Well sure, I mean, technically it's an eagle landing, I can see someone getting his knickers all stretched out for that.

I quit submitting microstock several months ago and sales (on my very small portfolio) never really changed. In fact they've been going up recently.

Reading some of these replies makes me think it would be interesting to start a thread for all the contributors who still read this forum, but have gotten discouraged about microstock and quit doing it (like me).  It seems there are quite a few.  

The topic wouldn't be just doom and gloom, but also - what would we need to see happen, what would need to change, to get us motivated to start doing microstock again?

My opinion is simple. Micro has chosen to elevate itself, in many ways, past that of the macro market. At the same time reducing the ability to gain ground on most of the major sites. Minor sites and upstarts have proven to be useless in most cases. It's a tough business to survive in never mind move ahead. Yes it can be done but I still think macro has a better rate of return.

I don't know how buyers view paying for buyouts through the micros but $3000 is not a high price even for today. I still see licenses for more than that without a buyout but obviously not through a micro agency. Simplicity has nothing to do with an images value. The simplest are often most valuable. I wouldn't let someone knock down your asking price with that argument.

... the same for me

But not for me. Nothing to argue about really.

MSG has become a haven for thugs. we're professionals. disagree until the cows come home, that's totally fine. I don't care if you dislike everything I say and vice versa...there's still a line that gets crossed regularly over here. it's not about moderation, it's about professional courtesy. not to mention the conspiracy theories and extrapolations on 'the truth' here go so far beyond ridiculous that you're not even disseminating information anymore.

this isn't a watercooler anymore. if you want it to belong to you, congrats....thanks to the intimidation tactics that happen, mostly unfettered here, it actually does belong to you and those like you. no one else bothers to come here. why do I come here? because there is some information that gets passed around. but that's rarer and rarer these days.

One could argue there is as much, if not more, intimidation over there as there is here. The reason this thread got started is because of the intimidation over there. Imagine a society where they (people in charge) censor people's comments and have a say over the contents of all media. You can probably think of a few places this still happens in. Now think of a society where you can write in a scathing letter and it gets published in an editorial section of a paper. Even if that letter goes about calling your boss or neighbours a fascist pig it would still not be the same form of intimidation. You see there is difference. Those who agree with and follow the tenets of the ruling party tend not to see things the same way.

Vivozoom, represents to me, just how difficult it is to break into the market. They have (had?) a really good staff and good ideas and not a bad name and nothing happened.

Quote from: gbcimages on February 13, 2011, 15:41

still, no sports figure,artist,photographer or whatever is  worth that kind of money

it is your opinion, some might disagree, I do

You're right, artist for sure, but sports figure not a chance.

Quote from: Zeus on February 13, 2011, 14:25

Certainly no more insane than paying some dimwit hundreds of thousands of dollars a month because he can throw/hit/dribble a ball.

I would agree, but a good sports player (whatever the sport) brings back revenue in merchandise and advertisement. In this case, it is an investment, even if I agree that the money involved is also absurd.

Art, the kind people deem as must have is by far and away one of the best investments you can make. So this million dollar image may easily become 2, 5 to 10 million while the sports figure heads off to rehab or hires a PR firm to explain his indiscretions. The only reason the sports figure makes that kind of money is because someone fills the stands for, what I believe, is an insane admission fee.

after one sale he would be up to 19%

But only for a year?

That's a little odd to sound like it's genuine.

I agree, it has the telltale scent of a scam.

Makes me wonder really, how many thousands of sales everyone in the micros are loosing, simply because they dont invest more money in expertise, trying to perfect the Search. Its the old story of wnting everything, the cake and eat it, I suppose.

Ask not what the micros can do for you but what you can do without the micros.  I sell quite a bit now on my own and I find I can easily get many times the price for my micro portfolio images as compared to the pitiful amounts the micros sell for.

Quote from: Zeus on February 05, 2011, 19:06

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on February 05, 2011, 18:58

[
Another good example but I don't think this will sink in either.

Ah nope. It's not the black and white, all details fit into neat little cubbies, scenario you'd like it to be.

Ahhh yep. It's pretty unbelievably simple and black and white. It's their site. They can do whatever they want with the forum.

In fact, they can choose to not have a forum. Then what? Would you sue them if they got rid of it?

Walmart, BP, and I dare say most large companies don't give a rat's patootie about the health of the environment. Profit, profit profit. But most will profess their commitment to green technologies and recycling etc. They do so because they know they gather good will by doing so. They don't have to do any of it. Many companies have 1-800 numbers to call to register complaints. They don't have to do this either. It's a matter of good business and maintaining a stream of communications. Many sites have open and lively forums where real discussions can take place and yes, as you so aptly put it, they don't have to do this either. It's a matter of perception. They ask how will we be viewed because of this or that action? I prefer not to bow towards the direction of iStock every time I reach my payout because I know they have reached it 4 times in the same period, now of course that goes to 5.25 times. But hey, it's their company and they can do whatever they want and we should all just accept this with grace and gratitude.

You seem to be confusing fair with legal.

They don't need to be fair. Just like at-will employment. Most companies can get rid of an employee regardless of the reason as long as it's within the law. Come to work every day complaining about your company and they most likely will fire you. May not be fair, but perfectly legal and within their right to do so.

Since you seem to like the law so much, maybe you should dig into the contributor agreement and see what it says about the forum. My guess is that it states they can do whatever they want. And if so, anyone who signed it has no argument.

Except this is not an employer/employee arrangement and the "agencies" went to great lengths long ago to distance themselves from the notion of being true agents or anything like an employer.