Author Topic: The most successful contributor at IS? (Read 6854 times)

Micky_Mango · « **on:** December 12, 2014, 02:18 »

I notice in the monthly earning discussion at IS the same name comes up EVERY month as claiming his BME, or at very least rising sales. However many people complain about reduced income, almost without fail ( I did see one solitary month when his income was down) the solitary voice in the wilderness is this guy, and he's becoming a major irritant to me. He's had so many good months, completely swimming against the tide of income drops suffered by pretty much everyone else, that he must be the most successful contributor there.
Sorry, just had to vent.

vielleicht · « **Reply #1 on:** December 12, 2014, 04:00 »

There are possibly others doing well too. But they usually don't post positive results here, as a courtesy not to irritate you - and avoid attacks as well.

Dook · « **Reply #2 on:** December 12, 2014, 04:28 »

Micky, I stopped bothering with anything related to Istock. Better focus to agencies that actually bring you money. BME at Istock is still much much less money than an ordinary SS month for me.

Me · « **Reply #3 on:** December 12, 2014, 04:29 »

Successful people tend not to post otherwise the copycats crawl out of the woodwork and suddenly best sellers are not best sellers any more

Micky_Mango · « **Reply #4 on:** December 12, 2014, 05:32 »

Quote from: Dook on December 12, 2014, 04:28

Micky, I stopped bothering with anything related to Istock. Better focus to agencies that actually bring you money. BME at Istock is still much much less money than an ordinary SS month for me.

Unfortunately I'm currently an exclusive at IS ( with the emphasis on 'currently')

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #5 on:** December 12, 2014, 05:46 »

Quote from: Me on December 12, 2014, 04:29

Successful people tend not to post otherwise the copycats crawl out of the woodwork and suddenly best sellers are not best sellers any more

That would be a relatively new paradigm if true, since everyone used to post glorious reports when things were good.

Me · « **Reply #6 on:** December 12, 2014, 05:58 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on December 12, 2014, 05:46

Quote from: Me on December 12, 2014, 04:29
Successful people tend not to post otherwise the copycats crawl out of the woodwork and suddenly best sellers are not best sellers any more

That would be a relatively new paradigm if true, since everyone used to post glorious reports when things were good.

But no one ever backs it up with actual information. Anyone can go onto a forum and claim BME month after month but without posting some information it means nothing.

ShadySue · « **Reply #7 on:** December 12, 2014, 07:00 »

If it's who I think you might be talking about, he's a video contributor mostly, and sells best via Getty.

But yes, in the Old Days, if you didn't have at the very least buoyant sales month on month you were jumped on and told your work was cr*p.
Nowadays if you post buoyant/improving sales (which I don't have, but presumably some do) people accuse you of lying and/or copy your work.

I think we can believe those who say their sales are falling, no matter how starkly it might look. Lobo would leap on someone from a mighty height if they said they were doing badly and they weren't.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=364381&messageid=7067273
You can well imagine he is anxiously scouring the stats of every negative poster to see if he can contradict them. That was the only one this month.

While we're on the subject, it's just disingenuous for him to say (and change the thread title), after overwhelmingly negative reports, that the figures for now exclude PP, Subs and GI. All of these were touted upon introduction as being 'extra' to our 'normal' credit sales. So it makes a lot of sense to report base sales as a comparison to previous years.

Micky_Mango · « **Reply #8 on:** December 12, 2014, 07:47 »

I have now edited my post as other have pointed out that it is unkind to single them out.

landbysea · « **Reply #9 on:** December 12, 2014, 09:10 »

Ok now that you named the person it is easier to understand. It's a lot easier to have strong growth when you are not in the big league in sales. That person is probably working hard and is in the part of the growth curve where efforts can show results. As some early diamonds saw there comes a time when you reach an equilibrium where hard work just keeps you even. That is even more so on istock now which is being flooded with new work while possibly actually losing buyers.

There is a certain black diamond I had the good fortune to meet 6 years ago when he had just turned diamond. He always reported growth while others were losing ground. He is a creative genius and full of talent and energy. As long as there is a camera in his hand he is producing. But I just checked and even he has reached the bad side of the curve.

bunhill · « **Reply #10 on:** December 12, 2014, 09:13 »

Quote from: Micky_Mango on December 12, 2014, 07:47

His name begins with a * and ends in an *. I don't know why I'm being so coy really, but there you go.

Yes it is strange and makes no sense - given that to all intents and purposes you just named them. But I am guessing that it has to do with you knowing in your heart that anonymously having a public go at someone on a different forum is nasty.

Micky_Mango · « **Reply #11 on:** December 12, 2014, 09:40 »

Quote from: bunhill on December 12, 2014, 09:13

Quote from: Micky_Mango on December 12, 2014, 07:47
His name begins with a * and ends in an *. I don't know why I'm being so coy really, but there you go.

Yes it is strange and makes no sense - given that to all intents and purposes you just named them. But I am guessing that it has to do with you knowing in your heart that anonymously having a public go at someone on a different forum is nasty.

Yep, you're probably right, I am now suitably ashamed of myself.

However, as they are about the only person posting positive results it didn't take a lot of intelligence to guess who I meant.
I have suitably modified my naming of the person in question now.

ShadySue · « **Reply #12 on:** December 12, 2014, 10:16 »

Quote from: Micky_Mango on December 12, 2014, 07:47

I have now edited my post as other have pointed out that it is unkind to single them out, even though they p*** me every time I see them swimming against the negative tide.

Strange reaction, though.
If some people can swim against the tide, there would maybe still be a glimpse of hope.
Or at least, there would be if some bigger players were managing to do it, not small fry.
Still, if newbies are getting traction, that's good too as many people are reporting newer files not selling (since whatever disaster happened in Sept 2012).
As it happened, last night I happened to wonder what happened to one of my old CV I used to chew the fat with, an inspector at iS. Well into Diamond sales, with a dl/ul ratio of well over 20/1. Noticed they have uploaded one file in 2014, and most of their most recent 200 is unsold - and that goes back to mid-2011. Most of the files feature models - people used to tell me I wouldn't sell because I don't have models, but nowadays the 'people' content is probably just as oversaturated as any other.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #13 on:** December 12, 2014, 12:05 »

"Does moderating a forum include accessing people's personal data in order to call them a liar?"

See bold part at the end. It's been ever Since TS opened that I haven't made what I did Before TS Opened. Last month was the first that came close, but it wasn't regular IS credit sales, it was the Audio and subs and TS that finally started to approach what I earned years ago. And I've added better and newer files.

So if someone is going to claim that things are better, now that we lost the regular credit DLs on IS, which On Average brought in six times more than a Sub or PP DL, it's going to be difficult for me to believe them.

But I will say, things for myself have picked up since the new IS Version (pick a number) started a couple of months ago. I'm actually looking forward to 2015 for more earnings than any previous year.

Quote from: ShadySue on December 12, 2014, 07:00

If it's who I think you might be talking about, he's a video contributor mostly, and sells best via Getty.

But yes, in the Old Days, if you didn't have at the very least buoyant sales month on month you were jumped on and told your work was cr*p.
Nowadays if you post buoyant/improving sales (which I don't have, but presumably some do) people accuse you of lying and/or copy your work.

I think we can believe those who say their sales are falling, no matter how starkly it might look. Lobo would leap on someone from a mighty height if they said they were doing badly and they weren't.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=364381&messageid=7067273
You can well imagine he is anxiously scouring the stats of every negative poster to see if he can contradict them. That was the only one this month.

While we're on the subject, it's just disingenuous for him to say (and change the thread title), after overwhelmingly negative reports, that the figures for now exclude PP, Subs and GI. All of these were touted upon introduction as being 'extra' to our 'normal' credit sales. So it makes a lot of sense to report base sales as a comparison to previous years.

LesPalenik · « **Reply #14 on:** December 12, 2014, 13:05 »

Quote

Unfortunately I'm currently an exclusive at IS ( with the emphasis on 'currently'

I would put emphasis on "Unfortunately"

tickstock · « **Reply #15 on:** December 12, 2014, 13:48 »

Quote from: LesPalenik on December 12, 2014, 13:05

Quote
Unfortunately I'm currently an exclusive at IS ( with the emphasis on 'currently'

I would put emphasis on "Unfortunately"

There's nothing unfortunate about it, they decided to be exclusive and they have all the power to change their situation. Take some responsibility for yourself. This thread and the one about Peter Lik show a lot about some people's character, I don't see how it's a bad thing when other people are doing well. Call me crazy but I like to see others succeed at photography.

Difydave · « **Reply #16 on:** December 12, 2014, 14:30 »

Quote from: ShadySue on December 12, 2014, 10:16

Quote from: Micky_Mango on December 12, 2014, 07:47
I have now edited my post as other have pointed out that it is unkind to single them out, even though they p*** me every time I see them swimming against the negative tide.
Strange reaction, though.
If some people can swim against the tide, there would maybe still be a glimpse of hope.
Or at least, there would be if some bigger players were managing to do it, not small fry.
Still, if newbies are getting traction, that's good too as many people are reporting newer files not selling (since whatever disaster happened in Sept 2012).
As it happened, last night I happened to wonder what happened to one of my old CV I used to chew the fat with, an inspector at iS. Well into Diamond sales, with a dl/ul ration of well over 20/1. Noticed they have uploaded one file in 2014, and most of their most recent 200 is unsold - and that goes back to mid-2011. Most files featuring models - people used to tell me I couldn't sell because I don't have models, but nowadays the 'people' content is probably just as oversaturated as any other.

I've said for a long time now that by virtually stopping downloads on new content, they destroyed the reason for uploading for an awful lot of people. From what I can see, most of what people are uploading there now has dropped in quality. The high end, really creative stuff that used to be uploaded there by some contributors (not me) seems to have virtually stopped.

Red Dove · « **Reply #17 on:** December 12, 2014, 18:44 »

I take everyone's claims - poor, spectacular or otherwise, with a pinch of salt and take action on the numbers I see in front of me.

ShadySue · « **Reply #18 on:** December 12, 2014, 19:09 »

Quote from: Difydave on December 12, 2014, 14:30

Quote from: ShadySue on December 12, 2014, 10:16
Quote from: Micky_Mango on December 12, 2014, 07:47
I have now edited my post as other have pointed out that it is unkind to single them out, even though they p*** me every time I see them swimming against the negative tide.
Strange reaction, though.
If some people can swim against the tide, there would maybe still be a glimpse of hope.
Or at least, there would be if some bigger players were managing to do it, not small fry.
Still, if newbies are getting traction, that's good too as many people are reporting newer files not selling (since whatever disaster happened in Sept 2012).
As it happened, last night I happened to wonder what happened to one of my old CV I used to chew the fat with, an inspector at iS. Well into Diamond sales, with a dl/ul ration of well over 20/1. Noticed they have uploaded one file in 2014, and most of their most recent 200 is unsold - and that goes back to mid-2011. Most files featuring models - people used to tell me I couldn't sell because I don't have models, but nowadays the 'people' content is probably just as oversaturated as any other.
I've said for a long time now that by virtually stopping downloads on new content, they destroyed the reason for uploading for an awful lot of people. From what I can see, most of what people are uploading there now has dropped in quality. The high end, really creative stuff that used to be uploaded there by some contributors (not me) seems to have virtually stopped.

BTW, your summing up of our current situation made me LOL:
"...So as manley099 says above "the Titanic has already crashed and sank". Except it wasn't an iceberg to blame in this case. It was subs. "
I award you a Crackerjack Pencil.

john_woodcock · « **Reply #19 on:** December 13, 2014, 03:15 »

"I award you a Crackerjack Pencil."

That may be a cultural reference lost on quite a few people!

Difydave · « **Reply #20 on:** December 13, 2014, 07:30 »

Quote from: ShadySue on December 12, 2014, 19:09

Quote from: Difydave on December 12, 2014, 14:30
Quote from: ShadySue on December 12, 2014, 10:16
Quote from: Micky_Mango on December 12, 2014, 07:47
I have now edited my post as other have pointed out that it is unkind to single them out, even though they p*** me every time I see them swimming against the negative tide.
Strange reaction, though.
If some people can swim against the tide, there would maybe still be a glimpse of hope.
Or at least, there would be if some bigger players were managing to do it, not small fry.
Still, if newbies are getting traction, that's good too as many people are reporting newer files not selling (since whatever disaster happened in Sept 2012).
As it happened, last night I happened to wonder what happened to one of my old CV I used to chew the fat with, an inspector at iS. Well into Diamond sales, with a dl/ul ration of well over 20/1. Noticed they have uploaded one file in 2014, and most of their most recent 200 is unsold - and that goes back to mid-2011. Most files featuring models - people used to tell me I couldn't sell because I don't have models, but nowadays the 'people' content is probably just as oversaturated as any other.
I've said for a long time now that by virtually stopping downloads on new content, they destroyed the reason for uploading for an awful lot of people. From what I can see, most of what people are uploading there now has dropped in quality. The high end, really creative stuff that used to be uploaded there by some contributors (not me) seems to have virtually stopped.

BTW, your summing up of our current situation made me LOL:
"...So as manley099 says above "the Titanic has already crashed and sank". Except it wasn't an iceberg to blame in this case. It was subs. "
I award you a Crackerjack Pencil.

I had visions of people in an office somewhere dressed as the crew of "Das Boot" when I typed that.

Thank you kindly for the pencil!

Do they work underwater do you know? I've already got water up to my knees. . .

[/size](Was it just me or was "Crackerjack" a weird program? An adult's idea of what kids would enjoy. I think I only used to watch it because there was nothing else on at that time. "It's Friday. It's five to five. And it's. . .Crackerjack!")[size=78%]

ShadySue · « **Reply #21 on:** December 13, 2014, 08:32 »

Quote from: john_woodcock on December 13, 2014, 03:15

"I award you a Crackerjack Pencil."

That may be a cultural reference lost on quite a few people!

Maybe, but I had a pretty good idea Dave would get it.
For the others, they would surely infer that it was a Good Thing, which was the point.
If they were interested beyond that, Google is their Friend, as it is my friend when the many US-specific references are made here.

jsmithzz · « **Reply #22 on:** December 14, 2014, 07:30 »

Quote from: Me on December 12, 2014, 04:29

Successful people tend not to post otherwise the copycats crawl out of the woodwork and suddenly best sellers are not best sellers any more

Totally agree. There are also always threads and the occasional PTOTW to post your most successful files. I think you'd have to be an idiot to show off these works in the forums.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: The most successful contributor at IS? (Read 6854 times)

Micky_Mango

vielleicht

Dook

Me

Micky_Mango

Sean Locke Photography

Me

ShadySue

Micky_Mango

landbysea

bunhill

Micky_Mango

ShadySue

Uncle Pete

LesPalenik

tickstock

Difydave

Red Dove

ShadySue

john_woodcock

Difydave

ShadySue

jsmithzz

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors