|
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 - cthoman
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... 145
776
« on: January 22, 2014, 17:06 »
Wow. That's terrible. So many people's dream is to become a "published author". I don't think it's widely known how little they make these days. Unless of course you're JK Rowling, Stephen King, or some other big name author.
There is still some hope. A friend of mine got a pretty good book deal last year. I guess if he becomes famous, I can say I knew him when.
777
« on: January 22, 2014, 12:33 »
Seems like a good move to me.
I don't know if it's a good move overall or not, but I have noticed that the last couple of days my sales were about the same but royalties a bit higher. I hadn't noticed that XS was gone, but that would explain it. I must have had a large number of XS sales.
I'm not going to complain about anything that results in (even slightly) higher royalties to contributors.
It seems like volume is dying. At least, for me it is. So, you might as well get as much as is reasonable out of each sale. Realistically, would any of us really join a new site that offers 1 credit sales at 15-20% royalty rates? Although, maybe we would. Everybody did jump on board of the Stockfresh train to nowhere.
778
« on: January 22, 2014, 11:11 »
Seems like a good move to me.
779
« on: January 21, 2014, 15:42 »
You like all the others, complaining but do nothing about it. How is that working out for you.
Hopefully, this comment isn't directed at me as well. I can think of very few that have tried harder than me to escape. Either way, I'm not offended. If everybody thought the same way I did that probably means something horribly disastrous happened. 
780
« on: January 21, 2014, 14:33 »
My RPI on SS is 3x the RPI on Alamy.
My RPD on SS is 0.61, on Alamy its 19$
SS is my top earner, Alamy my 7th. Guess where I am putting my images.
There is a Macro agency that pays 50% of earnings, partnering with Getty where the royalty is 20%. If you get a partner sale you are paid 10%.
That used to be true for me too (not anymore). I said the same thing about iStock as well at one time. 
781
« on: January 21, 2014, 13:55 »
The RPD in 2004 on SS was 0.20 cent, your RPD in 2013 is 0.70 cent.
250% up.
Sweet! I can wait another 10 years and with the next 250%... They'll still be the lowest.
782
« on: January 21, 2014, 13:28 »
Here is how Istock values my images:
Date (DD/MM/YYYY) Size License Royalty
20/01/2014 8:28 PM MST Large Regular $1.00 USD
12/03/2013 12:41 PM MDT Large Regular $3.12 USD
'nuff said 
It is called the SS effect, it was easy for IS to see who was gaining market share and they dropped prices in an attempt to plug the dam.
SS has no problem at all devaluing out assets to gain market share! As long at we believe the conditioned fallacy that we can do nothing to stop them, the micros will take advantage of our learned helplessness.
Instead of spreading the misinformation that we can do nothing about this inequity, it is time that we step up to the plate and demand fair compensation for out time, talent and resources.
We do have power we just have to take it back, if IS did not feel threatened by the contributor response of deleting images, they would not have removed Sean's portfolio. I removed my port from IS after that response and more people are doing it every day. They bought Yuri's and Andres ports but we all know the margins are slim and if they continue to lose quality contributors and ports one day they will find they will not be able to compete in the market or buy higher end contributors to fill the missing niches.
I think the trend has already started, I know more high end contributors who are shooting for macro sites, while leaving their sub par images for the micro sites. As this trend accelerates quality will drop on the micros and customers will migrate to sites with quality images. I know my own buying patterns are changing.
Shutterstock Earnings:
2004 - $0.20
http://web.archive.org/web/20041103054525/http://submit.shutterstock.com/faq.mhtml#23
2008 April - $0.25 (25% raise) + introduction of $0.30 and $20 EL
http://web.archive.org/web/20080415045654/http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml?
2008 July - $0.25 or $0.33 (10% raise) and $28 EL (40% raise) + Introduction of $0.36 and $0.38
http://web.archive.org/web/20080709054042/http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml
2008 September - $0.25 $0.33 $0.36 $0.38 and $28 EL + Introduction of ODDs $0.81 to $2.85
http://web.archive.org/web/20080901004029/http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml
2011 October - $0.25 $0.33 $0.36 $0.38 and $28 EL and ODDs $0.81 to $2.85 + introduction of SODs 20% to 30% of sale price. People reporting royalties of over $150
http://web.archive.org/web/20111029071122/http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml
2013 RPD (rounded) MSV - $23.50 TV - $14.50 CLO- $7.80 GL - $4.40 DT- $1.90 CanStockPhoto - $1.80 SS - $0.70 They still make money, but they aren't even in the ballpark for RPD of any of my other solid earners (except for 123RF which I ditched).
783
« on: January 21, 2014, 12:24 »
Sometimes its hard to see the forest for the trees. Of course if they can escalate profits by promoting lower royalty members they would, or else they would be complete fools. The administration is answerable to stock holders. However in the process you step on some contributors that were there building the company. So what, suppliers of files come and go. All replaceable, no one infallible.
Wait a minute! is there no moral in business? nope its business, profit, profit, profit!!
I have complaints about SS, but this wouldn't be it. These things may happen in the future, but it really hasn't happened yet. The only thing they've really dipped into so far was the affiliate program and Bigstock.
784
« on: January 19, 2014, 13:05 »
My judge is always how things are going at other agencies in comparison. For me, SS continues to shrink while DT and CanStockPhoto have been fairly stable. Now, I earn about the same each month at all 3.
785
« on: January 19, 2014, 13:00 »
When you pay the entirety of the janitor's salary at iStock and he still makes twice as much as you.
786
« on: January 18, 2014, 13:53 »
It's been a downward trend for a few years for me. On a side note, has anybody gotten paid this month? I just realized is past the 15th and I haven't been paid.
yes, came the 7th
I realize what happened. I had my minimum payout set at $200 from like the beginning of time, and it was the first month I didn't make over $200. I just bumped it down.
787
« on: January 18, 2014, 13:45 »
It's been a downward trend for a few years for me. On a side note, has anybody gotten paid this month? I just realized is past the 15th and I haven't been paid.
788
« on: January 18, 2014, 11:50 »
It's looking decent this month. I uploaded a lot recently though, so it might be a little below my expectations. They've always been solid for me though.
789
« on: January 17, 2014, 19:09 »
I have been thinking about this. I am hoping somewhere somehow a contributor or journalist or whoever got a job high up at an agency and will come out as whistleblower. The Snowden of Stock. That would be awesome. Maybe there is someone out there. How can it be that no one knows what goes on inside an agency.
What would they really expose that we don't already know?
790
« on: January 17, 2014, 18:08 »
I dont believe anyone paid by an agency any more. How can they ever be impartial?
It's kind of sad that you/we have to be convinced at all. Like Lisa said, I remember when we used to get raises all the time and there was exciting news in January. I'd love for somebody to shock me with some amazingly good news.
791
« on: January 17, 2014, 17:34 »
I had problems with it last weekend, but I just ran a test and I didn't see any problems.
792
« on: January 17, 2014, 10:02 »
They are all getting killed by phones. Do regular people even own cameras anymore?
793
« on: January 16, 2014, 13:45 »
Stupid to think that these customers can't already afford the cheap rates Fotolia already has. Just deplorable.
Those last two sentences get you a heart. I miss the money from quitting some of these agencies, but things like this always remind me of why I did it. I just hope enough people get the message eventually and we can make a positive change.
794
« on: January 16, 2014, 11:35 »
I'm so fed up with Fotolia. I am afraid if I pull my account that they will still have my photos on hundreds of 3rd party sites though.
I actually found Fotolia very courteous in closing my account. They even let you cash out a final payment that is under the minimum payment for a small fee.
795
« on: January 15, 2014, 16:05 »
There was mention of some of them coming from Fotolia - if all of them are, then what exactly is exclusive?
I think they meant the club was exclusive, so not everyone would get the deal.
796
« on: January 15, 2014, 14:53 »
It looks like a subs program, but without the upfront cost. So, you can get less money and less volume.
797
« on: January 15, 2014, 14:29 »
What are your thoughts?
They are doing you a favor. 
798
« on: January 14, 2014, 14:11 »
The fact that some people sometimes use Google Images to find images to use does not necessarily mean that this is what Google Images is most used for.
Well yeah, the number one use for Google is probably porn, but I thought we were talking about commercial use not personal use.
799
« on: January 14, 2014, 10:08 »
The average person is not using Google Images to look for images for a blog, newsletter, card ...
My guess would be that the average person very much shops like this. Most average people don't need thousands of images at SS a month. They need one now. I get walk in traffic from Google for stock and freelance. The licensing buttons seem like they could use some tweaking, but it is a good start. The Clipart filter seems to work great.
800
« on: January 12, 2014, 17:59 »
I'm not sure what your point was with all those quotes. I sell illustrations, and SS has never been my top agency since I started there in 2006. I've done well there, but it is not the ideal model for selling my work. I know it works the best for others, but it was never going to get me where I wanted. Maybe, one day it will change, but probably not.
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... 145
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
