|
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 - Microstockphoto
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 ... 49
801
« on: March 07, 2016, 14:03 »
whats the purpose of this? just to get a few bites? happy angling
802
« on: March 07, 2016, 13:49 »
highest I got was 30 and lowest I got was 17.40
803
« on: March 07, 2016, 13:40 »
decent end sprint made February a normal month, but I am not seeing any increase, just sustaining my earnings
804
« on: March 02, 2016, 13:18 »
angelawaye you have posted the client name and described the image they want in your op, i bet you 10 dollar that your client has received multiple offers by now from people lurking here. keep your cards close to your chest.
805
« on: March 02, 2016, 13:08 »
transfering a 1gb file has to be the easiest thing on the planet, dropbox, wetransfer, dropsend, onedrive, google drive, etc
806
« on: March 02, 2016, 13:04 »
5000 falls within a standard licence for 38 cents, right?
807
« on: March 02, 2016, 13:02 »
you would think that when a company closes doors the client reassesses their needs and budget. it is not a certainty that the client will just obey and move in flocks to istock. they might go with a cheaper option. so the question is, who is the cheapest at this moment in time? shutter adobe dreamstime deposit etc
808
« on: March 02, 2016, 02:33 »
yeah big fan of dicaprio, should have gotten an oscar much sooner, the guy only delivers quality performances, going to be one of hollywoods greats, if he isnt already
809
« on: February 29, 2016, 03:25 »
every site has their own customers, if you talk cannibalization than all sites need to be considered not only BS, i still sell the same images accross all agencies, and i agree, the client will not switch agency to find an image if they dont even know it exists, they will purchase the best fit for their needs.
810
« on: February 28, 2016, 04:13 »
right i thought you meant gross earnings.
811
« on: February 28, 2016, 03:35 »
no one knows their gross income
812
« on: February 27, 2016, 02:36 »
2m is still 8m short. old thread but still a nonsense incentive. its no incentive at all and no one has ever achieved it on envato
813
« on: February 26, 2016, 19:08 »
ironic that a newbie knows more than people claiming newbies have no clue
814
« on: February 26, 2016, 10:49 »
i guess i wasnt clear in my first comment, its not about noobs, or whatever you call them, cant match the quality, its not about being better than them, its about sustainability. as a business you cant win from the amateur. they have no overhead, they dont do it for a living, they will accept 10c per image, and thats where you and i are long gone. ss can keep lowering their royalties because the quality provided by amateurs is of high standard and they will see every dollar as a nice little extra, they do this on the side. theyre not slaving away trying to feed the beast and submit ridiculous amounts of imagery only to see their income decline
815
« on: February 26, 2016, 10:41 »
you should look up the meaning of the word restoration
816
« on: February 26, 2016, 06:17 »
This is a real test of how much contributors will take. I mean this company hasn't filed for bankruptcy right? So basically they just chose not to pay contributors and make a run for it. If we take this lying down what's next?
exactly ! i dont understand why people just roll over and take abuse, some guy in that list lost 12k, what! do something about it
817
« on: February 26, 2016, 02:09 »
30 dollar each
818
« on: February 26, 2016, 00:02 »
the question of a raise has been asked and answered, the answer was no
819
« on: February 25, 2016, 08:40 »
'Our commitment to maintaining an unmatched content library and developing unparalleled search technology continues to attract an increasing number of customers and contributors to our platform, fueling robust revenue and profit growth.'
yep, they can miss us complainers like a sore tooth
i mentioned before they are wanting to have the biggest library out there, oringer's goal is to have more images than getty, in the meantime squeezing the life out of old contributors.
new amateur contributors are submitting content now that can easily replace stuff submitted by pros years ago. so there is no risk for ss to lose a few complainers.
theyve got everyone by the balls, i am really hoping adobe shows them up
820
« on: February 24, 2016, 10:06 »
its obviously an error to receive those amounts. doesnt entitle anyone for compensation either.
821
« on: February 24, 2016, 10:03 »
nail on the head shadysue
822
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:06 »
bigstock was founded in 2004. and you call people newbies who are in the game just as long as you. you talk from your backside
823
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:00 »
theres one problem with your theory though. the forest aint dry its soaking wet
824
« on: February 23, 2016, 17:25 »
still wondering, are people better off with adobe increase, i guess from the lack of replies that people are not better off below the line
825
« on: February 23, 2016, 04:37 »
yep, we all signed up for it, with open eyes, but under different circumstances, ss was the only agency not cutting royalties, high volume of sales and adding new fair deals and adding big pay out sods, so there was a sense of whooyay, then they started rejecting images for no reason, renting big expensive office space, stopped communicating, adding a million images per week, sales dropped and cutting royalties, so now there is a sense of what the f...
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 ... 49
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
