|
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 - VB inc
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26
551
« on: November 08, 2010, 17:04 »
I havent. Probably jumping the gun here but lately i just dont trust istock. I would like to hear that buyers were still buying and it is being recorded and contributors are getting paid for it while this so called update with hardware is in progress. they have to increase their profits by 50% at any costs 
552
« on: November 08, 2010, 14:26 »
^^ maybe you should keep posting in this thread so that you get more pity downloads from admins running that site! haha just kidding... sort of...
am i the only one that had this thought?
553
« on: November 08, 2010, 14:21 »
Many people here are pleased with the site and it is great that Danoph visits our forum.
I am not a contributor (yet) but I have a question.
As far as I can tell, GL sells commercial RF licences. Yet, I found a picture of the Eiffel tower at night.
The illumination of the Eiffel tower is copyrighted, this is a very well known issue, and commercial licensing of such images is asking for trouble. Also, I found a photo of skyscrapers where logos are recognizable even in the preview image.
Was it a reviewer's mistake or something else?
This was my concern also when I took a brief look into their site. Some of the vectors seemed (in my opinion) to be traced from images found online. I would say the inspection process is very lenient compared to the bigger sites.
554
« on: November 03, 2010, 13:23 »
is there anything in their contract that say they will keep the 52% commissions to the contributors? I am all for companies treating their suppliers fairly and wish them success but the skeptic in me thinks more success (more buyers) in these for profit companies tends to lead to commission reductions for contributors in the long run. just like that song "mo money more problems"
555
« on: October 28, 2010, 21:26 »
^^ couldnt agencies ban you for doing this? I wonder if they give you a warning or not
Why? They all invite re-submission.
Not on istock. Some files cant be resubmitted once rejected which i think is absurd. i only know of istock since im exclusive there.
556
« on: October 28, 2010, 12:50 »
^^ couldnt agencies ban you for doing this? I wonder if they give you a warning or not
557
« on: October 27, 2010, 12:19 »
nice infos... mines mostly vectors but heres mine
36.7
30.9
27.4
26.3
21.3
558
« on: October 27, 2010, 00:10 »
^^ good points
Also, you really need to look at your portfolio and see which ones are the ones that earn you the majority shares of your revenue. If older images make up a substantial portion of your revenue, I would think twice about expecting the same returns for those images. Its probably due to earlier success with less competition and its current best match position.
I feel bad for the diamonds who will drop by a lot since most of their success was in the earlier days with less competition. I would figure these exclusives are the ones thinking about dropping exclusivity but they really should weigh the pros an cons.
559
« on: October 26, 2010, 04:36 »
They got smart and kept quiet from the get go instead of starting a thread announcing a price hike which will definitely stir up hundreds of angry posts about greed in which they will remain silent since they have no answers.
560
« on: October 24, 2010, 18:35 »
Might be sunday in the west, but dont forget that its monday in different parts of the world.
561
« on: October 23, 2010, 13:54 »
Anyone that thinks this istock scheme of rewarding ten contributors among thousands is great marketing is clearly naive. At best, is a slight distraction. I'd be impressed if they had up to 50 winners, but im sure 10 was the absolute minimum they can get away with. Many will try it out, only ten will be hooraying in the end.
562
« on: October 22, 2010, 17:27 »
HahHahAhah
$20,000 = 15 minutes of istocks earnings stolen from contributor revenue anytime after 2011.
Didnt do the math but im sure my message is clear
563
« on: October 22, 2010, 14:54 »
Further proof that they consider vector artist second class citizens. no announcement and quietly move all inquiries into the help forum. This little increase will surely put even more money into their greedy little pockets.
564
« on: October 13, 2010, 15:45 »
I love how people come on this forum acting all professional and with such high standards!! This is a microstock forum where people are dying for a payout!!! (k, not all but a lot!) Im sure that more than half of SS contributors would not be classified as professionals. To the OP... do you go into elementary school playgrounds and challenge kids playing basketball? dunking on them or blocking their shots... Screaming "IN YOUR FACE!!!!" cmon.... just ridiculous post
565
« on: October 09, 2010, 13:28 »
I will sit here and take it... since i will be one of the very few that will go up a level. Doesnt mean that i like or agree with the changes
566
« on: October 08, 2010, 21:24 »
I just can't talk about this without pointing out that you did a lot to bring this on yourselves. and right now, you just sit around an take it... or rather have go at me than the people who actually took a nice big sh*t in your lap. Yeah that's reasonable. All you should have done is deactivte your files, non destructive, undoable.
Im getting quite tired of seeing these clueless statements from people who obviously do not take in hundreds or thousands of dollars a week from microstock. Everyone knows what is going on at istock is wrong. All this talk of taking the moral high ground and deactivating or deleting your images on istock must not have that much income to lose because in the end, money talks. For many successful exclusives, there seems to be no viable alternative. Maybe its getting real crowded on itsock. maybe a ton of independants leave istock. maybe exclusives make more money with less competition. too many maybes
567
« on: October 04, 2010, 16:26 »
big corporations have a lot more power these days than most countries. And when the bottom line is all about profit, humans get screwed all the time.
568
« on: September 30, 2010, 13:27 »
Dont you think your undercutting yourself if you sell your vectors as rasters? I guess it might depend on what type of vectors you create. Early on at istock, i came up on this dilemna and decided not to sell my vectors as rasters as they were eating away at my vector sales which were a lot more profitable. This is also important to best match placement on it since i couldnt afford my vectors to keep sliding down the placement due to the same raster images selling for cheaper. Again, it really depends on the type of vectors you create anyways.
569
« on: September 25, 2010, 14:30 »
averil good point...
pixel.... thats not what im talking about..... my 14 credit files... all 3 of them which is related to one another was downloaded by the same buyer. unless he bought those same files with 3 different accounts, I wouldnt be getting a cut for $6.16, $6.04, and $5.88. im silver... all downloaded the same time. Doesnt this seem fishy to you?
570
« on: September 24, 2010, 22:04 »
I think the lack of transparency with the agency's doing whatever they want with no repercussions is terrible. How do we know that our agencies are not ripping us off blind.
Clear example of something fishy with the istocks payout. I do vectors and sell them as a series.. lets say music. Today i get 3 downloads apprarently from the same buyer because they were downloaded at the same time. These are 14 credit files and i get three different commission rates and they are not subscription. If its one account buying, wouldnt this be impossible unless something unethical is going on here? Im confused.
How does an industry start getting regulated? do we write and bitch to our senators to pass a bill??
571
« on: September 22, 2010, 21:20 »
My sales have slllloooowwwweeedd ever since the announcement. I was one of those exclusives that signed the "we the undersigned thread" and i'm probably being paranoid but can hq staff jiggle your best match placements?
572
« on: July 21, 2010, 18:53 »
i for one enjoy powerdroids posts so it would be a shame if you didnt post here anymore.
573
« on: July 18, 2010, 14:18 »
many dumb people may mistake royalty-free as take it for free but i think most people with some common sense does a little bit of reading if their new to stock imagery.
574
« on: July 14, 2010, 03:18 »
^^ dont count on less images/contributors in the future unless the agencies actually stop accepting them.
575
« on: July 13, 2010, 13:57 »
we are evolving into a society with a shorter attention span... the only videos i click on the internet are from trusted sources like friends on facebook... who wants to click through video advertisement if they have to?
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
