|
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 - eclaire
1
« on: June 04, 2013, 10:41 »
i remember Inmagine won't allow RF images which submit to microstock agencies, is it still the same?
sure otherwise they could just mirror their 123rf-content.
2
« on: June 04, 2013, 00:47 »
My small portfolio never performed well over there. But that's just maybe me. I have optioned out for Distribution plans.
3
« on: June 03, 2013, 08:31 »
The question remains why these accounts got merged. Is this a part of the Yuri-deal and these accounts have been sub-accounts of Yuri or did these two contributors joined business together? It's pretty strange IMHO!
Maybe they got together to eek out a better deal with istock. It doesn't matter to the customers unless it results in some kind of a severe price hike.
Yes it would make it also possible to them to submit as an independent with their personal name to other sites while remaining exclusive with their business account, but the other question than is why would iStock allow that and why at the same timing with the Yuri-deal. I think there must be a connection between the Yuri-deal and these two accounts merging together.
4
« on: June 03, 2013, 06:23 »
The question remains why these accounts got merged. Is this a part of the Yuri-deal and these accounts have been sub-accounts of Yuri or did these two contributors joined business together? It's pretty strange IMHO!
5
« on: May 29, 2013, 05:22 »
This thread was mostly sparked from my participation in that other forum which seems so much more .. well, .. professional.
What other forum may I ask?
http://forum.freeflysystems.com/index.php
Thanks, but I think it's much easier for a forum like this.
6
« on: May 29, 2013, 05:05 »
This thread was mostly sparked from my participation in that other forum which seems so much more .. well, .. professional.
What other forum may I ask?
7
« on: May 28, 2013, 20:38 »
thank you very much! Symbiostock is so cool and revolutionary.
8
« on: May 25, 2013, 10:20 »
dedication
9
« on: May 24, 2013, 09:33 »
Oberammergau, was es nicht dort, die Hottentottenattentaterin wohnte?
lol no but they make nice Ostzonensuppenwrfel over there 
10
« on: May 24, 2013, 09:04 »
Please forgive me. I dont speak German so often anymore.
It was not really serious, sorry I just couldn't resist. I'm sure your German is very good. And Oberammergauer Bildbro would be a pretty fancy funny name for an agency.
11
« on: May 24, 2013, 08:49 »
It's "Oberammergauer Bildbro" or "Bildbro Oberammergau"   feel free to be similar pedantic with my English 
12
« on: May 24, 2013, 06:42 »
Any news about the invitation?
I've got the same email "Thank you for requesting access into Offset. I'm excited to share that your invitation will be arriving in the next few weeks." on 24th of April too, but until now no more contacts about this.
buyers invitation...
13
« on: May 22, 2013, 14:36 »
yes it's true he moved to Legoland
14
« on: May 22, 2013, 06:04 »
Good Luck  4$ 
15
« on: May 22, 2013, 03:01 »
I don't like how SS seem to get blamed for low priced subs when they were raising the prices every year until other sites stopped them. Why would SS increase their $0.38 commission when several sites were paying $0.25? I think subs commissions were heading much higher but now were stuck until the sites have decided they can't get any more buyers and see how much they can raise prices. It would be hard for SS to raise prices first when they pay many of us the highest subs commission. There was a tiny commission raise from Thinkstock but $0.28 is still a lot less than $0.38.
subs have never been a good idea but they are here and now we have to deal with them. Subs have been introduced on other sites because of the success of SS so one can blame SS but I wouldn't.
16
« on: May 22, 2013, 01:51 »
Both yuri and his father. Jacob Wackerhausen and Steen Waskerhousen are real. They can easily be googled.
There is an amazing amount of speculations and hear say in this thread.
And not so many facts.
as for all eggs in one basket?
It is noticable that Yuri actively moves content from non exclusive into exclusivity.
Last time I heard a Danish microstocker do that, was because he stopped doing micro and let micro be one egg in the basket while he persued other income streams.
If Yuris move has any significance in the microstock market, in my opinion it would be that... People are becoming a lot more critical as to where they distribute their content and they shut down portefolios at places that are not cost/ benificial or directly annoying to work with. It is not just "upload to them all" anymore. And thats a good thing.
Nobody said they aren't real, it was just about a post in green big letters on the SS forum that led to some uncertainty if the poster is really his father. My personal estimation for him was also 3000-4000 downloads on a working day that leads to around 60.000$ a month and to around 200.000$ overall revenue per month assuming that SS was a little less than a third of his income stream. Who was this? (the Danish microstocker) I see this as a good thing too!
17
« on: May 21, 2013, 14:26 »
So he made it all up to get a better deal with Getty? If they were that stupid, he would be just as stupid to go exclusive with them
He didn't make all up, and I haven't said that but he did marketing from time to time.
18
« on: May 21, 2013, 14:15 »
I don't get how Yuri was feeling the pinch earning millions a year? He was doing great, unless he made it all up for that magazine article recently? This is just a way for him to make even more money. That's his choice, I'm sure we all have a price to sell out to Getty
LOL, he is staffing 100 people. He said himself micros where not enough compensation for the overhead he has on the books. Its somewhere on page 1-3 of this thread.
In that article, Yuri was talking about how much he makes in profit, not turnover. I can't remember exactly what it was, I think he was saying several million. That's with all the overheads, he could cut them whenever he wanted but I don't think he's doing this just for the money. I think he wants to see how big he can grow the business and a big cash injection from Getty will help. I can't think of any other reason why he would want to stick all his eggs in one basket.
That was then this is now:
Hi Guys.
We have found a good distribution partner (Getty Images) for the kind of content we produce. We will be removing all images from microstock doing the next few weeks. Microstock, especially subscription sites, are not suited for the kind of high production cost images we produce.
Best Yuri
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/yuri-arcurs-is-is-exclusive/msg317436/#msg317436
It was only a couple of months ago. So what's changed? I'm guessing a big bag of money from Getty but of course that's just me being silly.
If you know you have a meeting with Getty what would you do? Telling the interviewer you have problems with overheads and diminishing profits or that you are making millions in profit?
19
« on: May 21, 2013, 13:35 »
I don't get how Yuri was feeling the pinch earning millions a year? He was doing great, unless he made it all up for that magazine article recently? This is just a way for him to make even more money. That's his choice, I'm sure we all have a price to sell out to Getty
LOL, he is staffing 100 people. He said himself micros where not enough compensation for the overhead he has on the books. Its somewhere on page 1-3 of this thread.
I put a link on here somewhere not long ago where Yuri was talking in a magazine article about how much he makes, profit, not turnover. I can't remember exactly what it was, I think he was saying several million. That's with all the overheads, he could cut them whenever he wanted but I don't think he's doing this just for the money. I think he wants to see how big he can grow the business and a big cash injection from Getty will help. I can't think of any other reason why he would want to stick all his eggs in one basket.
Don't believe every marketing blub!
20
« on: May 21, 2013, 06:29 »
I don't get how Yuri was feeling the pinch earning millions a year? He was doing great, unless he made it all up for that magazine article recently? This is just a way for him to make even more money. That's his choice, I'm sure we all have a price to sell out to Getty
I'm sure he did/does well but revenue and profit is not the same, so maybe he did not that wonderful well as we all thought because of his 'good marketing'.
21
« on: May 20, 2013, 06:57 »
Well Vista/Dhoxax joined SS in June 2005 while Yuri joined SS in Feb 2005 but he is still claiming he introduced Yuri to SS.
I could suggest an agency to someone ('introduce' them) without using the agency myself. I did do it once, for someone with a narrow specialism.
sure he can but the whole thing is strange especially for a professor...
22
« on: May 20, 2013, 06:41 »
two entries on SS forum from Yuri's father
Well, now Yuri has left Shutterstock I can just as well reveal a few things. It is a long time ago since Yuri only had 1000 downloads a day at SS. A typical day at SS had between 3000-4000 downloads!! How do I know? Well, I introduced Yuri to SS. And I am Yuris dad - and very proud of my sons success!
By the way, Yuri is not the only one leaving SS. If you want to see my port, do it now. In some weeks it will be gone too! Time to say goodbye!
The best to all of you!
PS: Rinder99, thanks! You have always been fair to Yuri (and me) from the very beginning about 7-8 years ago.
Vista/Dhoxax
AND
Thanks for the nice words about my son Yuri (and my port)!
Why I leave too? Not so difficult to figure out really: I simply got an offer I could not refuse! Got It?
No, stock photography is only my hobby (though, a hobby with a nice income). In "real life" I work as an university professor and researcher.
The best to all of you!
Vista/Dhoxax .)
Well Vista/Dhoxax joined SS in June 2005 while Yuri joined SS in Feb 2005 but he is still claiming he introduced Yuri to SS.
23
« on: May 20, 2013, 02:51 »
I think everyone is waiting more or less patiently for you to understand what you have read.
"are not suited for the kind of high production cost images we produce" - does not mean microstock is dead. It means that Yuri believes his work that is produced by a team of people at a high cost is better suited on agencies elsewhere.
Of course, it would help if the agency you are moving to actively wants your work and is willing to negotiate a special deal for you . . . which is what everyone, probably correctly, suspects.
By contrast, many of us don't produce high production cost work, much less have large agencies beating a path to our doors.
After the dust settles, business as usual.
For me, that's in around 5 minutes from now.
Can someone remind me how to set the ignore feature?
please bring me respect, unlike you and many others i've correctly predicted the outcome of microstock in the long term a long time ago.
now you dont want to hear the ugly truth, well dont shoot the messanger, you can only blame yourself if you bet the farm on micros and put all the eggs on istock.
it's funny that those like me are called "trolls" both here and on RM forums.
People won't pay more. They will skip it. If this wasn't true, there wouldn't be microstock companies.
Well that is not true.
24
« on: May 12, 2013, 04:32 »
Veer deleted several thousand pictures from my port without notifying me. I'm talking about 4000 pictures most if not all have been ported over from Snapvillage-days. The thing that astounded me most was that some of these pictures had pretty good sales over there and I have uploaded them only because of the higher prices Snapvillage once had (no other microstock-agency ever got them) so absolute no reason to delete them actually it looks not too smart to delete exclusive high-quality content on their part.
Did anybody else got his Snapvillage-images deleted?
Personally I will stop now to support them with images they have never been really good (got some decent sales though) and their upload limit is just a pita.
25
« on: May 10, 2013, 12:20 »
eclaire would you go for it even if not fullframe? I have a 50d
it depends if you are planning to go fullframe anytime in the future I certainly would buy fullframe lenses now. If you are certain that you will stay with the 1.6crop than you shouldn't buy a fullframe lens because they are more expensive, heavier and bigger. I don't have personal experience with crop-lenses but I would recommend the Photozone site to do a research for ww crop-lenses with Canon mount.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
