MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Potential exclusivity at SS due to IPO - who will join? - edited  (Read 10146 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: May 22, 2012, 14:13 »
0
I'm beginning to wonder if this is what Bigstock will come to be used for.  That way SS could continue to function 'as is' and Bigstock could become their premium outlet.

I think SS is still wondering what Bigstock is supposed to be used for.  ;)


« Reply #26 on: May 22, 2012, 14:16 »
0
It would be interesting if they had image exclusivity, nominated by the reviewers, allowing us to opt out or in if an image is nominated.  That would keep it highly selected and targeted but still give contributors the option of whether they want to be included.  I would certainly consider specific image exclusivity at SS or BS but am very leery of total exclusivity.

velocicarpo

« Reply #27 on: May 22, 2012, 14:38 »
0
No. For various reasons. However, I would think about material exclusivity (not photoq exclusivity).

tab62

« Reply #28 on: May 22, 2012, 14:43 »
0
speaking of the devil- I just got an email from CREStock telling me I had a sale (.25 cents) thus no way I am going exclusive to SS...

« Reply #29 on: May 22, 2012, 14:50 »
0
I considered exclusivity years ago, but I'd never go exclusive now.  I have a handful of exclusive images at DT and Fotolia, but that's as far as I'm willing to go. 

« Reply #30 on: May 23, 2012, 05:25 »
0
I'm beginning to wonder if this is what Bigstock will come to be used for.  That way SS could continue to function 'as is' and Bigstock could become their premium outlet.

The certainly weren't thinking that way six months back when they introduced the "bridge to bigstock" that just copies everything on an SS member's account into BS.

rubyroo

« Reply #31 on: May 23, 2012, 06:45 »
0
No certainly not then... I just wondered if they might be thinking that way now.

OTOH, it might just be my stupid thought for the hour (I try not to exceed one per hour).

@ cthoman.  Thanks for that.  :D

Ed

« Reply #32 on: May 23, 2012, 06:49 »
0
I'm beginning to wonder if this is what Bigstock will come to be used for.  That way SS could continue to function 'as is' and Bigstock could become their premium outlet.


Hahahahaha....they better shut down my account at BigStock then  ;D

I upload the same micro portfolio to all the micros.  Shutterstock has less than 1/3 the portfolio of what Bigstock and DT have.


Coincidentally, I found an agency that offers image exclusivity, 50% royalties, and an agency "profit sharing plan" where your portfolio size determines what percentage of the net profit you get at the end of the year from all sales.  It's similar to a co-op.  It's a macro/traditional agency and one of it's photographers was featured pretty heavily in February when one of his images went viral.  They have image editors, they keyword your images, and (surprisingly), they communicate with you very well.  I'm not telling which agency it is...appears to be a jewell in the rough.

« Reply #33 on: May 23, 2012, 06:54 »
0
So overwhelmingly folks don't want exclusivity but open to image exclusivity - makes a lot of sense.  I still can't understand why even the agencies bother with total exclusivity.

« Reply #34 on: May 23, 2012, 07:14 »
0
Same old story about independents and dependants.

If the customers want exclusively so badly, they can buy the rights.
Exclusivity is only in the interest  of the agency, not the costumers and certainly not the contributors.

« Reply #35 on: May 23, 2012, 07:33 »
0
I also think it would be a disaster for the SS!

Customers want excellent, not "exclusive" photos under their nose...

customers might want exclusive content, hell they do want exclusive stuff, if not how is so much money made on IS by exclusives..

Because search engine...
But what can be exclusive in microstrock from costumers point of view?
Image on just one agency...! So what, if anyone can buy the same image.
I don't see any reason why anyone from buyers might want exactly exclusive image from some microstock agency! Macro and RM is different story...

So my opinion is that any kind of forcing exclusivity over relevancy/quality is step back from customer view...
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 12:48 by borg »

« Reply #36 on: May 23, 2012, 07:35 »
0
Same old story about independents and dependants.

If the customers want exclusively so badly, they can buy the rights.
Exclusivity is only in the interest  of the agency, not the costumers and certainly not the contributors.

"buying rights" is an absurd dreamstime invention.

« Reply #37 on: May 23, 2012, 07:41 »
0
Search engine with "exclusive content" in forumula is not natural...
And it is in confrontation with its true nature why search engine exist... :P
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 12:50 by borg »

« Reply #38 on: May 23, 2012, 08:17 »
0
It would be interesting if they had image exclusivity, nominated by the reviewers

SS Reviewers choosing which ones they like? No thanks. They are currently "nominating" potential bestsellers with rejections.

« Reply #39 on: May 23, 2012, 08:30 »
0
Same old story about independents and dependants.

If the customers want exclusively so badly, they can buy the rights.
Exclusivity is only in the interest  of the agency, not the costumers and certainly not the contributors.

"buying rights" is an absurd dreamstime invention.
Well maybe the wording is dreamstimish, but not the concept.
But it is heard of that a microstocker has sold the rights and has taken the picture offline for a period of time.
Anyway, exclusivity and microstock conflicts heavily by the nature of both concepts.
Microstock is about selling masses of pop images.
The customer must search elsewhere to find a unique picture.

Compare it to books or music. People want copies of the same picture, book and music, so that it is the same. If they want unica, they buy Mona Lisa or Gutenbergs bible.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 08:37 by JPSDK »

« Reply #40 on: May 23, 2012, 09:45 »
0
Same old story about independents and dependants.

If the customers want exclusively so badly, they can buy the rights.
Exclusivity is only in the interest  of the agency, not the costumers and certainly not the contributors.

"buying rights" is an absurd dreamstime invention.
Well maybe the wording is dreamstimish, but not the concept.
But it is heard of that a microstocker has sold the rights and has taken the picture offline for a period of time.
Anyway, exclusivity and microstock conflicts heavily by the nature of both concepts.
Microstock is about selling masses of pop images.
The customer must search elsewhere to find a unique picture.

Compare it to books or music. People want copies of the same picture, book and music, so that it is the same. If they want unica, they buy Mona Lisa or Gutenbergs bible.

Buying rights means exactly what it sounds like - you sell the rights, relinquish the copyright, the image is not yours anymore, basta.
I don't have knowledge of any agency besides dreamstime, macro or micro to practice this license mambo-jambo.
You're probably confusing selling rights with limited time exclusivity, which is available in RM license.

« Reply #41 on: May 23, 2012, 09:50 »
0
no it doesnt.
it all depends on the specifications in the contract.
You can sell more or less for a long time, or a short or for eternity.
You can sell a picture of your mother to the devil.
or you can timelimit her stay in purgatory.
Words on paper can be important.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 09:53 by JPSDK »


WarrenPrice

« Reply #42 on: May 23, 2012, 10:55 »
0
I must be misunderstanding "Exclusive Image."  I think this thread is about an image being exclusive to an Agency.  That doesn't make it Exclusive to a  buyer;  wouldn't it take an RM license for an image to be exclusive to the buyer?  Isn't Exclusive Right restricted to ... say a region, country, continent ... for a stated period of time?

The only advantage I see to Exclusive Image is to the agency.  Am I missing the point?

« Reply #43 on: May 23, 2012, 10:57 »
0
I must be misunderstanding "Exclusive Image."  I think this thread is about an image being exclusive to an Agency.  That doesn't make it Exclusive to a  buyer;  wouldn't it take an RM license for an image to be exclusive to the buyer?  Isn't Exclusive Right restricted to ... say a region, country, continent ... for a stated period of time?

The only advantage I see to Exclusive Image is to the agency.  Am I missing the point?

JSPDK started getting the meaning confused up there.

The advantage to the seller is that, presumably, the agency will charge higher fees for the exclusive content (otherwise, what's the point).

« Reply #44 on: May 23, 2012, 11:09 »
0
im not getting things confused.

They say that...if you are selling your images exclusively, you get more per image.

That sounds good enough.
Sounds like an advantage.
Sounds like you earn more.
But do you?

Think again, why would they want to let you earn more. Because they get something much more valualbe in return.
And that is a trapped photographer getting 16% shares who cannot say no.

Its a honey trap. Its dependancy.

« Reply #45 on: May 23, 2012, 11:24 »
0
If the customers want exclusively so badly, they can buy the rights.
Exclusivity is only in the interest  of the agency, not the costumers and certainly not the contributors.

You did confuse the terms.  The exclusivity we are discussing has nothing to do with customers, aside from their ability to license it only in one location.

« Reply #46 on: May 23, 2012, 11:32 »
0
Exclusivity has to do with convincing the customer that they have to pay more for something because they cannot get it at other places.
Exclusivity has a lot to do with customers and wallets.
Problem is, that on microstock exclusivity is not needed or possible. Its a fake beakon.

« Reply #47 on: May 23, 2012, 12:00 »
0
Exclusivity has to do with convincing the customer that they have to pay more for something because they cannot get it at other places.
Exclusivity has a lot to do with customers and wallets.
Problem is, that on microstock exclusivity is not needed or possible. Its a fake beakon.

Yes, however, your earlier quote concerned "buy the rights" which has nothing to do with an image being available at one agency, but instead, being only available (not really) for one buyer.

Actually, it isn't a fake beacon.  If you control the availability of the item, you can control the price.  Unlike the iPad, for example, which is the same price everywhere because Apple sets the price, we cannot set the price, so putting the same content everywhere only enables the buyer to pay the lowest price they can find.

lagereek

« Reply #48 on: May 23, 2012, 12:27 »
0
Exclusivity has to do with convincing the customer that they have to pay more for something because they cannot get it at other places.
Exclusivity has a lot to do with customers and wallets.
Problem is, that on microstock exclusivity is not needed or possible. Its a fake beakon.

Yes, however, your earlier quote concerned "buy the rights" which has nothing to do with an image being available at one agency, but instead, being only available (not really) for one buyer.

Actually, it isn't a fake beacon.  If you control the availability of the item, you can control the price.  Unlike the iPad, for example, which is the same price everywhere because Apple sets the price, we cannot set the price, so putting the same content everywhere only enables the buyer to pay the lowest price they can find.

One of the reasons I never turned exclusive ( although thought about it many times), is just your statement " control the availability",  Im afraid with gazillions of similars, today thats an impossibillity.  Yes, an image might be exclusive but just down the road the buyer will find a 99% similar image, non exclusive and for a pitten of the so called exclusive image.
Unfortunately this is what micro has come to.
Buyers, thanks to forums, bad press, the internet, are very much aware of this and its beginning to take its toll.
I am sure one of the reasons my RM sales are about 100% up, is that the serious buyer knows full well that any real time exclusivity can only be bought at a higher price and not in the micro world. :)

« Reply #49 on: May 23, 2012, 12:57 »
0
I do not see any reason why a customer would like to have an image from any exclusive microstock contributor (or just exclusive image in microstock)...
Because microstock (RF) doesn't have exclusive base...
 
« Last Edit: May 23, 2012, 12:59 by borg »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
3241 Views
Last post August 21, 2007, 10:01
by hospitalera
34 Replies
14062 Views
Last post April 06, 2011, 05:45
by visceralimage
6 Replies
4163 Views
Last post April 05, 2012, 06:49
by santosa laksana
6 Replies
4576 Views
Last post February 04, 2018, 21:22
by SpaceStockFootage
8 Replies
5911 Views
Last post December 18, 2021, 03:53
by Just_to_inform_people2

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors