Raise now effective at SXP!

cphoto · #1 (**permalink**) 03-25-2008, 07:30 PM

XS (new) >> 1 credit
S 1 credit >> 2 credits
M 2 credits >> 3 credits
L 3 credits >> 5 credits
XL 5 credits >> 10 credits
XXL 10 credits >> 15 credits

That's great BUT lately I noticed that most of my sub sales (99%) are for L or XL and my regular sales are most of the time for S or M.

I wonder if some existing users are not converting to subscriptions so that for the price of a couple of XL, or XXL and they can get 25 larger size image using subscription model?

If they don't raise or change the way sub works, I think more traditional users might move to sub, which would turn into less profit us.

helix7 · #2 (**permalink**) 03-25-2008, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cphoto

...If they don't raise or change the way sub works, I think more traditional users might move to sub, which would turn into less profit us.

The problem I have with subs is that they are not going up in price proportionally with credit sales. There is just too much of a gap, both in price increase rates and just in pricing in general. It's either you need 25+ images a month and buy a subscription, or you don't need that many and buy by credit. There's no in-between. I buy maybe 10 images a month. Obviously a subscription doesn't make sense for me.

I do worry about more people going to subscriptions, though. Even if you download 10-15 high-res images a month, you can use the rest of the subscription to download $1 or $3 comp images, and the subscription makes more sense. I could see more people going that route, especially if credit prices go up but subscription rates don't.

Maybe someday "Microstock" will become "SubscriptionStock". Enough sites are going to subscription models already.

cphoto · #3 (**permalink**) 03-25-2008, 08:54 PM

With a sub they can actually buy 750 any size picture a month!

So with new price structure:
For the same price of 20 XL images, buyers can now buy a $200 subscription and get 750 any size images.

Even worse, for the price of 14 XXL images, buyers can now buy a $200 subscription and get access to 750 XXL images

I know it's a bit extreme but that's just to illustrate the obvious problem.
I think the gap is way to tempting and something should be done, like either restrict sub to smaller sizes up to L, or charge more sub credits for larger sizes.

Karimala · #4 (**permalink**) 03-25-2008, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cphoto

With a sub they can actually buy 750 any size picture a month!

So with new price structure:
For the same price of 20 XL images, buyers can now buy a $200 subscription and get 750 any size images.

Even worse, for the price of 14 XXL images, buyers can now buy a $200 subscription and get access to 750 XXL images

I know it's a bit extreme but that's just to illustrate the obvious problem.
I think the gap is way to tempting and something should be done, like either restrict sub to smaller sizes up to L, or charge more sub credits for larger sizes.

I wholeheartedly agree. And after reading the comparisons, I'm finally convinced that I should give serious consideration to opting out of subscriptions at SXP. I've also noticed that the majority of my sub sales are L-XL-XXL, and my earnings have dropped in proportion to the loss of credit sales for those sizes.

What's interesting to note is that I have never experienced a decrease in earnings at DT since they implemented their subscription plan. I think part of the reason for that is because they charge more for best selling photos, which helps offset some of the loss from sub sales.

cphoto · #5 (**permalink**) 03-25-2008, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karimala

I think part of the reason for that is because they charge more for best selling photos, which helps offset some of the loss from sub sales.

Excellent point, that would explain also why my sales did not drop on DT!

So for a few months I had for best earners: SS, SXP, IS and DT.
Now it's more something like SS, IS, DT and SXP.

helix7 · #6 (**permalink**) 03-26-2008, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cphoto

...So for a few months I had for best earners: SS, SXP, IS and DT.
Now it's more something like SS, IS, DT and SXP.

Mine are SS/IS (tied or alternate #1 and #2 each month) followed by SXP 3rd. But I do worry that this will change. It is also disturbing that 2 out of my top 3 offer subscription packages. I haven't personally seen a dip in sales at SXP that I can tie to subscriptions cutting into credit sales, but it could happen. Couple that with my recent struggles with increasing my SS earnings (it's my slowest growth site by far), and istock could start pulling way ahead.

And that would be scarry because then I'd have to consider *gasp* EXCLUSIVITY! eeek!

Probably not, but seriously, I will be keeping a close eye on the spreadsheets over the next several months.

patrick1958 · #7 (**permalink**) 03-26-2008, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cphoto

Excellent point, that would explain also why my sales did not drop on DT!

So for a few months I had for best earners: SS, SXP, IS and DT.
Now it's more something like SS, IS, DT and SXP.

See it from the other side... did it increase....?...
At least not for me....
I'm considering stopping submitting to DT and going exclusive to a certain site.

Patrick.

Karimala · #8 (**permalink**) 03-26-2008, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patrick1958

See it from the other side... did it increase....?...
At least not for me....
I'm considering stopping submitting to DT and going exclusive to a certain site.

Patrick.

My earnings have definitely increased at DT since subs were introduced in Jan. '07. Earnings in Jan. '08 were almost double Jan. '07 and continue to rise. February was up 123% (thanks to an EL) and this month so far I'm up 104% from when subs began. November and December were rough, but I was still up by 33%. My average revenue per DL has also increased by 24% from the 13 months prior to the intro to subs.

The last two pay increases and consistent growth of my portfolio are probably why I haven't experienced any stagnation or decreases at DT. I'm also starting to see the benefits of having my images online for a long period of time, as more and more of them qualify for higher tiered prices. One good thing about the subs at DT is the DLs count towards higher tiered pricing, so you get there faster.

peolsen · #9 (**permalink**) 03-26-2008, 05:09 PM

SXP has never taken off for me. And now it's gone and died on me. No sales in March so they're finally on par with LO. Bah...

thesupe87 · #10 (**permalink**) 03-26-2008, 09:04 PM

Illustrations for me do better on Stockxpert than actual photos. On DT, I think photos and conceptual images sell better than illustrations. It's funny how certain sites do better with certain types of imagery. I have way more approved at DT than I do at Stockxpert (only around 300 on SXP)

Every site is different...that's why I'll never go exclusive. You gotta spread your stuff out to make money, unless you have a ginormous portfolio like Yuri, iophoto, or Andres. But even they spread their images out.