Yeah, I would delete this thread.  Let him have his hits and close the book.

Quote from: cclapper on March 25, 2011, 22:46

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on March 25, 2011, 22:41
Hahaha.  A troll wanting to increase his stats.  Come on, are you guys telling me you did not know that from the 1st post?

They jump from forum to forum gathering traffic for their sites.

Nobody ever reads post #25. 

You called it.  You are right, I did not read post #25.    I just saw this thread with 5 pages of replies.  It did make me laugh.

Hahaha.  A troll wanting to increase his stats.  Come on, are you guys telling me you did not know that from the 1st post?

They jump from forum to forum gathering traffic for their sites.

Pulling links that point to the big guys (like iS and FT) will not hurt them that much if you look at the % of their traffic and marketing budget.  They will not "feel" it like a smaller site would.  It does make a difference with organic (search) traffic ranking and of course the small percentage of buyers one would send from their site.

BUT... who will feel it is the little site that you want to show support.  Not only would it increase that smaller site's search ranking, your links in and buyer traffic would make up a larger % of the site's overall.

So, yes... IMO pulling any links to sites that you do not "support" (whatever that may mean to you) and putting links to sites you do will make a difference over time.

$20.  Wow, I will be Nil-to-Mil in no time. lol

Plus, I have been quite bored with the threads lately. 

Well ... I have been, for a while.  And I have a huge list of referrals from it; both buyers and sellers, that do quite well.

BUT

I have had some offers.

For one click at Google, the search term costs over $1 and the list of sites fighting for that space is rather big.

The search term "microstock photography" alone bring in 1000s of hits a month.  All very targeted traffic.

If an agency was paying $1+ for a click from one of the major search engines (many of them are) for "microstock" related keywords, they would be spending 6 figures USD for the traffic.

So, I would say it's worth at least $11.  Maybe even $12.

Just throwing it out there.  How much do you think MicrostockPhotography.com would be worth if I sold it/had an offer?

Quote from: grp_photo on January 25, 2011, 17:11

Quote from: Brandon Seidel on January 25, 2011, 15:58
It's always someone else's fault...

No it's always your fault!

Awwwe...  That's sweet, but I can't take all the credit.   

It's always someone else's fault...

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/where-do-you-think-we-should-send-buyers-and-why

I would like to know how they got my email address that I only use at 123rf.  Either they stole the address somehow from 123rf's database, or they are some sort of "partner".

NextGEN

What I do is create a gallery and add it to a protected page/post.  That way when you go to the page it requires a password, then once entered, you see the page.

114

Quote from: gostwyck on September 23, 2010, 20:00
My instincts tell me to believe Istock over some little-known blogger who names an unsearchable digital artist.

That little-known blogger is the "Yuri" of internet marketing and social networking.  Use that info how you want; it all sounds a little half-@ssed to me.

Congrats to the OP for taking a stand.  Many talk the talk; very, very, very few walk the walk.

Quote from: Mr. Stock on September 12, 2010, 17:41
What is the minimum that iStock needs to do, or not do, in order to make everyone content?

Promise not to lower it any more.  Like really, really promise; pinky swear. 

"If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there." - Lewis Carroll

Thanks, I missed that one.  While I was searching my sites, I found a few links I needed to delete.  I still had one on Microstock Photography Topsites also that I had forgotten about.  That site surprisingly gets a lot of traffic and good page-rank for a single page site.

I thought I had all their links gone a while back when I was dropping all the FT links.

Thanks.

True.  But if you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.

No one will lead because most (not all) will tuck the tail and give in like they always have.  Words are one thing, actions are another.

You can easily search the threads of the previous issues and find the near future outcome here.  One or two standing by what they say will not do anything.

iStock started paying a nickle a download, soon we will be back there again.

It's sad, but I give it a month or two.  Let's see what everyone says in a few months.

I predict many will be saying, "Well, I will only be dropping to 17% from 20%; that's not so bad.  At least sales are better than site NNNNN."  We may even hear, "Yeah iStock; you increased sales (and profit) so much I am now at 18% instead of 17 (which means iStock only gets 82% instead of 83)!  Here is your muffin sir."

Maybe everyone should start kissing a** now so you get bumped up to page 12 in the best match instead of page 50 behind all the new "midstock" coming in.  The 1st one to start the "Yeah iStock" thread gets half the muffin.

Or better yet, we can go join Matt and the others, ... or ... well ... Matt at the Fotolia Exclusive's table.  I bet he would like a muffin.

Very well; noted.  I will leave the judgment to all the other threads.

As for the sites, I think it goes: Successful, Trustworthy, Low Agency Commissions.  Pick 2.