pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Veer's New Direction  (Read 3541 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 26, 2013, 15:46 »
0
According to the latest email promotion from Veer, they have decided that the more "traditional" stock that has been around for a while - white backgrounds, smiley happy people is now "Bad Stock" according to them and their new direction.

This is all well and good.  Yuri might not like his work considered bad stock but it gives a site like Veer a way to differentiate themselves from the pack.

Personally I like the idea of creating more creative and less "bad stock" type of images.  If some does produce they type of images Veer is looking for it then comes down to whether or not to trust that agency with these images and deciding where to put such images to get the best return.

If an agency like Veer is going to become a boutique agency then they should be charging for it and rewarding the contributors accordingly.

I haven't uploaded anything to Veer in a long time after initially starting a port there because lack of sales.  I've seen promotions to buyers but not to contributors.  You'd think they offer some incentives for contributors to upload more interesting and unique work.



« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2013, 15:48 »
+2
oh whatever

« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2013, 16:11 »
+3
I agree with the OP. If Veer want to become a tightly curated boutique agency - then that's great...as long as we can expect boutique royalties.

« Reply #3 on: September 26, 2013, 16:47 »
+8
I used to quite like Veer but they've become a bad site for contributors.  Low sales, not much communication here anymore and various problems with uploads have put me off them.  A new gimmick is unlikely to help.  They had a great chance to become one of the big selling microstcok sites but I think they wasted it.

« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2013, 16:57 »
0
I used to quite like Veer but they've become a bad site for contributors.  Low sales, not much communication here anymore and various problems with uploads have put me off them.  A new gimmick is unlikely to help.  They had a great chance to become one of the big selling microstcok sites but I think they wasted it.

very well said! I remember having +80 pictures removed from my portfolio without any explanation, that was over 1 year ago

« Reply #5 on: September 26, 2013, 17:27 »
0
seems that the 'old' is 'new' again  with creatives going to be more and more in demand as opposed to traditional stock
Offset is certainly catering to that market - and offering them at a premium.

There must be more demand from the bigger ad houses , because SS is on top of their game. They wouldnt be wasting resources creating this new branch if they didnt strongly feel that this is a worthwhile direction to go in.

It would be refreshing to have 'less than technically perfect' images come into play again

« Reply #6 on: September 26, 2013, 18:31 »
0
As a buyer of stock, I like Veer. They have always had more creative and artistic photography and I use them a lot for ads and brochures. So this new direction makes sense to me - play up your strengths.
However as a contributer, my sales have really dropped in the last couple of years and I don't expect this to change that at all.

« Reply #7 on: September 26, 2013, 19:00 »
+1
I used to quite like Veer but they've become a bad site for contributors.  Low sales, not much communication here anymore and various problems with uploads have put me off them.  A new gimmick is unlikely to help.  They had a great chance to become one of the big selling microstcok sites but I think they wasted it.

very well said! I remember having +80 pictures removed from my portfolio without any explanation, that was over 1 year ago

Count yourself lucky. I had 1,400 removed. When asking about it, Ryan said back in May,

"We've temporarily deactivated some older content from the Veer UGC collection to bring more stability to our platform as we prepare for the launch of our new site.  We'll be reactivating this content once the new site launches."


« Reply #8 on: September 26, 2013, 19:13 »
+2
only 5 months ago, we are being way too harsh ;D

« Reply #9 on: September 26, 2013, 23:24 »
+1
I  feel I should put in a good word for Veer, as I am on a pace to have my second best month ever there in Sept, and Aug was good too, earning over $100 for me. Whatever Veer is doing that's new, I like it.  ;D

« Reply #10 on: September 27, 2013, 01:34 »
+1
I  feel I should put in a good word for Veer, as I am on a pace to have my second best month ever there in Sept, and Aug was good too, earning over $100 for me. Whatever Veer is doing that's new, I like it.  ;D

It's good to hear that somebody is doing well on Veer. Maybe there is hope after all .  .  .

« Reply #11 on: September 27, 2013, 02:20 »
+3
The reviewing delays are absurd. If they allowed you to queue stuff like DT it wouldn't be so bad, but you are supposed to go back to the site every day for weeks or months to find out if they have got round to reviewing the last 50 so you can transfer another 50 into the review queue and wait a few more weeks or months for those to get digested.
Plus, sales and commissions are pathetic.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #12 on: October 09, 2013, 08:39 »
+1
Horrible sales. Hardly worth any effort, actually.

« Reply #13 on: October 09, 2013, 09:21 »
0
A new gimmick is unlikely to help.

This is most likely going to be correct. But I will at least give them credit for trying to differentiate themselves, rather than settling for "Low Earner" status and status quo. As you say, it is unlikely to help. But why not try?

I also agree with the sentiment that if they want a higher grade of stock, they should be charging higher prices. And that would mean no cheap subscription plans. (Yeah, right)

« Reply #14 on: October 10, 2013, 01:04 »
0
I used to quite like Veer but they've become a bad site for contributors.  Low sales, not much communication here anymore and various problems with uploads have put me off them.  A new gimmick is unlikely to help.  They had a great chance to become one of the big selling microstcok sites but I think they wasted it.

very well said! I remember having +80 pictures removed from my portfolio without any explanation, that was over 1 year ago

Count yourself lucky. I had 1,400 removed. When asking about it, Ryan said back in May,

"We've temporarily deactivated some older content from the Veer UGC collection to bring more stability to our platform as we prepare for the launch of our new site.  We'll be reactivating this content once the new site launches."


I had over 2,000 taken from my port...I wish there was some explanation as to why that had to be done because of the new site coming. Sales have slumped since the deletion.

Ron

« Reply #15 on: October 10, 2013, 02:01 »
0
I used to quite like Veer but they've become a bad site for contributors.  Low sales, not much communication here anymore and various problems with uploads have put me off them.  A new gimmick is unlikely to help.  They had a great chance to become one of the big selling microstcok sites but I think they wasted it.

very well said! I remember having +80 pictures removed from my portfolio without any explanation, that was over 1 year ago

Count yourself lucky. I had 1,400 removed. When asking about it, Ryan said back in May,

"We've temporarily deactivated some older content from the Veer UGC collection to bring more stability to our platform as we prepare for the launch of our new site.  We'll be reactivating this content once the new site launches."


I had over 2,000 taken from my port...I wish there was some explanation as to why that had to be done because of the new site coming. Sales have slumped since the deletion.

That was done because of site performance while migrating to a new platform.

« Reply #16 on: October 10, 2013, 07:34 »
+1
I used to quite like Veer but they've become a bad site for contributors.  Low sales, not much communication here anymore and various problems with uploads have put me off them.  A new gimmick is unlikely to help.  They had a great chance to become one of the big selling microstcok sites but I think they wasted it.

very well said! I remember having +80 pictures removed from my portfolio without any explanation, that was over 1 year ago

I closed my account there years ago due to no sales.  Then, about a year ago, I reapplied and was accepted.  However, I read a lot of bad press about them and decided not to upload there.  Your issue was one of the reasons I chose not to upload, along with the subs being the dominant commission with lean downloads.  I am just getting burned out on getting sh*t on by MS agencies, so my focus in mainly on the top 4-5 agencies and a couple of smaller ones that I like to support, like P5 and GL.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
97 Replies
19625 Views
Last post May 17, 2009, 01:53
by travelstock
9 Replies
4402 Views
Last post September 16, 2009, 09:36
by Adeptris
Veer

Started by tab62 General Stock Discussion

1 Replies
1004 Views
Last post April 16, 2012, 16:47
by lisafx
6 Replies
2595 Views
Last post June 27, 2012, 06:45
by CD123
34 Replies
5159 Views
Last post December 13, 2012, 13:00
by Poncke

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle