MicrostockGroup

I think that there are three types of buyers: 1. higher end agency-type businesses, large companies, etc. 2. small business and 3. individuals. I think that IS caters to 1. and some of 2. and therefore the price increase will not matter too much. I think that for part of groups 2. and 3., price matters. I think that some of the 2. and 3. group that currently buy at IS will migrate over to the other sites.

My opinion is that IS will likely lose some buyers, but their price increase will fill in the gap left by that loss. They will continue to make money. I think that the other sites will see some increase in business, but unless they advertise on the scale that istock has done in the past, they will remain where they are, behind IS. If one of those sites decided to wage war, I think they stand a good chance of giving IS a run for their money. I like to root for the underdogs.

After looking into my crystal ball, that's what I came up with. Just my opinion, though. I might need a new crystal ball.

Are the Dt prices for a level 1 image?   I have had xs images that have given me  5.63$ which  means that even for xs size they can sell for over 11$

Same for fotolia.  I have doubled my prices there and I think that some have even trebled or quadrupled their prices.

Interesting comparison.

Just a question: A "large" images about the same resolution at all agencies or do some sell the max resolution at the "large" price?

Same her that was why I thought it was worth mentioning.  My RPD has been over 2$ for several months now.

__snip__

They tried that at Snapvillage same price no matter what the size. Wasn't a roaring sucess, but not the only issue with that site
 (I love the term someone else came up with for snapvillage = craphamlet)

The current price range in µstock is unsustainable in the long run, period. Some type of shoots will disappear from µ in the long run, since the return doesn't cover the costs. What might stay are left-overs from assignment shoots, but that's only true for a small minority of professional photographers. The amateurs will keep uploading their glorified snapshots.

Hi Paulie,

 I agree. I wouldn't think setting your own price would be good for the agencies or the shooters, confusing for buyers. Maybe a flat price set by the agency across the board, one size fits all. Again its just an idea. Anyone wish to comment and add other options, love to hear them 

Best,
Jonathan

^^^ ... is the right answer.

Providing the contributor with the ability to set their own prices, within certain constraints, doesn't seem to have done Fotolia much harm, especially considering they're generally accepted to be the fastest growing agency out there. Yuri seems to doing just fine pricing his stuff at 4 credits for the smallest size.

I know at least two (German) agencies that work exactly like this:
www.shotshop.com (flat price €30)
www.digitalstock.de (photographer can choose between three price levels: €4,99, €9,99, €14,99)

Both pay 50% and have at least some sales, but far from the volume of the big micros (in my case their at sixth and seventh place behind the big five).

Hi Jonatan!



No, i was talking mostly "I wish I could" - as far as I remember in Fotolia you can change for a little some prices - double it for the small image for example or simply make bigger for the extended license. The higher you level is the greater freedom of changes you have. But all the same you're not totally free in pricing, its a pity.