Let's just discuss.. Just do some brainstorming on why many of you so eagerly want to help veer become a success despite %35 commission and being nothing special..

Let's give the reasons to why support a new website that comes with an exciting %35  commission.

Since Brian loves to answer questions here and be friendly but he doesn't seem to notice my questions about commissions I thought we would just brainstorm..

I am sure Brian is aware that I wanted to help him to get an idea about vectors by starting a pole on reliability of rivals. And I am again sure Brian is aware that it is very natural that I am asking for %50 commission on the content I DID CREATE.. (not veer, me)

I don't know why are you people so loving to help veer despite they are getting your content for FREE and paying you %35.. I would like and extra website to sell my images as well (like all of you) so that's why convince me about %35 please.

Stand now! Do not submit! and they will have to come begging you with probably even more than %50 which you deserve. Why do you think they are here trying to market veer so desperately.

Veer needs you! You don't need veer at this point!

It's a good question and one you have to ask an iStocker as well. Most of them don't see 35% until they are well up the food chain contributing as exclusives. I'm not trying to dance around your original question but answer it by way of example. I suspect the reason iStockers do it is for the money. I find in general that too many contributers, me included,  contribute to far too many sites. This same argument of percentages goes on in one from or another on dozens of forums; why should I only take 40% for RM from Getty (home territory only??), I like Alamy they pay 60%, why is RF only paying 20%, These guys pay this, those guys pay that. In the end no bank, grocery store, car dealer or coffee shop will do business based on a commission levels; all of them want to see the green. If you think Veer will generate a good income based on those percentages then go with it, if you think you can do better elsewhere go with that. The old 50/50 relationship still exists in a few places but for the most part they have been replaced with deals that favour the distributor, like it or not. In the case of Veer they can easily argue that they already have a large customer base that is there the second the first image goes live. Advertising is in place, buyers are coming to the site now. No need to go through an exercise of bottom feeding in an attempt to attract a few fickle buyers. I'm sure that's the reason of the switch from SV to VMP. You decide if that's worth arguing over an extra 5%.

That's what Brian would say, If he actually said something.

If you are a new website, you shouldn't come here offering the same as the market. Istockphoto was the first so you can not argue with them really. It is wrong as well. %50 would be more than enough for all you mentioned.

istockphoto for example (last year) made about $100 million and paid about $20 million to contributor. So they are getting %80. Say they were paying %50 to us. Please explain what's not to RUN with %50 or $50 million dollars. It is our content at the end of the day.

When you say we just upload you forget the time spent in creating the images. I can assure you we are doing most of the business by giving them ready to sell images for FREE. All a reviewer does is hit a button to accept or reject in an automated system.

Image storage is not the most expensive thing in the world. I was into web design, I know a few things about websites if you will excuse me  

The summary is I am drawing and while Brian (veer) gets %65 for approval or rejection, I get %35 for my own content. Dreamstime, 123rf and bigstockphoto pays about %50 so it is possible to run the business like that, right?!

As far as I know dreamstime is far from going bankrupt. It is the opposite! They are getting very rich with %50 believe it or not.

Veer, on the other hand, If it were to become a success, would get rich rich with their %65, not just rich.

You know, I understand your desire to get 50% royalty, but it is really hard to take your argument seriously when it is so glaringly obvious that you have done absolutely ZERO research on Veer. They are hardly a start-up site. As a designer, I have been purchasing macro from them for years. They have a very tight community of loyal designer customers, few of whom hang out there because they are also contributors. I have also been purchasing marketplace images from them since they first became available. They sent promos out to every single one of their customers, via email AND direct mail, giving us $10 toward our first (no minimum) purchase from the Marketplace. That is huge.

They are doing all the right things, in my opinion, in order to make this work. You are free to not participate, of course. I really don't think it is necessary to rant and lob insults at someone who I believe is doing his best to be helpful and straightforward as much as is possible. If you expected an easy "answer" to your multi-paragraph "question"/rant about why you deserve 50%, I think you might be disappointed, as you would be asking the same question of any of the other many sites who do not pay 50%.

Tell me what makes veer so powerful if we don't submit any images? If we don't submit images, they have nothing achieved in "microstock" yet.

What makes them so powerful? Their existing and very loyal customer base which is unlike that of any other macro agency that I've seen.

Marketplace images are easily accessible in all search results right alongside the macros and, as I said, they are already and have been selling images via Marketplace, despite the fact that your images may have not yet arrived.

I will amend my original comments to state that you know very little about Veer.

But it really doesn't matter to me what you wish to believe, so I have no idea why I bothered to engage you in the first place.

Carry on.

There should be a balance between commissions and sales.  With FP I get 70% commission but I earn 50x more with istock on 20% commission.  FP should pay us less and spend money on marketing to boost sales.  istock should raise commissions but I still prefer them to several sites that don't spend money on marketing and don't make me much money.

SV spent lots on marketing but the site wasn't good.  Hopefully Veer will spend as much and will provide the buyers with a good service.  If they don't, I wont put up with 35%.

Good argument!

I knew this one had the potential to get bloody, but I decided to participate anyway. That's what I like about MSG, the carnage... oops I mean the calm discussions.

I can't say I know enough about the inner workings of any of the agencies to know where the majority of their money goes (ie. contributors, advertising, etc.) You could be right that some guy that looks like the monopoly guy could be walking away with all of our money.

In the end, I will probably give Veer a shot to see if it works for me. I'll have to read all the terms first, though.

I was just looking at veer website and noticed that prices translate to pounds (�) over here. And If I am paid in dollars ($) than it means I am getting even less than %35 on UK sales.

1$ - 20$ price range = 1� - �20 in the UK

I'm not a math whiz, but I believe the pound is currently stronger than the dollar by quite a lot, so wouldn't this exchange work in your favor?

Never mind...

So you are saying that they do not pay you 35% of the actual sale price; they pay you a percentage of what the sales price would be if the customer lived in the U.S.?

Are you sure about that? (This is a serious question; I have not read the FAQ. Please provide a link and I will do just that.)

thanks!

So you are saying that they do not pay you 35% of the actual sale price; they pay you a percentage of what the sales price would be if the customer lived in the U.S.?

Are you sure about that? (This is a serious question; I have not read the FAQ. Please provide a link and I will do just that.)

thanks!

http://www.veer.com/download/pdf/vmp_faq.pdf the link to contributor FAQ

Okay, I see now. Thank you for the link.

It is listed as a "royalty per download", as opposed to a percentage of sale. I was basing my question on your previous references to "35%" and had only looked at the submissions guidelines, and not the other doc.

You're right; that's not great.

Unfortunately veer in my opinion is:

looking great,
talking great,
but thinking cheeky

I am sure as the xs prices in UK start from �1, in other parts of europe they start from 1 euro. Either way, the commission for us is not %35 but about %20

Now I would be happy if it was even %35 

Let's just discuss.. Just do some brainstorming on why many of you so eagerly want to help veer become a success despite %35 commission and being nothing special..

Let's give the reasons to why support a new website that comes with an exciting %35  commission.

Since Brian loves to answer questions here and be friendly but he doesn't seem to notice my questions about commissions I thought we would just brainstorm..

I am sure Brian is aware that I wanted to help him to get an idea about vectors by starting a pole on reliability of rivals. And I am again sure Brian is aware that it is very natural that I am asking for %50 commission on the content I DID CREATE.. (not veer, me)

I don't know why are you people so loving to help veer despite they are getting your content for FREE and paying you %35.. I would like and extra website to sell my images as well (like all of you) so that's why convince me about %35 please.

Stand now! Do not submit! and they will have to come begging you with probably even more than %50 which you deserve. Why do you think they are here trying to market veer so desperately.

Veer needs you! You don't need veer at this point!

Hi Cidepix:


I don't mind talking about the Veer Marketplace royalty structure. Apologies if I missed your questions in other threads.

 
Now - about Veer: 

We disagree - we do think Veer is pretty special.

Veer.com has been recognized by buyers as one of the most user-friendly and well-designed sites in the industry.  Veer has been successful because it has always focused on the customer, on every level - from an inspiring brand, to design savvy marketing, plus good website UI, and superior customer service.

While Veer Marketplace is a new part of Veer, Veer isn't new at all. Veer has a passionate following among designers, photographers and illustrators - and has been around for 7 years now. Veer is actually a pretty big player - probably one of the larger stock sites around after Corbis.com and Getty/Jupiter.

We've created a royalty structure for Veer Marketplace that will help us build a long-term sustainable business, which in turn will help push more sales and more royalties your way. From our research, based upon not only royalty percentages and per credit royalties - but also image prices and subscription download rates - we're roughly on par with most of the biggest guns in microstock, as well on par with royalties paid out on the traditional RF or RM side of the industry.

We're going to be backing Veer Marketplace with high quality marketing efforts, great web design, high-performance servers and storage units. That doesn't come for free --- distributors like Veer or iStock or incur big costs to market content and create and support a loyal customer base.

As you have all seen with the ups and downs of this industry and with individual agencies themselves  - building a successful stock site is really hard work - it costs lots of $$, and takes time - some luck too! 

Of course - we'll need to build a passionate and supportive contributor community for this to work at all.... and as you all know - that will take time and lots of hard work too.

[ It's certainly not as simple as responding to a few question on this forum by any means. It will take patience and some trust from all sides. ]


As others have said about Veer Marketplace already - "the proof is in the pudding".
We're a month away from launching the contributor side of Marketplace, and a few months away from launching the buyer side. I'd ask that before you decide you don't want to be part of Marketplace, consider waiting and checking things out yourself.

 

 - Brian

"Veer.com has been recognized by buyers as one of the most user-friendly and well-designed sites in the industry.  Veer has been successful because it has always focused on the customer, on every level - from an inspiring brand, to design savvy marketing, plus good website UI, and superior customer service."

It�s clear how Veer has placed the customer in first place, forgetting the rights and wishes of those that create and manufacture that which the customer wants. To continue making the customer happy you have to have the content that some of us are not willing to deliver for such prices. To those who are willing to work for almost nothing, remember the newspapers that are going under for distributing their information free on the Net. For Veer marketpalce - good luck in your search for slave labour. I for one will be out of Snap/Veerplace

Quote from: cidepix on May 07, 2009, 10:25

Let's just discuss.. Just do some brainstorming on why many of you so eagerly want to help veer become a success despite %35 commission and being nothing special..

Let's give the reasons to why support a new website that comes with an exciting %35  commission.

Since Brian loves to answer questions here and be friendly but he doesn't seem to notice my questions about commissions I thought we would just brainstorm..

I am sure Brian is aware that I wanted to help him to get an idea about vectors by starting a pole on reliability of rivals. And I am again sure Brian is aware that it is very natural that I am asking for %50 commission on the content I DID CREATE.. (not veer, me)

I don't know why are you people so loving to help veer despite they are getting your content for FREE and paying you %35.. I would like and extra website to sell my images as well (like all of you) so that's why convince me about %35 please.

Stand now! Do not submit! and they will have to come begging you with probably even more than %50 which you deserve. Why do you think they are here trying to market veer so desperately.

Veer needs you! You don't need veer at this point!

Hi Cidepix:


I don't mind talking about the Veer Marketplace royalty structure. Apologies if I missed your questions in other threads.

 
Now - about Veer: 

We disagree - we do think Veer is pretty special.

Veer.com has been recognized by buyers as one of the most user-friendly and well-designed sites in the industry.  Veer has been successful because it has always focused on the customer, on every level - from an inspiring brand, to design savvy marketing, plus good website UI, and superior customer service.

While Veer Marketplace is a new part of Veer, Veer isn't new at all. Veer has a passionate following among designers, photographers and illustrators - and has been around for 7 years now. Veer is actually a pretty big player - probably one of the larger stock sites around after Corbis.com and Getty/Jupiter.

We've created a royalty structure for Veer Marketplace that will help us build a long-term sustainable business, which in turn will help push more sales and more royalties your way. From our research, based upon not only royalty percentages and per credit royalties - but also image prices and subscription download rates - we're roughly on par with most of the biggest guns in microstock, as well on par with royalties paid out on the traditional RF or RM side of the industry.

We're going to be backing Veer Marketplace with high quality marketing efforts, great web design, high-performance servers and storage units. That doesn't come for free --- distributors like Veer or iStock or incur big costs to market content and create and support a loyal customer base.

As you have all seen with the ups and downs of this industry and with individual agencies themselves  - building a successful stock site is really hard work - it costs lots of $$, and takes time - some luck too! 

Of course - we'll need to build a passionate and supportive contributor community for this to work at all.... and as you all know - that will take time and lots of hard work too.

[ It's certainly not as simple as responding to a few question on this forum by any means. It will take patience and some trust from all sides. ]


As others have said about Veer Marketplace already - "the proof is in the pudding".
We're a month away from launching the contributor side of Marketplace, and a few months away from launching the buyer side. I'd ask that before you decide you don't want to be part of Marketplace, consider waiting and checking things out yourself.

 

 - Brian

Hello Brian,

Thanks for the detailed reply. I will be watching veer's progress but; had you said the commissions will be %50, I wouldn't have waited to see the progress.

No matter what the competition does, I honestly believe the image creator deserves at least %50 since the business would not have existed without us. You guys are making money on someone else's talent, and yet %50 is not enough for you! That is how I see it.

But thanks anyway, nice reply, in fact couldn't have been better considering your situation, being on veer's side.

Good luck!

Quote from: sam38 on May 07, 2009, 21:06

It�s clear how Veer has placed the customer in first place, forgetting the rights and wishes of those that create and manufacture that which the customer wants. To continue making the customer happy you have to have the content that some of us are not willing to deliver for such prices. To those who are willing to work for almost nothing, remember the newspapers that are going under for distributing their information free on the Net. For Veer marketpalce - good luck in your search for slave labour. I for one will be out of Snap/Veerplace

I just read Brian's post to be that the royalty structure has not yet been announced for Veer.  Am I missing something? 

I don't want to upload for slave wages either, but I didn't think that was what we were talking about here...

Hi Lisafx -

Sorry if that was confusing. We did announce the royalty rates - they have not changed.
I was mentioning an updated rate card that displays the per credit royalties as well as the credit pack cost in non-US$ currencies (the latter was missing from the earlier version). Royalties are set - check the initial post, and the documents up at the Veer Submissions page for more info:

http://submissions.veer.com/

I'll be offline for most of this week - but Aaron will have the updated card that includes foreign currency conversion for credit packs. He'll be checking in here while I'm offline.

- Brian

...No matter what the competition does, I honestly believe the image creator deserves at least %50...

If that's how you feel, then most microstock sites shouldn't be to your liking. Aside from a small handful (StockXpert, FP, etc), how many pay 50% or more? None besides StockXpert in the roster of agencies I work with. Why do you work with istock or shutterstock if low percentages are such a problem? SS especially, which most estimates put their percentage of payout compared to total image sale value at less than 20%.

It's the nature of the business. If 35% is insulting to you, then maybe this business isn't for you.

cidepix...with all due respect, I beg of you, PLEASE go to the Veer website. Go straight to veer.com, not the marketplace page. Pretend you are a designer. Search for an image. Set up a lightbox. Try out the shuttleboard. Note how the search results are returned, and the emphasis placed on Marketplace, right within the main collection.

Veer has been an innovator with BUYERs for YEARS. This fact cannot be discounted as if it holds no value. Without customers, it won't matter if the agency pays you 90%.

Some of the stuff you are saying suggests tunnel vision. If you don't want to join up based solely on their commission structure, then fine, but I think some people make take a bigger picture into consideration.

cidepix...with all due respect, I beg of you, PLEASE go to the Veer website. Go straight to veer.com, not the marketplace page. Pretend you are a designer. Search for an image. Set up a lightbox. Try out the shuttleboard. Note how the search results are returned, and the emphasis placed on Marketplace, right within the main collection.

Veer has been an innovator with BUYERs for YEARS. This fact cannot be discounted as if it holds no value. Without customers, it won't matter if the agency pays you 90%.

Some of the stuff you are saying suggests tunnel vision. If you don't want to join up based solely on their commission structure, then fine, but I think some people make take a bigger picture into consideration.

I am taking the bigger picture into consideration. That is why I am discussing it here. The reason I started a thread for veer is because I see they have the most potential amongst the sites out of big 6 or 7.

Once I am convinced about their approach and they will make sure they get lots of customers our way and be reliable with their terms and conditions then I will place my images on veer.

I mean it is obvious that Brian knows what he is talking about. Just go to the other topic about "fotomina!" and see the huge difference.

It is as different as black and white. That is why I am finding it well worthy to question the negatives about veer, as well as the positives. %35 iS a negative if you will excuse me.

And mind you, I don't even bother talking about other new websites. So If I am going to add a new one to my agenda, it is going to be veer.

btw @ helix7, sorry If I offended you in any way in my last post since I wrote it with ZERO sleep in the last 30 hours due to a project I was working on.  

Thanks for quality discussion guys, anyway.

SS especially, which most estimates put their percentage of payout compared to total image sale value at less than 20%.

"Most estimates" By who?

Can you actually support that statement in any way with links/quotes?

Quote from: cidepix on May 10, 2009, 17:44

Sure, I am not talking for you (instead of you) , but I am talking for you (goodness of you) since %50 unquestionably would be good for you. Or would you say %20 is better

For my veer knowledge, have a look at my previous post. They are owned by corbis, and that is why I bother to discuss it. Why would I waste my time for a discussion on mostphotos for example. I don't care if they pay %10 or %90.

But I care when it comes to veer because I will definitely make good money once I place my images on there and I would rather make %50 than %35. I guess you wouldn't, so let's not take it further.

You don't seem to understand the basics of being successful in this business, the percentage received by contributors is indeed important, however it's not nearly as important as volume of sales, I'd happily take 35% from a site that I know will market and sell my images better than a site that pays me 50% but doesn't sell anything.

I agree with all that but we have sites that pay %50 and are proven success stories. For example StockXpert. You can also add DT, BigStock and 123rf to that list as their commissions are better than veer and they are selling pretty good and getting better.

Kudos to veer though: the best subscription model. Seems even more promising than IS. It is a big hit. If they sell a lot of subscriptions they will sure generate very good money for us.

I will be watching veer closely. and probably contribute once I see them rising on the right side column.

What I was saying from the beginning is %50 would have got an instant support from me. But %35 only deserves my support when I see them rising and there is no doubt they will generate me some good money. Otherwise no point in wasting valuable upload time.

Since it is not good will (%50) but pure business (%35) then my approach will be the same, so I will wait for them to prove they are a big deal before I take any action and submit to them.

Quote from: helix7 on May 10, 2009, 01:23

SS especially, which most estimates put their percentage of payout compared to total image sale value at less than 20%.

"Most estimates" By who?

Can you actually support that statement in any way with links/quotes?

Obviously there is no way to nail it down, but some people have been able to estimate an average approximate percentage at SS. They won't release any numbers about how many buyers use X amount of their daily download quotas, which would be necessary to figure out a more precise estimate, but there was some discussion a while back about some estimates based on info someone got from an SS insider. Yuri put his estimate at around 15% I believe, and considering how seriously he takes his statistics and strategy, I'd say that's a fairly believable number.

One site paying 35% or less commission is ok with you, another isn't. Pretty convenient if you ask me.

so what you are saying is, if we are already being screwed by the existing ones, we might as well get screwed by any new site and never try to change this vicious circle?

I would like it all to change of course but if we can not change a new one, how do you expect to change an established one. I don't hate veer, nothing close to hatred, I actually quite like them except commissions.

I didn't get banned from fotolia forum for being "only" against veer.

This thread is getting more and more ridiculous. 

Here I am, an istock exclusive, trying to convince someone who has already made his mind up (based on half-baked theories and assumptions) that Veer is the next up & comer.

Why do I care whether he has a clue?? 

I agree with RT that it's pretty funny that other sites have been getting away with much less than 50% for quite a while now and for some reason Veer has been singled out for scrutiny. I love how SS gets "woo yay" all 'round for their new marketing, when I mentioned Veer's similar promotion (which was launched first), it was less warmly received:

Quote from: cidepix on May 07, 2009, 11:16

and please see, that they are giving $10 towards the content they get for FREE.

But that's okay. Maybe it will delay the floodgates at least 30 days. 

All I wanted to do was to discuss the %35.

Apparently I have no rights to even mention my disagreement with %35 commission. I also have no rights to mention veer in such a thread because apparently I didn't bash IS or SS enough in order to qualify for criticising veer. 

But you are right, this thread is getting ridiculous and it is all my fault.

Can someone please explain to me exactly why it's so ridiculous to express dissatisfaction at a proposed 35% commission, and to at least attempt to get a higher rate?

It's perfectly reasonable to want to get a higher rate.  But to go off in a rant like this thread started out because a site is offering about average what the other sites are offering seems rather odd.  And to expect people who are already making similar rates and even less at other major micros to rally around the cause is naive.

If the OP had started a general thread stating that we would all like higher commissions and do away with low sub royalties, and better yet a concrete plan to make that happen (similar to the Contributor Cooperative thread, for example) they would have probably attracted much more agreement. 

Frankly, I don't know who Cidepix is or why he/she would have a vendetta against this particular agency (Veer).  For all I know they could be a disgruntled former employee or work at a competing agency.  Certainly nothing they have said makes much sense to me.

And cidepix, as for complaining of "not having any rights" to complain about the commission structure.  Sure, you have every right to complain.  Tyler hasn't locked your thread, right?  Having the right to complain means you also should expect there will be people who disagree with you.  If you can't handle that then you would probably be well advised not to start controversial ranting threads in the first place. 

But to go off in a rant like this thread started out because a site is offering about average what the other sites are offering seems rather odd. 

What you guys don't seem to understand is an organized pressure from contributors COULD have resulted in a commissions increase. ( Call it "go off in a rant". No problem! ) But won't happen now, don't worry, after all the replies you have provided veer has a very good reason to keep the commissions low! Believe it or not, had you all "gone off in a rant" like I did on this thread you could have gotten a commission increase. (Probably)

For all I know they could be a disgruntled former employee or work at a competing agency. 

This was an attempt to get a better commission, and I only need to be a contributor to do this. I have nothing to do with veer. I have nothing to do with any website, apart from contributing. Again what is the point in revolting against IS or SS? They already have a gallery of millions of images and the probability they will give you an increase is much less than veer since veer is NEW ( you like it or not it is new, their microstock gallery is quite small, and still needs huge contribution from us)

If nobody contributes for %35 then you will automatically be given %50 or even more. To say otherwise is ridiculous. Why I don't say this about istock? Here is why: Already having millions of images makes them less vulnerable, Not only we would need to stop uploading, but also we would need to delete the entire istock collection to make similar impact. If you think it can be done for any established website, tell us how, so we can get a better commission.

Having the right to complain means you also should expect there will be people who disagree with you. 

They (you) sure have all the rights to disagree with me which I can always take. If you think they(you) just disagreed with me you are in an illusion lisafx  You just tried to teach me how I should have started the thread and you also gave me an example of the ideal thread. Further, just have a look at the reply below yours which I won't even take serious to provide an answer.

I disagree with you as well, but I don't go as far as teaching you how you should have responded to me.

Quote from: cidepix on May 10, 2009, 21:06

so what you are saying is, if we are already being screwed by the existing ones, we might as well get screwed by any new site and never try to change this vicious circle?...

Well it's your opinion that 35% means getting screwed. For most people in microstock, it's fair. Even istock exclusives don't get much more, and it's only those that are at the diamond level that get a higher rate than 35%. Yet people do quite well there, and few (if any) exclusives complain about the percentages.

Would I like to get paid more? Sure, who wouldn't. But your crusade against Veer is just totally misguided. I'm not sure why you think you can muscle them into a higher commission with some forum ranting, and they certainly aren't a new company as you say, so I also don't see how that would make any difference in this argument. And as mentioned countless times by myself and others, 35% isn't bad compared to many other microstock rates. So why you started your campaign for higher commissions with Veer is just bizarre.

Your "vicious circle" isn't going anywhere, and even if somehow you managed to convince Veer to raise rates you'd never succeed with any of the other companies, no matter how many people you managed to rally around your cause. Again, I'd love to make more money, as would everyone else in this business. Unfortunately, though, we're too far along in the establishment of standards and acceptable rates in microstock, and going back on those rates is just not going to happen. You might as well be arguing for 99% commissions, because this whole thing is about as silly as that would be.

Now, this is a good and well argumented response. I am not going to say I disagree because I don't. I agree with most things you just said!

Yes, veer is an established macro agency. I have veer in my favourites tab and they are the first place I will upload my images as It is obvious they are going to do well. But their microstock collection is still much smaller than IS or SS. That is why they are the subject of this thread.

I only have 2 questions to you and to all the guys if they would care to answer:

1- What would happen if nobody uploaded to veer? Would they sit down and contemplate what offerings need to be improved or would they just keep everything the same although no one uploads images?

2- What would happen if nobody uploaded to IS or SS? Would they sit down and contemplate as quick as veer would? Do they depend on new content as much? If the answer is yes! Then I am sorry, yes this thread should have been covering all agencies.

I like almost everything about veer and the reason I started this thread is, I would want them to be the perfect example of how an agency should be run.

I would be fine if they at least offered the possibility to make %50 if you were to go exclusive. That would be fair. If you are exclusive and put your trust in veer, you should make %50 and if you are a non-exclusive then probably %35 is fair.

Veer has been an innovator with BUYERs for YEARS.

A few very knowledgeable people, like yourself but also RT, stated that before. Many microstockers never heard of Veer, probably because they operated in another arena. Success in one area doesn't necessary mean success in another one. Veer certainly seems to have the market potential. So let's just wait and see.

The site isn't ready yet, it's rumorware for now. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as I said long ago, and as long as Veer Marketplace/Microstock isn't live there is no sense in discussing how and if they will transplant their indisputable success elsewhere into the Microstock arena. We don't even know yet what their content and acceptance policy will be.

I'm a fan of the Austrian philosopher Wittgenstein's adagio : Wor�ber man nicht sprechen kann, dar�ber muss man schweigen. (Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent).


 

Just a guess, but they probably never heard of Veer because they are not designers. Since designers are actually the ones making the purchases, I'd think they'd be the more important factor in the equation and getting them the hardest obstacle to overcome.The ready pool of designer/buyers already on the site (remember, this site is not separate, it is completely integrated into the veer.com site) have it right in front of them in every search...

Agreed. Veer is well-known and respected among designers, and for many, it's the macro site of choice (myself included). When this new microstock offering was announced, it was a big hit among many designers for two major reasons, one of which being that Veer is an established, respected company. The other being that this would simplify things a great deal for designers in their billing/invoicing. If you can purchase macro and micro from the same company seamlessly, that solves a lot of paperwork headaches for designers. As compared to Getty, where although you do have the microstock arm of the company (istock), they aren't tied together, and billing and tracking purchases to individual jobs/projects at istock is very clunky. Veer could potentially simplify that with the Marketplace.

Veer also has one of the most aggressive direct-mail marketing campaigns targeting designers and design studios. It's also one of the most creative, I think.

Veer isn't a company that will need to ramp up their microstock offering. They will hit the ground running with the Marketplace, and I think they will have a lot more momentum than Corbis had with SV.

I disagree with you as well, but I don't go as far as teaching you how you should have responded to me.

You are certainly a great source of amusement, Cidepix.  

Nobody's trying to teach you anything.   Would be a complete waste of time.

some stats

Just wait till they get 20,000 microstockers checking their accounts every hour

ha ha ... you're right Leaf