|
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 - qwerty
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42
901
« on: January 31, 2010, 01:58 »
$ = 10% down on December,
about the same as last years January total with 30% more photos.
Hold the phone, late run now equal with December now.
902
« on: January 30, 2010, 00:40 »
$ = 10% down on December,
about the same as last years January total with 30% more photos.
903
« on: January 28, 2010, 23:45 »
won't the agencies that charge more just block them from accessing their database if they don't provide correct and comparisons.
904
« on: January 27, 2010, 05:07 »
oh well at least someone is benefiting.
Thanks Brian for posting here, I think alot of people want veer to do well to create some competition to the top 4 and stop monolopy forming. Look forward to hopefully better result from planned changes.
905
« on: January 27, 2010, 04:49 »
Any explaination on the dramatic reduction in both views and sales in the last 2 months ?
It's been pretty bad there.
906
« on: January 27, 2010, 04:34 »
ah I like the thing about targeting more customers in China but more contributors is something they don't need to encourage  1 billion more competitors ? Do people think China is a market that microstock agencies should be targeting ?
907
« on: January 27, 2010, 02:37 »
Oh yeah and I agree keywords at Shutterstock are really bad.
Time and time again I see terrible keyword spamming. Nothing seems to happen.
908
« on: January 27, 2010, 01:46 »
very very slow,
909
« on: January 27, 2010, 01:38 »
100,000+ images in one week eh? I wonder how may of them....
...
- dogs dressed up as humans doing things
Working with dogs doing things is NOT EASY! Getting good results require lots of time, preparation, and patience.
The real problem is contributors sending images which are too close to snapshots.
^^^ but they are getting approved. They'd stop submitting them in bulk if they were rejected.
910
« on: January 22, 2010, 07:34 »
Best to only say here if sales are bad because the exclusives are getting restless about the fact that buyers may be going for the cheaper non-exclusive option and we don't want them to put us further back in the search to compensate 
worst month ever
911
« on: January 21, 2010, 01:42 »
what's the point ?
mine is 0.01% if made my portfolio 10 times bigger instantly it would only go to 0.1%.
Meaningless number, even someone like yuri etc would only be at 0.5% or something like that.
912
« on: January 18, 2010, 05:24 »
I didn't say they would tell me. Though it appears to me quite a few of them don't have any strategy.
913
« on: January 18, 2010, 01:24 »
what I'd prefer to hear is the agencies marketing strategies.
914
« on: January 17, 2010, 03:42 »
When is started I had 29 days in a row then one day with zero then 64 days in arow. Two and half years on and I'm lucky to through one week without a zero day. I guess it's a combination of less photos to submit (I had a big stockpile in the beginning) and more competition. oh it could be other things such as aliens,bad reviewers,best match shakeups,solar flares and alike. No I don't want to keep your streak alive
915
« on: January 17, 2010, 03:30 »
my overall acceptance rate there is 85-90% last two months it's dropped to around 55-60%.
Did I read something about they were going to increase their quality required for acceptance or was that another agency.
My earnings at 123 are around 5% of my monthly total.
Hence why they sit around 6 or 7 on the list to the right.
916
« on: January 13, 2010, 01:26 »
I filled out the form before and they have witheld taxes @ 5% on US sales I think that is correct for tax treaty between Australia and US. I looked on my details and there was a button to "redo" tax forms. Is that for if I want to change some details or do we have to redo it every calender year ? I like that they pay out whatever amount left over at the end of the year. Very fair. I don't like that I haven't got a single view in 1 month with a portfolio of around 250 photos.
917
« on: January 12, 2010, 04:43 »
canadian government has copywrite over the design of their coins, and have apparently defended it in the past. There appears to be no iconic photos of uluru (Ayres Rock) on the Shutterstock or Istock so something must have gone down regarding it recently. There are some on Dreamstime and some on Getty images which say "no release but release may be necessary." eta: http://www.environment.gov.au/parks/permits/uluru-media.htmlpermit required for commericial photography within the park. Uluru has been in the news of late regarding tourist climbing the rock and the traditional owners not wanting them to do it because of the religious significance of site.
918
« on: January 12, 2010, 04:18 »
Wouldn't it just have been easier to say if you go exclusive by August you get SJlocke's special "canister grandfathering" option. If you don't go exclusive by that date then you don't get it. end of story. 
919
« on: January 10, 2010, 06:34 »
Howdy,
One idea is they could make one flat price for a Micro image at any size. $10 bucks would work for me. I would make a lot more money, even if they dropped to half as many sales as they are now at the new $10 price.
Cheers,
Jonathan
They tried that at Snapvillage same price no matter what the size. Wasn't a roaring sucess, but not the only issue with that site (I love the term someone else came up with for snapvillage = craphamlet)
920
« on: January 08, 2010, 21:14 »
umm I can see your point with that search. Looks like I won't be using getty for bacon sandwich needs.
921
« on: January 08, 2010, 20:17 »
Most of designers don't care about prices. The difficulty to find the perfect image is more important than finding lower prices. They always have to deal with deadlines, limited budget is second in the priority order.
You can look at how the Vetta collection is successful, as an example of that.
Why do they buy from microstock then ? I do agree thought the difference between $5 and $10 is less important than between $10 and $500 but I'm sure that sorting by price is an option that a lot of buyers will want. Istock however will be unwilling to provide it because it will lessen the benefit for themselves and exclusive artists.
922
« on: January 08, 2010, 16:11 »
I think the big companies should raise the price of subscription plan, as we work to improve the images quality of the level every year, now buyers get the better goods but only to pay the old price, for contributors may be unfair!
Just my sense 
Most of the big companies do raise the price of the subscription plan. The problem is that this doesn't always flow onto the contributor.
923
« on: January 08, 2010, 06:31 »
no decreased if anything
924
« on: January 08, 2010, 06:30 »
My approval rating this month:
SS 59,62%
IS 40,68%
FT 30,96%
DT 52,85%
BS 72,22%
StockXpert 85,83%
...
Veer 4,23%... (6 images accepted out of 142)
And, of course, no sales and 9 views on a portfolio of 259 images.
Ok, I can be still a newbie, I don't have a great portfolio and so on.
But don't you think there's something strange here?
t
You have a very low acceptance rate everywhere, so your situation with Veer is quite logical.
For example it is really very easy to get acceptance on BS or StockXpert above 95%
Yeah but it shouldn't be 1/10th the acceptance rate of that of Istock with 1% of the revenue
925
« on: January 08, 2010, 06:19 »
well that's a bit better, I wish they had done their homework first and saved everybody some heart ache.
Hopefully they might have learnt something about looking after their suppliers but I doubt it.
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
