helping to set the market price. If nobody submitted to micro then the buyers would have no choice but to pay whatever the price is. If the price was too high there would be no buyers. Somewhere in between is the happy spot where buyers wont pay more and sellers wont take less. Our distributors keep dropping prices so why wouldn't buyers take advantage of that? At one point we were happy to pay $5 to rent a movie from a local video store. We were then offered stuff like Redbox rentals for a dollar. We were then offered stuff like Netflix all you can watch for $8 a month. Who in their right mind would still pay $5 to a local video store? Nobody which is why they no longer exist. Buyers are disagreeing with macro because they now have the Netflix of photography being offered to them. And the only reason the Netflix of photography exists is because we support them. So, you, me, and everyone else here in microstockland are responsible for the current market.
455
« on: November 07, 2015, 10:21 »
R.I.P. Stephen Strathdee (sharply_done) 
You are missed.
Yeah I saw that too. R.I.P. Stephen. Him and Hatman standout as people who really helped me when I was starting out. It's a shame he's gone. There's gotta be an award for oldest thread revived. 2007, 8 years!
456
« on: November 05, 2015, 19:44 »
the dinosaurs can either adapt or be vanquished
Rawrrrr. Watch out for those microasteroids!
457
« on: November 05, 2015, 18:52 »
1
What in your opinion are the main differentiating factors between stock photography and hobby/creative photography?
2
What is the one piece of advice you would give to someone starting out in stock photography?
Thanks so much for any replies! 
1. Stock vs Hobby With a hobby usually you create images that please your creative side without any goal of making money. For some hobbyists who have a golden finger the opportunities and money come anyway but these don't seem to be common. This is where I started. Taking pictures of flowers and tons of other pretty stuff no stock buyer wanted to pay for. With stock the focus is to create images that sell. Either by stumbling upon a scene, or by creating one, where you say "oh yeah that's money right there". After a while in this business if I didn't think I could make money from a photo I wouldn't take the picture. My need for creative satisfaction was replaced by the satisfaction of money. 2. Advice Be a great businessperson first and a good photographer second. Everybody is a photographer these days. I think a person with great business skills and mediocre photography skills will do way better than an amazing photographer with mediocre business skills. Taking a picture is only one small piece of the big puzzle. Sales, marketing, finance, social media, networking, SEO, and other business skills are what will help grow a profitable microstock business and lead to other money generating opportunities beyond microstock.
458
« on: November 05, 2015, 18:23 »
Who knows when or if the ratio of people jumping versus coming aboard will ever reverse.
I only disagree with this one.
For now, it's like you said. But wait for time when all agencies will have about 100-200 millions of images (in next few years probably) and we will see that less and less people will join (and continue to work for microstock)
Why?
Because at this moment new contributors upload 100-200 images and they can even earn some money out of it in few months. In the future they will make less then a dollar with the same amount of images and just quit it in the start.
Technically they will join, but they will not be real contributors or competitors if they quit quickly.
I see what you're getting at but I think these distributors know the game pretty well. They know that they keep reducing benefits and commissions to increase their profits, bunches of contributors leave, and they're still getting record growth with new contributors and images. Why? Because every group of people that joins has their expectations set at that time. Even if most old users are earning 25-75% less than a few years ago, this year is the BYE, BME, BDE for most new users. And when todays users have 75% drops the new users that replace them will be having BXE's. Somebody nailed it earlier. Who cares if the old expensive jaded employees leave when they can be replaced by new enthusiastic people who are ecstatic to earn anything more than a compliment. 1990 - Wow I can earn $1,000,000 a year in stock photography 2005 - Wow I can earn $100,000 a year in microstock photography 2015 - Wow I can earn $10,000 a year in microstock photography 2020 - Wow I can earn $1,000 a year in microstock photography
459
« on: November 05, 2015, 14:28 »
Well I'd partially agree with you on some points.
You said "Microstock is broken. It's unprofitable and unsustainable for contributors." What needs to be added to that is "for people who expect long term income growth"
I think the growth wall is because every image has a sales lifecycle. Grow, plateau, die. I don't know what the formula is but maybe let's say you need to double your portfolio every year to just to break even. If you start off with 25 photos it's not hard to quaduple that to 100 photos in a year and you perceive that as growth. Same for next year going from 100 photos to 400. Life is wonderful in microstockland. But a few more years down the road as on old timer how many people can go from 10,000 to 40,000 photos or even 20,000. Not many. So in the long term it's probably unsustanable for most people.
But for the agencies like SS who are seeing record financials and are doubling their collection quarterly, that would indicate that for every one person that abandons ship there are maybe dozens or even hundreds of people jumping aboard. And in a few years those people may abandon ship. And so on. So for certain distributors they dont see a problem. More people joining than leaving and record revenue and profits? What problem?
Who knows when or if the ratio of people jumping versus coming aboard will ever reverse. Until then it's probably not a concern for most or all distributors. This is kind of like the California gold rush. The only people who made money were the ones selling tools to the miners.
I've removed most of my collection from microstock to sell direct and also sell outside of stock. Turned out to be a good decision for me. Like I said before I'm grateful to have had micro give me the opportunity to learn the business. It has opened a lot of doors into other things.
460
« on: November 04, 2015, 07:53 »
It looks like they may have finally reached the point where reducing contributor royalties has had a negative impact on them and are now reversing it. No company would willfully hand that much of their profits out of the kindness of their hearts. I hope this is the start of the turnaround toward more positive things to come. Been waiting a long time.
Looks like my enthusiasm may have been a bit premature
461
« on: November 02, 2015, 13:18 »
I'd agree with Firewall. I have a 5DMII, D800, and a Sony A7R. The 5DMII seems to have similar image quality to the 5DIII and mine has weird chunky crosshatch noise patterns in low light and shadows when they're adjusted even a little bit. The D800 and A7R shadows are cleaner with a fine grain and don't have weird patterns. The D800 is great but if you want mirrorless I'd suggest the A7RII. My A7R is great but the A7RII has a lot of improvements that would probably go great with your Canon lenses with an adapter. Especially focus seems to have a major improvement.
One thing I can say about the Sony's is I'm surprised with focus accuracy in just about any lighting conditions. At night taking a picture of a city skyline my NEX-7 and A7R don't hunt much, almost always focus lock, and the pictures are almost always in focus. In similar lighting my 5D hunts constantly and fails to lock. The D800 does much better but same problem as the 5D. Plus the D800 seems to show a focus lock when it didn't actually get focus which is really annoying. And the D800 liveview quality is pretty bad. A7R LCD liveview and even viewfinder are pretty good. The A7R battery life isn't great but I bought a few spares. But comparing apples to apples if you left any DSLR with the live view on for a few hours it would drain batteries pretty quickly too.
I'm still holding on to my Nikon and Canon stuff a bit longer. I still use the D800 occasionally. The 5DMII I literally haven't used in a couple years. I jump back and forth between brands but I haven't regretted going with Sony.
462
« on: October 29, 2015, 20:21 »
It looks like they may have finally reached the point where reducing contributor royalties has had a negative impact on them and are now reversing it. No company would willfully hand that much of their profits out of the kindness of their hearts. I hope this is the start of the turnaround toward more positive things to come. Been waiting a long time.
463
« on: October 22, 2015, 18:26 »
Yeah I occasionally get custom requests. Usually from strangers. Sometimes it's for a custom shoot but usually it's they want to license an image but want to make changes to an like color or remove something.
For custom work I always immediately give a ballpark "typically between X and Y" range the first email or call to feel them out on budget. That way I figure out if it's worth spending more time on. Otherwise people can drag things out for days or weeks of calls and emails making you jump through flaming hoops only to find out they have a $50 budget to do $5000 of work. If it scares them, great. I didn't waste much time. My costs are my costs. I need to run a profitable business.
Yeah I also get people wanting to talk on the phone about an "opportunity to do business together". It's normally BS like "hey I have this great idea where you spend tons of your own money making a bunch of prints so I can decorate my business with them and you'll get a ton of exposure." Anytime it sounds like a sales pitch I tell them to send me more detail about their proposal in an email and if I feel it makes sense we can then set up a call. Occasionally it's something legit.
I'd say maybe a 1/4-1/3 of the time it ends up turning into business for me.
464
« on: October 19, 2015, 06:02 »
I've mostly quit microstock. I still have a few hundred images left down from a couple thousand and haven't submitted anything new for a couple years.
I remember not long after I first started micro in 2007 how I used to check several times an hour and would get so excited watching the sales downloads and earnings go up. I thought at that time there was huge potential and that I could retire on this at some point. Today I really don't even bother to check the micro earnings anymore.
I believe there's still potential in micro for the image factories who can pump out images by the tens of thousands. I only have time to create a handful of images a day and the return isn't there anymore so it no longer make sense for me. I also believe there's still opportunity in macro for the right images with the right agencies.
I've been focusing on my own website and am excited again. I'm no longer concerned with ambiguous royalties. I get 100%. I set my own pricing of dozens or hundreds of dollars instead of a few dollars or a few cents. I have control over my copyright and where my images are used instead of unclear or even unannounced partnering deals. I get renewal revenue for when the license the customer purchased expires instead of perpetual no limits usage.
I'm thankful to micro for giving me the opportunity to learn the business. But time to move on.
How do you market your site? Is that a big expense for you?
I'd also like to ask how you get your site discovered by buyers when they are Google searching, assuming a lot of expert SEO but a lot of this takes a long time to learn, I can't write code and don't have the time available to learn. The idea is you want to come up on the front page of Google when a buyer searches for stock footage or stock video of....whatever you have for sale and beyond. That's my problem right now, have nearly 30,000 clips on P5, building up on SS and VB and have a website up which links customers to all three sites my content is on but it needs to get under the nose of every buyer, this is the world wide web, this is a large customer base but how to get my content under their noses so they can at least have a look at it.? Starting to think that maybe SEO should be my priority instead of filming new content, I already have a fully stocked store.
Yes, the idea is the higher you show up in Google search for relevant terms, the more traffic, the more buyers. People usually only look on the first page or two of search results and then will refine their search if they're not finding what they need. Also, are you trying to drive traffic to your site? If so you have the linking idea backwards. You should be using other sites to link to your site. Backlinks are one of the more important things Google looks at to determine the relevance of your site. Linking to other sites from yours is promoting them, not really you. When they get to that site they now can wander off and possibly find someone else's video they like better than yours. Yes, SEO is extremely time consuming to learn and implement as a strategy. But without it chances are nobody will find your site or files. I've been studying it for around fifteen years.
465
« on: October 19, 2015, 05:19 »
I've mostly quit microstock. I still have a few hundred images left down from a couple thousand and haven't submitted anything new for a couple years.
I remember not long after I first started micro in 2007 how I used to check several times an hour and would get so excited watching the sales downloads and earnings go up. I thought at that time there was huge potential and that I could retire on this at some point. Today I really don't even bother to check the micro earnings anymore.
I believe there's still potential in micro for the image factories who can pump out images by the tens of thousands. I only have time to create a handful of images a day and the return isn't there anymore so it no longer make sense for me. I also believe there's still opportunity in macro for the right images with the right agencies.
I've been focusing on my own website and am excited again. I'm no longer concerned with ambiguous royalties. I get 100%. I set my own pricing of dozens or hundreds of dollars instead of a few dollars or a few cents. I have control over my copyright and where my images are used instead of unclear or even unannounced partnering deals. I get renewal revenue for when the license the customer purchased expires instead of perpetual no limits usage.
I'm thankful to micro for giving me the opportunity to learn the business. But time to move on.
How do you market your site? Is that a big expense for you?
Marketing hasn't cost me anything. I've spent most of my time on search engine optimization and in the past month I started to promote it through social media. I'm planning to test paid search with Google, Facebook and maybe Twitter starting in the next couple weeks.
466
« on: October 18, 2015, 15:18 »
I've mostly quit microstock. I still have a few hundred images left down from a couple thousand and haven't submitted anything new for a couple years.
I remember not long after I first started micro in 2007 how I used to check several times an hour and would get so excited watching the sales downloads and earnings go up. I thought at that time there was huge potential and that I could retire on this at some point. Today I really don't even bother to check the micro earnings anymore.
I believe there's still potential in micro for the image factories who can pump out images by the tens of thousands. I only have time to create a handful of images a day and the return isn't there anymore so it no longer make sense for me. I also believe there's still opportunity in macro for the right images with the right agencies.
I've been focusing on my own website and am excited again. I'm no longer concerned with ambiguous royalties. I get 100%. I set my own pricing of dozens or hundreds of dollars instead of a few dollars or a few cents. I have control over my copyright and where my images are used instead of unclear or even unannounced partnering deals. I get renewal revenue for when the license the customer purchased expires instead of perpetual no limits usage.
I'm thankful to micro for giving me the opportunity to learn the business. But time to move on.
I raised my prices three weeks ago and have already made more in those 3 weeks than I did in any month previously with my own site. By a factor of 4-5 times as much.
I think you have the right idea. I'll be raising my prices further. They're clearly not high enough yet.
That's great to hear and I think is a good example that buyers are willing to pay more for the right image. Or right personalized service. Or easier buying experience. Or whatever the reason was. Buyers will pay more if you add value and give them a reason to. Everyone will have different limits for what a buyer is willing to pay for their work.
I keep on increasing my prices and my sales volume and overall revenue continues to go up. I haven't hit the ceiling yet. And prices need to keep going up to justify the massive costs it takes me to create the images.
I was thinking I had to compete with micro prices. But now I see I should really be competing with macro prices. Some people are willing to pay $500 for my vectors on Shutterstock. I think that's the direction to go in. Thanks for your advice here.
You have some really nice work. For illustrators you folks have the opportunity to create whatever you can come up with and make it as unique as you want. The more unique the more of a reason a buyer would buy from you. And if you create your own brand and only make your images available through you then you have full control of your prices. Some buyers are willing to pay for the right image. I have better chances of selling one image for $500 than 500 images for $1.
467
« on: October 18, 2015, 14:37 »
I've mostly quit microstock. I still have a few hundred images left down from a couple thousand and haven't submitted anything new for a couple years.
I remember not long after I first started micro in 2007 how I used to check several times an hour and would get so excited watching the sales downloads and earnings go up. I thought at that time there was huge potential and that I could retire on this at some point. Today I really don't even bother to check the micro earnings anymore.
I believe there's still potential in micro for the image factories who can pump out images by the tens of thousands. I only have time to create a handful of images a day and the return isn't there anymore so it no longer make sense for me. I also believe there's still opportunity in macro for the right images with the right agencies.
I've been focusing on my own website and am excited again. I'm no longer concerned with ambiguous royalties. I get 100%. I set my own pricing of dozens or hundreds of dollars instead of a few dollars or a few cents. I have control over my copyright and where my images are used instead of unclear or even unannounced partnering deals. I get renewal revenue for when the license the customer purchased expires instead of perpetual no limits usage.
I'm thankful to micro for giving me the opportunity to learn the business. But time to move on.
I raised my prices three weeks ago and have already made more in those 3 weeks than I did in any month previously with my own site. By a factor of 4-5 times as much.
I think you have the right idea. I'll be raising my prices further. They're clearly not high enough yet.
That's great to hear and I think is a good example that buyers are willing to pay more for the right image. Or right personalized service. Or easier buying experience. Or whatever the reason was. Buyers will pay more if you add value and give them a reason to. Everyone will have different limits for what a buyer is willing to pay for their work. I keep on increasing my prices and my sales volume and overall revenue continues to go up. I haven't hit the ceiling yet. And prices need to keep going up to justify the massive costs it takes me to create the images.
468
« on: October 18, 2015, 14:27 »
Did anyone read all 18 comments of the OP and consider he might be pulling your leg?
+1
Of course he's lying, that's what he does.
Even if it's a joke it's a great topic. People complain constantly around here about micro revenue falling, bad agency deals, and on and on. There are plenty of opportunities out there. If micro doesn't bring money or happiness, do something else that does. I believe having your own site can have a huge amount of opportunity if you have even a simple business plan. If you have no plan or the plan is "upload all of my images to my site and expect sales" it's the wrong plan.
469
« on: October 18, 2015, 08:39 »
I've mostly quit microstock. I still have a few hundred images left down from a couple thousand and haven't submitted anything new for a couple years.
I remember not long after I first started micro in 2007 how I used to check several times an hour and would get so excited watching the sales downloads and earnings go up. I thought at that time there was huge potential and that I could retire on this at some point. Today I really don't even bother to check the micro earnings anymore.
I believe there's still potential in micro for the image factories who can pump out images by the tens of thousands. I only have time to create a handful of images a day and the return isn't there anymore so it no longer make sense for me. I also believe there's still opportunity in macro for the right images with the right agencies.
I've been focusing on my own website and am excited again. I'm no longer concerned with ambiguous royalties. I get 100%. I set my own pricing of dozens or hundreds of dollars instead of a few dollars or a few cents. I have control over my copyright and where my images are used instead of unclear or even unannounced partnering deals. I get renewal revenue for when the license the customer purchased expires instead of perpetual no limits usage.
I'm thankful to micro for giving me the opportunity to learn the business. But time to move on.
470
« on: October 12, 2015, 10:34 »
If this means they will sell more extended licenses that would be wonderful.
I agree with that. What good is it to overprice your images if they never sell at the higher price?
This probably deserves its own thread, but who decides what overpriced is?
I don't disagree with what you're saying, Mantis, but I suppose the answer is: "overpriced" means higher than the average price for similar images on similar sites.
I would love to sell my fantastic  bird and critter images for $1000 each on SS, DT, and FT, or even for a "mere" $500 each, but it's not likely to happen because that *would* be overpricing.
Just curious if you've tried higher pricing or checked to see how the supply and pricing are on micro vs macro. If you specialize in birds, have some somewhat rare pictures or offer a benefit like super detailed and accurate descriptions, that could draw buyers in who are willing to pay more.
471
« on: September 26, 2015, 13:18 »
Predictability is key - variance permits purchases here and there that may have nothing to do with the pricing. On the other hand, it may have everything to do with the pricing. Large scale experimentation, exactly like what you are doing, is what we need to contribute to the statistical database we have so we can make more accurate market analysis.
Based on what I've seen, most independents are pricing at over $20 for full size images, and getting few sales. There will, of course, be exceptions to that, but it is that knowledge that drives me to experiment with a new license model (one time use) at a much lower cost ($0.99 for a small, $4.99 for a full size).
This is good to know but do you know why there's a $20 max? Is it the images aren't differentiated enough from micro? Is it lack of traffic? Are they targeting specific buyers or any buyer? Other?
Getting pricing right also depends on traffic and conversion rate. Based on what I've seen so far I don't think I could get enough traffic to make $5-$20 work for me. So while I may get fewer sales, the sales at a higher price more than make up for the volume. I just had a $450 license sale. It would take 90 $5 sales to match that. Are there a decent amount of Symbio people that are getting that level of traffic to get over 90 sales in a month?
I haven't really seen any stats on independent stock sales. If you have any Symbio data you'd be willing to share I think it would be helpful. Like you said, I'm also experimenting to find the sweet spot between price and volume.
PW, I wonder about this too. Based on what I see, especially those new to stock, is the general disbelief that images can be worth more than $10 or $20.
Well, some probably wont be worth more than $10 or $20 if there's no reason for them to be worth more. If you're selling the same images on your site as on micro then you're probably not going to be able to go much higher with price. I've removed most of my images from micro so they're only available on my site. If a buyer really wants my image, they can't get it elsewhere and I control the price. Whenever I ask a buyer how they found me, almost every time the answer is the same. "We've looked at Getty, Istock, and Shutterstock and haven't found what we needed". So most of the time they couldn't find what they needed and were forced to do a Google search. For anybody who wants to set up their own website I would ask what's unique about your website that buyers won't be able to get the same thing on micro or elsewhere. Unique images? Unique subject? Unique licensing? If the answer is nothing is unique then I wouldn't expect much or any sales. Some buyers have no problem paying more for the right image and those are the buyers I'm targeting.
472
« on: September 26, 2015, 11:17 »
Predictability is key - variance permits purchases here and there that may have nothing to do with the pricing. On the other hand, it may have everything to do with the pricing. Large scale experimentation, exactly like what you are doing, is what we need to contribute to the statistical database we have so we can make more accurate market analysis.
Based on what I've seen, most independents are pricing at over $20 for full size images, and getting few sales. There will, of course, be exceptions to that, but it is that knowledge that drives me to experiment with a new license model (one time use) at a much lower cost ($0.99 for a small, $4.99 for a full size).
This is good to know but do you know why there's a $20 max? Is it the images aren't differentiated enough from micro? Is it lack of traffic? Are they targeting specific buyers or any buyer? Other? Getting pricing right also depends on traffic and conversion rate. Based on what I've seen so far I don't think I could get enough traffic to make $5-$20 work for me. So while I may get fewer sales, the sales at a higher price more than make up for the volume. I just had a $450 license sale. It would take 90 $5 sales to match that. Are there a decent amount of Symbio people that are getting that level of traffic to get over 90 sales in a month? I haven't really seen any stats on independent stock sales. If you have any Symbio data you'd be willing to share I think it would be helpful. Like you said, I'm also experimenting to find the sweet spot between price and volume.
473
« on: September 26, 2015, 07:50 »
Companies will do whatever it takes to improve their financial position. If they find that something improves finances, and it's not unethical or illegal, why not? And obviously some companies don't even care if it's unethical or illegal.
It's all probability.
474
« on: September 25, 2015, 17:53 »
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags"
Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?
We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.
I was going to type something similar but you said it well. With the greed and debt Getty/IS is in, any upward commission adjustment simply takes away from their ability to deliver to those two factors.
Here we go again! Once more "Greed" as THE explanation!
When will people stop falling for buzzwords and fashionable pseudo-intellectual arguments?
Just to be clear, at your level, you are as "greedy" as they are, for example when you ask for a better pay. The same goes for everybody else who try their best for themselves and for people that matter to them.
He that is without "greed" among you, let him first cast a stone....
The butcher is serving you well not because of his generosity, but because it is in HIS interest to serve you well, or because of his "greed", if you insist in using this word. When he stops serving you well, you only have to switch butchers and he will be penalized.
When he stops serving you well, not "greed", but his lack of understanding of his market, his competition and his customers will sink his business.
If there is something to be blamed about Getty, is not greed, but their incapacity to keep up with the competition, to innovate, to have a decent relation with their suppliers... iStock's RPD is the shame of the industry!
Greed, business practice, or whatever anyone wants to call it, in a agent/distributor relationship each party wants to get as much and give as little as possible. Right now agencies/distributors have the upper hand in the get lots and give little game. Unfortunately, by contributors continuing to flock to micro sites and send gazillions of images we are telling these sites we are super-happy with the current deal. And they will continue to give us less and we will continue to say thank you for giving us less by sending bazillions more images. Maybe one day when we're earning under 10% but don't know if because of some vague license scheme we'll finally have had enough. Oh wait... Regarding the CEO, who knows what'll happen. Hopefully something better than what's happened with past personnel changes.
475
« on: September 21, 2015, 17:27 »
I'm not going to explain it much further except in this way: you earn $0.25-$0.33 a sub sale right now. If you can steal even one of those daily sales and earn a dollar on it as an independent, you've made 3-4x the money on that one sale.
I understand the 3-4x part. If that works for hitting your sales goal great. It's a different approach than I'm taking but I'd love to hear the outcome of how it worked.
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 120
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
