|
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 - SpaceStockFootage
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 ... 98
476
« on: June 04, 2020, 04:00 »
Is 0.08% of ones shares 'a good chunk'?  He'd be selling a lot more than that if he was worried about where the value is going... probably just freeing up a bit of cash for a new car or something.
477
« on: June 02, 2020, 22:14 »
Checked the numbers on the 27th of May and again today... total images on SS have increased by 0.2%, and total videos have decreased by 0.36%. Just an FYI.
478
« on: June 01, 2020, 16:36 »
So your advice to counter the massive drop in royalties every January (and probably a bunch of months after that for most), is to just accept the massive drop in royalties every January, and upload your new stuff a month or two later than you normally would? Maybe I'm missing something, but... how does that make us serious businessmen? (Especially the women?)
479
« on: May 29, 2020, 22:14 »
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.
Why would they go anywhere?
480
« on: May 29, 2020, 01:45 »
But if you have only 20 video downloads per month, you will loose as much as 19% in total earnings.
26%... if you include the 10 lots of 15% and the 40 lots of 20%.
481
« on: May 28, 2020, 14:53 »
Can't knock you for coming up with an idea, but there are a lot of flaws in it. First, it would be more like 0.4 cents than 40 cents per view. I'd need 625 views per month, per item, to make the same as I do now (or a total of 135,000 ad views)*... and I'm not sure how feasible that would be. Second, an ad agency, online news company or video production company etc etc... isn't going to want to sit and watch ads and enter codes before they can create the content they're on a deadline to make. You need 1000 images for a big collage image type thing then they need to watch 16 hours of ads. Individuals and small enterprises might use it, but they're probably the type who are more likely to use the free image sites where they don't have to watch any ads. Yes, the quality isn't as good, but if they want an upgrade from the free sites then they're more likely to go with the subscription sites. And if you want to earn 0.4 cents per download then you're also better to go with one of the subscription sites... without having to build a website. But if not... the cost of creating the site, maintaining it and marketing it so you get to the point that you can be getting 625 ad views per item per month (or more) and I can't see it working.
The poll in another thread had 500,000 items from 68 contributors. If we make a site for, say, 1000 contributors (with 625 ad views per item per month), you're looking at getting 55 billion ad views per year. If we can get that many ad views then we're in the wrong line of work!
482
« on: May 27, 2020, 05:00 »
A 10% to 20% shutdown of content would suffice to achieve this as shareholders won't be happy with a significant drop in sales and profits.
But what drop in sales would that result in, realistically? 10 to 20% less content wouldn't automatically result in 10 to 20% less sales... could just result in 10 to 20% of all sales being from content that is still on the platform, rather than content that's not. Take all the steak off your menu, then you're probably going to get people looking for alternative restaurants to eat at. Get rid of just the 12 oz. steak when you still have 8/9/10/11 oz. and 13/14/15/16 oz. steaks available... people are more likely to just buy one of those instead.
483
« on: May 27, 2020, 04:46 »
So the protest from video content creators worked here is an update SS just shared about levels:
The video content creators may have protested but they did nothing to change SS' new payment model. SS admitted on their forum that they made some mistakes in the first e-mail that was sent regarding video commissions.
Agreed. The odds of them seeing all the backlash and then deciding to completely backtrack on the numbers due to it... all within the space of three hours, is pretty unlikely.
484
« on: May 26, 2020, 18:02 »
Does this mean by uploading to Blackbox we are automatically in the top tier of earners???
That would seem to be the case. From the owner: 'I can tell you that we will reach 5,000 in as little as a month'. That would mean an increase to 20% after the first 90 minutes of the year, 25% after 7.5 hours, 30% after 1.5 days, 35% after a month and 40% after 5 months. Don't forget the 15% that BB take as well... although they did have a deal that seemed to pretty much eliminate the 15% (although the exact details of the deal were never really disclosed when it came to figures), but not sure how that will work now... whether they still get a special rate or not. But still, does make BB a lot more appealing now. I was planning to stop uploading to BB, but I guess it makes sense to carry on. Unlikely I'll be going over 25% on my individual account. Might hit 30% in time for Christmas if I'm super lucky.
485
« on: May 26, 2020, 10:48 »
Well, I can't make any sense of this. Will everyone zero at the beginning of each year (start on 15% and have to rise up the ranks fresh)? that seems insane.
If not, why is my level on the email tied to my downloads so far since January, and not based on my total for last year, which would place me well into the next tier.
"All contributors reset to level 1 for both images and videos every year on January 1st."
486
« on: May 22, 2020, 07:47 »
4000clips...
So you make around $6,500 a month or more? Result! A few hundred dollars in the short term? First, short term implies there's a long term... there could be, there might not be, no matter whether you or I contribute to subscription sites or not. As for a few hundred dollars, I've made $17K just from unlimited subscription plans in the last 12 months. Not saying that to blow my own trumpet, just to show you that it's a little bit more than a few hundred dollars. And is there much difference in getting that money in the short term rather than in the long term? Is there a long term? Are subscription sites the new long term and you're just missing out on a few hundred dollars (or several thousand dollars) in the short term?
487
« on: May 22, 2020, 00:02 »
With how many total clips though?
And I make enough money as well, I just decided to give the subscription sites a try and now I make more than I did before giving them a try. Sorry, but me having a couple of bad months on one of the many sites I contribute to, isn't proof that I can't compete on quality, or that subscription sites are the end of the world as we know it.
I worked it out by the way... I make roughly $20 per clip, per year on SS, AS and iS.
488
« on: May 21, 2020, 07:30 »
Ok, so if we just go with fixed price agencies... SS, AS and iStock... then what would be the cut-off point for you when it comes to having a hard time selling there, versus not having a hard time selling there (on the basis of average revenue per item over the last 12 months)?
$1, $5, $10, $20, $50, $100, $200, $500?
You must have a figure in mind if you feel I'm unable to compete on quality versus price? I honestly don't know what the figure is, but I'll be 'doing the math' shortly, and I'll let you know! If it is $500 (which I'm pretty confident it's nowhere near) then I really don't think that counts as having a hard time selling... and if it's $1 or less then I'd probably agree with you... but there must be a line between the two?
489
« on: May 21, 2020, 01:58 »
https://www.cinema5d.com/pond5-expands-distribution-rights-legal-coverage-media/
But wouldn't this hurt P5 as well because they will not be selling higher price licenses?
I think it's a way pond5 is trying to make clips more 'attractive' to buyers - but I don't think it will work.
a) Buyers who can afford big t.v. studio productions PAY that money for exclusivity, etc.
b) Buyers who can't wouldn't anyways.
Now it just makes it cheaper for the buyers who would have paid the big $$ anyways, so the net result is less revenue to pond, and less revenue to creators.
True, but it could make Pond5's offering more attractive to those who can afford big TV productions... but currently get their stock elsewhere.
490
« on: May 20, 2020, 15:11 »
Thankfully the one place where I've consistently not had a drop in earnings, is the unlimited subscription sites. Videoblocks....
Jan: 225
Feb: 300
Mar: 389
April: 674
May: 448
meanwhile your sales on ss collapse...strange coincidense here...
Well it is a strange coincidence if it only started in the last couple of months (if I've been on subscription sites for a couple of years), subscription sites have existed for several years, and only my SS and AS sales are falling, when Pond5 and everywhere else are steady. I appreciate you want to blame everything on subscription sites due to the intense disgust you feel for them, but it doesn't seem to tally. What's wrong with the Pond5 buyers? Brand loyalty, they like spending more money, they do less research about competition? Why are Sstr's sales dropping on SS if he doesn't contribute to sub sites? Is that my fault as well, or just subscription sites in general?
491
« on: May 20, 2020, 15:04 »
Yes, I'm sure every single buyer that would have bought my content from SS during May, just happened to discover subscription sites over the last two months.
News travel fast. Similar as we, as buyers or in our professions each one, we follow news, trends or even word of mouth (including forums?). People working with stock material, guess are up to date informed on any (actually for them) good news. They live from this, right?
If I was a client and I was given the opportunity to pay an unlimited plan and download "potentially" work- useful high quality content that low priced for future use, I would have take the opportunity as long as either contributors will delete their content either the marketplace will collapse (if so depserate to sell for peanuts).
I know, I know, too big to fail hah? 
Yeah, my point is that news doesn't travel fast if buyers are just discovering unlimited subscriptions seeing they've been around for several years and I've been on them for a couple of years. Why just in the last couple of months is my point?
492
« on: May 20, 2020, 06:27 »
Anyway, count yourself lucky... my balance for the entire month is $1.20! And that's from two sales!! (Feb $192, Mar $180, Apr $59, May $1.20)
It happens when a buyer can find your clips for free on the
Unlimited subs plan around...fortunately i didn't,and my sales are on average if i look the stats since april 2019 considering coronavirus..
Yes, I'm sure every single buyer that would have bought my content from SS during May, just happened to discover subscription sites over the last two months. What was happening for the two years before that... were they just a bit slow to discover them? While it is a possibility, there's no evidence to support that, especially with my historical figures. Sales on regular sites have been constant or growing since I've been on subscription sites. I mean, there's no evidence to support that your sales were $1.80 because they're not on the unlimited subs plans... but it's possible! Thankfully the one place where I've consistently not had a drop in earnings, is the unlimited subscription sites. Videoblocks.... Jan: 225 Feb: 300 Mar: 389 April: 674 May: 448 But still, I'll stick with what I'm doing. Not sure I'm ever going to be able to agree with somebody who is happy to sell on a site that offers content for sale at $1.80 (among other prices), but no longer wants to sell their content there if it does sell for $1.80... seems slightly illogical.
493
« on: May 20, 2020, 01:13 »
Is that wise? There's nothing specific about that clip that made it sell for $1.80... I mean, if that one is available for that price, to certain buyers, on certain plans... then all your clips are available for that price, to certain buyers, on certain plans. So if you're concerned about your clips being sold for scraps, the best option would be to delete all your clips immediately. In the absence of not being able to do much to change the situation... I'd rather keep mine all up and take the rough ($1.80) with the smooth ($102) though.
Anyway, count yourself lucky... my balance for the entire month is $1.20! And that's from two sales!! (Feb $192, Mar $180, Apr $59, May $1.20)
494
« on: May 16, 2020, 20:25 »
I'm no expert, but I'd suggest sending them your French and Arabic ID card, translated into English. That should do it.
495
« on: May 16, 2020, 20:18 »
...the amount I can withdraw is exactly $45 less than the amount sent.
The more important factor would be how much is your available balance in your Paypal account... is that $45 more than you can withdraw or the same? Either way, you want to be looking at your account activity.... charges, fees, reversals, refunds etc... whether the Pond5 payment was sent in two parts and one is still pending etc. I'm guessing you'll find some clues there and it's not just a case of having $0, Pond5 sending you $100 (for example) and you can then only withdraw $55 of it.
496
« on: May 15, 2020, 03:26 »
and fewer does not translate to accurate, more can too, depending on subject matter more can be better, provided they are accurate.
Once again you've completely missed the point of what I was saying, which is a perfect demonstration of what I am saying! More cannot also be accurate when you are referring to something being less than something else... or fewer than something else. I was not talking about whether somebody should use more or fewer keywords... or more or less keywords, as the case may be. I was referring to the word usage of 'fewer' over 'less' in the context of the sentence/title. Fewer is accurate... if less was used, then that would have been inaccurate (but close enough and accurate enough for somebody to know what you mean in most cases). However, not everybody knows that, so if you have an image tagged as fewer and people are searching for less... you're missing out on views. Now I'm perfectly aware that my original comment on the subject may not have been 100% clear, or could have been worded differently, but that's the entire point of my argument... you can be as accurate as you want, but the people searching for your content might not be. To err is human, and while I'm not suggesting anyone adopt spammy techniques like misspelling of keywords to catch people who might make typos, or tagging a horse as bear... I'd definitely recommend including slang, common misconceptions, acceptable usage etc etc. That's why you'd tag a tomato as a fruit and a vegetable... peanuts as a nut and a legume etc etc. But still... you stick to your keywords of 'canines with spheroidal abdomens exhibiting intermittent azure pigmentation of the epidermis' and I'll stick to my keywords of 'dogs with egg-shaped bellies and light blue patchy skin' (while also including yours). ...i simply could not run my business by operating at 90% accuracy.
What are you operating at currently?
497
« on: May 14, 2020, 22:16 »
Yeah, you're completely missing the point! It's not about using cat in an image of a dog... it's about considering that somebody might search for 'big fluffy clouds in the sky' rather than 'altocumulus clouds in the troposphere'.
...and the title of this post is a good example as well. While 'fewer' is accurate as we're talking about quantifiable numbers, a lot of people would have titled it 'more or less keywords'.
498
« on: May 13, 2020, 21:05 »
While I wouldn't keyword a merlot as a shiraz, I almost certainly would keyword a gibbon as a monkey. For the same 'think like a buyer' approach though... they may rely on accuracy, but they may not be all that accurate themselves. And they might just want a cute image/video of any kind of monkey-like animal... and if so, they're probably more likely to search for 'monkey', than they are 'primate'.
499
« on: May 04, 2020, 23:24 »
...buildings themselves are not works of art and cannot be copyprotected.
...but they can be rejected by agencies for whatever reason they like, which is what you seem to miss, every single time. If you want to sell them yourself on your own site, and you're confident there's nothing they can do about it, then feel free to do so. But this forum is mainly about selling stock through stock agencies rather than the intricacies of copyright law. Something you never seem to get is that if it's legal for an agency to sell certain content, that doesn't mean it's illegal for them to refuse that content for whatever reason they choose, or for no reason at all.
500
« on: May 03, 2020, 21:22 »
Just a couple of answers to a few things...
You get a breakdown of your sales, and get an email for every sale you make with the price, date, clip etc. You never know which agency you sold it at, but you can usually tell based on the price.
They don't make the percentages they get from the agencies public, as I guess it's a figure they've had to negotiate, so the agencies don't want BB to go advertising it. Could cause them issues if they try negotiating deals with other people.
They definitely have a deal with SS on the percentages, but that might just be it. Based on sales prices, I don't think they have a deal with P5 or Adobe, but I could be wrong. Maybe with Vimeo... hard to tell.
Yeah, the 20% for keywording and 20% for editing is just a recommended figure. You can negotiate with the person and if you have a track record of getting decent sales with your content then that's going to put you in a better position. I mean 20% for five minutes work is great if the clip sells 5 to 10 times in a year... not so great if it sells once a year or less.
Signing up with a curator is probably a good idea if English isn't your first language. While I'm not sure if great keywording makes that much more of a difference than good keywording, I reckon 20% could be worth it to avoid bad keywording. Otherwise, probably best to do it yourself unless you're super busy.
Collaboration features are good... have used a couple of people for keywording and allocated a share for a model in some shots. The keywording ones were mainly with people I know to get the hang of it so they could do keywording for other people. Obviously they signed up using my referral code, so I get 1% from every one of their sales!
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 ... 98
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
