Quote from: loop on April 21, 2013, 11:38

Cooperatives have never been open to everyone. What defines a coop is its ownership shared structure, but they don't have to be open to everyone in the world.

You should read these:

http://reic.uwcc.wisc.edu/issues/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_Principles

People dont agree with me on my coop argument, confirmed by the plusses  some comments get and the minusses I get. However, your links back up my comments.

People can give their own explanation to what they think a coop is, and/or what they want stocksy to be, but its just not a coop. Period. Its maybe a coop like structure.
 

Quote from: Poncke on April 22, 2013, 11:45

People can give their own explanation to what they think a coop is, and/or what they want stocksy to be, but its just not a coop. Period. Its maybe a coop like structure.

So what does that leave then?

You're insinuating that Stocksy is a bogus enterprise trading under the false pretence of a Co-op and it's actually not legally a co-op at all.

It seems a bit odd for a coop to not screen their members, should they allow people in who have never used a camera before?  I don't see the point of that at all.

Quote from: sjlocke on April 21, 2013, 11:52

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on April 21, 2013, 11:22

I had hope this would be something it seems not to be.  It appears the venture bruce took up after IS is more akin to stocksy than IS.  As the curtain was pulled back and my hope faded so did their traffic and interest.  Maybe lighting in a bottle is more IS and less stocksy.  If they had combined IS original concept and a coop, then who knows.  I seem to remember IS rocketing off from the beggining.  Not years into it!!!

IS certainly didn't rocket off anywhere within three weeks of opening.

IS may have not in three weeks but it did keep those buyers who found it and their interest did rocket off.  The interest was there in this case but the product is not up to par and I think there was a collective sigh of dissapointment.  Take the bad aspects of istock, ie artsy promoted over usefull commerical value, and clickish, and that seems to be the only thing offered here.  I would stick to IS/getty/shutterstock for my needs if I were a buyer.   

To tell you the success of usefull vs artsy, Sean, you have outsold the queen of IS 3 to 1 since 2010.

I haven't heard that 'collective sigh of disappointment'.  Are you saying that buyers are not happy with what they are seeing at Stocksy? 
It's been less than a month.  Buyers usually plan several months ahead.  How do we know there aren't a bunch of images being place in private lightboxes waiting to be purchased over the next few months?  I'd give it at least a year before drawing any conclusions.
I think it is a smart move to have content different from the iStock's and SS's of the world.  If Stocksy was just a clone of all the others there would be nothing to set them apart as far as buyers are concerned and that would, IMO, impede their chance at succeeding.  How many recent startups with the same old content are doing well right now? 
I applied there, didn't get a response, but I hope they are a big success.  We need an agency that pays 'well' (if that's possible in micro) and treats their contributors with respect.  Maybe certain existing agencies can learn something from Stocksy in the long run.

Exactly, its a nonsense conspiracy theory.

Hahahahah, what a joke.  I am not knocking stocksy, nor the members, nor drumming up conspiracies, nor saying they are an illegal entity.

Which brings me back to my previous statement that stocksy contributors are quite sensitive about stocksy.

I am not attacking you nor stocksy. Its just a discussion about what is a coop. And I think they are not.

It does matter, if they were a true coop I would be able to submit to them, even if its for a trial submission and be rejected.

Im not at Stokasy
they dont like my cats. Only shits with premade instanjgranj filters.
Moannn

It does matter, if they were a true coop I would be able to submit to them, even if its for a trial submission and be rejected.

Hmmm ... this sounds personal.  Must be a conspiracy.   

Quote from: fotoVoyager on April 22, 2013, 14:53

Quote from: mlwinphoto on April 22, 2013, 14:42

We need an agency that pays 'well' (if that's possible in micro) and treats their contributors with respect.  Maybe certain existing agencies can learn something from Stocksy in the long run.

Amen to that.

interesting, 40% - 50% royalty rates used to be the norm until microstock came along and brought the industry to where it is today. a completely new generation of stock shooter jumped on the bandwagon and was more than happy to sell files in volume for pennies and be rewarded with bronze royalty rates, now you want a reversal? stock prices were also much much higher, even more so than what you are calling fair prices at stocksy. i think that those certain existing agencies did learn something and brought the royalty rates down and sadly the prices too, just to compete with the realities of today's industry.

i think a utopian co-op is what stocksy is.

I'm on the "who really gives a rat's behind" side of this.
Does it really matter whether it's a coop, Utopian or otherwise?  If you are in ... it's cool;  If not ... something must be wrong.
 

Quote from: shudderstok on April 22, 2013, 15:58

Quote from: fotoVoyager on April 22, 2013, 14:53

Quote from: mlwinphoto on April 22, 2013, 14:42

We need an agency that pays 'well' (if that's possible in micro) and treats their contributors with respect.  Maybe certain existing agencies can learn something from Stocksy in the long run.

Amen to that.

interesting, 40% - 50% royalty rates used to be the norm until microstock came along and brought the industry to where it is today. a completely new generation of stock shooter jumped on the bandwagon and was more than happy to sell files in volume for pennies and be rewarded with bronze royalty rates, now you want a reversal? stock prices were also much much higher, even more so than what you are calling fair prices at stocksy. i think that those certain existing agencies did learn something and brought the royalty rates down and sadly the prices too, just to compete with the realities of today's industry.

i think a utopian co-op is what stocksy is.

I'm on the "who really gives a rat's behind" side of this.
Does it really matter whether it's a coop, Utopian or otherwise?  If you are in ... it's cool;  If not ... something must be wrong.
 

No not at all. Its not about that at all man. You are missing the point completely. Wum you are.