MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: StockFresh - from Peter Hamza and Andras Pfaff  (Read 275848 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

helix7

« Reply #375 on: September 09, 2010, 15:41 »
0
...StockXpert (before the buyout) remains my favourite agency of all time...

Same here. Which is another reason why I'm really hoping to see StockFresh succeed.

That and it would be great to see some real competition in the Top 4 and maybe see iStock get dethroned. :)


rubyroo

« Reply #376 on: September 09, 2010, 15:54 »
0
...StockXpert (before the buyout) remains my favourite agency of all time...

Same here. Which is another reason why I'm really hoping to see StockFresh succeed.

That and it would be great to see some real competition in the Top 4 and maybe see iStock get dethroned. :)

Absolutely.    :)

« Reply #377 on: September 09, 2010, 19:26 »
0
You won't be able to opt out of subscriptions, but only photos up to M size are included.

How sad. Most sales fall in the XS-M range anyway, so for most buyers this suits perfectly well.  And there goes our images to rapidshare & such, as seen so many times.

« Reply #378 on: September 09, 2010, 20:07 »
0
You won't be able to opt out of subscriptions, but only photos up to M size are included.

How sad. Most sales fall in the XS-M range anyway, so for most buyers this suits perfectly well.  And there goes our images to rapidshare & such, as seen so many times.

Although there's some overlap, subscription buyers are a different market. You have to commit for over $200 per month on most sites. That doesn't work for the majority of users who just need a few images at a time. They might make a dent on PPD sales but won't replace them. On StockXpert most contrib complaints were about XL+ sub downloads because royalties are the same for each size and of course customers tend to download the largest sizes whether they need them or not.

As for image pirating, not having subscriptions doesn't make any difference. It's an interesting topic though because I'm sure many people here contribute to a stock agency that's pretty much connected to a Rapidshare-like service and nobody seems to have an issue with it. But that's a different story :)

jbarber873

« Reply #379 on: September 09, 2010, 21:44 »
0
You won't be able to opt out of subscriptions, but only photos up to M size are included.

How sad. Most sales fall in the XS-M range anyway, so for most buyers this suits perfectly well.  And there goes our images to rapidshare & such, as seen so many times.

Although there's some overlap, subscription buyers are a different market. You have to commit for over $200 per month on most sites. That doesn't work for the majority of users who just need a few images at a time. They might make a dent on PPD sales but won't replace them. On StockXpert most contrib complaints were about XL+ sub downloads because royalties are the same for each size and of course customers tend to download the largest sizes whether they need them or not.

As for image pirating, not having subscriptions doesn't make any difference. It's an interesting topic though because I'm sure many people here contribute to a stock agency that's pretty much connected to a Rapidshare-like service and nobody seems to have an issue with it. But that's a different story :)

I'm not sure what you are referring to. Care to elaborate?

« Reply #380 on: September 09, 2010, 22:32 »
0
It's all well and good if you can actually get approved to sell images.  I did get a very fast response after I used the form (thanks for the quick response), but all I got was an apology that things are moving slow and a request for more patience.

I actually enjoyed StockXpert for the most part and did fairly well there with footage.  I hope you'll get back to selling footage.

« Reply #381 on: September 09, 2010, 22:51 »
0
You won't be able to opt out of subscriptions, but only photos up to M size are included.

How sad. Most sales fall in the XS-M range anyway, so for most buyers this suits perfectly well.  And there goes our images to rapidshare & such, as seen so many times.

Although there's some overlap, subscription buyers are a different market. You have to commit for over $200 per month on most sites. That doesn't work for the majority of users who just need a few images at a time. They might make a dent on PPD sales but won't replace them. On StockXpert most contrib complaints were about XL+ sub downloads because royalties are the same for each size and of course customers tend to download the largest sizes whether they need them or not.

As for image pirating, not having subscriptions doesn't make any difference. It's an interesting topic though because I'm sure many people here contribute to a stock agency that's pretty much connected to a Rapidshare-like service and nobody seems to have an issue with it. But that's a different story :)

I'm not sure what you are referring to. Care to elaborate?

depositphotos has a link to depositfiles, not sure of connection apparently connected, but not same owner. It has how dp generates a lot of traffic, free advertising on depositfiles.

ayzek

« Reply #382 on: September 10, 2010, 05:14 »
0
Why dont you leave this to your customers. a review (upload) system should be realy nice according to selling performance. No inspectors and no review times. Pics that are not selling for some time period should be deleted.
All files need to be checked for quality and legal issues. You wouldn't believe what people upload sometimes... :)

Sure, you are right that I cant imagine :D. But, how can you be sure that your inspectors taste better than directly customers taste. Or how they can be fair to all contributer while peoples cant be succesfull to be fair their own child in this world.  For example how can you be sure that your inspector can reject a image that can sell 1000 in a year because he thinks that its not suitable to stock photography. Or how can you be sure that if he is checking his friends images carefully as much as others. I can give so many example like this.
Yes inspectors should check the legal issues and clearly defined qualites. but rest should leave to customer tastes. For example why dou you (i am not sure you are checking this.) need to check for quality of composition. I dont understand that. Are you selling these images to blind costumers?
When i am sending an image, i want to think more about what to inspectors wants than what the customers wants. Because its just blocking my creativty and enthusiasm.


How many images do you have i dont know but i saw your collection is not differnet than others. There is so many people has got more than 5000 pics in their portfolia and you can find their images cheaper in some other stocks. This is not a good kind of diversity. Also, did you reviews all their images? What dou you think about the exclusivity for having uniqe colection?

We have over 250,000 images at the moment. Some sites might be a little bit cheaper, but I think these prices are fine for now. If it turns out that we're too expensive, we can always adjust them. One thing is sure, we don't want to be too cheap though. As for exclusivity, it doesn't make sense because we've just started and there's nothing we can offer to exclusives yet. Maybe when we get big! ;)
You dont need to be cheaper than that. 1-20 Credit is accaptable for both side i think so. Accaptable percentage, stability and clear definations are should be good offer for exclusivity.  But if you say that "Maybe when we get big" i have got questions in my head about stability. You can change so many thinks when you get big ;)

« Reply #383 on: September 10, 2010, 06:35 »
0
Does anyone know how traffic is going on at the StockFresh? I mean do they sell anything? It would be great if StockFresh could keep up with all other microstock agencies on the market. I just wonder how much time it will take until their sell ratio will be sufficient for them to exist...

Hope StockFresh will manage to survive... good luck!

Microbius

« Reply #384 on: September 10, 2010, 06:39 »
0
People will pay the prices. Why are we, the suppliers, putting downward pressure on the price of our own goods, that's just nuts. Let the market set the price suppliers need to push for the highest possible, buyers will let you know with their feet if they are willing to pay. I'm sure Peter knows what he's doing!

« Reply #385 on: September 10, 2010, 06:52 »
0
I am not worried about prices or image quality on StockFresh, I am sure both will be more then decent. What I am worried about is how many buyers they will be able to attract to their side. Hope they'll manage to do that.

vonkara

« Reply #386 on: September 10, 2010, 11:32 »
0
You won't be able to opt out of subscriptions, but only photos up to M size are included. So it works for bloggers,  websites and magazines who need a ton of images and you won't feel ripped off with 35c XXL downloads.

OK, at least you are limiting the sizes buyers can get for the sub price. That's good.

Same as the photos.com "deal". But the last time it was up to the L size if I am correct. This ended to be a stream of subscription sales replacing the credit ones.

I understand Stockfresh to say that their buyers look for credit first. But that's only because they don't have a regular customer base. Once any buyer think the collection is enough appealing, the stream of subs will surprise you, just like 123RF and such

« Reply #387 on: September 10, 2010, 16:54 »
0
Although there's some overlap, subscription buyers are a different market.
I know, but it's a market that I don't like to be in (that's why I was never at SS, despite everyone reporting good earnings). Microstock images are already too cheap to sell them even cheaper. Give frequent buyers a massive discount in big credit packages, I'm fine with that. But letting people download hundreds of images for just US$100 or US$200 is an absurd to me.

« Reply #388 on: September 11, 2010, 12:55 »
0
I'm doing what I can to help Stockfresh become successful - I just applied for an account today, and I plan to upload my entire portfolio there (regardless of how much traffic they have right now). Of all the "wannabe" sites out there right now, SF looks the best. It even feels like the old StockXpert.

« Reply #389 on: September 11, 2010, 13:10 »
0
I'm doing what I can to help Stockfresh become successful - I just applied for an account today, and I plan to upload my entire portfolio there (regardless of how much traffic they have right now). Of all the "wannabe" sites out there right now, SF looks the best. It even feels like the old StockXpert.

This will work only if you are accepted. My my application with top sellers was rejected. I am hesitant to re-apply - types of photos that they seem to want are in minority in my portfolio, I am not sure I want one more FT (accepting 5% of what I send)

« Reply #390 on: September 11, 2010, 15:37 »
0
You won't be able to opt out of subscriptions, but only photos up to M size are included.


How sad. Most sales fall in the XS-M range anyway, so for most buyers this suits perfectly well.  And there goes our images to rapidshare & such, as seen so many times.


Although there's some overlap, subscription buyers are a different market. You have to commit for over $200 per month on most sites. That doesn't work for the majority of users who just need a few images at a time. They might make a dent on PPD sales but won't replace them. On StockXpert most contrib complaints were about XL+ sub downloads because royalties are the same for each size and of course customers tend to download the largest sizes whether they need them or not.

As for image pirating, not having subscriptions doesn't make any difference. It's an interesting topic though because I'm sure many people here contribute to a stock agency that's pretty much connected to a Rapidshare-like service and nobody seems to have an issue with it. But that's a different story :)


It may be worth a trip back to this thread, just as a reminder http://www.microstockgroup.com/stockxpert-com/revenue-plummeting-at-StockXpert/

Microbius

« Reply #391 on: September 11, 2010, 15:55 »
0
As for image pirating, not having subscriptions doesn't make any difference. It's an interesting topic though because I'm sure many people here contribute to a stock agency that's pretty much connected to a Rapidshare-like service and nobody seems to have an issue with it. But that's a different story :)

Which agency is that?

ETA: Sorry missed the reply, I don't upload to Deposit Photos, thankfully, as I'd have to withdraw my portfolio after finding this out!
Double ETA just tracked down the thread where FD tracked down the connections, double glad I don't upload there!
« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 16:17 by Microbius »

« Reply #392 on: September 12, 2010, 03:00 »
0
Out of interest, will you be feeding through via another SXC-style site?  I recall someone at iStock saying they were really amazed at how much iStock purchasing arose via that route.


Well, I'm not sure if you're aware, but many top contributors left SXC after the transition and started a new site at http://rgbstock.com . RGB is growing very fast and although I'm not involved in that project I'm sure we'll work something out together.


Aha!  That's good to know.  I have to say I'm not a fan of giving free images away myself, but if some connection between the two of you will bring such startling amounts of purchasers to Stockfresh, then I'm happy to hear of this.


I'm one of the RGBStockers.  We are growing exponentially and are happy to feed traffic to Stockfresh because of the long association the RGB team have with Peter Hamza.  The association has always worked well and we hope it continues to do so.  The engine that ran SXC and helped create all that startling amount of traffic is now harnessed to RGB.  Unlike SXC we are independent of anyone.  You might not be a fan of free images but you need us more than we need you.  We have had offers from other microstock sites to feed traffic to them but we chose to link to Stockfresh because it is an independent site like RGB and we've all had more than a bellyfull of grasping corporations.  The reaction of iStockers when Getty acquired SXC sickened us to the point where many of us deleted our galleries, broke away and created a new site.  I'm disappointed that the same hubristic reaction is apparently alive and well at Stockfresh.  I hope I don't see it again.

rubyroo

« Reply #393 on: September 12, 2010, 03:51 »
0
Thanks so much for that Weirdvis  :)

It's great to witness this new collaboration as it happens, and I'm so glad to hear of it as it sounds as though it's the key to bringing high volumes of traffic through, as we saw at StockXpert.   Sorry if my 'I'm not a fan' comment came across badly... it's just born out of my own fears for my future (which I very much hope to get over one day!) ;)

My partner (who has no such fear) just realised that he still has pictures on SXC that he'd forgotten about, and is about to pull them off rather than allow them to potentially result in an 85% payment to Getty on the back off someone else's hard work (he's not with any of the Getty 'family').

Was a bit confused by your comment:  "I'm disappointed that the same hubristic reaction is apparently alive and well at Stockfresh."  Are you referring to the assumption some have made that Stockfresh might 'sell out' in the future?

Thanks again for your input, and for sticking to your values.  Great to know!  ;D

« Reply #394 on: September 12, 2010, 05:08 »
0
It may be worth a trip back to this thread, just as a reminder http://www.microstockgroup.com/stockxpert-com/revenue-plummeting-at-StockXpert/


I'm going to say this one more time: Overall sales on StockXpert were fine despite all the rumors, surprisingly even subscriptions didn't manage to cannibalize everything... It would've even survived being disconnected from SXC. However, we were adding 40-50,000 images and who knows how many new contributors each week and downloads ended up being split up between more and more people. There's just a lot more supply than demand.

rubyroo

« Reply #395 on: September 12, 2010, 14:08 »
0
Hi again Peter,  I'm just wondering when your marketing drive starts in earnest... no sales here yet, but living in hope!  :)

« Reply #396 on: September 12, 2010, 15:36 »
0
Thanks so much for that Weirdvis  :)

It's great to witness this new collaboration as it happens, and I'm so glad to hear of it as it sounds as though it's the key to bringing high volumes of traffic through, as we saw at StockXpert.   Sorry if my 'I'm not a fan' comment came across badly... it's just born out of my own fears for my future (which I very much hope to get over one day!) ;)

My partner (who has no such fear) just realised that he still has pictures on SXC that he'd forgotten about, and is about to pull them off rather than allow them to potentially result in an 85% payment to Getty on the back off someone else's hard work (he's not with any of the Getty 'family').

Was a bit confused by your comment:  "I'm disappointed that the same hubristic reaction is apparently alive and well at Stockfresh."  Are you referring to the assumption some have made that Stockfresh might 'sell out' in the future?

Thanks again for your input, and for sticking to your values.  Great to know!  ;D

I'm not sure on the hubristic reaction comment too. A number of people are very pleased about stockfresh and very hopeful for Peter.

Xalanx

« Reply #397 on: September 12, 2010, 15:42 »
0
I have uploaded over 1500 files, not a single sale so far. Can't say I'm pleased, and if it wasn't the easy upload process I wouldn't have got to this number.

« Reply #398 on: September 12, 2010, 17:43 »
0
Already forgot this site: signed up early June, logged in today:  Your application is waiting to be reviewed......
THREE months to review some application files? Sounds promissing once we can submit our files........

helix7

« Reply #399 on: September 12, 2010, 18:05 »
0
It may be worth a trip back to this thread, just as a reminder http://www.microstockgroup.com/stockxpert-com/revenue-plummeting-at-StockXpert/


Reminder of what? That some people didn't do well at StockXpert while others did excellent? Even in that thread you're quoting, many people reported massive increases in earnings after the introduction of subs, JIU, and photos.com.

When I recall my days with StockXpert, I was making more there than I was at istock, DT, and FT individually.

So you apparently didn't like StockXpert. That's fine. But because you had a bad experience, no one should put any faith in SF?
« Last Edit: September 12, 2010, 18:20 by helix7 »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
15 Replies
17481 Views
Last post July 27, 2010, 20:26
by a.k.a.-tom
13 Replies
18441 Views
Last post December 30, 2010, 04:17
by alfonsodetomas
8 Replies
11282 Views
Last post February 18, 2012, 17:41
by Fran
74 Replies
36158 Views
Last post December 20, 2014, 02:26
by Hobostocker
52 Replies
58349 Views
Last post March 02, 2015, 01:13
by Hobostocker

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors