MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: GUESS why buyers buy at istock!!!  (Read 10880 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 01, 2008, 11:55 »
0
Sorry Leaf, couldn't resist. ;)  Referring thread

iStock were first to market, so they likely have a lot of buyers who started when they were the only option and have never had a reason to leave.

We all know how loyal iStock exclusive contributors are, so there's likely a similar element in their buying members.

They do a MASSIVE amount of marketing, events and pressing the flesh.

Their website is great for buyers with a lot of functionality that isn't available at competing agencies (zoom to 100%, corporate accounts, etc)


« Reply #1 on: April 01, 2008, 12:12 »
0
I agree with Lee. IS is much more evolved in many respects. Buyers feel it. I feel it. Simplicity is not always a winner.




molka

    This user is banned.
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2010, 08:05 »
0
"They do a MASSIVE amount of marketing"

Where? Before I started working at BTL ageny for a while, I didn't even know they existed. I recently talked to a few high level creative colleagues, and they never heard of it either. People tend to think when they are involved in something that it's all bigger than life

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2010, 08:08 »
0
Maybe they did a massive amount of marketing 2-1/2 years ago when this post was created. And it was on April Fools day so maybe it was a joke.

« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2010, 08:27 »
0
That's too funny. Sure, in 2008, I would have totally agreed with Lee!

« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2010, 10:10 »
0
 I couldn't agree more Lee. Is it time to go exclusive while the others jump ship. Sounds like an opportunity waiting to happen for many shooters. If I went exclusive at Istock I would start at 40%. I haven't seen those kind of numbers in years. They also now pay on a motivation level of who produces the best and highest selling work with more returns. I wish I could say that is how it has been done in the past through Macro but no such offer has ben present. So if you work harder and make more return to me is a very motivating offer.

Best,
Jonathan

« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2010, 14:48 »
0
If I went exclusive at Istock I would start at 40%.

Really? How are you going to do that with 12K sales in 3 years? I guess this is yet another of your fantasy number exercises.

« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2010, 15:12 »
0
If I went exclusive at Istock I would start at 40%.

Really? How are you going to do that with 12K sales in 3 years? I guess this is yet another of your fantasy number exercises.

I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure JR passed the Gold mark after me, but is now at 12K+ images sold whereas I'm on 11K with not much to spare - I think its a reasonable bet that on the exclusive Redeemed Credits over the course of a year he'd get to 40% with the increased upload slots etc if he's not there already.

« Reply #8 on: October 21, 2010, 15:34 »
0
I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure JR passed the Gold mark after me, but is now at 12K+ images sold whereas I'm on 11K with not much to spare - I think its a reasonable bet that on the exclusive Redeemed Credits over the course of a year he'd get to 40% with the increased upload slots etc if he's not there already.

He must have had some great growth over the last year. Regardless, the point makes sense. It seems like the best options are to go exclusive or leave iStock entirely. Rolling over and accepting under 20% still makes me cringe, and I'm not sure my confidence in IS is strong enough to make the leap to exclusive.

« Reply #9 on: October 21, 2010, 15:43 »
0
I think its a reasonable bet that on the exclusive Redeemed Credits over the course of a year he'd get to 40% with the increased upload slots etc if he's not there already.

He's not talking about 'over the course of a year', he's saying immediately __ which is obviously nonsense.

« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2010, 15:50 »
0
He's not talking about 'over the course of a year', he's saying immediately __ which is obviously nonsense.

I suppose theoretically it is possible. I'd need about 11k in downloads to reach 150,000 redeemed credits. That's with mostly 10 credit downloads which would be 14 credits as exclusive. Although, I'd assume you'd need more as a photographer, since they don't average as high.

Edit: I realized you'd need to already be exclusive for the above to work, so I guess you'd need to sell 10,000 XL files or 15,000 L files to make 150K of redeemed credits.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2010, 17:17 by cthoman »

lisafx

« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2010, 18:06 »
0
I couldn't agree more Lee. Is it time to go exclusive while the others jump ship. Sounds like an opportunity waiting to happen for many shooters. If I went exclusive at Istock I would start at 40%. I haven't seen those kind of numbers in years. They also now pay on a motivation level of who produces the best and highest selling work with more returns. I wish I could say that is how it has been done in the past through Macro but no such offer has ben present. So if you work harder and make more return to me is a very motivating offer.

Best,
Jonathan

Are you planning to go exclusive at IS?  How would you get around the fact that you have ownership stakes in both Blend and Spaces?   Would that no longer be a conflict with the IS exclusivity agreement?

FWIW, Jonathan is a high producer.  If he says so, I'm willing to believe he can make it to the 40% level.  However these numbers will be tough to maintain, even for some of the top shooters.

I can't imagine any serious pro will actually go exclusive at this point.  Speaking for myself, I don't ever expect to be jumping back on that fence  :P

traveler1116

« Reply #12 on: October 21, 2010, 18:23 »
0
I couldn't agree more Lee. Is it time to go exclusive while the others jump ship. Sounds like an opportunity waiting to happen for many shooters. If I went exclusive at Istock I would start at 40%. I haven't seen those kind of numbers in years. They also now pay on a motivation level of who produces the best and highest selling work with more returns. I wish I could say that is how it has been done in the past through Macro but no such offer has ben present. So if you work harder and make more return to me is a very motivating offer.

Best,
Jonathan

That's one way to look at things.  But wasn't it much better before the change, even for you?  You would have been able to upload about 7,000 images in a year and that would get you to diamond pretty quickly which was permanent.  The new change might help you get the 40% rate a few months faster for this year but who knows next year.  And how many people are jumping ship, would 1,000 people leaving make anything better for new people?  I don't see how changing the goal posts each year is good for anyone, how can you plan for anything if all you know is what you'll make for the next 12 months (and we don't even know if the levels won't be changed sooner, nobody knows anything any more)?
« Last Edit: October 21, 2010, 18:27 by traveler1116 »

« Reply #13 on: October 21, 2010, 23:01 »
0
Hey Gostywk,

 I am off on the Istock numbers I am about to hit 40,000 which would be 35%, I read the site info incorrectly. The idea was not to brag about numbers the idea is that no other agency makes a higher per image return and then rewards you for your hard work. Watch how well Istock does in the next year they will easily pass last years sales in a horrible economy. My mistake with the numbers this week. Lots going on and it was completely a mis print. Thank you for bringing to my attention no matter what vehicle you delivered it on. Always happy to step up for my errors and take responsibility.

Jonathan
« Last Edit: October 21, 2010, 23:20 by Jonathan Ross »

« Reply #14 on: October 21, 2010, 23:18 »
0
Hi Lisa,

 I am not an exclusive at this time but if I could do it I would drop the other Micros in a heart beat right now. Being owner of another agency is not a breech in the contract as I know it. It has to do with having RF at other agencies copy written in your name.
 
Cheers,
Jonathan

helix7

« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2010, 07:42 »
0
...The idea was not to brag about numbers the idea is that no other agency makes a higher per image return and then rewards you for your hard work...

Maybe I'm missing the obvious, but what kind of rewards are we talking about here? Increasing royalty rates? Because maintaining those rates, even with hard work, is going to be a lot harder at istock for everyone. So maybe I'm missing something...

« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2010, 12:34 »
0
Hi Helix,

 I think the reduction is unfortunate but they are the top player and I don't think they are going anywhere soon. I think they are positioning themselves against the competition and trying to outplay them. I also don't think they need as many photos as they have and I would prefer they just pull images that have not sold for three years. Many other Macro agencies do this. It keeps your Sell through rate higher and makes you more desirable for an agency to represent you. At the moment anyone can upload there images to Micro but the future might hold something different. Trying to always make your sell through rate strong will only help your business in the long run.

Best, Jonathan

lisafx

« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2010, 12:51 »
0
Being owner of another agency is not a breech in the contract as I know it. It has to do with having RF at other agencies copy written in your name.
 

I would verify this with Contributor Relations if I were you.  At one time you could be thrown off Istock just for being a reviewer at another stock agency, much less an owner.  Maybe that's changed, but it would be something to look into if you are serious about exclusivity. 

« Reply #18 on: October 22, 2010, 12:59 »
0
Hi Lisa,

 Thanks for the tip. I have spoken with people there but that is a good point to make clear to them. I appreciate the guidance.

Best,
Jonathan

« Reply #19 on: October 22, 2010, 13:53 »
0
I'm pretty sure that's not something that would work...

« Reply #20 on: October 22, 2010, 14:05 »
0
Thanks Sean,

 If possible you know the company as good if not better than most everyone, can you point me to the part of the contract the reflects that information? I would really appreciate it.

Thanks,
Jonathan

« Reply #21 on: October 22, 2010, 16:31 »
0
 Hi all,

 I have spoken directly with the company and it is my RF images in Macro that are copy written to my company that keeps me out, I can't un-license them for several years. Thanks for your input.

Best,
Jonathan
« Last Edit: October 22, 2010, 16:33 by Jonathan Ross »

« Reply #22 on: October 22, 2010, 16:51 »
0
I couldn't agree more Lee. Is it time to go exclusive while the others jump ship. Sounds like an opportunity waiting to happen for many shooters

Except that it isn't an opportunity.  What someone with your portfolio is looking to do is dominate the 1st page of searches with your images.  If you think that will be easier because a bunch of exclusives are giving up their crowns, think harder about it.  Most of those people weren't dominating searches anyhow.  Images from Yuri, Lise, Andres, Sean, Iofoto, DNY59, etc are what you see on the 1st pages, and many of these contributors are exclusives who aren't going anywhere, or non-exclusives who aren't going anywhere either.

It might be easier to compete farther down "the tail" but that's about it.  You will not get better exposure by jumping in when contributors with less mojo than you are jumping out.

« Reply #23 on: October 22, 2010, 17:43 »
0
Hi Lisa,

 I am not an exclusive at this time but if I could do it I would drop the other Micros in a heart beat right now. Being owner of another agency is not a breech in the contract as I know it. It has to do with having RF at other agencies copy written in your name.
 
Cheers,
Jonathan
Jonathan, not so long ago you were dead set against exclusivity with any agency. I'm wondering what's caused you to re-evaluate that position.

lisafx

« Reply #24 on: October 22, 2010, 18:58 »
0

Jonathan, not so long ago you were dead set against exclusivity with any agency. I'm wondering what's caused you to re-evaluate that position.

He mentioned in another thread he is recovering from a soccer injury.  Maybe he is on some very nice drugs for the pain ;D

(Just kidding in good fun Jonathan - not taking a shot BTW. )


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Buyers Bailing on Istock

Started by lisafx « 1 2 ... 67 68 » iStockPhoto.com

1692 Replies
251311 Views
Last post December 24, 2012, 21:19
by gostwyck
18 Replies
3938 Views
Last post November 24, 2011, 15:34
by lagereek
162 Replies
17763 Views
Last post May 14, 2012, 10:27
by jbryson
20 Replies
3934 Views
Last post February 14, 2013, 17:41
by Poncke
9 Replies
2517 Views
Last post January 15, 2014, 19:56
by djpadavona

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors