MicrostockGroup

could some of you explain to me why are you opted out of the partner program.
I have just checked and my images aren´t there, in thinkstock at least. But now i wonder why shouldn´t i opt in, i was a contributor in StockXpert and i am right now contributing in other sites as well, so my images are available in many sites, what would be the reason not to sell in thinkstock too? is just a matter of the price or comission they sale, or is it because you think it would damage your sales at istock? Thank you in advance for your opinion.
Bte

Nicely summed up Sharpshot.  I will add that it was particularly nasty (and shortsighted!) of them to lower the subscription payments they were already making at StockXpert from .30 to .25.  It felt like a slap in the face. 

Also, consider the fact that there is no instant reporting of sales, and the payouts for people opted in are getting pushed farther and father back...  It all adds up to a clear message that the masterminds behind Thinkstock hold contributors in contempt. 

Ok, thank you for the info. It´s hard to follow this allways changing microworld when you don´t do this as a daily basis, and when you have to read every news in foreign lenguage.
Thank´s for summit up for me.
BTW i´m not going that road either.

I put old, low-selling photos in when the program started, but after that breach of trust when they had told us they were going after 'new customers' (hinted: poaching SS's customers), they emailled all their biggest buyers and suggested they take out TS subscriptions, bizarrely encouraging iStock's best customers to ditch iStock. I opted out as soon as I heard about that. Insanity.

Gee, that really sounds like a description of the entire Istockphoto organization. Yes, I know -lots of people like them and make plenty of money there- but they really do have an arrogant side to them that has been refined and honed and turned into - thinkstock.  There isn't much that any of us can do about it, but it certainly adds a great deal of weight to the "NO" side of the exclusivity debate. I tried to opt out of the partner program repeatedly to no avail, and finally, after some strongly worded letters regarding my rights under the copyright laws, got a reply from them saying that they were entitled to sell my images for 6 months from the request date, and they were going to do so right up to the last second. And that's true, they can.
I owned the Getty stock from the day they went public many years ago, and sadly, right up to the time they took the company private in buyout that grossly undervalued the company.( proving that you should never own the stock of a company where one family holds a controlling interest).
 Thinkstock is a very good way of generating short term profits at the expense of long term damage to the supplier base. This would not make sense for a company being managed for the long term, but it makes perfect sense for a company being groomed for an IPO. The private equity firm holding this company only wants to turn this around at a profit, and if burning bridges to maximize short term profits does that, then that's what they will do. It's the best explanation, at least in my opinion, of why thinkstock was created, why StockXpert was bought , and why they would take the risk of alienating a large group of contributors. Thinkstock is going to be very strong for a year or two, and it will be done on the backs of the contributors who signed on to istock in good faith. All the costs of developing the current group of images that exists on thinkstock was amortized by StockXpert and istock. The only real cost associated with thinkstock is advertising, which is pretty cheap right now. ( and the ads are everywhere!).
Having said that, if Getty does go public again, i would probably still buy it, because even with the damage this group of managers has done to the brand, it's still the best company in the space.

Same here

Despite the prevailing shitstorm iS seems to have removed all my images off Thinkstock that ended up there via StockXpert as promised.