Author Topic: Has there been a big increase in sales volumes at FT? (Read 33417 times)

wut · « **Reply #25 on:** March 06, 2012, 14:03 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on March 06, 2012, 13:50

Quote from: heywoody on March 06, 2012, 13:25
Quote from: luissantos84 on March 06, 2012, 12:28
I am doing well in FT (looking at my own numbers comparing to DT, IS, 123RF) but I decided to make some calculations to understand how fair the royalties are, I "don´t understand" why they are the only agency not paying what a buyer actually PAID for (IS, DT, 123RF, SS don´t do this)

Doesn't SS do the same as we get fixed amounts for credit sales irrespective of the buyer package?

I believe we cannot add SS to the equation, not only because they are mostly subscription (I have 69% subs) and even if we make calculations 200EUR (263$) for 750 pictures (0.35$) and YES buyers may not donwload all 750 but any person can reach the 0.36$ rate quite fast, we need to add the fact that they never claimed or talked about this or that %, they always had flat rates

It's the same thing with ODs and ELs, various prices per DL (the larger the cheaper). I bet most ppl have at least 69% of subs at FT and DT, I'd say most ppl, % wise, get more subs at DT and FT than at SS. I sure do.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #26 on:** March 06, 2012, 14:17 »

March has started slightly better for me than previous few months, but then for some reason I always do better on Fotolia in spring than in the fall... must be the content of my portfolio.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #27 on:** March 06, 2012, 14:20 »

beside what I have wrote, there is also the crappy deal from being registered on FT with a US link, many European contributors having US account and being paid in US $ :/ thats another 30% cut

fotografer · « **Reply #28 on:** March 06, 2012, 14:48 »

Quote from: andresr on March 06, 2012, 07:31

Quote from: lisafx on March 05, 2012, 18:24
Nope, no sales increase here. But then, I am an Emerald, and they decided some time last year to rig their search engine against high ranking (expensive) members. Bet they're saving a bundle in royalties.

+1

+2

lisafx · « **Reply #29 on:** March 06, 2012, 18:33 »

Quote from: lagereek on March 06, 2012, 08:35

Quote from: lisafx on March 05, 2012, 18:24
Nope, no sales increase here. But then, I am an Emerald, and they decided some time last year to rig their search engine against high ranking (expensive) members. Bet they're saving a bundle in royalties.

Not by much but its noticable, I didnt know they rig their search against high ranking members? Im Gold myself.

You may be a unique case, because your content is so specialized. Would like to hear if your sales are negatively affected when you turn emerald. Keep us posted...

lisafx · « **Reply #30 on:** March 06, 2012, 18:38 »

Quote from: gostwyck on March 06, 2012, 08:49

I suspect it may have more to do with customer resistance to higher-priced images. FT have been steadily reducing the upper tier price levels available to high ranking contributors for some time, presumably because of this.

I think you have the order reversed. I saw no resistance to doubling my prices for literally years. Now, with most sales being subs, and all but best selling images being demoted to 1 credit, my sales should have increased, if it really was an issue of customer price sensitivity. Instead, they declined steeply pretty much overnight, as is typical with an unfavorable search change, and have never recovered.

briciola · « **Reply #31 on:** March 06, 2012, 18:55 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 06, 2012, 18:38

...Now, with most sales being subs,

funny, I hadn't bothered with Fotolia, when I did a year or so ago nearly every sale was a sub. (Glad I canned them)

Suljo · « **Reply #32 on:** March 06, 2012, 19:44 »

Quote from: heywoody on March 05, 2012, 18:19

Quote from: Suljo on March 05, 2012, 17:58
Quote from: heywoody on March 05, 2012, 17:41
Could be just a blip but Feb was 50% above normal and I seem to be getting more dls per week than I'm used to getting per month - more dls than even SS in the last week.

Jezz you a selling tutorial Poser, DAZ and other low polly models as you own work?!?
unbelievable
Prepare you self to be kicked off really soon from most agencies...
[sse][/sse]

No, I’m not selling models, I’m licensing images created using (mostly) 3rd party models with EULAs appropriate for this use. This is exactly the same as a photographer creating images of objects or models not created by him/herself. Two further points (assuming you make images and the depicted models):
Unless you’re writing the actual code you are using tools just as I am, the only difference is the degree of separation from the final image,
If you can produce better models than those available from Poser or Daz, you could probably make much more doing that than selling penny stock.

Edit – had a look at your port on IS expecting to see Mark Evans style images. Instead I see snapshots of luggage, photo frames etc, presumably without a licence from the manufacturers. Sorry, but you simply don’t have the credentials to make that kind of statement.

Anyhow we will see who will end first.

fotografer · « **Reply #33 on:** March 07, 2012, 09:19 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 06, 2012, 18:38

Quote from: gostwyck on March 06, 2012, 08:49

I suspect it may have more to do with customer resistance to higher-priced images. FT have been steadily reducing the upper tier price levels available to high ranking contributors for some time, presumably because of this.

I think you have the order reversed. I saw no resistance to doubling my prices for literally years. Now, with most sales being subs, and all but best selling images being demoted to 1 credit, my sales should have increased, if it really was an issue of customer price sensitivity. Instead, they declined steeply pretty much overnight, as is typical with an unfavorable search change, and have never recovered.

Totally agree with you Lisa. My sales went up when I doubled the prices. This is to do with Emeralds getting bad placing in the searches. Like Lisa my sales went virtually
overnight. I made 6 times more in 2010 than I did in 2011!!

robynmac · « **Reply #34 on:** March 19, 2012, 03:29 »

Quote from: briciola on March 06, 2012, 18:55

Quote from: lisafx on March 06, 2012, 18:38
...Now, with most sales being subs,
funny, I hadn't bothered with Fotolia, when I did a year or so ago nearly every sale was a sub. (Glad I canned them)

My experience is similar to Lisa's. e.g. for me $$ for Feb 2012 were down more than 50% on Feb 2011.

I've experimented with changes in price, and it's made no noticeable difference. Very sad. Every month I think it can't get any worse, but somehow it does...

wut · « **Reply #35 on:** March 19, 2012, 08:15 »

Quote from: robynmac on March 19, 2012, 03:29

Quote from: briciola on March 06, 2012, 18:55
Quote from: lisafx on March 06, 2012, 18:38
...Now, with most sales being subs,
funny, I hadn't bothered with Fotolia, when I did a year or so ago nearly every sale was a sub. (Glad I canned them)

My experience is similar to Lisa's. e.g. for me $$ for Feb 2012 were down more than 50% on Feb 2011. I've experimented with changes in price, and it's made no noticeable difference. Very sad. Every month I think it can't get any worse, but somehow it does...

What about DT? Because most ppl see a downward trend there, but an upward at FT. It always looked to me like those 2 agencies were somehow connected, my sales were always almost identical, but in the last 2 months I'm experiencing the same trend most ppl are.

OM · « **Reply #36 on:** March 19, 2012, 08:55 »

February was good but March is truly awful for me. Don't have many images there but sales were always regular until now.Anything priced above 1 credit now only seems to sell as a sub so that there's little point in getting above silver as the max credit of 3 will be hammered back down to 1 within 6 months of no sales. Very few newly accepted images have even been seen 2-3 months later and I'm sure there is some favouritism in the choice of images for the 'recently accepted' page. The same names seem to crop up rather frequently but maybe they're just the most prolific uploaders.
The oft repeated mantra of 'upload many and upload often' doesn't fly for me when I see my new uploads remaining invisible for months. Probably all got to do with over-supply/lack of demand and those at the top of the tree (corps) squeezing those below for every cent they can.

Pixart · « **Reply #37 on:** March 19, 2012, 10:38 »

What I don't get is WHY don't new photos sell? Fotolia has become basically a subscription agency that sells a few downloads. Subs buyers typically want fresh photos, so why don't they sell at Fotolia?

My dowloads are up a teeny bit this past week - but I barely remember some of the stuff that is selling so I don't know what they have done to the search to drag this old stuff up!

OM · « **Reply #38 on:** March 19, 2012, 13:49 »

Quote from: Pixart on March 19, 2012, 10:38

What I don't get is WHY don't new photos sell? Fotolia has become basically a subscription agency that sells a few downloads. Subs buyers typically want fresh photos, so why don't they sell at Fotolia?

My dowloads are up a teeny bit this past week - but I barely remember some of the stuff that is selling so I don't know what they have done to the search to drag this old stuff up!

What method does Shutterstock use to get its new work in front of buyers? With FT, the only chance of getting seen fast is to be 'chosen' for the recent upload page. Then you can get a hundred+ views and, say, 8 sales within the first day. Then at least you're on the search map.

robynmac · « **Reply #39 on:** March 19, 2012, 15:28 »

Quote from: wut on March 19, 2012, 08:15

Quote from: robynmac on March 19, 2012, 03:29
Quote from: briciola on March 06, 2012, 18:55
Quote from: lisafx on March 06, 2012, 18:38
...Now, with most sales being subs,
funny, I hadn't bothered with Fotolia, when I did a year or so ago nearly every sale was a sub. (Glad I canned them)

My experience is similar to Lisa's. e.g. for me $$ for Feb 2012 were down more than 50% on Feb 2011. I've experimented with changes in price, and it's made no noticeable difference. Very sad. Every month I think it can't get any worse, but somehow it does...

What about DT? Because most ppl see a downward trend there, but an upward at FT. It always looked to me like those 2 agencies were somehow connected, my sales were always almost identical, but in the last 2 months I'm experiencing the same trend most ppl are.

Here are some stats showing the percentage of my total earnings from DT and FT:

   2010    2011     2012
dt   12%      13% 12%
ft   23%    16% 11%

So, DT has remained fairly steady (bit of a decline over the last couple of months), but FT has declined dramatically.

wut · « **Reply #40 on:** March 19, 2012, 15:31 »

Quote from: robynmac on March 19, 2012, 15:28

Quote from: wut on March 19, 2012, 08:15
Quote from: robynmac on March 19, 2012, 03:29
Quote from: briciola on March 06, 2012, 18:55
Quote from: lisafx on March 06, 2012, 18:38
...Now, with most sales being subs,
funny, I hadn't bothered with Fotolia, when I did a year or so ago nearly every sale was a sub. (Glad I canned them)

My experience is similar to Lisa's. e.g. for me $$ for Feb 2012 were down more than 50% on Feb 2011.    I've experimented with changes in price, and it's made no noticeable difference. Very sad. Every month I think it can't get any worse, but somehow it does...

What about DT? Because most ppl see a downward trend there, but an upward at FT. It always looked to me like those 2 agencies were somehow connected, my sales were always almost identical, but in the last 2 months I'm experiencing the same trend most ppl are.

Here are some stats showing the percentage of my total earnings from DT and FT:

   2010     2011   2012
dt   12%    13%12.31124871
ft   23.82054676   16.4866542   11.22584586

I see, DT is holding its own. I guess that lost FT percentage went to SS...

MatHayward · « **Reply #41 on:** March 19, 2012, 15:47 »

I'm seeing a rise in sales this month. I am assuming there has been a recent shift in the search algorithm as the images that are selling for me more consistently are from a different era than what has been selling in recent months. Not my newest images but newer images all the same.

robynmac · « **Reply #42 on:** March 19, 2012, 15:49 »

Quote from: wut on March 19, 2012, 15:31

I see, DT is holding its own. I guess that lost FT percentage went to SS...

Yes. Thank goodness for SS!

robynmac · « **Reply #43 on:** March 19, 2012, 15:58 »

Quote from: MatHayward on March 19, 2012, 15:47

I'm seeing a rise in sales this month. I am assuming there has been a recent shift in the search algorithm as the images that are selling for me more consistently are from a different era than what has been selling in recent months. Not my newest images but newer images all the same.

I hope you're right, Mat - I'm yet to see it. Very discouraging to see new images disappear down a deep dark hole...

OM · « **Reply #44 on:** March 19, 2012, 17:18 »

Oh I'm sure that the algo changed at the beginning of March but not for the better, at least not for me. They're always tinkering with it which makes FT so unreliable as a source of predictably income. With a small portfolio, I cant really call anything I see as hard evidence but when robynmac reports a 50% decline in the last year at FT on such a large portfolio, I'm more inclined to trust my 'gut' feelings that something has changed yet again.

wut · « **Reply #45 on:** March 19, 2012, 19:33 »

But which agency can you trust these days? Best to just spread out your work among the top 4, to even it out, some will always go up while some go down...

hellobob · « **Reply #46 on:** March 30, 2012, 06:53 »

Quote from: andresr on March 06, 2012, 07:31

Quote from: lisafx on March 05, 2012, 18:24
Nope, no sales increase here. But then, I am an Emerald, and they decided some time last year to rig their search engine against high ranking (expensive) members. Bet they're saving a bundle in royalties.

+1

+2 with drop in commissions.

lagereek · « **Reply #47 on:** March 30, 2012, 07:12 »

FT, has always sold well for me, so even this month, but they have to start mixing their search with some newer stuff, together with old established sellers. Same images are selling most of the time.

THP Creative · « **Reply #48 on:** April 12, 2012, 00:14 »

Big slide backwards in last month or so for Fotolia. Anyone noticed the same? Perhaps just yet another search results change which has affected me badly, but bumped up others.

wut · « **Reply #49 on:** April 12, 2012, 04:33 »

Quote from: THP on April 12, 2012, 00:14

Big slide backwards in last month or so for Fotolia. Anyone noticed the same? Perhaps just yet another search results change which has affected me badly, but bumped up others.

Almost on par with March sales, which was a BME. So, pretty good

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Has there been a big increase in sales volumes at FT? (Read 33417 times)

wut

Elenathewise

luissantos84

fotografer

lisafx

lisafx

briciola

Suljo

fotografer

robynmac

wut

OM

Pixart

OM

robynmac

wut

MatHayward

robynmac

robynmac

OM

wut

hellobob

lagereek

THP Creative

wut

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors