|
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 - KnowYourOnions
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29
601
« on: January 24, 2015, 17:21 »
Uh Oh ...  CEO Tom Bennett: "I think the public domain launch helps to underscore the differences," he said. "We're focused on the long term, and focused on providing value to the artists, both the buyers and sellers who are active in the marketplace, and helping empower them as media producers. I think the other guys, pretty much across the board, are focused on short-term profit." " Employees spent six months preparing the public domain sites, including several trips to the National Archives in Washington, D.C., and the long, tedious work of breaking up the clips into searchable segments. Bennett said the initial installment of 80,000 assets is just the first phase, and they'll continue to add to the public domain project." http://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/blog/techflash/2015/01/pond5-bets-free-willbolster-the-fees.html*Some good points here on how PD free stuff is already killing the search of RF stuff on P5 and mislead the best selling files with free stuff - https://www.pond5.com/community?forum=629&thread=39986639&lp=1 
602
« on: January 24, 2015, 10:54 »
I wouldn't call $1000 a fortune for an exclusive video that can't be duplicated - seems like a reasonable price to me or maybe even cheap, and of course is only possible if someone is willing to pay it. It's easy for her to criticize someone else's asking price when she wasn't the one who made the video. Selling it for a few dollars would be more disgusting. Whether they should be profiting from someone else's misfortune at all is another question. However, any photographer crazy enough to put themselves in harm's way in a war zone should certainly be well compensated for their risks. For me if it comes down to a choice between going to Syria to photograph ISIS or doing another isolated apple in my studio then the apple shot suddenly becomes much more interesting - I'd rather keep my head attached to the rest of my body for as long as possible, even if it means being poor. Anyone who chooses the opposite should be paid well - Getty is just doing their job in this case.
Getty should NOT profit from this, and I hope all money collected will go to Kenji's family.
604
« on: January 24, 2015, 04:30 »
Can we hear the opinions of people who works for Pond5, in regarding of this issue. Why leaving us the choice of what price to set for footage if the best selling clips are 69$? Someone puts 5$, someone 300$, what this looks like... Why not set a fixed price and accept only the file that meet the criteria.
probably not...cause they are too busy vacationing, flying and partying around the world 
605
« on: January 23, 2015, 09:09 »
606
« on: January 23, 2015, 03:29 »
Does the site here track the monthly numbers and keep a record? I know I don't pay attention, but a chart or trend would be interesting for the past year or years.
I see something when I copy that says "arrow" but I don't see the arrows? They are short term anyway.
I'd like to be able to look at January 2013 vs January 2014 vs January 2015 - for the poll as a whole, for example. Instead of personal results and numbers, on messages. We all have ups and downs. But a larger survey would be more stable or representative than, "I had a bad month..."
Great point...who can pull that info out?
607
« on: January 22, 2015, 15:22 »
Current best selling videos on Pond5 (the ones you see on the top page "Media of the Moment") are priced around $69 for 1080 HD file. If you sell for cheaper, you are not really increasing your sales, but just decreasing your profit. It's a bad business decision.
+10
608
« on: January 22, 2015, 11:47 »
Wait a minute, I played in bands for years and took random road trips, now I've dropped down the "sexy" list by taking photos. I'm mortified... Oh wait it says artistic photos, I'm still safe at number 5 or 6. 
nah....We ALL sexy cos of #4 - making a clever remark
609
« on: January 22, 2015, 11:09 »
My informers told me their CEO had been sunning in Brazil for months. It must be nicer there than in NY Soho swanky 30,000 sq ft office. I admit, by reading this looong thread one got to agree with Sean, we all may be in an assisted living home before things get improved. btw this free domain gig does have some super cool clips, but we got to pay our bills too. 
610
« on: January 22, 2015, 06:10 »
Why, why, why does it still lowercase every title and description?
Gold medal for persistence, Sean! It's been a year and a half since you've been asking this legit Q and still no answer. RESPECT!
611
« on: January 22, 2015, 04:22 »
These days I dont think that there is a normal way of things when it comes to the purchase of microstock images. I worked for a large company that produced newspaper fliers for many clients. They would buy a stock image (microstock) and use it in many different print vehicles, mainly newspaper inserts. The example I always like to use is that of Danny Smythes wonderful image of a simple orange on a white background (weve all seen it and probably never paid any attention). The image was purchased by the company and then used in every grocery store newspaper ad under the sun in every state in the US when oranges were in season. They probably should have purchased the license for extended seats but didnt know or care that that license even existed. No one kept track. They still use the image and Ive been gone 7 years. Once the image was purchased and thrown in the pool of other images it was free to be used as needed and was, over and over again for multiple clients. Is it right? No. Does it happen more than we would like to know about. Yes.
Too bad this happens. But in this we are being asked to consent to this sort of abuse, not being random victims of it.
And I agree with Jo Ann. Each company buying an ad should pay at least a sub royalty for the image to make it fair or reasonable.
+10 Ad agencies working on multi million dollar campaigns pay peanuts for our work. Total rip off!
612
« on: January 22, 2015, 04:02 »
However, I would have preferred they spend a portion of the profits from contributors' work on hiring a larger sales staff to sell that work, rather than using it to pay staff to make clips of public domain footage.
+10
613
« on: January 21, 2015, 20:07 »
615
« on: January 21, 2015, 18:13 »
I really hope they start selling more video clips because right now it's almost zero. Adobe integration should change that soon.
I hope too...an interesting spring ahead of us. 
616
« on: January 21, 2015, 17:52 »
I am so glad you like it, Jonathan.
Have a question for VP of finance, even though I know this is not really our business, but curious to know how does he justifies spending on such a huge swanky space in Soho when only 20 employees sit in 30,000 square feet office, considering rest of P5 staff actually live out of NY? If we do the math right, that's like 1500 square feet per person, no!!!
I'm not sure where you're getting your number from, but we have many more than 20 employees in either of our offices these days. Pond5 only had about 30 or so employees when I started here a few years ago, and we were in a smaller space then, but we're well over 100 employees today, and we're still growing. That's why we moved into a larger space.
You mean 81 employees scattered around the world, no?
I was talking about NY based employees only that occupy 30,000 square feet.
How many folks are NY based then?
I just read this via PRNewsWire - http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/pond5-launches-the-public-domain-project-with-80000-free-media-clips-300022538.html"Based in New York, with offices in Geneva( ?), Switzerland, and Prague, Czech Republic, Pond5 recently raised $61 million from Accel Partners and Stripes Group. It currently employs a global team of 81 people."CONTACT: J.J. Colao, 646-820-1708, [email protected]SOURCE Pond5 Well... about 30,000 square feet....here is the source http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/20/pond5-issues-80000-free-media-assets-with-the-launch-of-its-public-domain-project/"By all accounts, Pond5 has been doing quite well recently. The New York-based company saw revenues of $19 million in 2014, up from $12 million in 2013, and has relocated to 30,000 square feet of swanky new office space in Manhattans posh SoHo neighborhood. Its also been on a bit of a hiring push, adding a VP of finance in October and looking for marketing and operations executives." You say office is 5000 sq ft only? ... wow, TechCrunch made you 6 times bigger. Swanky PR! 
617
« on: January 21, 2015, 17:23 »
Try this one - www.facebook.com/govooza/posts/581698011961783
or go to vooza.com and find "Bull*hit metrics" video
Ah! That did the trick, thank you
Hah! That was great! I'll have to check out more of their videos.
I am so glad you like it, Jonathan. Have a question for VP of finance, even though I know this is not really our business, but curious to know how does he justifies spending on such a huge swanky space in Soho when only 20 employees sit in 30,000 square feet office, considering rest of P5 staff actually live out of NY? If we do the math right, that's like 1500 square feet per person, no!!!
619
« on: January 21, 2015, 09:11 »
I get what you say about a paycheck being a paycheck but I'll take 19 less sales for the same money every time. That's 19 less customers who want my image that might later on need to buy it at full price and 19 less "customers" that can give away my image for free. Less sales at a higher price is much more sustainable for me in the long term.
As far as trust...a smaller agency made up of contributors or owners I respect would be preferable to a corporation who takes everyone they can find.
In all honesty, I had my hopes with P5, but after this recent swanky new office in posh Soho and VPs appointments I lost my faith in it. Or they just fooled us about how artsy they were. No idea...but by looking at a top tier and corporate success, I think smaller scale of micro stock business is not going to work. I wish I am wrong.
They still pay us 50%. Most other agencies cut our commissions so they can use OUR MONEY to fund posh quarters and fancy, expensive titles. I give P5 credit for not using us as the pawns to pay for their luxuries.
Let's sit and watch...they all claimed to be "the good guys" until they gain our trust and get greedy....time will tell!
620
« on: January 21, 2015, 09:01 »
Once again I'll make the case that having nice office space in SoHo is a good thing, since they'll hopefully be inviting clients and potential clients into the space and they're located near a lot of NY video editors who are potential buyers. And editors have very cool office space.
However, I would have preferred they spend a portion of the profits from contributors' work on hiring a larger sales staff to sell that work, rather than using it to pay staff to make clips of public domain footage.
I don't know...I just get the feeling they're tossing stuff at the wall to see what sticks, like iS. If they'd said editors were clamoring for vintage footage and this would generate tons of traffic, and backed it up with research that shows the increased traffic would result in an increase in sales, then maybe...
BS Metrics video to watch - http://vooza.com/videos/crap-metrics/:-)
621
« on: January 21, 2015, 08:39 »
I get what you say about a paycheck being a paycheck but I'll take 19 less sales for the same money every time. That's 19 less customers who want my image that might later on need to buy it at full price and 19 less "customers" that can give away my image for free. Less sales at a higher price is much more sustainable for me in the long term.
As far as trust...a smaller agency made up of contributors or owners I respect would be preferable to a corporation who takes everyone they can find.
In all honesty, I had my hopes with P5, but after this recent swanky new office in posh Soho and VPs appointments I lost my faith in it. Or they just fooled us about how artsy they were. No idea...but by looking at a top tier and corporate success, I think smaller scale of micro stock business is not going to work. I wish I am wrong.
622
« on: January 21, 2015, 06:34 »
Ok, so you contribute on SS, Alamy...where else? do share ... and congrats!
SS, Alamy, DT, iStock, 123, Bigstock, Canstock, Veer, Fotoarabia, Depositphotos ... but SS, iStock, DT and Alamy are the backbone of that. I was on Fotolia but I dumped them when I couldn't stand their behaviour any more.
I suppose I should add that I don't believe I could make anywhere near as much as I have done if I was starting out today. I got in on the ground floor.
Thanks! Sorry for being totally nosey, but I guess you have been doing this full time last 10 years?
623
« on: January 21, 2015, 06:25 »
624
« on: January 21, 2015, 06:14 »
Once the deal is completed they will announce more 'exciting' news-
"We just upgraded our office to make our board members more comfortable and gave them all a nice pay raise! Thanks Contributors for working so hard for us. "
I would say I feel like a prostitute but they at least get paid for their services- I am more like a cheap whore getting nothing...
Oops...good guys just did it! "The New York-based company saw revenues of $19 million in 2014, up from $12 million in 2013, and has relocated to 30,000 square feet of swanky new office space in Manhattans posh SoHo neighborhood. Its also been on a bit of a hiring push, adding a VP of finance in October and looking for marketing and operations executives." *TechCrunch on 20/1 - Pond5 Issues 80,000 Free Media Assets With The Launch Of Its Public Domain Project "While Mr. Bennett acknowledged that his industry is in a time of transition, he hopes the Public Domain Project will help the company distinguish itself in the marketplace. "This helps tell our story," he said. "We know there's been a lot of activity in the sector, but we think this project will help let people know that we're the good guys." *Crain's NY Business on 20/1 - Pond5 launches free stock-footage archives
625
« on: January 21, 2015, 05:24 »
If you had an agency that paid 20 times more than SS but had 1/20th the sales who would you upload to first? In other words if you were earning $400 at SS over 500 sales or earning $400 at X on 25 sales which would be your preferred agent?
I'd be on both Apart from that, it's not an easy question to answer because one of the advantages of a site like SS is that the high sales volume tends to even out so that monthly earnings are regular, low volume sites deliver erratic earnings.
A real world comparison is between SS and Alamy. I've had months where Alamy has outsold SS but on average SS comes out well ahead. So far this month, SS has earned almost 10x what what Alamy has delivered - but that might change tomorrow. Consistent income from month to month is important.
@Jo Ann - A wasteland for 10 years? In those 10 years it has bought me a house in the UK, lock, stock and barrel, at the cost of a fairly modest effort. It doesn't look like a wasteland to me.
Ok, so you contribute on SS, Alamy, DT, iStock...where else? do share ... and congrats! :-)
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
