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 - louoates
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28 [29] 30 31
701
« on: May 01, 2008, 18:32 »
Just what we need. Another beta micro site w/macro prices. You newbies out there, take a look on the right side of your screen. See the Big 6 section? If you're not there you are nowhere. If you even think about new sites before they have any track record you've got way too much time on your hands. Just my opinion.
Please excuse me while I wash Lucky Oliver blood from my hands. Someday I will take my own advice.
702
« on: May 01, 2008, 18:08 »
Snap has rocketed one place up from the bottom of my worse sites. Hmm. I wonder if that's because LO is no longer around?
Snap actually generated $0.90 in April for me. I guess that's because those great ads are so effective.
703
« on: April 30, 2008, 22:19 »
An off planet group. All they've got to do is ask what we and buyers want not go hide out at a resort.
704
« on: April 30, 2008, 22:13 »
Look at their latest blog about the polar bear swim. Everybody knows you can't code FTP with shrunken walnuts.
705
« on: April 28, 2008, 13:41 »
I haven't even tried. It could only reduce the market size if accepted. Most users can easily tone stuff in Photoshop.
706
« on: April 26, 2008, 17:24 »
Problem too, most of the pictures on NLS were available elsewhere for 25 and 30 cents. I liked NLS... had hopes for it... but, didn't make it.
but who's to blame for that? definitely not the sites. we submit what we want. if we mass submit to everyone, we shoot ourselves in the foot and this is what happens in the end.
something photographers and illustrators can learn...
which in a way explains why certainly exclusiveness has its place
Joma, Are you blaming those who submit to many sites? The site failed because they didn't have what people wanted at the right price...or they didn't find those folks quick enough who would be their customers. It's as simple as that.
707
« on: April 25, 2008, 17:07 »
I have a few home shots that got accepted easily. New construction, when the home is really, really generic both in style and location. And when the home is secondary to the main thrust of the shot. In my case it was "sold" sign in front of a house with the house in real soft focus behind. The sign was about 1/2 of the image area.
708
« on: April 23, 2008, 16:29 »
I checked out the site a few weeks ago and found that it was slick indeed. I've uploaded 57 images there and will probably do more once the site search is available to buyers.
You can upload any number using their simple regular process. Fast and easy. I haven't tried their separate FTP feature yet but I hear it works fine.
I find that I really need a site to complain about and since LO's demise I'm investing my future angst toward Yay should they earn that privilege in the next few months.
709
« on: April 17, 2008, 11:21 »
snapvillage.
710
« on: April 16, 2008, 09:12 »
Ditto on the "no marketing--no survival" comment earlier.
I suppose now we can look on the list to the right and write off all those we never see do any mainstream advertising.
711
« on: April 10, 2008, 18:52 »
About the only consistent driver of buyers to micro seems to me to be their advertising spending. All the big 6 on the right are consistent large scale advertising buyers. Maybe it's just me but I have never seen any of the others in any of the publications that I read except for Snapvillage who just started advertising last month.
There's a direct correlation in my opinion between traditional ad budgets and money in our pockets. Those are the sites that are reeling in the buyers, including new customers to micro, month after month. The other sites are scurrying around after the crumbs.
I think we should demand of all the new wanna-be micro sites that they reveal some hard promotional ad dollars they are committing. We're investing our time so they should come clean with some hard reasons for us to hit that upload button.
712
« on: April 09, 2008, 11:16 »
Whenever LO is down it means the staff is over teaching snapvillage their marketing skills.
713
« on: April 09, 2008, 11:14 »
I'd say LO has been a major disappointment. Along with Snapv.
On LO I average 1.5 views per month on each of my 209 images, with 4.8 downloads per month. However no dls for nearly a month.
Either their marketing really sucks or their buyers are not looking for my images that are selling elsewhere. I guess we just plod ahead and put our time in where it seems to be more profitable.
The newest site that is showing promise -- at least with the way they are getting things right site-wise -- is Yay Micro. I guess hope is what some of us have in abundance.
714
« on: April 06, 2008, 17:05 »
I saw the latest Snap Village ad bragged about on their blog. As impossible as it seems, IMHO, the latest ad is even worse than the first. Look at it for yourself. I hope it's not just me. I'm embarrassed for them paying for such junk advertising.
Anyway, my negative comments were on their blog for maybe an hour before someone snapped it away. And I was being more than charitable with my critique. I hope they don't delete my images also.
715
« on: March 31, 2008, 14:14 »
I believe they're out giving technical and marketing advice to Snap Village.
716
« on: March 28, 2008, 18:27 »
I can't believe so many are wasting so much time trying to dig information about a crook. If it looks like a snake and rattles like a snake, that's all you need to know to walk away.
717
« on: March 23, 2008, 10:13 »
Hard to tell about views. Many end up in lightboxes and sales result much later.
Odd thing is with Snap Village, I had two sales recently. One with 3 views and one with 2 views! The only other sale I've had there was one with 93 views!!?? That may be because their marketing has just started.
718
« on: March 18, 2008, 13:48 »
Lame start advertising wise. How about an exciting reason to check out the new site? If you have a unique feature lead with it. Advertising 101.
By the way, I believe dinosaurs are extinct. Not a good omen.
719
« on: March 16, 2008, 18:35 »
2.5 years: 14,634
720
« on: March 15, 2008, 10:57 »
You might want to check out SnapVillage's blog about their new marketing. Seems like the giant in the room has wakened.
I'm glad I spent some time last month uploaded 200+ images. The advertising that they're talking about seems to dwarf most of the efforts of the sites on the right.
721
« on: March 11, 2008, 21:49 »
I ran all the suggested names through a new freeware application I found on the siteofthedamned.com site. Turns out that none of the names above made it through the Voodoo, Damned or Possessed filters.
The software also came up with some suggested names for new ventures but suddenly my computer seems to be doing funny
722
« on: March 10, 2008, 12:55 »
I heard that Snap Village was seriously looking at acquiring this startup.
723
« on: March 07, 2008, 14:09 »
Oh, please! Last time I looked under my desk there were dust bunnies but no chains. If you feel so humiliated, get the want ads.
724
« on: March 04, 2008, 14:19 »
I voted IS as more problems only because of the labor-intense uploading with the stupid, slow working category requirement and the disambu thing that is sometimes really strange in not accepting certain widely-used words and word combinations.
HOWEVER, Istock = 35% of my revenue, FT = 4%.
725
« on: March 03, 2008, 10:09 »
Won't hardly ever happen. Once in a great while you might get a site mail from an end user. Figure about 99% of the time you won't. Just be glad they bought. Fotolia used to have a button to find out what company or individual downloaded it but I can't find that link on their site anymore.
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28 [29] 30 31
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|