Reading mode: Light Dark

Are no photo gear review websites profitable?

Go to last post
Evidently, DPR's revenue is not enough to cover operating costs.

For the digital photography industry as a whole, I think DPR is invaluable. It has strongly influenced many informed buying decisions I and others have made in the last decade.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting, but brings some questions for me. I suppose it's possibly the rock I have been hiding under, or the lack of understanding of modern lingo. But what is Affinity and Peer Rank - and how is it arrived at. It does not seem to have any bearing on how many visits a site gets in a month?

But outside of not understanding those things, it is very interesting just for the average visits per month. I find it really interesting for Imaging Resources site which supposedly died several years ago but is still active and one of my absolute favorites when it comes to information concerning different cameras in comparison to others as it has the same photo subjects for various image categories and exposure settings to compare cameras from today to those of 20 years ago. And it seems to have a larger number of followers than dpr does even now.

I do not know what happened to the imaging resource site, if someone bought it or how it got resurrected, but surprised to see it still is visited more frequently than dpr.
 
Arek Halusko said:
Just like forms killed newsgrups/usenet social media killed off quite a bit of forum traffic and social media doesn't translate to direct sales much. Also were 20+ years in so were getting into a generational gap with how people use the internet. Seems most just want their 15 second fix of stupid video addiction instead of building up an account on different forums websites and becoming part of a community.
Or its just pure greed on port of a corporation that doesn't even want to spend a pittance of their income to keep the site or at least the forums goindg.
Click to expand...
 
John Koch said:
DPReview doomed? Exactly why? Doesn't the website garner more visits than most of its contenders?
Click to expand...
It's the type of visitors that matters, and that where I say DPR falls flat.

For the most useful type of Info that it has, that type of information is a Dime a Dozen on the internet, so what's the real value there? Just look at the drop in value for the average Stock Image. Then look at how many folks that visit DPR and request to only talk about Photos.

Well clearly the Market has move on, it's a HYBRID market. Video is growing, stills only is NOT. Yet what do we hear and see talked about on DPR daily by some.

Wall-Street wants companies that are buying entities that are showing growth. If DPR is showing the opposite exact, then you have your answer. But I doubt that is the entire story to DPR demise, but still a huge part of it.

Way too many folks are still in denial of what is happening to anything other than FF cameras. The writing has been on the Wall for Quite some time now, most folks just refuse to see it.
 
I think you're right. Like the camera market itself, this is a "shakeout".

Discussing cameras and lens alone is.....pretty dull. If it wasn't for mirrorless, we'd still be trying to find something different about SLR's. (Yessirree, this new model has a shinier mirror, and new strap lugs! The forums would then go mad debating mirrors and strap lugs.)

Forums only have value if a discussion has a goal, if questions are answered, and they are supportive, respectful, and enjoyable. They're not really social networks, but libraries. (I know that's an ancient reference these days). Social networks are imploding, too.

Monetizing free sites has been a problem since the graphic web came along (remember blinky banner ads?) Maybe AOL had the right idea. A "gated community with a monthly fee". "Free" can lead to a sense of entitlement - apparently.
 
BackToNature1 said:
Way too many folks are still in denial of what is happening to anything other than FF cameras. The writing has been on the Wall for Quite some time now, most folks just refuse to see it.
Click to expand...
Last year, (CIPA) 5,955,335 interchangeable lens cameras shipped, so it's not like camera sales have completely stopped.

Last year, (CIPA) 5,003,953 "Lenses for smaller than 35mm format Cameras" shipped, so it's not like people only buy FF cameras. (FF and larger is 4,724,025)

And even #3 Nikon has a profitable Imaging division.
 
Photo gear review sites are financed by
  • Ads
  • Affiliate
  • Sponsorships
  • Selling user data
Perhaps it could be argued that DPReview lost profitability because it largely refused to do the latter two. That's the enshittification of the web in a nutshell.

On the other hand, I sort of hope that this process continues. That ads continue to perform worse and worse, to be ultimately recognized as the snake oil they are. Only then will we perhaps find a new way of generating profits that don't rely on lying and manipulating people.

Sometimes I yearn for the days when independent newspapers were still profitable in their own right, and honest reportage was still viable. If those days actually ever existed.
 
Last edited:
justmeMN said:
BackToNature1 said:
Way too many folks are still in denial of what is happening to anything other than FF cameras. The writing has been on the Wall for Quite some time now, most folks just refuse to see it.
Click to expand...
Last year, (CIPA) 5,955,335 interchangeable lens cameras shipped, so it's not like camera sales have completely stopped.

Last year, (CIPA) 5,003,953 "Lenses for smaller than 35mm format Cameras" shipped, so it's not like people only buy FF cameras. (FF and larger is 4,724,025)

And even #3 Nikon has a profitable Imaging division.
Click to expand...
That sounds like a big number, but per capita and globally, thats a tiny number. Fortunately, that's only new cameras and lenses, but used camera and lens sales just redistribute equipment.

I think camera companies got a lot smarter about pumping out changes for the sake of changes. With imaging specific (expensive) trade shows dying off there's less impetus to crank out something new for the shows.

I don't have answers, just observations. It may be that camera marketing failed. Too much "sell the tech" and not "sell the lifestyle". The "lifestyle" angle shifted to smartphones with cameras. Fair enough. They're lifestyle devices.
 
Funny how of all the websites in the world, only DPR is shutting down, despite being the biggest in this domain.

How can all other websites survive but not this one?

I've never heard of a large website like this one to ever get deleted just like that.

Advertising is an issue only here, apparently.
 
This reminds of the 3G shutdown. Oh how some people with ancient flip-phones carried on. A few I knew were paying at least twice what I pay monthly just to keep their phones. Then they complained about the cost. They need to choose their battles.

Back to DPReview and the drama in progress.

Perspective: If Photokina can end, that should tell you about the state of the photo industry. PhotoExpo faded out. Maybe there will be something photo at CES, next to the smart bidet exhibit.
 
Rambow said:
Funny how of all the websites in the world, only DPR is shutting down, despite being the biggest in this domain.

How can all other websites survive but not this one?

I've never heard of a large website like this one to ever get deleted just like that.

Advertising is an issue only here, apparently.
Click to expand...
DPReview is far from the only website on a downward spiral. I know of several websites that are admitting to a significant decline in engagement and revenue, and I'm sure many more are not talking about it. The internet is changing significantly, for better or worse. And traditional websites are mostly going away. You can check back on this post in 10 years to let me know if I'm wrong. Oh wait, you can't.
 
Reading is a skill, like writing (and penmanship).

Seeing and listening to something isn't.

The skill is in making something worth seeing and listening to.
 
Bob A L said:
I do not know what happened to the imaging resource site, if someone bought it or how it got resurrected, but surprised to see it still is visited more frequently than dpr.
Click to expand...
I think you're misreading the numbers. DPR gets almost 10 times more visits than IR. I think IR was acquired by a company called Madavor Media, which seems to have saved the website for the time being.
 
BackToNature1 said:
John Koch said:
DPReview doomed? Exactly why? Doesn't the website garner more visits than most of its contenders?
Click to expand...
It's the type of visitors that matters, and that where I say DPR falls flat.

For the most useful type of Info that it has, that type of information is a Dime a Dozen on the internet, so what's the real value there? Just look at the drop in value for the average Stock Image. Then look at how many folks that visit DPR and request to only talk about Photos.

Well clearly the Market has move on, it's a HYBRID market. Video is growing, stills only is NOT. Yet what do we hear and see talked about on DPR daily by some.

Wall-Street wants companies that are buying entities that are showing growth. If DPR is showing the opposite exact, then you have your answer. But I doubt that is the entire story to DPR demise, but still a huge part of it.

Way too many folks are still in denial of what is happening to anything other than FF cameras. The writing has been on the Wall for Quite some time now, most folks just refuse to see it.
Click to expand...
What you suggest may later be proven true but these may not be the reasons for DPR's failure. It could be as simple as its business model.

Advertisers love the 'type' of visitor that visits DPR and its direct competitors because its readers are buyers of a specific type of products and advertisements can be finely targeted.

A decade or so ago, Youtube bled revenue. It wasn't profitable. That didn't mean that their market was too small or that Wall St. NASDAQ was not interested. What was unprofitable was Youtube's business model, and 'correction' of it led to the incessant advertisements that we adore today.

Between the 1930s and 1950s about 85% of US automobile manufacturers went out of business and that did not herald the demise of the automobile industry.
 
Comparing the number of visits to various photography websites is interesting, but to understand Amazon's decision, I think it would be more interesting to see how the traffic to DPR has changed since Amazon acquired the website. That was before the camera market started to shrink, during the height of the digital camera boom.

Even more interesting, how has the revenue and profit generated by DPR changed during the same time period? A steep downward trend in performance could very well be sufficient reason for Amazon corporate to close down DPR, especially during a major restructuring, when likely every business unit is scrutinized.
 
Amazon acquired DPReview (2007) just as the Olympus "Pen hype" was ramping up. Micro Four Thirds was the 1st clean sheet, all new camera type in decades. So there might have been a "halo effect" on DPReview, pumping up traffic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Solvency & Survival of Competing Photography Websites
Replies
1
Views
2
Mako2011
Mako2011

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top