|
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 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 64
76
« on: October 13, 2015, 18:49 »
He is talking a lot about his own agency. Maybe he is indeed preparing to focus more on his own company after being frustrated with his Gettyimages adventure.
I am sure if he was satisfied with his results there, he would let the world know. It would be good advertising for Getty if Yuri could write an article how his income has doubled or tripled since going exclusive with them.
That was my take, promoting his own site. He mentions positives for his own site with several comments that search results on peopleimages return too few images. I would not be shocked to see him open up his site to key contributors.
77
« on: October 13, 2015, 18:41 »
If the information is correct, I think she should get more than 90 days in jail. She could have easily killed someone.
"Duva-Rodriguez was arraigned in the early afternoon in Rochester Hills on the single charge of reckless use, handling or discharge of a firearm, a misdemeanor punishable by up to 90 days in jail and/or a fine."
78
« on: October 13, 2015, 13:36 »
It is easy to make judgements when you are not living with someone with mental illness.
No one is making judgments against mental illness. Some of the people shooting up schools have mental illness issues. The question is, why would a home with a mentally challenged person have 1 gun, not locked up, let alone an arsenal of guns, not locked up?
Requiring a self-locking childproof gun safe in every home with a gun, plus additional safety features on the gun itself, and passing a law requiring the gun and safe pass inspection before anyone can live in the house sounds good to me. Also, only one per house, like pools. Ok with you?
There is a solution right there. But NRA lobbyists aren't even going to allow a plan like that to move forward.
Do you think all parents with mentally ill children supply them with guns or for that matter have them in the home? I would say the vast majority are more in line with Mr Greenburg who was unable to get his child the help he needed. They try for years to help their children and are unable to do so. I think many parents have tried to change the system, however Mr Greenburg has the means and fortitude to take it to a level most parents can not. Let us hope he can accomplish his goals. Greenburger Center For Social and Criminal Justice - 8 Ways to Fix The Systemhttp://www.greenburgercenter.org/mission#point2what
79
« on: October 13, 2015, 13:10 »
Even worse...these parents seem to know their children are disturbed, and somehow think getting them involved with guns and developing deadly shooting skills will help. Of all things...why guns? How about volunteering in a soup kitchen, or gardening, or drawing, or shooting PICTURES, or any other hobby than a deadly one that encourages them to express their rage by killing innocent victims?
It is easy to make judgements when you are not living with someone with mental illness. A Father's Storyhttp://www.greenburgercenter.org/article?ID=30And even harder to do what it takes to facilitate change. Greenburger Center For Social and Criminal Justice - 8 Ways to Fix The Systemhttp://www.greenburgercenter.org/mission#point2what
80
« on: October 12, 2015, 23:08 »
'63% Of Mass Shootings carried out by mentally ill shooters'
Maybe its time to make sure they cant by a gun at the candy shop then. Why not take both measures instead of one? Treat patients, stop selling guns.
If only it were as simple as taking one or two measures. The problems that contribute to violence are numerous and expansive. America needs to be committed to making large and numerous changes. For instance - how many people in the US, do you think there are, who are mentally ill and have never been diagnosed and never will be diagnosed? Even if they are identified and prevented from buying weapons, what leads you to believe they can not find other methods; such as the homemade bombs used in Boston or in Oklahoma City by timothy mcvey; who built a bomb that robbed 168 people of their lives and injured over 500 people! I am not against preventing mentally ill people from buying guns, however I do not believe it will make much impact towards reducing violence and deaths. America has many social issues to tackle if they wish to turn back the clock on violence.
81
« on: October 12, 2015, 15:12 »
You are amazed that 1.5% of world's population owns 42% of the guns but you are not amazed that the same people with 42% of the guns does not account for 42% of gun murders?
I would suspect that most places in the world that have enormous rates of gun murders are also in the middle of some sort of civil war or are battling some form of organized terrorism. Unfortunately for them.
Fortunately for those of us who live in the US, we are not in the middle of a civil war, yet we *do* have a tremendous number of murders by gun each year.
How do you explain that in a nation supposedly at peace?
Culture, society, racial issues, inequality, poverty, drugs.
Lots of factors influence this much more than "SO MANY GUNS!!!".
Thank you for adding rational dialog to the discussion Fujiko, Thank you for bringing up some excellent points throughout this thread and trying to stick to facts. With all sides skewing information it is difficult to determine where reality lies. I think you are spot on that the problems are social, there are many problems that contribute to the issue and you mentioned a few. Someone mentioned earlier in the discussion that Americans gun ownership has gone down, yet America violence in the schools has escalated to historic rates. Americas value system has changed in recent years and you can see this reflected in its TV programming and cultural norms. How can America expect it's youth to have good values and mental health when they limit access to mental health care and provide them with Television programming like Hannibal, Breaking Bad etc. If we want to reduce violence in society we need to address the social issues you mentioned and more. As it stands we are talking about using bandaid measures to treat large societal cancers. The wounds are so large the bandaid measures will not squelch the bleeding. No idea how accurate the following information is, however this is the type of information needed to start the healing process. That and dedicated funds and motivated citizens resolved to solve the numerous social issues that propagate violence. 63% Of Mass Shootings carried out by mentally ill shooters http://tinyurl.com/dxx6s9bPsychiatric hospital bed shortage by state http://tinyurl.com/p5ze46y
82
« on: October 11, 2015, 10:02 »
I have met many old school photographers, professionals in the trade during 1990 and up to 2010, doing stock or "police and accidents".
They often failed to adapt to global crowdsourcing. Where people from Ucraine and Uri from Denmark simply produced a better product, because they produced a more precise, more striking content without distractions, that could be used globally and not only in the local media..
They could not compete or adapt. Their artistic development was halted because of greenhouse effects and lack of competition and it was characteristic that they said: " I like to shoot photos" and " I dont like to photoshop too much".
Which is exactly what you say.
So I think you should ask yourself if the istock greehouse has limited you and if you are competitive in a global crowdsourcing environment.
And I dare you: show us some of your photos.
Really 18+ likes How soon we forget that IS "used to" have the toughest reviews in micro. I do think SS farms out its reviews by region and who you get is the luck of the draw. Take a good long look at the new images coming in to shutterstock. Many of those images would have never made the reviews at the former IS. The review process is flawed.
83
« on: October 03, 2015, 12:59 »
Funny this conversation as it carries on. Here is a nutter shooting people and the main issue seems to be his gun?? right now in Europe there are tens of thousands of refugees, innocent women and children and around, 70 people a day are dying and that without any guns, knifes, crossbows, canons, bombs. They are just dying because countries don't wish to help, politics, political murder without a gun.------------------------------------------not a single word about that....some contrast isn't it.
The refugee crisis is awful. But more than 80 people are killed per day in the U.S. every year, year after year, by guns. More than 30,000 people per year...more than a quarter million over the last decade. It's a daily crisis here and has been for a long time.
Funny this conversation as it carries on. Here is a nutter shooting people and the main issue seems to be his gun?? right now in Europe there are tens of thousands of refugees, innocent women and children and around, 70 people a day are dying and that without any guns, knifes, crossbows, canons, bombs. They are just dying because countries don't wish to help, politics, political murder without a gun.------------------------------------------not a single word about that....some contrast isn't it.
The refugee crisis is awful. But more than 80 people are killed per day in the U.S. every year, year after year, by guns. More than 30,000 people per year...more than a quarter million over the last decade. It's a daily crisis here and has been for a long time.
yeah but we are talking between 70-100 people PER/DAY here! children starving, decease, infections, viruses, stress. My brother is down there right now as a physician, he calls it murder by torture.
All this and we are still talking about the vehicle of death instead of the political, social & health issues which contribute to both situations. I think collectively we are in the process of waking up. If we want things to change for the better - instead of pointing fingers the world needs to ask themselves some difficult questions; define the root issues which contribute to our increasing social issues and then allocate adequate resources needed to solve those problems and heal our communities. In the mean time those who would use a gun to harm others can access them easily and they have the means to kill more people in a set period of time than they do by most other means. One life lost because of our apathy is too many! We are all culpable because of our passivity; one life lost by gun, knife, bowling ball, tire iron, fire place poker, a mans fist or in the horrors born in the expansive refugee crisis is too many!
84
« on: August 26, 2015, 01:19 »
SSTK hit the top ten most shorted stocks on the NYSE a few days ago.
85
« on: August 10, 2015, 11:02 »
Well said VB inc. I completely agree, however I also think greed played a large part in the equation.
Of course it played a large part!
All people in all societies pursue their own interest, seeking what is good for them, their families and their communities.
You do the same, every time you make an economical decision in your life, when you want an agency to pay you higher commissions, when you look for a good deal when you buy a lens, or when you want a cheaper car, etc.
Except that, when others do it, you call it "greed"!
Breaking News: there is nothing wrong with that, on the contrary! The pursue of self interest is the catalyst of all progress; it unleashes innovation, creativity, hard work and ultimately leads to a better life for all people.
With reason this is healthy, however the balance has been lost in micro and became worse when shutterstock rolled out the IPO leaving the wallstreet crowd to suck the company dry. The vehicle was different with IStock, but the results were similar. I quit keeping track in January of this year, however at that time the key players place in the company by Insight venture capitol, excluding Jon have granted themselves 16,356,140 shares of SSTK stock at a cost to themselves of $0. If they disposed of it at an average share price of $70 which was the low stock price in January, that amounted to $1,144,929,800 It is clear that the last thing on their minds is the welfare of contributors, their biggest concern was/is driving stock prices up, and they are in this for the short term. They know the window to drive stock prices up is limited. That is why you are seeing key players move on to the next lucrative IPO.
86
« on: August 10, 2015, 10:54 »
that day when start paying higher royalties will never come at this attitude placating to grab money and f*** the corporation exists. venture capital is just that sort which is like those mining corporations which rape the land of resources, cause pointless pollution to make the land unlivable , fire the miners, pack up and leave the country with their big bucks and leave what is ghost towns all over the land.
no different with sharks shareholders who really don't give a rat's arse whether you or the corporation have a tomorrow at all. that's not why they are in the business. such shareholders have a history of bad karma, they would die a million deaths if they were to believe in karma , but they don't because they worship only money 
I meant it from the royalty increase that occurs as they reach the next payout level. All sites benefited by IS exclusives jumping ship. But that bump in profits is only temporary because they will move up the ladder, and the best of them will do this quickly!
87
« on: August 09, 2015, 11:16 »
Finally showing this AM...
Mine are too.
Yesterday, Hongover said the long-due images would appear in our ports "by the end of tomorrow," which means today, which of course means s/he was right. How clever of him/her.
The curiosity only grows.
You notice he has something to say about everything shutterstock. Down to shutterstock share prices, how other technology stocks are doing in the market as well as the impact of international currency. The list goes on. And his comment about shutterstocks competitors read strategic insider thinking. He is also not the only new contributor here spinning all things positive for shutterstock. We'll see if SS goes anywhere. They're projected to earn over $100 million in revenue in the 2nd quarter and a 2% increase from first quarter.
Fotolia has been losing a lot of traffic lately and thy had roughly 250k users in June. Adobe stock also had about 250k users in June, while SS had over 2.7 million users. In order for Adobe stock to be a threat, they need to have close to 500K users for July. We won't know for a few more days.
iStock has fallen a lot recently. Falling over 500 places in the the last 8 months doesn't bode well. Parent company Getty Images fell 1000 places in the last few months. No wonder they're panicking and suing Google.
Fotolia has also fallen quite a bit lately as well. This was way before Adobe Stock launched. I wonder if they're also facing some issues.
It's quite surprising that Dreamstime and 123RF has better traffic, but hasn't translated to better earnings for contributors. Maybe we'll see that change in the upcoming months.
Sometimes people mistaken artistic value for commercial value. His portfolio has little artistic value, but has more commercial value than a portfolio filled with landscapes.
We have to think more about what kind of companies have subscriber accounts. Design/advertising firms, healthcare/medical companies, software development firms out of India with American clients, supply companies, International trading, food processing companies, financial firms, technology/software companies, news outlets etc.
That's why landscape/nature photography isn't as profitable as they used to be. They aim to be everything yet, not specific enough to fit into any category well and there's are simple too much of it out there. Sometimes, non-artistic images are best sellers.
88
« on: August 09, 2015, 10:49 »
Been happening to mine, periodically for years. Some of them have gone missing for more than a week.
The ones that go missing never do well as far as sales are concerned.
89
« on: August 09, 2015, 10:40 »
I am sure contributors signed the five year deal with the prices and royalty returns in mind when they signed up.
They can't be that desperate to hold onto the content, can they?
It tells you a great deal about company intent moving forward, when they strategically write something like this into the agreement. To me it is fair warning they intend on cannibalizing their contributors in the future.
90
« on: August 09, 2015, 10:04 »
Well said VB inc. I completely agree, however I also think greed played a large part in the equation.
Two of the key players Insight Venture Capitol put in place, have now moved on. They usually stay as long as it is lucrative for them to do so. As for the bottom line, they will need to offer stock incentives to the two new replacements.
It will be interesting to see how things develop once the majority of IS exclusive defectors hit higher payout levels. They are trying to attract new contributors much more aggressively than in the past, however for most, it takes time to develop the skill necessary to be competitive and it takes time to build large portfolios.
I wonder how the market will respond when it becomes necessary to start paying higher royalties for the majority of their collection, because it will eat into profits.
91
« on: August 08, 2015, 21:51 »
Too bad one of the analyst did not ask about shutterstocks "state-of-the-art processing operation". It would be interesting to hear how they describe it to the financial crowd.
analyst are no better than weather station ppl predicting the weather.
those of us old enough to have started investing in the 80s would remember there was a bunch of experts who made alot of money as teachers of investing. i was one of those who bought their lessons.
later they started an investment company, so we all went in big time since they were all experts.
we lost big time as well. the only ppl who actually make money in stock market are the sales agents.
and the inside traders. everybody else are brought in for the roller coaster ride, just so wall st continues to make money as the rest of us lost our pants off our retirement savings.
I was more interested in how shutterstock would sell themselves to market investors re "state-of-the-art processing operation"
93
« on: August 08, 2015, 08:07 »
Although according to some they have automated the process! I'm not sure since the quality of reviewing doesn't give the impression they spend much time on it!
Too bad one of the analyst did not ask about shutterstocks "state-of-the-art processing operation". It would be interesting to hear how they describe it to the financial crowd. "With more contributors than ever uploading their best content and a state-of-the-art processing operation and best images 24 hours a day, seven days a week, we believe we are well positioned to scale the supply-side of our marketplace for years to come."
94
« on: August 08, 2015, 08:01 »
I don't know about everyone else, but i started to to have doubts about shutterstock about a year ago. It probably is due to a fact that they admit to continue selling cheap to gain market share while the quality of the images rises. istock started at 10 cents a download but they adjusted their price along the years to reflect the quality at least. Did shutterstock raise their's? I am not sure on this matter.
I also bought shares of shutterstock when they were originally in the 40s and sold them in mid 90's when the Getty free images hoopla happened. I felt the general consensus among many of the members here turn from yay to boo around the same time my feelings turned south. In my view, there has been no positive news for contributors lately.
The market isn't stupid. This business model depends on crowdsourcing. The market see the pitchforks being sharpened by its contributors and many are voicing their complaints. I think the stock reflects the overall contributor mood which is going south...
You summed it up well and I agree. My enthusiasm took a real hit when I read these comments from Shutterstock Management when they presented at the Goldman Sachs US Emerging Cap Growth Conference. Shutterstock publicly admitted that they have purposely chosen not to raise prices as a business strategy to gain market share. Shutterstock has also stated that they will continue to price undercut the competition as a long term business road path. "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 years So 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
95
« on: August 07, 2015, 18:05 »
Paid downloads rose 14% Y/Y in Q2, and revenue/download 13%. The size of Shutterstock's library rose 11% Q/Q and 47% Y/Y to 57.2M images.
Adobe competition or investors wake up to over priced stock?
If earnings dropped while revenue rose then their costs have increased.
They certainly haven't increased what they pay us so it must be somewhere else - too much for top management? Too many employee perks?
I think the stock was overvalued and due for a drop but the magnitude of it that fast was surprising - maybe all of the insiders saw it coming and cashed out their options.
Snip GAAP net income in the quarter was $5.3 million or $0.15 per share, as compared to $4.9 million or $0.14 per share a year ago. The increase primarily reflects the improved operating performance, offset somewhat by increases in stock-based compensation expense. Non-GAAP net income, which primarily excludes the after-tax impact of non-cash equity-based compensation expense and the amortization of acquisition-related intangibles, increased 23% in the second quarter to $11.2 million or $0.31 per share.Snip So for the full year of 2015, we're updating our guidance as follows: Revenue of $425 million to $430 million; adjusted EBIDTA of $82 million to $85 million; non-cash equity-based compensation expense of approximately $31 million; an effective tax rate approximately 44%; and capital expenditures approximately $18 million. And now taking a look specifically at the third quarter, and we are assuming in these figures both for the quarter and the full year no material change from current U.S. Dollar exchange rates, we expect in the third quarter revenue of $105 million to $108 million; adjusted EBITDA of $18 million to $20 million; non-cash equity-based compensation expense of approximately $8 million; an effective tax rate of 44%; and CapEx of approximately $5 million. Snip Operating expenses increased 32% versus the second quarter a year ago, with the primary driver being the higher contributor royalties associated with our growing revenue base. Contributor royalties were again stable at approximately 28% of our revenue in the second quarter. Given the consistency in our contributor payout ratio, our gross margin has also remained largely steady at approximately 60% this past quarter excluding stock compensation expense. Sales and marketing expense was approximately 25% of revenue in the quarter, excluding stock compensation costs. Though we are seeing somewhat higher keyword costs due to competition, it is important to note that our overall marketing spend as a percent of revenue is essentially unchanged versus the prior-year quarter.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3408976-shutterstock-sstk-jonathan-oringer-on-q2-2015-results-earnings-call-transcript
96
« on: August 07, 2015, 11:30 »
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3408976-shutterstock-sstk-jonathan-oringer-on-q2-2015-results-earnings-call-transcriptJonathan Oringer - Founder, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer Snip To ensure we are meeting the demands of existing customers while also attracting new users, we remain focused on building cutting-edge technology and introducing new and innovative product offerings. A great example is our rollout during the second quarter of monthly subscriptions with no daily download limit. We also rolled out a smaller subscription offering for users who may not need as many images per month. While these new subscription offerings have some short-term financial implications which Tim will discuss in a moment, over time we expect them to drive additional subscription growth, extend average retention length, and increase lifetime customer value. Snip With more contributors than ever uploading their best content and a state-of-the-art processing operation and best images 24 hours a day, seven days a week, we believe we are well positioned to scale the supply-side of our marketplace for years to come. We see plenty of opportunities to invest even further, to create the best user experience for both customers and contributors, and we will continue to do so even if the ultimate return on that spend is not expected for quite some time. Snip Before I finished up, I'm sure that most of you have seen the announcement that Tim will be leaving Shutterstock and Steven Berns, one of our board members up until a few days ago, will be taking over the CFO role next month. Timothy E. Bixby - Chief Financial Officer Snip While customer growth this past quarter remained quite strong, the number of new e-commerce customers was somewhat below our initial expectations, primarily due to some softness across much of Europe. However, as Jon mentioned, we recently launched several new subscription offerings to better meet customer needs. The early signs have been encouraging, with subscription growth increasing versus the months before we introduced these products. There is one nuance surrounding the new product offerings that I want to mention, as it impacted reported revenues this past quarter and does have full-year implications. While the new subscriptions are expected to lift average customer lifetime revenue, revenue recognition is somewhat more back-loaded to the end of each month rather than evenly spread across the month. And this is due to the monthly rather than daily download limitation. As a result, we saw an increase in deferred revenue due to this change, and we recognized roughly $2 million less in revenue during the second quarter than we likely would have had with no product changes. This impact will flow through the remainder of the year. While customer expansion is certainly the biggest driver of our strong revenue growth, it is not the only metric that is growing nicely. Revenue per download increased 13%, and paid downloads increased 14% year-on-year, with the growth in revenue per download reflecting the impact of higher enterprise sales as well as continued momentum across video, editorial, and music products, all of which carry higher than average effective prices for Shutterstock. Snip The strongest growth driver continues to be our enterprise business as we further build our relationships with agencies, media organizations, and large enterprises, by adapting our core offerings to their needs. This was a business that barely existed several years ago and now has over 20,000 users, up over 50% from the second quarter in 2014.
97
« on: August 07, 2015, 11:26 »
Some interesting questions coming out of the new earning call transcript. http://seekingalpha.com/article/3408976-shutterstock-sstk-jonathan-oringer-on-q2-2015-results-earnings-call-transcriptSnip Question-and-Answer Session Youssef H. Squali - Cantor Fitzgerald SecuritiesHi, thank you very much, a couple questions, please, if I may. Tim, can you go back to and maybe give us a little more clarity on exactly what happened in Europe? I think you singled out Europe as the area of some weakness around your e-commerce offering and then you were launching the new products. So maybe just some more detail on that would be helpful. And then on the a-la-carte service, I think Adobe's offering is priced more competitively than yours. Any plans to match pricing? And if not, how do you compete within that niche? Thanks. Rohit R. Kulkarni - RBC Capital Markets LLCAnd as far as the big-picture competitive environment is concerned, is there any linearity that you saw in terms of how customer acquisition, or your retention, or your churn trended over the last 12 weeks to 18 weeks around Adobe launch? And how do you think you need to react over the next six months or so?Dean J. Prissman - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLCHey, guys; thanks for taking my questions. I know you talked about enterprise customer growth, but what was the enterprise revenue growth in the quarter, and how did it compare to last quarter? And then I think following upon Youssef's question, Jon, what if anything in the competitive environment would make you consider price cuts in your a-la-carte business? Thank you.
98
« on: August 07, 2015, 10:05 »
Found that article http://blog.microstockgroup.com/the-tyranny-of-the-microstock-lifecycle/Snip "Everything you upload to a stock marketplace will have its prime selling days and eventually fade out to never again be bought by buyers. This strict rule applies even to the most successful contributors." I was fine with images fading over time, it the past it was not so difficult to replace them and they did not "fade" away overnight. With new search changes that were rolled out with the IPO; that all changed and images no longer fade away. I lost my best selling images over night; essentially in one day. And since then they have been much more difficult to replace. The new paradigm plays out, exactly as the key players which Insight Venture Capitol placed at shutterstock intended. It increases their bottom line. Once the game plays out, they move on to the next lucrative IPO. But the damage has been done and I am not sure micro will recover so easily. http://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/shares-plummet/msg428235
99
« on: August 06, 2015, 19:40 »
For what its worth I think its a realisation that the stock was overvalued. Its always a worry when a CFO leaves to pursue "other opportunities" a revision to figures sometimes following.
The thing I find most amazing/worrying is that the no of images available has increased by 50% in a year specially since they don't seem to want mine!
I think they remained focussed on growth so I don't see a royalty cut.
Nice to see our Istock fanboys jumping all over Sstocks grave - premature I think Istock have more to worry about with their mountain of debt as opposed to SStocks war chest of cash (watch out Dreamstime?)
I think it was a given that the team Insight Venture Capitol put in place would move on. They have provided the key players with a good portion of revenue in the form of free stock grants and they will now move on the the next lucrative IPO.
100
« on: August 06, 2015, 19:27 »
I see you feel that offering an opinion born out of personal experience is actively belittling and condescending toward new contributors.
If we do not verify the rose colored reality that you want to hear, we are against you and are rooting for you to fail.
No one is against new comers here and they never have been. However you can not expect us to ignore the reality of the current business environment, so that we can provide the answers that you want to hear.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 64
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
