|
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 - gbalex
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 64
551
« on: April 26, 2014, 09:54 »
Excuse me but is it possible for BS to offer lower royalties? They added that failed 50,000 DL RC level. And already pay less than SS. How much lower can it go there?
I closed my FT account and I must say, they waited for the end of the month and removed everything and paid me in 30 days. Couldn't have been any smoother or easy.
I closed mine over the partner programs and potential of losing all rights to everything because of mass distribution to unknown agencies, lack of detailed accounting or being able to monitor what was going on with my work. A general plague that's been afflicting microstock.
It would not surprise me a bit to find that SS is offering similar API deals via BS where they pay lower royalties overall.
They will push the API that brings the greatest returns for them, my comment was in reference to using bigstocks API over shutterstocks API implementation. And yes they have kept pricing stagnant for 9 years to capture market share. If that market shares starts to slide, I do not think they will have any problem devaluing our assets further to garner a larger share of the market. https://www.bigstockphoto.com/partners/http://help.bigstockphoto.com/hc/en-us/articles/200303245-API-Documentation
552
« on: April 25, 2014, 13:33 »
actually if we think closely the agencies doing poorly should be the ones giving incentives, the others like SS we are already "happy"
Indeed, so they hve no incentive to improve their incentives.
Wonder what would happen if they became a monopoly, as many people seem to desire.
Another clich: "Be careful what you wish for".
(not meaning 'you' in particular)
Good points
553
« on: April 17, 2014, 10:02 »
What we believe to be true becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. If we believe that we can not bring about change, that will most certainly be true. That is why it is never helpful to spread that mindset. If we say it often enough, eventually we start to believe that it is actually true.
Since the early 1500 & 1600's there have been untold groups of people that have been told the same things and a good many of them eventually formed uprisings and unions that changed and tipped the scales. Some of these people even gave up their lives for change, not just their incomes.
If large producers did not actually make a difference to the micros they would not be offering them special deals. And they would not see those who speak out about or make attempts to make changes in the face of unfair practices as a threat.
What they do discount is how their own actions change perception about them among contributors. You can see this on the site forums when the sites make various joyous announcements. The response is nothing more than a few whoooo yays with the majority choosing to keep their actual thoughts to themselves. Trust and respect have dropped more than a few notches and for good reason.
554
« on: April 16, 2014, 09:31 »
We are powerless as a group, and that's probably what makes most artists angry when they look at the situation. Frustration out of the inability to actually make any significant change in how Microstock is run or how it pays the workers.
I disagree. As a group we hold all the power. But, there aren't enough of us disgruntled to the point where we are willing to do something about it. And if there were I doubt we could get organized and agree to take any significant action.
It's up to each individual to decide if MS is right for them cuz it isn't going to change without us, collectively, forcing that change.
I agree. Most people seem to be fairly happy. I don't get it, but they are.
It is called learned helplessness http://tinyurl.com/l7frvvo
We do hold the power we just need to wake up to that fact. The site are hoping we don't and that is why they canned Sean, they know we hold the power and they knew we were listening to Sean. Yuri built a functional site and that changed the power dynamic for him as well.
you were listening to sean and some others, but to say "we" is nonsense. and the real reason they canned sean has nothing to do with the listeners site mailing some selected people trying to go private on facebook groups and accord stock etc to create a mutiny, or to create a script that was easy to delete all your images. it had nothing to do with that at all. sean shot himself in the foot he let his own ego get the better of himself.
i admire sean for being the voice of many, and he had balls for doing so, and for that i am thankful, but he was also working a few different angles while doing it, and getty found out. i don't think it was so much as what sean was saying openly on our behalf that got him canned, i think it was what was really transpiring in the background that got him canned.
were you invited to be in the secret facebook group? were you invited to the secret accord stock? if you saw what was being posted in both of those, specifically accord stock, then yes, if your were getty you would have canned him too.
Sean is an honest and above board guy, who spoke out when many were afraid to and I respect him for that. If all of the sites conducted business with integrity they would have not have to worry about large groups of contributors talking about business as usual. They canned Sean as a result of their own business decision and the backlash those actions "finally" created among large groups of its contributors. There will always be backlash if the micros do not choose to treat the contributors who power their success fairly. Fair treatment would include paying them a reasonable % of the profit that has been generated as a result of contributor resources and hard work. And it would include pricing those assets in a range that will bring returns that allows contributors a reasonable standard of life.
555
« on: April 15, 2014, 16:31 »
LOL. You win, lets give you your 2% inflation compensation and raise you from 0.38 cent to 0.3876 cent, rounded up, 39 cents per DL. I am sure I will see you again with snips and quotes, pissing and moaning about something else.
Why do you keep arguing with me anyways, after all the insults you have thrown at me its clear I am not at your level of intelligence. But I am done with your pretentious, disdain behavior. To me you are the perfect example of condescension.
Good luck with your sour grapes, I am heading for another BME.
Bye.
Again those are your own projections not mine. You are the one who consistently engages conversation with me. I merely respond to your remarks which are completely off base. The following link is a perfect example, I can not post a simple link to a positive article without you projecting your logical strawman fallacies regarding me into the mix http://tinyurl.com/ly2m734
556
« on: April 15, 2014, 15:03 »
You want SS to compensate for inflation, LOL, which company or employer has ever done that. My previous employer Xerox told me tough luck when I complained about inflation and wanting a raise. You are just so bitter about SS... whatever.
Again you insult me, get off your high horse and stop pretending you are better then others. Why do you keep up with us mortals, dont you have better things to do, as heir to a fortune 200 company? I make 65000 dollar per year in my day job, dont you worry about me slaving for anyone.
I did not insult you or your job Ron, I did call you out on your ridiculous and false straw man assertions that companies do not compensate for inflation, nor do they give annual price of living increases each year.
So now you call me a liar and Xerox did give me raise? Xerox hasnt properly raised their salaries for almost 5 years now. I think they gave a 3% raise once, after I left, which didnt even cut the inflation at that time. Its the only reason I left them, because I was having less and less spending power. At SS my RPD has gone up and is still going up.
You live in internet truth, get out there in the real world and see that things are different. I am starting to think that you believe The Matrix was a documentary.
Your logical strawman fallacies are becoming illogical, even by your all over the map strawman standards. They are good for throwing the conversation off track and not much else. Your projections, thoughts and fallacies are not my own! Lets stick to the facts; only 4% of companies surveyed are NOT planning to give inflationary salary increases next year.
557
« on: April 15, 2014, 14:48 »
We do hold the power we just need to wake up to that fact. The site are hoping we don't and that is why they canned Sean, they know we hold the power and they knew we were listening to Sean. Yuri built a functional site and that changed the power dynamic for him as well.
Good luck with that. This pretty much explained it all to me...
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/let%27s-promote-together-%27the-best-contributor-friendly-agency%27!-first-time!/
I do agree that at that point in time many pinned their hopes on one site and that magnified the problem. I do not agree that everyone will eventually become frog soup. We already see that some of the bullfrogs have made attempts to jump out of the pot.
558
« on: April 15, 2014, 13:46 »
We are powerless as a group, and that's probably what makes most artists angry when they look at the situation. Frustration out of the inability to actually make any significant change in how Microstock is run or how it pays the workers.
I disagree. As a group we hold all the power. But, there aren't enough of us disgruntled to the point where we are willing to do something about it. And if there were I doubt we could get organized and agree to take any significant action.
It's up to each individual to decide if MS is right for them cuz it isn't going to change without us, collectively, forcing that change.
I agree. Most people seem to be fairly happy. I don't get it, but they are.
It is called learned helplessness http://tinyurl.com/l7frvvoWe do hold the power we just need to wake up to that fact. The site are hoping we don't and that is why they canned Sean, they know we hold the power and they knew we were listening to Sean. Yuri built a functional site and that changed the power dynamic for him as well.
559
« on: April 14, 2014, 20:10 »
You want SS to compensate for inflation, LOL, which company or employer has ever done that. My previous employer Xerox told me tough luck when I complained about inflation and wanting a raise. You are just so bitter about SS... whatever.
Again you insult me, get off your high horse and stop pretending you are better then others. Why do you keep up with us mortals, dont you have better things to do, as heir to a fortune 200 company? I make 65000 dollar per year in my day job, dont you worry about me slaving for anyone.
I did not insult you or your job Ron, I did call you out on your ridiculous and false straw man assertions that companies do not compensate for inflation, nor do they give annual price of living increases each year. By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone's viewpoint, it's much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty just wastes our time and serves to undermine honest rational conversation. Your assertions are patently false. Most U.S. Companies Planning Moderate Pay Raises for 2014 http://tinyurl.com/kndolqtSnip A new survey by global professional services company Towers Watson (NYSE, NASDAQ:TW) shows that most U.S. employers are planning to give workers a raise next year. The survey of 910 U.S. companies conducted by Towers Watson Data Services found that only 4% of respondents are not planning to give salary increases next yearhttp://news.xerox.com/news/Average-2014-US-salary-increases-to-remain-at-3-percent-according-to-surveySnip Employers say they'll dole out raises averaging 3% in 2014, virtually matching annual increases in 2013 and 2012, according to a survey of more than 900 mid- to large-size companies. http://tinyurl.com/k5hqms2
560
« on: April 14, 2014, 16:31 »
are you happy with other agencies? have they given you any raise? is income there higher than before?
blaming SS for their failure doesn't seem reasonable in my opinion, as tickstock mentioned a few days ago there are even cheaper agencies
You do not seem to understand that the top agencies dictate how much their competitors can charge buyers for images and specifically sub packages. How do you expect the smaller agencies to be able to raise prices; if their largest competitors who have far greater market exposure are prepared to undercut their pricing long term? What SS and IS do as far as pricing and the structure of their sub models; will dictate what the other sites are able to charge. Shutterstock has not raised pricing to buyers in over 8 years. How do you expect the other sites to compete with them if they charge buyers more while they have less money to advertise their product?
561
« on: April 14, 2014, 15:54 »
You want SS to compensate for inflation, LOL, which company or employer has ever done that. My previous employer Xerox told me tough luck when I complained about inflation and wanting a raise. You are just so bitter about SS... whatever.
Inflation is not SS problem, in fact SS is the only agency that didnt cut earnings but did raise them. ALL other agencies have cut royalties and slashed prices, but thats fine with you, because they are not SS.
Based on your response and bottom barrel level of hope I would guess that you are a slave in servitude and pick cotton for a living! Snip http://tinyurl.com/l6zou4lA survey by Towers Watson Data Services found that employers were planning to bestow pay increases that will average 2.9% in 2014. Thats up a hair from the 2.8% average increases that employees got in both 2012 and 2013. Kiplinger expects the inflation rate to be 2% in 2014, so an employee who gets the average raise will more than keep up with rising prices.There is a wide gap between the pay raises for top-rated workers and raises for employees with average or below-average ratings. Towers found that office stars received increases of 4.6% in 2013well above the 2.6% pay hike granted to workers rated average and way more than the 1.3% received by those rated below average. What you fail to acknowledge is that shutterstock has cut our earnings by not raising prices to buyers nor royalties to contributors in over 8 years. And that has impacted pricing and business strategy at all of the agencies, because they are losing market share to shutterstocks long term price undercutting war.
562
« on: April 14, 2014, 14:37 »
That is right it is nothing new and yet many here continue to ignore the reality of the situation. To the point they ignore what "subscription pricing" has done to the entire industry.
sorry but I don't really remember seeing you complaining about subscriptions before having serious drops in income
we are all well aware about subscriptions and also ODs/SODs/ELs, the last ones represent 42% of my income at SS
can you tell us which % of your income comes from SS?
He started submitting to SS when he got 20 cent an image. Now he gets ODDs SODs ELs and is complaining about SS not raising prices and that their sub model is ruining the business.
Why submit your images for 20 cent in the first place.
You consistently fail to admit to yourself that the image quality in 2004 was very different than it is today. You continue to ignore the facts when I posted images from shutterstocks top contributors as an example of image and content quality in 2004. You also fail to take into account the number of downloads we were receiving for those very low commercial value images. We uploaded images that were complete crap and they routinely received 5,000 to 10,000 or more downloads each. Yes these days we receive OD's, EL's, & SOD's for much better quality images and still receive lower RPI for those vastly superior files that also cost more to produce. Inflation is a concept you completely ignore, and that economic denial is not typical of any business model.
563
« on: April 14, 2014, 12:51 »
Why do you keep posting the same articles over and over again? It's nothing new. And you keep ignoring the non-sub options SS has introduced that bring in higher revenue.
That is right it is nothing new and yet many here continue to ignore the reality of the situation. To the point they ignore what "subscription pricing" has done to the entire industry.
The pros did not keep pricing down. The micros could have easily raised pricing and created curated collections as quality rose. They did not and could not because the largest subscription site fully admits that they purposely kept pricing stagnate and low as a business strategy to gain market share.
There are curated collections. The micros have a different business model.
That is right shutterstock recently introduced Offset and the quality of the content found there often times does not justify the increased prices they charge; because they acted too late. And now they will have to compete with the artificially low subscription model pricing that they utilized to gain market share. http://www.offset.com/search/New+Yorkhttp://tinyurl.com/mvdh3y5
564
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:40 »
Why do you keep posting the same articles over and over again? It's nothing new. And you keep ignoring the non-sub options SS has introduced that bring in higher revenue.
That is right it is nothing new and yet many here continue to ignore the reality of the situation. To the point they ignore what "subscription pricing" has done to the entire industry. The pros did not keep pricing down. The micros could have easily raised pricing and created curated collections as quality rose. They did not and could not because the largest subscription site fully admits that they purposely kept pricing stagnate and low as a business strategy to gain market share.
565
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:24 »
I don't think the industry will ever fail any more than Computer and Software companies will cease to exist.
I do expect the same to happen, as the wild early days of computers. Some will fail, some will be purchased, some will merge. Some will go into limited special areas of interest.
I'd be happy to see all the partners and little basement parasitic agencies go away. They are nothing but a drain and compete on only one point. Lower Prices. They offer the customers nothing of value, and offer us nothing for the future. The create a loss for value and our rights as we lose any control over our own images.
For the people who spend their entire time here pointing out the obvious, that Microstock undervalues our work. (and I agree with them) Here's the challenge.
How do we fix it? Now that would be an interesting and positive discussion.
What's the realistic solution?
There isn't one. You can sell on your own, find reasonable partners or go full macro. But, those solutions aren't going to work for everyone and they are all more lateral moves than fixing the issues. Like I said earlier in the thread, some of us may have to wait for the industry to fail. I assume that is what Mantis means by benefits of critical mass.
In the case of the micros the self proclaimed "number one subscription imagery site" has done the most damage to the industry by purposely not raising prices for 8 or 9 years. As for the computer industry, it is the large companies who failed. The smaller, leaner companies who did not spend tons of money on overhead are still in business; while their bloated competitors were forced to close shop.
566
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:12 »
if selling digital images is becoming more difficult the agencies will be forced to pay us less, not more !
--> supply vs demand.
It is not about supply and demand. Shutterstock admits that they have purposely chosen not to raise prices as a business strategy to gain market share. Shutterstock has also admitted that they will continue to price undercut the competition as a long term business road path. Shutterstock's long term price undercutting strategy has negatively impacted micro pricing and subscription strategy for the entire industry. "We havent raised prices in many years and then been a great strategy so far to grow."Snip Duck Swartz So whats changed in the marketplace thats giving you the opportunity to locate in the enterprise in a more, in a more robust way?Timothy E. Bixby - CFO The quality of the images has increased pretty dramatically over the past 10 yearsSo in the past five years the contents gone up to a level where the biggest publishers in the world mediated either starting to notice that is price, these images are not only price well, but they are also similar to some images that they have paid thousands of dollars for and also had to be on the phone for an hour negotiating the license for that image.Snip Duck Swartz Talking about your present strategy longer term?Timothy E. Bixby - CFO We think we can raise the prices over the long term but were primary in the growth mode right now and we would like to continue to cover as much of the world as possible and take as much as growth in the business that we can before we play with the pricing level.
We havent raised prices in many years and then been a great strategy so far to grow.
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
567
« on: April 12, 2014, 11:40 »
what is Your agenda against me?
Other then type written words on a forum I have no idea who you are, never have met you, talked to you, seen your images, know where you live, instant messaged you, or shaken your hand (that I know of)
You have some agenda for what reason I do not know.
You constantly attempt to insult me, attempt to bate me into online arguments, and are just a general nuisance like a gnat on a piece of fruit.
This pattern plays out over and over. You attack someone and they respond to your uncalled for derisive remarks. Then you proceed to portray yourself as the victim. The process repeats itself ad nauseam with numerous different people over and over again, on this board and other boards. You always feel entitled and justified in your attacks on other people, if their viewpoints differ than your own. Yet you feel persecuted when they let you know how they feel about your un provoked attacks. In this case I simply posted a link to a positive article about SSTK and you feel entitled and justified in attacking my character for posting a simple link to a positive article with no comments.
568
« on: April 11, 2014, 11:58 »
snip
its curious that you have copied that deep thoughts guy 
I am a business man, I quit playing which is my most favorite company in the world long ago. If you look at the facts "good and bad" you have prepared yourself to make informed smart business decisions.
Now back to your regularly scheduled SS Whoooo Yays!
I am not a Whooo Yays dude, guess you mean Mike!
I am starting to think that You, Mike and Ron are the same person!
569
« on: April 11, 2014, 11:48 »
snip
its curious that you have copied that deep thoughts guy
I am a business man, I quit playing which is my most favorite company in the world long ago. If you look at the facts "good and bad" you have prepared yourself to make informed smart business decisions. Now back to your regularly scheduled SS Whoooo Yays!
570
« on: April 11, 2014, 11:38 »
Shutterstock is Now Oversold (SSTK)
http://tinyurl.com/kmy72mz
Ow the joy you must feel. How long did you wait for that news so you could quote it?
When I read the news this morning I was wondering how long it would take for you to post it. LOL.
Sad really.
Do you always make superficial snap judgements? I am finding that it is common on this site. Congrats to you an the person who gave you a plus, your deductive and reasoning skills are spot on as usual. LOL No wonder you miss so much. Definition of 'Oversold' 1. A condition in which the price of an underlying asset has fallen sharply, and to a level below which its true value resides. This condition is usually a result of market overreaction or panic selling. 2. A situation in technical analysis where the price of an asset has fallen to such a degree - usually on high volume - that an oscillator has reached a lower bound. This is generally interpreted as a sign that the price of the asset is becoming undervalued and may represent a buying opportunity for investors.
572
« on: April 10, 2014, 09:54 »
Seems like some people don't understand where this reporting comes from? Or if they do, the criticism of Mike is misplaced?
(I don't use it, I found it would have driven everyone I know to stop following me and watching a steady flow of SPAM from my Twitter account. And Also I don't want to be announcing my sales or income. BUT...)
Look on your SS "Account Settings", it's a added feature of SS.
" Shuttertweet
Automatically promote your images with your Twitter account. Sign up for Shuttertweet and Shutterstock can automatically:
Tweet a daily summary when work gets accepted. Example tweet:I got 10 images accepted to @shutterstock today! Check out my gallery here: http://tinyurl.com/-----
Tweet a daily summary of your download stats. Example tweet:I sold 10 images today through @shutterstock! My gallery is here: http://tinyurl.com/-----
All you have to do is add the Shuttertweet application to your Twitter account. Login to Twitter and allow Shuttertweet to post updates to your account. To activate, you must authorize the Shuttertweet application. You can deactivate Shuttertweet at any time. "
So is this, which I also don't plan on using.
" Facebook Connect
Activate the Shutterstock Facebook application and share your achievements at Shutterstock with your friends:
Post a daily summary when your images or videos are accepted to Shutterstock.
Post a daily summary of your Shutterstock sales stats.
Earn referral fees.
Example post:
You can choose to post a summary of accepted images or videos, a summary of your sales, or both. Any traffic from your posts that leads to successful sales will be paid out under the terms of the Shutterstock Referral Program. All you have to do is add the Shutterstock Facebook application to your Facebook account. To activate, make sure third-party cookies are enabled in your browser, then click the button below. You can turn off Shutterstock Facebook updates any time.
Login with Facebook
"
Also as far as I can see, the features are both broken, but people who joined when it was first started can be active. Again, I have no interest in sending endless messages to my friends and followers and people who don't care or have a use for my images.
SS knows and documents those who Whine and Cry and Bitch all the time and only turn off THOSE galleries while others who Praise SS for all the AMAZING GOODNESS they do get Special Super Duper Advertising to help their sales!
Mike if we all work hard to produce excellent images which can stand on their own merit, none of us will need to cling to disingenuous marketing techniques. This marketing technique speaks of desperation.
Why would you quote me. I made absolutely no mention of twitter. My post was in response to Mike's comment which I quoted and highlighted in bold. As for twitter are you just figuring this out? It seems that you are the one who is confused. Mike is the one who did not understand that his twitter account was reporting his sales. That was Louis's point! At the time, several years ago Mike was reporting that his sales were higher than they actually were. His own SS automated tweets pointed that out.
573
« on: April 10, 2014, 01:22 »
SS knows and documents those who Whine and Cry and Bitch all the time and only turn off THOSE galleries while others who Praise SS for all the AMAZING GOODNESS they do get Special Super Duper Advertising to help their sales!
Mike if we all work hard to produce excellent images which can stand on their own merit, none of us will need to cling to disingenuous marketing techniques. This marketing technique speaks of desperation.
574
« on: April 09, 2014, 14:06 »
"FT counter attacks IS" Yes we all know that IS is ultimately responsible for the sub war. Shutterstock is the leader in subscription royalty-free imagery Snip Shutterstock's pioneering strategy has helped it dominate the image subscription market amid an industry of imitators. We have earned our spot as the number one subscription imagery site by being inventive and by building our own successful business model, said Jon Oringer, founder and CEO of Shutterstock. Others try to copy our 25-A-Day subscription, but customers are not fooled." http://tinyurl.com/ovo9mlp
575
« on: April 08, 2014, 16:36 »
So it's not only banks that can print money. It must be a nice feeling!
http://tinyurl.com/jwcq7za03/05/2014 Steven Berns MBA, CPA Director 5,000 Derivative/Non-derivative trans. at $17.5 per share. 87,500 03/03/2014 Thilo Semmelbauer, MBA President & Chief Operating Officer 25,000 Award at $0 per share. 0 03/03/2014 Timothy E. Bixby, MBA Chief Financial Officer 15,000 Award at $0 per share. 0 03/03/2014 James Chou, MBA Chief Technology Officer 7,500 Award at $0 per share. 0
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 64
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
