MicrostockGroup

I agree sites undercutting is a problem

But thinkstock is marketed directly at the customers currently buying ppd at istock. Plenty of reports of decreased earnings. As expected (from the same thing happening elsewhere) my extra large sales were the first hit and have plummeted because these are the first customers to go to subs.

With thinkstock I'm limited to my weekly upload limit at istock.  There is only a small capacity for me build a large portfolio on ts. That small port is then thrown to the back behind getty's owned content, reducing further what I could hope to earn. On my sites I can hope to get best sellers that sit at or near the top of the search. That wont happen at TS, because I behind getty's 17 sites and istock exclusives. I can only ever hope for the crumbs.

as well as the fact that I earn from 30c to $1.05 for a subs sale everywhere else, I've had raises on subs prices at SS and DT. Raises at Thinkstock are just not going to happen, especially for independants. Not a hope.

Getty have a long history of undercutting, I am surprised they havent done some amazing deals aimed purely at destroying the competition, especially as they have the lowest costs of running the site. I expect it to come (but hopefully not).

Thankfully the chances of it pulling subs buyers from other sites, particularly SS is minimal, but when its customer base is istock, supporting Thinkstock is purely undercutting yourself and shooting yourself in the foot.  

I'm not normally this grumpy, but still just dont see anything positive in TS. There is only 2 sites who a worse deal (and I wont contribute to them) I even get a better deal from crestock.

Yikes - that is so oversaturated and oversharpened it nearly blinded me!   

Looks like what was stated in another thread about volume sub buyers not caring about quality is absolutely correct!