|
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 - Noedelhap
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 ... 90
801
« on: August 04, 2018, 05:06 »
There's nothing really too different I can say other than what I already said previously. I am unhappy that sales are not good for many contributors, but outside of continuing to work on improving the site as it stands, I can't control which images sell. Sales are admittedly low, which is something I have been honest about, and that affects me directly much more than it affects any individual account, so making GL a more profitable company for myself and our customers is always a priority and something we are working towards. Your portfolios are your personal businesses, and you have every right to make any business decisions you feel necessary that will be in your best interest. We never want to lose contributors, but it's a part of a micro stock agency big or small, with high sales or low sales. I'm sorry I don't have a response that would be more satisfactory to any individual contributor, however the work I do, and the work I plan to do continues.
It has been 2 years since the take-over, right? Out of curiosity, how do you manage to stay in business if sales are down so much? Is GLStock viable or running break-even? How do you plan to revive sales and make the business grow?
802
« on: August 04, 2018, 04:53 »
Others know more about this than me but here is my impression.
When Yuri started the number of other photographers was very low and almost all were rank amateurs with little understanding of how to use their camera to make commercial images, and were doing it part time mostly for fun. Yuri was one of the first to realize that there was potential to make serious money if you took a professional approach. He analyzed successful images to identify the types, subjects and styles that would sell, then developed a style that was in demand. He was probably one of the first to use professional models, makeup artists, setups, etc., while everyone else was still trying to figure out how to shoot an isolated tomato on white and when to use a tripod. He recognized the potential and capitalized on the situation - he became a pro in a sea of amateurs - and that made him rich. In those days the number of images was in the hundreds of thousands, not over 200 million. There is no way he would be able to do the same if he started today. Timing, luck, and mostly skill in taking a professional approach early is what got him to the top. Or at least that's my impression, I'm sure others may think differently.
Yes he was business orientated and would look for a second into entering stock now.
Spoke to him about 5,6 months back and he sure knows the market is ruined.
How ironic, knowing that he partnered with the biggest culprit in microstock: iStock/Getty, in a time when it was said that iStock's pricing and policy would start a race to the bottom. Not to say that he alone is responsible (he's not THAT big), but it does remind me of how mankind is extracting fossil fuels and cutting down rainforests to make money, and when the environment finally is destroyed, they're like 'yea, the planet is ruined, better find some other source.'
803
« on: August 03, 2018, 16:23 »
No, maybe Pixabay would allow that kind of use, but Shutterstock only allows 100% own work, no derivatives or anything.
Also, it's better not to try either, because certain images from Pixabay could be stolen or copied. So stay on the safe side, create everything yourself.
804
« on: July 31, 2018, 18:17 »
Might be the lack of demand, more competition, oversaturation or the quality. Mind to share one or more videos for a dose of constructive criticism?
805
« on: July 26, 2018, 04:07 »
I'm going to raise my prices in response. Sales at Pond5 are not that frequent, so I might as well try it.
806
« on: July 22, 2018, 06:06 »
If there is controlled revenue, then how come each contributor's plateau lies somewhere else? Say, Person A has a plateau of $200 monthly (i.e. he won't ever make more than that, no matter how hard he tries) but Person B has a plateau of $1000. Seems rather arbitrary, doesn't it? How is that number decided then?
Now, a gradually decreasing profit is very normal in most businesses and fields. Your revenue plateau is most likely just a combination of 1) your own personal effort 2) port quality 3) competition in your subject matter 4) buyer numbers 5) changing trends.
Each factor has numerous parameters that ultimately determine your port performance.
Your profit may rise, plateau or even decrease as years go by, depending of how favorable market conditions are. And that's all there is to it. No conspiracy, no secret SS department closely monitoring your personal port, no devious algorithms designed to screw you over on a personal level.
807
« on: July 21, 2018, 10:37 »
Luckily I never get these $1.50 sales, and I sell a lot there. I can understand that people are very unhappy with it. What type of footage is typically sold at those low prices?
Video footage I believe, including drone/aerial shots (which is what I read in a forum thread). Drone footage is relatively expensive to produce, so I understand their frustration. I myself make animated stock videos, and I haven't had a $1.50 sale so far, only $16 and higher.
808
« on: July 20, 2018, 15:09 »
I've been with Crestock from 2010 to 2016 and I've had 3 payouts; one in 2012, one in 2014 and one when I closed my account in 2016. I don't remember any delays then.
Although I can't say much about their current situation, any delay should be actively solved by them, instead of leaving their contributors hanging in uncertainty.
809
« on: July 20, 2018, 06:01 »
I sent them an email (directed to their CEO) and at least their support desk responded - with the following email: We completely understand where you are coming from and I want to help clarify.
The reality is this: we have been proud to offer 100% commission since the launch of the Marketplace, and we made major investments in its success, but we need a more sustainable way to manage the operating costs going forward. After weighing every option available, we have determined the only way to maintain long-term health and success of the Marketplace is an even share in commission.
We get that this isnt ideal, and its not what wed hoped for either. Thats why we want to show our continued commitment to our contributor community by making impactful changes. Our plan is to increase the promotion of Marketplace content to those customers who are purchasers. This will lead to more sales for you.
We will also continue to educate all new and existing customers about the benefits of the Marketplace as part of their subscription. We definitely want to support you moving forward. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thanks!
If there is anything I can do to assist, please let me know.
810
« on: July 19, 2018, 17:59 »
That's almost impossible without a good marketing budget. In my opinion it's not worth the effort. No matter how optimized your SEO is, the big agencies will always be ahead of you in the search results. Even if you do attract visitors, you'll have a hard time converting them into (regular) buyers because your port cannot compete with the huge library of the big agencies.
811
« on: July 19, 2018, 17:56 »
Time to stop submiting to iStock 
That moment was years ago. Their keywording system is so ridiculous that they cannot blame StockSubmitter for the bad keywording quality. People who put some effort into it, will do the same thing when uploading via StockSubmitter and those who are too lazy won't be uploading quality keywords with DeepMeta or QHero. Such arrogance from Getty/iStock.
812
« on: July 18, 2018, 18:51 »
Oh yeah, you're all right. We should take time away from processing footage to complain and start petitions. No! Not one comment on here or petition signed is going to change their business decision. Weak and powerless is going on a forum to complain like a sissy. Buck up and get back to work if you're strong enough to adapt. Wining is not speaking up for you self interest. Not you or anyone on this forum is actually changing the business decisions of these big companies. So you have the decision to accept the rule change and keep playing the game or sit on the sidelines and complain. I really don't care what ya choose. The more people complain and hold back from uploading, the more money I can potentially make. I'm just trying to keep things positive. And yes I fully understand what's happened here and why everyone's so mad... I just don't think that response is a productive choice when it comes to business. Good luck everyone!
Accept and adapt? Oh sure, business-wise I've adapted. I have focused more on freelance assignments and see microstock as nothing more than side income. But accept silently without a fight? No way. Let the agencies know how we think about them. Do I think they will reverse their decision? Will it change the industry? No. But hopefully my opinion on this may raise awareness and stop others from uploading there. Because there's no need to support greed and unethical businesses. As for you, if you want to fight a losing battle, working twice as hard for that same lousy income, go ahead. You may succeed in recuperating your losses, accepting the fact that agencies keep chipping away your income until you're exhausted from working too hard. I'm off seeking greener pastures.
813
« on: July 18, 2018, 18:19 »
I'm blown away by everyones response. $25 isn't enough for an HD sale? $100 for 4k? That's way better than all these under $20 4k sales I've had flooding in recently. People complain about how bad their business model was before, and then complain about it when they make a change... and now a petition? That's crazy! It's not like they dropped it to 5%. It's still 50%! That's good in this game. They should have some money to spend on marketing now, which usually creates more sales. But good ahead and write them off if you want.
Tyson, you don't seem to see the big picture. They're driving down market prices while also massively cutting our commissions, which is bad enough in itself but gets worse if/when it encourages other companies to do the same. We are the suppliers in an industry. When our profit is squeezed - especially in dramatic cases like this - if we do not respond as suppliers in any other industry would, then that is economic suicide. We've seen this play out with stock photography, and plenty of people here, myself included, will do all we can to not have that process repeat in stock footage.
SpaceStockFootage: why would you think there has to be a murder in order to use words like "betrayal," "back-stabbing," "crap" excuses, etc.? It's a betrayal for a company to market themselves as especially contributor-friendly and then make a massive 50% cut in commissions. And it is crap to paste it over with hollow excuses. Do you really think they're going to increase sales enough to make up that 50%? Do you think even they believe that? Of course not, it's a false hope meant to pacify us. So what do you do when a business partner takes 50% of your money and then gives a BS reason about why he took it?
Let's address the obvious problem. The businesses are strong and centralized, we as individual suppliers are weak and widely dispersed. They're always looking to increase profit and undercut the competition, and to do that they'll always have an eye toward paying their suppliers less. Every single time they make a move in that direction, we owe it to ourselves as business people to take a stand and say no. By not uploading, by deleting portfolios, and especially by then telling the companies that you're taking those actions, we let them know that there are economic consequences to squeezing us. The more unified we are in that, the more powerful the response, then the more economically defended we are in the long term. So please don't shrug this event off. Don't take a "it's not so bad" attitude or a defeatist attitude. Simply take one single minute to sign the petition and share it with your friends. And if you have other ideas to protect our interests, please share them.
I see the big picture very clearly. This modern outrage culture looks exhausting. It seams to me that people are getting so caught up in complaining that they are really missing the big picture. Wasting time speaking out about this will not help you succeed in any way. Adapt and get back to work!!! And please quite saying this is driving down market prices. $25 for HD and $100 for 4K isn't driving anyones prices down. I just sold a video for under $5 on Shutterstock.
You don't seem to understand something crucial. Storyblocks branded themselves as the most contributor-friendly agency claiming to 'always' give 100% commission on video sales. People responded by uploading their ports and thereby supporting and even advocating for Storyblocks. Sure their $49 prices were on the low side, but the 100% commission made up for it. Now, they suddenly destroy our trust and goodwill with an outrageous cut (50%) which is the biggest paycut ever in the history of microstock. What's worse, they even dare try to spin it as something positive and uplifting for us, insulting our intelligence. More sales in the future making up for the loss in revenue? No agency ever lived up to that claim. Truth is, that 100% commission was their only USP for contributors. Now they're just a mediocre, low-priced standard agency, but with lower sales AND known for stabbing their own contributors in the back...and for what? To boost their profits, nothing more. And you're okay with that?
814
« on: July 18, 2018, 08:25 »
Update: There was a small issue from our side which is resolved now, and they reactivated our account back.
One thing more it's a bad idea to call or email depositphotos on weekend.
This is a contributor forum, probably not many buyers reading. It does seem weird though that after all the years they've been around they seemingly still haven't got their act together.
I searched google to find out something about the issue and, I must say, I was surprised, there are lots of angry people here lol.
So, it was an issue on your side. What was the cause exactly?
815
« on: July 18, 2018, 08:23 »
Not Shutterstock, I think you mean DepositPhotos.
And let's not forget Revostock.
816
« on: July 16, 2018, 11:42 »
By the way, the email is one hell of a bloated corporate-speak crapfest. There's no way to properly spin a commission cut as something positive, so why do they even bother? Upper management always seems to think contributors are morons who can't see it when they're trying to play the 'we're your best friend' sob story.
817
« on: July 16, 2018, 11:20 »
Hahahahahahahahaah, maybe we should find our old statements about their sketchy business... but noooo, some shitheads from this forum tried to convince us that Videoblocks is a great way to sell files. Here you have it. Now you'll get even less than on SS 
We made good money there for like first 2 years. Did you miss that sitting on the sideline?
And you forgot that such dumping businesses drive other agencies to lower their prices. In every industry.
Income from SS and P5 both kept growing too.
Stop crying.
And both invented new ways of selling stock files at lower prices. Did you miss this too?
There's no correlation between that and Storyblocks' pricing. Keep in mind that Videohive and Getty/iStock were already selling video for lower prices than Storyblocks ever did. So I had a good 3,5 years there. No regrets. I took a piece of the pie while I could and now it's time to ditch them.
818
« on: July 16, 2018, 10:27 »
When sales decline, the only option to maintain a steady revenue as a stock agency is to cut commissions, as we all know. Therefore, as of August 1, sales commissions will be brutally slashed in HALF (from 100% to 50%).
What a huge letdown. Some people already expected this business model to be unsustainable and a future commission cut, although some believers (myself included) thought the 100% commissions could be funded and propelled by the library memberships. Sales indeed declined, but that was to be expected when the library grows.
Now this very harsh reduction makes me wonder if there's any incentive at all to upload anymore. Prices were already lower than usual, and Pond5 lets you set your own prices. But now that's we're getting only $24 per sale, it's hardly better than Shutterstock, but without the volume.
Vague promises about bringing back sales are hardly believable, since their main revenue comes from the free library, so this is just another way to generate extra profit at our expense.
Storyblocks, you screwed up big time and lost me as a fan.
Consider a 75%-80% commission and I might be able to live with that.
819
« on: July 15, 2018, 15:40 »
It's possible to earn $100 selling images on shutterstock per month. I earn approximately $30. 
Sure. Do 3.33 times what youre doing now.
... or 3.33 times better...
...or wait for a 333% pay raise at SS...
820
« on: July 12, 2018, 04:35 »
Almost every agency did some things to contributors that are considered unprofessional or downright unethical, but nowhere near as bad as Getty/iStock and Depositphotos.
So despite each agencies' flaws, I still enjoy working with Fotolia/AdobeStock, Shutterstock, Storyblocks and Pond5.
821
« on: July 11, 2018, 07:24 »
I miss the Fotolia portal. It wasn't perfect, but much better than this awful Adobe Stock design.
For instance, the Adobe Stock contributor portal has way too much whitespace, which makes it hard to read.
See attachments for my comments on some of your design flaws. Including a redesign of the download stats page.
822
« on: July 04, 2018, 19:51 »
At least your getting exposure. Who knows, maybe Nike, Apple or Google sees your work!
823
« on: June 23, 2018, 17:33 »
I haven't uploaded anything new to IS-Getty for more than two years. They don't deserve my new content (certainly not my videos) and considering my revenue is only 20% of what it used to be, I couldn't care less what happens to them.
824
« on: June 19, 2018, 07:14 »
Plus DepositPhotos is a shady agency with questionable ethics.
825
« on: June 17, 2018, 12:29 »
You shouldn't be using any bitmap work in your vectors anyway. As a buyer and contributor I can say that it's incredibly irritating to download your "vectors" and then have to fix raster elements used.
Or worse, buying what is called a vector, preview looks like a vector, downloading, then finding out its just a jpg embedded in illustrator, with no vectors at all.
That would never be put up for sale at a decent agency, would it?
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 ... 90
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
