pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: iStock Watch 2011  (Read 25949 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RacePhoto

« Reply #75 on: January 12, 2011, 02:23 »
0
I don't think I ever said getting to .38 was easy at SS, but I said that getting to .33 wouldn't be too hard if you were serious.

Also TS took our material that was making .30/dl and then generously offered us .25/dl, to many of us that seemed insulting.

So true, and now Photos.com is offering the same photos for 90 cents and paying the same 25 cents commission. Jupiter and ThinkStock are in the same group, almost identical collections. For some reason Jupiter lists Photos.com collection, but when I search, all of them are not included. Could be another programming "feature. :)

The fact that someone is selling anything, even "crapstock" for 90c to a dollar or sub at potentially 19-24 cents, is terribly insulting.

Maybe that's why I find it difficult to get serious about making $500 so I can get 8 cents more for a sub download, competing with other sites that sell work for under a dollar and pay relatively the same pay. A crummy quarter for a download.

Once again I found some interesting material that I thought could be marketed and get downloads, no models, low production costs, my kind of ideas. I searched a little bit and found a site sell the same for $1 per download. Maybe not one of the major Micro sites, but the big sites don't sell this type of stuff because they are running scared about some Public Domain material.

My position all along has been that complaining about getting 25 cents, instead of 30 cents is hardly important. At that point people bring up that SS pays 38 cents, instead of sticking to the same argument. Then someone else will come back with the percentage is too low on ThinkStock or photos.com, when the percentage isn't the problem. It's just that the company doing this is Getty and they are cutting pay across all of their sites and pissing people off.

I'd be much happier to read people admitting that they are unhappy with Getty and finding fault with everything Getty does, while they give a pass to other places paying the same or lower commissions, and give a pass to places that bottom line, don't make nearly the same amount of income. Percentage doesn't put food on the table. Bottom line, sales and income count more than percentages.

If I make $4 a month at ThinkStock and $0 a month at BigStock, which one pays better?

So I'll get back to my point. 90 cent or $1 on demand downloads are too little. No matter how you slice the pie and count commissions. 25c or 38c pay per download isn't enough for the work people put into making the images. Quibbling over one site changing from 30c to 25c like it's a big issue, makes little sense when defending another site that's paying most people 33 cents? As if the 33 cents is some big milestone? None of it is enough or a fair and reasonable return.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
5184 Views
Last post August 30, 2009, 22:17
by lephotography
8 Replies
4200 Views
Last post July 22, 2011, 11:41
by luissantos84
14 Replies
4723 Views
Last post February 06, 2013, 17:16
by jamirae
2 Replies
3139 Views
Last post July 17, 2014, 20:05
by goober
2 Replies
5196 Views
Last post March 17, 2016, 03:30
by Phadrea

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors