pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Snap Village - How do you see it?  (Read 5033 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 21, 2008, 05:31 »
0
Just wondering how you see SV and what you think the future might be there.


« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2008, 06:20 »
0
So far they does not seem to head anywhere. They are seem to be just collecting images. They have strong name behind them, so they will probably start to put some effort into getting sales as well.

« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2008, 07:16 »
0
Sales have slowly increased, I even had one EL, which resulted in $24 for me, so I hope SV will get more popular with the time.

iofoto

  • iofoto.com
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2008, 07:19 »
0
We've had over 150 downloads this month so far- both single image and subscription.

« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2008, 07:41 »
0
Sales are improving, although they are still in beta. I think they'll take off in the future. One annoying thing though: 6MP photos are downsized to 1600x1200 (medium size), something that reduces the sales potential. Since many photographers use 6MP cameras, this is a policy that I find difficult to understand.

« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2008, 07:53 »
0
I stopped uploading to SV a while ago, since there was just one sub sale (now subs are turned off). But since you guys report improvement, I may start uploading again. What price do you set. I set all mine at $10.


« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2008, 10:11 »
0
The fact that they require paypal account that doesn't work in so many countries is not something that makes a good impression , at least in my case.

helix7

« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2008, 10:48 »
0

Dead-in-the-water as far as I can tell. Haven't seen a notable update to the site in a while, and it's still not Safari-compatible, which seems to be a massive problem since many designers (thus buyers) use Macs. Upload is still buggy, and overall progress is extremely slow. At this rate I almost wonder if they are already giving up on the project.


gbcimages

« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2008, 10:57 »
0
I've had  one payout with them. I hope to get more payout with them this year

« Reply #9 on: January 21, 2008, 11:35 »
0
The low $10 payout is better than most of the new sites.  Lucky Oliver have a minimum of $100.

Albumo started at the same time and there seems to be far more sales with SV.  If they do launch the site properly this year, I think they will do well.  It depends on how much they want to have a lower priced site.

« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2008, 12:00 »
0
Not sure about this site:

No FTP
Buggy at times
Five photo upload limit
No sales to date

I'll keep uploading but I don't have a lot of hope here.

helix7

« Reply #11 on: January 21, 2008, 15:36 »
0
What is really crazy is that I've seen lots of SV sponsored Google ads. You would think they might hold off on advertising while the site is still in Beta. Maybe put some of that money towards, oh, I don't know, perhaps, site development and bug fixes?

 ???

« Reply #12 on: January 21, 2008, 17:01 »
0
sales are going well for us and I only use safari and have no problems......

« Reply #13 on: January 21, 2008, 17:54 »
0
I'm waiting for them to have my IPTC data problem fixed before I upload more.  They recently emailed me to say they're looking into it (after a couple of months). 

I have that problem in IS only and they never bothered correcting it, though they were aware of it.  So in IS I have to paste keywords, but at least the site's performance pays the effort, and SV at the moment does not. 

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #14 on: January 21, 2008, 19:36 »
0
Interesting thing I just discovered while looking at an image in Featurepics: an ad for rf images at Snapvillage on the side with a link to the site ??? Nice competition.

« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2008, 02:52 »
0
Relatively speaking, Snapvillage is likely to be a big disappointment IMO.  I know others will have a different view.

By Relatively, I mean relative to the potential of Corbis; SV isn't a small startup funded by limited venture capital - it's Corbis.  And by that measure I think it's been amateurish, shoestring, toe-in-the-water and a massive disappointment.

It appears to be managed by people who have no understanding of the microstock business (or even of the stock business); they didn't understand the need for IPTC (until pressured by contributors) or for a decent watermark (once again under pressure).  Their keywording department is rubbish and appears to be staffed by people with no previous knowledge of keywords or categories or their importance.

There is a big play on the 'snappiest' search algorithm, which is touted as being 'sophisticated and unique', but actually doesn't exist (and six nearly six months after launch still doesn't exist).

And the 'old school, head in the sand' attitude is underlined by the ridiculous 45 day wait for commission payments.

SV is run by people who seem to think that microstockers are people who run around taking poor quality snaps with mobile phones.  Yes, it will make sales due to the huge Corbis customer base, but I don't think it will realise a tenth of its potential until they get real and change the management.

« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2008, 04:48 »
0
There might be a shot cut to getting the No.1 microstock site.  Having seen the news that the management want to sell Getty, I wonder if Bill Gates will buy it and get hold of istock?  That might be a better strategy than starting a new miscrostock site that will take years to compete with the number 1 site.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
21 Replies
5914 Views
Last post September 06, 2007, 16:24
by leaf
4 Replies
2450 Views
Last post October 05, 2007, 10:23
by PecoFoto
8 Replies
3376 Views
Last post February 14, 2008, 18:50
by madelaide
11 Replies
3889 Views
Last post March 05, 2008, 08:42
by null
7 Replies
3758 Views
Last post May 25, 2009, 17:38
by bittersweet

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle