What is happening to iStock?

[madman]

As a basical maths setup, a buyers get 100 images from $250 in a month, then buyers give $2,5 per image to istock, so istock earn $2,5 per image selling via subscription, but we get $0,27 per image, it almost equal 10% commision, istock get 90%, we get 10%, look what a big difference and what a big GREED!!!

[ShadySue]

In a glorious irony, I got 15% more subs in July than June, but actually earned less for them.
Way to go, iStock. 
(That's only my experience. I know others got rising $$ from subs sales.)
Whatever, I hate 'cheap subs', and can't get my head round uploading files to get 75c, followed by a demotion for not selling as a credit sale and earning 34c.

Don't be so sure you earned less for them, maybe they are pocketing heaps from the subs program even if very little makes it to your pockets.

I think you misunderstood.
I am perfectly sure that I earned less $$ for the subs I sold in July, even though I sold 15% more subs. So I earned less for them, i.e. the subs I sold.

[madman]

In a glorious irony, I got 15% more subs in July than June, but actually earned less for them.
Way to go, iStock. 
(That's only my experience. I know others got rising $$ from subs sales.)
Whatever, I hate 'cheap subs', and can't get my head round uploading files to get 75c, followed by a demotion for not selling as a credit sale and earning 34c.

Don't be so sure you earned less for them, maybe they are pocketing heaps from the subs program even if very little makes it to your pockets.

I think you misunderstood.
I am perfectly sure that I earned less $$ for the subs I sold in July, even though I sold 15% more subs. So I earned less for them, i.e. the subs I sold.

maybe subs prices lowered.

[ShadySue]

In a glorious irony, I got 15% more subs in July than June, but actually earned less for them.
Way to go, iStock. 
(That's only my experience. I know others got rising $$ from subs sales.)
Whatever, I hate 'cheap subs', and can't get my head round uploading files to get 75c, followed by a demotion for not selling as a credit sale and earning 34c.

Don't be so sure you earned less for them, maybe they are pocketing heaps from the subs program even if very little makes it to your pockets.

I think you misunderstood.
I am perfectly sure that I earned less $$ for the subs I sold in July, even though I sold 15% more subs. So I earned less for them, i.e. the subs I sold.

maybe subs prices lowered.

No, just my balance of 34c subs was increased. Maybe there are a lot more people with essentials subs, or maybe it was just my bad luck.
The subs rates are:
Non-exclusive    $0.28
Exclusive Main Collection    $0.34
Exclusive Signature Collection    $0.75
Exclusive Signature+ Collection    $2.50
Non-Exclusive Signature Collection    $0.28
Non-Exclusive Signature+ Collection    $0.28

[madman]

interesting, maybe some error, maybe you must contact to support.

[ShadySue]

interesting, maybe some error, maybe you must contact to support.

No, I just got proportionately more 34c sales.
I don't like it, but I don't think it's a mistake.

It's just like average rpd on credit sales, seesaws from month to month.

[hatman12]

Anyone who thinks that istock is going to continue to pay those $2.50 subs commissions is living in a dreamworld.  With gross financial revenue having declined significantly, and no evidence (yet) of any growth following the price changes made in Sept 2014 and the redesigned UI, they are going to use whatever means possible to sustain or improve profits.  And the prime contender is those $2.50 subs.  Why would they willingly make those payments when there are perfectly good ordinary exclusive files that pay $0.75 or even non-exclusive files that pay only 28c (approximately one-tenth).  No, what they really want is to get as many customers as possible on the premium subscription, then gradually reduce the exposure given to those $2.50 files.  For exclusives, subs sales might rise, but subs income will not rise at the same pace (or might even decline).

[ShadySue]

With subs, I've been selling reasonably proportionately to my uploads from each year; with what few credit sales are left, not so (sales from uploads in 2014/5 are extremely few, and from Sept 2012, few).
That's only my own sales: but just from that limited data I suspect subs buyers see a different search.
That is only a vague hypothesis; I don't intend to take out a sub to find out. 

[kmlPhoto]

I am very angry with istock because I feel like to be fired my job....

It is always hard for me to remember that I don't have a job in Microstock. I have a job outside of Micostock. They set goals for me, tell me how to do my work, require me to put in 40 hours a week... For me, Microstock is a way to make a little extra money until I retire from my real job and pursue photography full time.  In a way I feel fortunate that I never got a taste of the golden years of Microstock as I entered the market way too late, but I do feel for all of you who had the ability to support yourselves in this industry and saw that deteriorate. I had the same thing happen to me in the 90's with IT consulting. All I am saying is that I feel your pain.

[goober]

Well apart from istock stuff ups there are a lot of other factors involved in the downgrade of microstock like over supply.

[madman]

Well apart from istock stuff ups there are a lot of other factors involved in the downgrade of microstock like over supply.

so, why istock downloads and revenues still constantly down within 2 years? despite increasing folio and despite sales on other sites still going on normally. WHY???

[goober]

Well apart from istock stuff ups there are a lot of other factors involved in the downgrade of microstock like over supply.

so, why istock downloads and revenues still constantly down within 2 years? despite increasing folio and despite sales on other sites still going on normally. WHY???

Settle down mad mad man. If sales are normal on other sites focus your attention there.