|
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 - bad to the bone
76
« on: March 12, 2011, 13:20 »
Well lisa, i didn't say they don't do their business, FT is a real good distribution machine. I said: "they don't understand what they sell and it seems to me that they didn't understand what made them big."
In my opinion FT have had the chance to profit as most as no other agency from the problems and bad behauvior of IS. They throw it away for higher profits.
77
« on: March 12, 2011, 12:20 »
...don't forget that you start at the lowest percentage for each download at any agency. You can't expect to get the same RPD as someone who is uploading since years.
78
« on: March 11, 2011, 22:01 »
25$ Dollar if your are real good. After some month.
Less than 10$ if you are averrage.
Less than 5$ if you don't have a clue how this business works ( that means not to know how a good foto should look like, it means not to know what customers at mircro buy. They didn't buy good fotos at all.)
79
« on: March 11, 2011, 21:43 »
34 a day, 8 month ago with roundabout 350 images online. Meanwhile 500 images online i didn't pass this record...but constantly my average is growing, so it is just a matter of time.
80
« on: March 09, 2011, 19:32 »
what do you expect from a liar? You discuss how a liar should behave if he was not a liear...that's as interesting as the discussions with a dungheap why a dungheap shout better not stink, dicussed with the dungheap.
But for shure...discussing this in this way here is a better investment in time than to do images and upload them at IS.
81
« on: March 09, 2011, 19:16 »
ups...douple impact
82
« on: March 09, 2011, 19:14 »
wow, this is really worth a new topic...a new member at micro, how much have i wished this would happen some times.
:-) welcome
83
« on: March 09, 2011, 19:10 »
just make a list when this happened. ft have a working plan for reviewers. Normaly it was at monday when everything was rejected, now it has changed.
84
« on: March 09, 2011, 19:08 »
I'm a bit astonished what all this payout discussions are about....is it an issue for Newbies to post anything without intent?
FT pays 2-3 weekly at moneybookers and 1-2 weekly at paypal. Only at the beginning of the year it will last longer...i think it's because they pay their taxes out of the running business so constributors have to wait longer. The other agencys behave more constnatly but the others are "in " the business...the FT managment only await their salvation by buyout.
85
« on: March 09, 2011, 18:54 »
well, some days it seemed like the PR assistants of FT have a lot too much sparetime and spend it by posting here.
But...at the end it is a good idea...maybe he/she read what was written in this thread :-) Okay, just a joke....it's FT, you have to be unable to read and to write if you want a job in the PR.
86
« on: March 09, 2011, 18:49 »
steady downloads, rather more. As interpreted, new constributors at some days what reject everything. Backward i had only to avoid mondays, now i have to find out the new work plan.
But, nearly no downloads on new images .... but reanimation on old ones.
If this concept will establish i can give all new images at other agencies because there's no chance for development at FT. Oh, first i had to tell i gave my images first to FT and only the rejected at all others. I profited from the "exclusive image" concept a lot since i started at micro.
I also believe that this concept was the main reason for FT to come into the first 4...but i know that they don't know why they earned that gift. So, im not very amazed, that they give it away for nothing. FT is managed by nerds, they have no idea what they do or why they do it, they only try to copy IS to make no own decissions and hope to survive at 3 th or 4 th level, what is a lot of profit for beeing in a business what nobody of the CEOs understand. If i were at there position i would cry out every day and hour a big "weaaheaou".
The only problem is, they will never understand what they made big and I expect they will take some day everything away what made them big to the rubbish and fall apart deeply.
That's different from IS...IS is managed by people who knows the business. In my opinion, only subjective, naturaly.
87
« on: March 02, 2011, 22:33 »
I would tell you about my numbers, but after that i had to kill myself befor FT will do :-)
88
« on: February 26, 2011, 18:40 »
To do something is very easy....we start an agency by our own money, anyone who takes money in is shareholder. The structur has to be a mixure out of the best selling agencys....and the shareholder gets money out of the profit of the agency, not of the pictures, they will be sold as cheap as possible :-)
89
« on: February 24, 2011, 22:09 »
It depends. If someone would like to have the security to have "all" rights...now he have them. And, just as an idea, if some of the older customers uses this image in an unlegal case and the buyer find's out...it is a very cheap way to make money if he first bought the complete rights of the image :-) We will see this as a interesting businessmodel in the future.
90
« on: February 24, 2011, 20:09 »
Well, for shure 400$ is a very low price for a buyout, but that's micro. I had a lot of requests since my time as costributor for doing illustrations on customer needs....from clients who saw my work at micros. None of them ever gave me an order, even if i offered a scarry low price.
Whilst non of my normal clients would discuss about prices at this level. For a microclient 400$ is a enourmos ammount. Not in advertising-business where you create something on clients needs.
To compare these two worlds seems to me nonsensical.
91
« on: February 24, 2011, 16:46 »
In my case it was a 800$ sale, i earned 400$. That's a good deal for the buyer and also to me. The image earned 120-150$ in front. I spent more time than it is now sold, but, as an illustration i can do it again. Now knowing it will be sell. (i only offer pictures out of the second line to DR, 590 online, well 589 now).
The Image was only accepted by 3 agencys, they earned well and now this single image is gone.
I would never think about offering my images to 20 agencys..i offer to seven and this is a lot of wasted time at the last two.
3.000$ is, in my opinion, a price out of the 80's last century. For shure some image are worth that...but nothing what i produce.
92
« on: February 24, 2011, 15:32 »
Congrates to you. I never thought this could be happen. Interesting to hear it does. Thank you for your replys.
93
« on: February 24, 2011, 15:26 »
In my case it was a good selling image, but it is an illustration, i can do it better and in a new way now...
94
« on: February 24, 2011, 15:18 »
When i started at Dreamstime und also during the last 25 month i never ever thought that any customer would buy the whole rights at any image. I always thought that this was a concept mistake by Dreamstime done in the beginning without any market relevance.
Well, yesterday it happened. Someone bought a SR-EL-Licence from me. I can't believe it.
Does this happend to anyone else or is this the exception what approve the rule?
95
« on: February 24, 2011, 14:58 »
Seems like i overlooked this during my wait for the next cut of commission...
What's the meaning of 2.3 Credits? In which cathegory is the outcome/earning classified?
regards
96
« on: February 16, 2011, 14:11 »
Bread and circuses....
97
« on: February 11, 2011, 18:54 »
...YES, and to make glass, you only need sand.
Or to make Steel, you only need ore.
Or to make big Fotos, you only need a good camera.
Or to paint famous pictures, you only need a pencil.
Or to make intelligence, you only need brain mass.
98
« on: February 11, 2011, 18:43 »
Maybe, sometimes in future i will find out what these discussions are about.
Best Illustration is what sells best...at microstockbusiness, is it worth to mention or to discuss? Is this an artclub or something else?
Best agency for any Illustration is what gives the best return per Image, anyway if they reach it by more sales or by higher prices...RPI (Revenues per Image) is the Benchmark at this point.
This thread isn't about fotos...even if some someones would hope to get more attention in posting rubbish here as they get at microstockagencies for their rubbish fotos.
Fotorealistic Illustrations are not the matter of this thread. I can create an fotorealistic Vector Illustration of an perfect ball in seconds...some can do it better with more complex Objects....gratulations to them. Was this the question, NO!
99
« on: February 11, 2011, 17:57 »
123 does always a good job, also in reviewing times, to me. Only praises from my side.
100
« on: February 07, 2011, 22:35 »
You can create this with every common 3d software. You need to learn how and you need to know how it looks the way it sells. Very easy...as everything what sells.
That's why everyone earns millions....very easy...
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
