|
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 - Mellimage
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 19
126
« on: July 27, 2013, 01:15 »
I wouldn't believe support has any clue on what's going on.
I am sure their system screws up those changes. I have just checked, I found two of my files, both of them have exactly one download, both of these downloads are newer than six months. One file has still the original pricing (1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10), the other has reduced prices (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).
No logic there...
At least the change they did to the amount of price reduction (not anymore giving out XXLs for 3 credits) makes it a little easier to take.
But certainly no new uploads from me.
I am not saying they are implementing this policy in a flawless matter. This is just what support indicated to me - which is in contrast to their own announcement. Their own announcement, how poorly ever it was distributed, does not indicate an amount of sales a file needs to keep its originally set price level. So I protested their decision not to reinstate those images that were reduced in pricing even though they sold at least once within the past 6 months. In the end all of this is cosmetic operation, as it saves only a few files and if they wanna really lower more files in price they just need to tweak the search engine and these files move to the back of the search, never to be found, unless the artist does the marketing for the images him/ herself - precisely the job the agency is to do with the ammount of commission they receive from us.
127
« on: July 26, 2013, 15:48 »
I had informed support as I had several images that were reduced in price even though they sold within the past 6 months. The announcment states: images that haven't sold within 6 months will be reduced in price. etc. The answer I received from support indicated that an image needs to be sold 3 Times within 6 months in order not to be reduced in price. (I knew it needed 3 sales to get back to minimal pricing (not the price you had previously set) after a reduction) - but I did not read their statement as meaning if an image does not sell three times within 6 months it will be reduced in price. With the search engine as it is - and the market situation as it is (and the results research has shown) - I am pretty sure sooner or later 80%+ of the images will be locked in price at the 1-6 credits price range (and I am pretty sure if that does not go fast enough search engine tweaks will ensure that this applies to pretty much the whole FT collection sooner or later). This is a step this specifically will target gold status contributors and higher, exclusive contributors as well as contributors who provided image exclusive content - for as long as they set the base price to their images at 2 and higher. They see the largest reductions in income on existing files. My personal consequence from this is - no uploading to FT of any new images for the time being - and removing files who sell well elsewhere. Further steps to be considered. 
128
« on: July 24, 2013, 16:48 »
I see in multiple threads that people call the places that sell licences to our images, agencies.
I think we have to realize that they are not agents for us at all. They don't care about us or our well being ( as an agent should) all they care about is their bottom line ( which is what a store should do)
They are on-line stores and we provide them with merchandise on a consignment basis.
They are the same as Walmart, and their goals and tactics are the same.
I have come to the conclusion you provide as well, but fact is THEY CALL THEMSELVES AGENCIES - thus I'd like them to act as such.
129
« on: July 24, 2013, 15:29 »
Didn't a former executive at iS move into a management/executive position at Fotolia?
Garth Johnson if I remember correctly.
And Dittmar, a former Fotolia member (Germany, Switzerland, Austria) moved onto istock/Getty - but Dittmar has left both by now, it seems.
130
« on: July 24, 2013, 14:39 »
Certainly makes it more complicated to decide what to send to fotolia.
Or incredibly easy... nothing. Because the file needs to earn its cost back within the first 6 months or it is unlikely it ever will.
No, there are files for every price point. But I thought the system with a mix of indie and partly exclusive content was a brilliant move to attract localized content and more high end stuff.
There certainly is, but the question is - is fotolia the one. They really have a sweet spot in my heart, because they were the first i signed with and had sales with eons ago, but things have gone from good to bad and from bad to worse and i wonder if the time has come to reconsider sending any work to them.
131
« on: July 24, 2013, 14:24 »
I have more than 10 so far, guess there must be over 100, this is just ridiculous!
Same here... . I have very few sales generally and a small port, which means I am through checking till March, but there are files in there that have more than 3 downloads totally, and sold at least once in the past 6 months that are reduced in price. On the other hand, I have seen files that have one single download to their name in the past six months, are older files too - and still keep their price level for now.
132
« on: July 24, 2013, 14:21 »
Certainly makes it more complicated to decide what to send to fotolia.
Or incredibly easy... nothing. Because the file needs to earn its cost back within the first 6 months or it is unlikely it ever will.
133
« on: July 24, 2013, 14:14 »
same here Mellimage 
have a file that sold for the first time on 06-21-2013 01:00:52 pm (over 2 years old)
which makes me thing that we need 3 downloads on files older than 6 months or there is a bug
To work this in retro-actively would be a breach of contract (and a misleading announcement, because then they should say, if an image has not sold within the past six months at least three times...) - or an image needs from now on to sell at least 3 times to stay at the price level it is introduced at... so it probably is bug - and i will report it to FT
134
« on: July 24, 2013, 14:07 »
*facepalm*
There are even images affected that sold more than once in the past 6 months!
135
« on: July 24, 2013, 13:57 »
IMPORTANT
Folks, check your sold files. I had images reduced in priced based on the today announced system that I have sold back in June. Sure enough some of them aren't high sellers, but they have been sold at least once before this change was implemented.
yes but in fact you need to have 3 downloads if they were older than 6 months, were they submitted before that period?
Luis, the anouncement says: In order to give a second chance to images that have not sold for over 6 months, we have decided to update our sales conditions slightly. Well the images that I talk about have sold at least once in the past 6 months and were reduced still. I understand that FROM TODAY ON (as the announcement was made today) the conditions are new: if images do not sell for 6 months from now on, they will be reduced in price and then need 3 downloads to go back to normal pricing (if I set it back to that). But this rule was NOT in place until the announcement that was made today, so all images that sold within the past 6 months at least once SHOULD not be reduced in price. I find it mindboggling that images that have over 300 sales to them and sold at least once within the past 6 months are reduced in price!
136
« on: July 24, 2013, 13:47 »
IMPORTANT
Folks, check your sold files. I had images reduced in priced based on the today announced system that I have sold back in June. Sure enough some of them aren't high sellers, but they have been sold at least once before this change was implemented.
They even reduced my bestseller in price (it has over 300 sales) even though it sold in June!
137
« on: July 24, 2013, 13:45 »
IMPORTANT
Folks, check your sold files. I had images reduced in priced based on the today announced system that I have sold back in June. Sure enough some of them aren't high sellers, but they have been sold at least once before this change was implemented.
138
« on: July 24, 2013, 12:22 »
Delete files only if it makes you happy. There is no evidence that D-Day had any effect whatsoever on iStock, but some people were very happy to take certain files out of possible abuse on other sites.
Sad to say it, but I think this is right. D-Day was a great idea, but didn't turn out to accomplish anything. I don't plan on tilting at anymore windmills. Just going to turn the majority of my efforts elsewhere.
At least this time the efforts all others make won't be put to nil by a certain bighead going exclusive with FT and then say something like "professionals deal with professionals" 
139
« on: July 24, 2013, 10:18 »
I will go through my port and definitely delete some images - especially those that sell well and at higher prices at other agencies in order to avoid that FTs prices will undercut these prices... .
140
« on: July 24, 2013, 10:01 »
The announcement was sent around today? I have an image, an older one, that sold for the first time in a while last week. But it needs to sell two more times to be back at old prices. HUH?  ? So the new pricestructure (time measurement) was implemented BEFORE the announcement was made??
141
« on: July 24, 2013, 09:37 »
Not doubting this announcement...
But has anybody else gotten that email - I haven't.
[/quote
No, but i just discovered that i was unsubscribed to the newsletter (even though i remember subscribing to it.)
I am subscribed - not something that should come from a newsletter. Changes like this should be sent to everyone via email as well.
Of course it should, because it is a major change in the relationship between agent and contributor. But, just like with many things, SHOULD does not always mean it IS done. And at FT it appears that what SHOULD be done is often miles away from what IS done.
142
« on: July 24, 2013, 09:25 »
Not doubting this announcement...
But has anybody else gotten that email - I haven't.
No, but i just discovered that i was unsubscribed to the newsletter (even though i remember subscribing to it.)
143
« on: July 24, 2013, 09:24 »
Its crazy how they follow istock with their price rises and commission cuts, now they follow them with a price cut. Haven't they noticed that istock has suffered from all the changes while SS has kept things simple and is doing well? If buyers weren't that concerned about prices during a big economic downturn, why start cutting them now? Makes no sense to me.
precisely my thoughts!
144
« on: July 24, 2013, 08:58 »
I think it is time that contributors stand up and remind agencies what their function is - they are agents to US contributors.
They get a huge share of our commissions but they do not tell us what they do with that. I want them to be accountable to me!
Agent - what have you done to promote my imagery on the market. Don't lower the prices on my assets just because you have failed to do your work.
Also give me tools to decide whether or not I let YOU (the failing?) agent reduce my image prices -or remove these images from your collection.
And I agree with cobalt - the timeframe 6 months is way too short. 18 or 24 months seem more appropriate. In that regard I like DT's system of notifying me of unsold content - where I can decide whether i offer them for free, have them rekeyword, or remove them from the collection.
145
« on: July 24, 2013, 08:38 »
Well at least it is well defined and give some control to the contributor. If an image has a few sales, the contributor has the power to raise the price. If it doesn't sell at all, well then it doesn't really matter anyway.
Well, if an image sells well the contributor can only raise the price to how far his contributor level allows - with higher ranked contributors to raise images to higher prices than lower ranked ones.
146
« on: July 24, 2013, 08:28 »
i just imagine what happens when they are changing their search engine (best match again) and suddenly bestsellers stop selling - it's a way to reduce large parts of the collection to prices between 1 and 3 credits.
*DISLIKE*
147
« on: July 20, 2013, 05:26 »
Another things that irritates me is that they recently increased upload limits, which indicated to me, that the queues might be shorter and image inspection would move forward a bit faster. But no - images still need over a week to be inspected. Some of the slowest I know (even SS manages to move faster).
148
« on: July 20, 2013, 01:45 »
I just got banned from the istock forum.
Dear Bruce,
The administration team at iStockphoto has revoked your forum privileges. Comments from iStockphoto Administrators (if any):
Take a break from it for a while. You\'ve been overly active repeating the same comments since the beginning. If you have an interest in participating beyond trolling you can let me know.
Lobo
If you would like to discuss this with client relations, please email [email protected].
Best Regards,
iStockphoto.com
He probably has a point but my frustration with this mess and my need to make the payout cutoff is got me pretty much upset. I'm 8.32 away from the 100.00 needed, and been that way for the past 3 weeks. About to close out the account if I ever make it to the 100.00. Flat out frustrated.
It's mind-boggling - Istock f*cks up - does not hold any deadline they set themselves, stops communicating about it and then treats the contributors with arrogance if they complain about it. Class act, Class act. Oh yeah - professionals deal with professionals. Well then, istock. people you ban are not gonna stop complaining - they just will complain in spots where you cannot immediately calm them down or have "better control" of what is said. I am sure that is gonna improve Istocks reputation tremendously.
149
« on: July 19, 2013, 10:49 »
With a third of this month left, DT is battling for the last spot on the earnings ranking against 123rf. And even though someone mentioned they have the most expensive images after istock - they are also battling against 123rf with regards to RPD this month. 
150
« on: July 19, 2013, 09:57 »
welcome to Stocksy then! 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 19
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
