zero

I had no sales after several months and noticed that the only people selling anything were getting really low subs commissions.  So I didn't want to spend years getting to the payout level and asked for my portfolio to be removed.  They tried to persuade me to stay but I didn't see the point.  It took 90 days to get my images removed.

I received the same email and took them up on it.  Have had about 300 images accepted so far.  Fairly slow review times, and no sales yet.

Most folks will agree that it is not worth uploading there.

Waste of time.

Two sales - since last June - for a total of 55 cents.

Contrast that with GL Stock - where I'm still uploading my portfolio (started about a month ago) - where I have had 4 sales in a month for $16.64 royalty.

Hi all

I believe I've seen a topic about this recently - Pocketstock. I've just received a mail from them, where they state that they would like to represent my portfolio, and if I upload before this and this date, they will set the royalty rate to 40 % on all future uploads. Anyone else received this email?

Anyone of you in here represented on Pocketstock? Any sales?

Please enlighten me :-)

Oh, and my 50 cents regards Stocksy..... No answer yet for me either.

Brian

Did you check the site?
Could you find something special there?
A sensational image selection, innovative licenses or other unique features?
I couldn�t.
It seems to be an ordinary, fanciless new microstock site � nothing special.
So - how could they be successful in a fiercely competitive market?
The only thing that crosses my mind is - low, lower lowest prices or cheap tricks at photographer�s expense (see the Veer deal)

Btw: The owner of Pocketstock is Russell Glenister the former owner of image100, a royalty free agency which he sold for good money to Corbis a few years ago.

Now the sixty-four-thousand-dollar question:  What could be the reason for Russell to start a new game with nearly no chance to find success in the market?

PS: They asked me in February last year � I decided not to join - pointless in my view

Its a shame they didn't seem to do their research before launching the site but I suppose anyone that did, wouldn't bother launching another microstock site.  They tried having a USP by letting buyers ask for a discount but that was tried by Cutcaster long before and didn't really work.  So then they decided to try low prices, that was the final straw for me, as that doesn't work either.

Stocksy might have a genuine USP, they're the first new site for many years that might offer buyers something different that they want.  Almost all the other new sites have copied a business plan that hasn't worked for years or have come up with something that's not wanted by buyers.

Hi all

I believe I've seen a topic about this recently - Pocketstock. I've just received a mail from them, where they state that they would like to represent my portfolio, and if I upload before this and this date, they will set the royalty rate to 40 % on all future uploads. Anyone else received this email?

Anyone of you in here represented on Pocketstock? Any sales?

Please enlighten me :-)

Oh, and my 50 cents regards Stocksy..... No answer yet for me either.

Brian

How did they get your email? I am wondering.

There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

Quote from: bruce_blake on March 06, 2013, 02:43

Quote from: sharpshot on March 05, 2013, 13:30

There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

It's unhealthy competition and a waste of time, all they do is cut prices and ruin the marketing.

Some do but it's not true that they're all like that  Some of the ones I use have higher prices than some of the big 4 sites.  I read that Yuri uses 200 microstock sites.  That seems like too many for me but I have no problem with around 20.  Some don't get the marketing right but some pick up enough buyers to keep me happy and pay a good commission.  I'd much rather buyers used them than the big sites that have been cutting commissions.

Lets get real. Yuri is Yuri and no one else is.

He has a paid staff that's bigger than my family, cousins, their cousins and all their offspring.  A studio, rents locations, Makeup, production, editing, keyword, uploading, and pays hundreds of thousands a year to make the machine run. He's a genius and deserves everything he's earned. BUT we aren't him and for people to keep saying Yuri does this and Yuri does that, is absurd.

So what if he has 500 agencies. His staff is paid to upload. He's maximizing his returns on every shot, but sending it everywhere. He doesn't care if it goes to CrapStock and sits all year and makes nothing. But I'd expect if it does, he will be watching and eventually drop unproductive sites. Why should he pay someone to work a site that doesn't return the expense of uploading to it?

And that's where we can be the same and make some logical business decisions. If a site isn't making a return worth the time and effort one of us puts in to upload and allow our images to be sold there. We should drop that site, and only support the ones that do work for us.

Supporting the parasitic, price cutting, bottom feeders does nothing to improve the market, our income, or Microstock income. The idea that more piss poor competition and devaluation of the whole market is a good business decision, because they are competition for the good ones that do work for us... Is foolish.

Maybe people should want to be like Lisa or SJLocke, something realistic. Nothing wrong with Yuri or his plan or business, it's just not what most of the people here are about. We don't have a staffed corporation. Ask some people who have 5000 and up images, how many agencies do they support?

Mr. Locke was an exclusive! Lisa has her own site and a good distribution of representative agencies. I'd bet she didn't take the bait from any of these new start-ups with empty promises.

And a direct answer to the "some have higher prices" which could also have been some pay higher commissions. That's wonderful, but they have almost no sales, no effective marketing, they don't produce any volume return, so you are getting 100% of nothing and wasting your time and effort. Some might have higher prices, most have lower prices. Get real!

Quote from: Batman on March 08, 2013, 00:28

Quote from: bruce_blake on March 06, 2013, 02:43

Quote from: sharpshot on March 05, 2013, 13:30

There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

It's unhealthy competition and a waste of time, all they do is cut prices and ruin the marketing.

Some do but it's not true that they're all like that  Some of the ones I use have higher prices than some of the big 4 sites.  I read that Yuri uses 200 microstock sites.  That seems like too many for me but I have no problem with around 20.  Some don't get the marketing right but some pick up enough buyers to keep me happy and pay a good commission.  I'd much rather buyers used them than the big sites that have been cutting commissions.

Quote from: bruce_blake on March 06, 2013, 02:43

Quote from: sharpshot on March 05, 2013, 13:30

There are only a few that have been a complete waste of time for me.  I wish more people had got behind some of the small sites instead of spending so much time complaining about the big sites.

If the big sites hasn't cut commissions, I doubt I would of tried many of the smaller sites but I don't see any point in being loyal to sites that are slowly making microstock unsustainable for me.  It was great selling an EL with Zymmetrical and getting $70 commission but because so few people gave them a chance, they've gone now.  I have no regrets giving them a go.

I agree too. A healthy competition is needed in this industry. We don't want to see certain sites monopoly the whole industries and we have no choice but to follow the giants' rules. Sometimes new sites are good way for newbie contributors to start up as all the giants has overcrowded, provided the site is well developed, not a scam. Just my opinion.

It's unhealthy competition and a waste of time, all they do is cut prices and ruin the marketing.

I strongly agree with you. Simply cutting price is an unhealthy approach which will ruin the stock photo market. But not all of them, there are some those cheap price sites we should certainly avoid.