|
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 - stockmarketer
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 ... 35
626
« on: October 27, 2011, 15:02 »
Shutterstock is an outstanding and highly professional microstock agency who, in contrast to others, are continuing to grow our incomes on a monthly basis. Be grateful to them and don't start silly threads like this whining about nothing.
+1000! Shutterstock is a dream compared to most other sites. Not only is uploading fairly easy (and I have never had an issue with rejections) but the site delivers what's most important, and in vast quantity: sales.
627
« on: October 27, 2011, 11:13 »
Scary, scary stuff.
So two rules we should all be following for our email accounts if nothing else: make your email password a long string of letters and characters -- not a word -- and not something you use anywhere else, and change it regularly.
628
« on: October 27, 2011, 10:56 »
Did you use the same password for your PayPal account that you use for email? That's the only way that I can see a hacker getting into your PayPal after hacking your email account. It's wise to have a unique password for every site that requires login. And even better, it's good to regularly change them all.
629
« on: October 24, 2011, 12:43 »
CanStock is a solid agency. Right up there with 123RF and BigStock, solidly in Middle Tier. If you're not selling there, you should check your port against what is popular there and see if you're on target with buyers' needs, because there is a lot of activity there... far from "no salses" as the OP suggests.
630
« on: October 24, 2011, 11:06 »
Sept was my BME at 123, and comparing earnings from Oct 1-24 to Sept 1-24, I'm up about 8% this month and will almost certainly beat it.
631
« on: October 18, 2011, 12:14 »
On the bright side...
We are all probably (temporarily) enjoying sales on pictures that would never normally sell because they are normally buried.
Assuming search is restored to what it was yesterday, and our best sellers are back on top, now our low sellers could enjoy a bit of a boost moving forward thanks to the sales they're getting today. Not that they'll be back near the top again, but if they have a few downloads thanks to today's change (mistake?), maybe they won't be at the bottom anymore?
632
« on: October 18, 2011, 10:54 »
The real question that matters to me is whether it will impact my sales.
Is anyone seeing bigger sales today because of it?
Me, I'm seeing a normal sales day today. I haven't checked how well my images are ranking in search, but I was looking at my sales before seeing this thread and wondering why my newer images don't seem to be selling like new images used to. So whatever shift just happened doesn't seem to be impacting me.
633
« on: October 11, 2011, 13:45 »
I'm not thrilled with how the first 11 days have gone, but I just looked back at my data for the past few years. For me, Sept has always been a bit stronger than Oct, so I am not panicking yet.
In terms of monthly sales, the amounts are traditionally pretty similar, with October typically beating Sept by a small margin, probably due to having a larger port. But in terms of RPI, Sept is always stronger for me. I keep a chart of this, and the pattern matches exactly to the past few years. I'm projecting that my Oct 2011 sales will be almost a match to my Sept 2011, but RPI will be down a fair amount.
(I know there are some RPI disbelievers out there, but I find it to be an incredibly useful metric, particularly in cases like this when I'm trying to make sense of month-to-month patterns and project where I'm headed.)
634
« on: October 10, 2011, 14:48 »
Just had my first one this morning as well. Maybe it's just starting to roll out on a wider basis? I was wondering why I wasn't getting any while my sales on subs, ODs and ELs have been higher than they have ever been.
635
« on: October 10, 2011, 14:35 »
Had an amazing run in the last few weeks of Sept and even the first several days of October, thanks in large part to the crazy run of ELs at SS. (To anyone else who was experiencing these, did they also dry up for you a few days ago? To me, it suggests there was some kind of campaign that ran from roughly Sept 22 - Oct 7.)
But for the past several days, I'm falling closer to August levels.
636
« on: October 06, 2011, 12:09 »
I get it, you don't agree with uploading to the smaller sites. Fair enough, but you don't have to be so hostile and insulting to people who see things differently to you.
You're right, Lisa. Guilty as charged. I certainly didn't mean to offend... I sometimes get over-passionate about making my points. I'll work on dialing my tone back a notch or several. Thanks for pointing it out. We can always count on you as a reasonable voice around here.
637
« on: October 06, 2011, 11:17 »
I don't understand how people think the smaller sites aren't worth uploading to, because they have so few sales but at the same time they are a threat to the big sites? Some of the big sites will use any excuse to lower commissions. If there were less sites, do people really think we would be better off? They would just think of a different excuse to lower commissions whenever they want to.
I don't understand why this is so difficult to grasp. I sell my widgets through 4 stores that do great volume, sell at good prices, and give me a fair commission. When a bunch of new stores open up in the same neighborhood wanting to sell my widgets at a fraction of the price of the established stores, should I: a) blindly say "Yes indeed, anything to get more sales!!!" b) realize this would steal business from the stores selling a great deal of my widgets at good prices, and ultimately be a big blow to my own bottom line. Everyone keeps saying this is about commissions. Based on Chad's posts here and all my recent emails with people at FT, I believe them when they say it's about image pricing. Just do the math. An Emerald's pics at FT will sell for as little as 1/6th the price at a site like DP. If I were FT, I would be shaking my head and wondering why on God's green earth my suppliers would want to undercut their own sales.
638
« on: October 06, 2011, 10:52 »
Yuri posts here when he wants our opinions. It would be good to know what he thinks about this. If he said that he can't talk about it, that's fine. At least we would know why there's no response from him.
But read your reply again... you still contend he owes us a response of some kind, even if it's to say he can't comment. He doesn't owe us anything. When I see him post here, I assume it's because it's in his best interest to do so... to measure our reaction to something. He's not going to come here and say something that's against his interests, and coming here to say "no comment" would not be in his interest.
639
« on: October 06, 2011, 10:33 »
We have worked with industry leaders such as Yuri Arcurs and Mark Butler (Monkey Business) to convince agencies like deposit photos to sell at sustainable prices reflected by the current online market leaders. We applaud their recent success and hope the trend will continue. We encourage all photographers with portfolios on this and similar sites to do the same.
Chad Bridwell
Director of Operations
Fotolia.com
Mentioning Yuri Arcurs and Mark Butler puts them in a spot. It will make it easier to put blame not only you, but also Yuri and Mark for any negotiations that will not benefit Fotolia contributors. Since you have worked with them, I think contributors will expect replies from both of these industry leaders. Fotolia contributors have a right to hear from Yuri and Mark since you put them in the middle! Now, if you wrote what you wrote without their consent, in my opinion it is unprofessional coming from a Director of Operations. But that's just my opinion!
No comment ?
We have "a right" to hear from them? I'd love to hear from them as well to hear about the deals they struck, but do you really think they're going to come in here and tell us all about it? They don't owe us anything. Face it, we're all capitalists here. We're all trying to create the best images and hoping that buyers will choose our stuff over everyone else's. If you were in Yuri's or Mark's shoes, would you feel obligated to put your competition's interests on the same plane as yours, and report back to your competitors about deals you're striking with agencies? I don't see Yuri and Mark as carrying my fate in their hands. If I want to succeed, it's on me to make that happen. Yuri and Mark got where they are because they're * good, and if I want their success I have to reach out and grab it for myself.
640
« on: October 06, 2011, 09:23 »
So you would go, give up all alternatives and actually help the ones who are really greedy and make a lot on photos and clearly signalled that they intend to give next to nothing if possible, get as close to monopoly as possible. Just genial. With such geniuses around, no wonder these agencies can just freakin' shaft subbmitters to freakin' death.
I rose to the level at FT that they allowed me to double the price of my images, and they elevated my commissions at the same time. My RPD is high there. SS treats me very well... and they must have done something recently to encourage EL sales because I'm getting 3-6 of them everyday. DT has always been great, especially with the tiered pricing based on number of downloads. I have tons of high level images and get a great RPD there. The only Tier Tier agency I'm disappointed with is IS. I still get a good RPD, but I don't like their recent policies, so I've stopped uploading. So given how well the Top Tier (and even Middle Tier) have done for me (except maybe for IS) why would I stab them in the back and undercut my own RPDs by jumping on board every fly-by-night upstart that wants to steal market share from them? You have to admit that's pretty stupid in principle.
641
« on: October 06, 2011, 06:31 »
Here's what I would do...
As soon as I saw signs of this happening, I would try to protect the high prices my images sell for at the top agencies by removing my ports from the small new agencies that offer my images for a fraction of the price the big dogs offer, and thus push the "race to the bottom" forward.
Guess what... this has started already. The signs are all around us... wheels are already in motion to reduce our take to something like .20 per image. So I'm taking action now... removing my port from the smaller sites that sell my images for too cheap. I have to protect my high prices (and commissions) at the top sites.
And guess what else... this is what FT asked me to do. And after being enraged about it for a few days, I now see that they're right. Maybe your RPD is low at FT and my story is different (I'm getting a good RPD at FT because I'm Emerald and get 37% and can double my image price)... but the principle is the same. If you want to protect your returns from SS, IT, DT and any other site you really like... STOP jumping on board every low-cost agency that pops up. By supporting the bargain basement sites, YOU'RE driving your returns down to .20 per image.
642
« on: October 06, 2011, 06:21 »
As to whether sales are drying up at 123RF... no, they're not for me. I keep having BMEs at 123, and I expect this month will be the same. (Getting about 30 sales per weekday now, and I see no recent dip, just steady increases.) I can't be the only one... look at the poll results to the right... 123RF is now considered Top Tier. I wouldn't quite put them there yet, but it's a sign that 123RF is definitely on the rise, and far from on the slide as the OP suggests.
643
« on: October 02, 2011, 22:52 »
.
644
« on: October 01, 2011, 06:04 »
My BME by a long shot.
Up about 25% over August, my previous BME. (The recent mad rush of ELs at SS have certainly helped, though it still would have been a BME without them.)
Up about 120% over Sept 2010.
Now into my fourth year in ms, and no wall in sight (knocking the closest wood I can find).
645
« on: October 01, 2011, 05:57 »
Just noticed 123RF is with Top Tier, is this the first?
Like I've said in the post above, you deserve it guys, good work!
Putting 123RF in the Top Tier just doesn't reflect reality as I know it. My Middle Tier agencies each generate around 10% of the earnings of either of my Top 2: SS and FT. 123RF is certainly on the rise for me, but it is far, far from Top Tier in my view. And FT in the Middle Tier? That just seems like we're punishing it for the recent dustup. Are the majority of people here REALLY earning more on 123 than on FT? Again, for me FT earnings beat 123 about 10x over.
646
« on: September 29, 2011, 16:11 »
I'm one of FT's top contributors. I was targeted with the email.
And you know what? I see FT's point.
FT has sold extremely well for me over the years, but I jumped on board new agencies to get downloads wherever I could. I have to admit I didn't scrutinize the pricing these new agencies would be offering. Now that I've been doing the comparisons, I'm pretty shocked. At my pricing level at FT, I see that other sites are selling at a small fraction of the prices that FT has on my images.
As for commissions, I'm getting a good rate at FT that is pretty competitive with the others.
So I see the problem that FT is describing, and I admit that I've been part of the problem.
I'm even willing to correct it in order to preserve the market demand for the prices that FT has on my photos. This is in MY best interest. (Does no one else see this???)
If and when FT reaches out to me again to open discussions on adjusting my pricing at the offending agency(ies) or removing my photos from those places entirely, it's entirely likely that I'll decide to do so. Again, I now believe that this is in MY best interest not to have a photo selling for 50 cents in one place and 10 dollars in another. We can all acknowledge that this is just bad business, right?
But... and this is a big BUT... if FT shows impatience in working with me through this process and knocks me down to White level before we have a chance to work through this, I WILL CLOSE MY FT ACCOUNT. That is a promise.
647
« on: September 29, 2011, 14:58 »
A possible explanation? SS recently started promoting (or maybe just testing) its single-download option. Maybe that's attracting quite a few people who aren't really sure what licensing this option covers, and then they find out that they actually need an extended license and go that route instead? Might be a stretch but it looks like the timing of the two things correlate.
648
« on: September 29, 2011, 12:48 »
When things seem too good to be true, they probably are.
The EL streak has been continuing for me everyday (5 so far today) and I'm still concerned there's something fishy going on.
These started rolling in all of a sudden late last week. Does anyone know if SS started some big marketing push, or perhaps they're promoting ELs differently on the site now? I'm trying to find something that makes sense to explain this, or I'm going to start thinking there's a hacker with a fake credit card out there downloading all the images he can until the hack is caught and shut down, and all these downloads are removed from our accounts.
Hopefully I'm just paranoid and I should just relax and enjoy this run while it lasts.
649
« on: September 27, 2011, 21:26 »
I think the lowest % comes from someone who buys just a few credits with Pounds or Euros and then a base contributor who is paid in dollars.
Yeah, I think this is the thing I never understood. Is a credit one Euro in Europe and one Dollar in the US, but I'm only getting $.37 for each Euro as well as $.37 for each dollar? Is Fotolia the only site that does this?
650
« on: September 27, 2011, 21:21 »
Is there a web page somewhere that compares the commission rates and prices of all the major agencies?
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 ... 35
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
