Jump to content

RozenskiP

Members
  • Content Count

    343
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About RozenskiP

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    In the man cave in post processing dont bother me

Recent Profile Visitors

1,089 profile views
  1. Been some strange pricing days this month and I don’t sell videos. I will get blasted for sure but my averages and sales went up and I mostly do travel photography. Today was light on volume but pricing worked well.
  2. did you check their web and YouTube pages many companies repost their adds so people can find them the youtube pages are by country market but seems most TV ads are listed.
  3. As I said ti would depend on tier break out what was defended was no on was basing anything on data and now we can support with data. So Yes I was correct and yes it did not turnout well for anyone at this point like it or not
  4. This is why I think tiering that limits uploads based on sales would help. Some thoughts to piggyback on your list...and I qualify they are only opinions. pathway to better cost so can share more revenue QC costs to pay reviewers--also quality is both technical and commercial value--does it sell. You might have best picture you ever took was wheat field at sunset...but same for 10K others...so how do you limit saturation that creates no value... There is some sort of challenge that makes exclusivity worth discussing. People uploading on multiple sites means they in theory are competing against their self for non-subscription sales...that said subscription sales are anchored to platforms so in that case it is a double edged sword. Maybe exclusive for non-subscription sales in some way. Hard to police too. Not sure about smart phone limits. I do a lot of editorial and you can take quality pictures with new phones if you know how to control exposure and f on phone. Especially if you have a smart phone stand. They tend to Bias to high ISO but a stand brings it down and you are dong great. Many editorial images are best captured with what you have on hand. Genre restrictions could be managed with an earned upload number. If someone had a limit to uploads and wasted on a Genre they are not good at so be it. I always tell people stating out shoot what you know. But people do need to experiment to get better. I like the last idea. If there was a on call list that could get people to fill gaps they see with searches. That would help Heck why not provide us with more direct search data. Several sites let you see words that are being searched. Yeah some people will spam keywords... but letting us see the search term volumes would help us understand realtime (weekly or monthly) market demand...
  5. I am having a spike in volume for some reason...not particular content driving it so my month revenue is up on volume. I have had almost no 0.10 sales. Lots of 0.13 / 0.17. No reason other than feeling but it seems like maybe there was a leakage in sales volume in the system that was corrected.
  6. Yes you are correct, part of why I don't like to get in to their business too much as there are multiple ways to look at it. I have just seen on the boards some that were wrong in terms of pay and compensation that would make interacting with them harder as they may be seen as adversarial. We need to build a group of partners with them. I had pulled form Yahoo Finance as quick reference when I logged in to my accounts some metrics even showed PE at 80.1 this AM.
  7. I do get at that with mention of I think the might be on the verge of triggering a downward spiral. If the force the makers of commercial quality to leave, even 10% what happens is the cost of review is spread among lower revenue producing accounts. And these are accounts that spam upload--again technical quality to get in but no commercial value so the metrics of review cost are upside down. That said with the down labor market they will likely get reviewers at a lower cost so may not be an immediate crisis. But likely that the next trend in images could be filled with lower commercial quality images.
  8. All good perspecitives. I don't like to get in to their heads as so many things could be in background...aqcuisitions or being acquired is often something you see, bond financing etc. Financial strategy can be complex. The PE is only 45 not 75 but not uncommon for a smaller cap tech focused model. Most of the pay I saw was much lower than millions but the incentives were in millions (some were even at zero salary but incentive paid). Again nothing out of the norm really. It does feel like even if not intentional they disincetivized us to use their platform relative to others. As a service provider to us we should be able to provide more feedback. Other than reducing our share of profits the real complaint we should have is the cost of review SGA and and Cost of Revenue (outside of paying us) should be leaned out to the benefit of all.
  9. Agreed but they squandered it with excessive review costs... remember last year when they couldn’t even keep up and reviews got into the one week plus range. Of course its about more profit that is why we also contribute. They are treating it as zero sum... never steal a large piece of the pie when you can make the pie larger for all. In this case the larger piece of the pie is going to cost of the networking between creators and buyers. If we need a 40% pay cut it was because for them to maintain targets they pushed the costs of networking on us... hence they have a broken model. In theory the could reduce this cost and share it with themselves, us and buyers to be a market leader.
  10. Looking at financial statements and annual report it seems that SS needed to find a way to increase profits from the business model as it has gotten stagnent in an increasingly competitive but growing market—commoditized if you would. The reality is the recent pricing changes did not fix the model but was a zero sum approach that took out the problem on the creators, and we are a vital partner as stated in the annual statement. This shows a lack of understanding of the community. There are three ways to correct the business Profit model Increase sales—hard to do in a competitive and rapidly price compressed and commoditized market. Heck we the creators are partly at cause because we will load similar or same content to multiple sites and it price competes with itself... but that was the idea when SS was formed to compete with others Reduce royalty payments—this is the path that was chosen and raises questions about relationship with creators and may have made SS a less preferred platform Reduce cost of networking buyers and creators—I can speculate that the IT costs are fairly baked in, frankly you have one of the better interfaces to create synergy, and static but the price of processing is really where the profit leakage may reside...reviewing is likely a large cost. To be honest you dont pay for the review we the creators do when you sell our photos. But we have all seen the loose quality of contributors allowed in with an abundance of low or no commercial value images. Remember in the annual statement it shows clearly recognizes that relationships between buyers and creators are strategic fo focusing on the networking model is where the opportunity is. And a way to make you a leader to buyers and creators. YOU NEED TO FIX THE QUALITY ISSUE TO FIX THE REVENUE ISSUE—all the repricing has done is likely trigger a spiral down A possible solution: Dont limit our profits limit our up loads based on our tier. Do limit uploads of nonproductive contributors—save money on reviewing If someone has uploaded 1000s of images to a portfolio but only has 10s of sales there should be a metric that limits them to only xx uploads per week. We see this all the time where someone will repeat an image that meets technical quality but is made in color variations, variations with every flag of the world, simple images of maps showing EVERY TOWN in the US, I could go on. This is not creative work it is work that should be done by the end user. But we the rest of the creators paid for their review with our sales and in turn you SS lost revenue by allowing this. Now you take it out by taking our value and putting it in your share of profits. The system could look at monthly sales and as the quality of a portfolio improves over time you could release more upload volumes. I would not recommend a reset every year. If someone would have had a COVID image up in early Jan they would not have benefited from it when the outbreak started. Potential Rules—earned uploads / reviews—based on concept that the business model’s real flaw is cost of review and commercial quality of some ports All users allowed a baseline of xx uploads per year based on tier of previous year sales. New users get a probation period that gives them reasonable volumes to test their port. Each month there is a second monthly tier system based on sales you can upload additional the following. The goal of the system would be to limit spammers but allow them to improve the value of their port. For people that aren’t refreshing portfolios with current or relevant material they would have drop in tiers and limit uploads based on their performance. Your business model is funded by us. So make us in a partner in fixing it not an adversary. SS I have a history of helping companies fix models feel free to reach out and I can explain this more. Be open to a new idea.
  11. Seems like enough people have disengaged to water down the new adds. Hope more pointless roses added so they burn time and money on review. That is the main problem with the business model they, well actually our sales, pay for photo reviews where the large majority have no commercial value over their life time.
  12. not really... it takes time. Its a shame they did that as its time you would be uploading to them
  13. I have a decent volume account and I have enough after 2.5 days to sample how much of a hair cut they just gave us... I would say that they just gave us about a 45% reduction in pay for our product...at Tier IV going toward Tier V Now you will notice in other posts I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt as I am a data person and that is all I need, this was a restructuring of profits clearly. Not worth my time here unless loaded on Getty first and 5 others...
×
×
  • Create New...