Author Topic: New Pricing (Read 19952 times)

brm1949 · « **on:** July 15, 2013, 13:38 »

Is this new, I have lost track of how they are screwing us:

http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1560?esource=50407_iStock_ABC_Wave_2_RNB_EN_em&sp_rid=&sp_mid=5577078

ShadySue · « **Reply #1 on:** July 15, 2013, 13:41 »

Quote from: brm1949 on July 15, 2013, 13:38

Is this new, I have lost track of how they are screwing us:

http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1560?esource=50407_iStock_ABC_Wave_2_RNB_EN_em&sp_rid=&sp_mid=5577078

No, not new, they've just started advertising it. The change was announced by email and istock's announcement thread on 27th June.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=354618&page=1

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #2 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:18 »

Press release from Yuri Acurs and iStock:

http://www.sys-con.com/node/2737094

Ploink · « **Reply #3 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:24 »

"...said Ellen Desmarais, the new general manager at iStockphoto..."

Did I miss that one?

ShadySue · « **Reply #4 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:29 »

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:24

"...said Ellen Desmarais, the new general manager at iStockphoto..."

Did I miss that one?

Never 'eard of 'er.

Ploink · « **Reply #5 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:32 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:29

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:24
"...said Ellen Desmarais, the new general manager at iStockphoto..."

Did I miss that one?
Never 'eard of 'er.

...dropping "Hs" everywhere,...

*SCNR*

ShadySue · « **Reply #6 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:39 »

Quote from: fotoVoyager on July 16, 2013, 04:18

Press release from Yuri Acurs and iStock:

http://www.sys-con.com/node/2737094

That is so embarrassing.
In addition to the new content and pricing changes, iStockphoto has also improved its online search experience. With more enhancements on the way, iStock recently updated the way search results are displayed with a streamlined grid and rollover capabilities that offers customers a cleaner, faster and simpler way to find specific content and the information they need. Other enhancements include a price filter to help creatives find the best content within their budget, new "Only from iStock" and "Editors' Pick" icons that make it easy to identify and purchase the perfect, stand-out content, and an improved search experience that helps creatives access exactly what they're looking for, free of hassle.
... at at time when:
1. The default search is said to be Best Match, but it is usually Age or Downloads, and takes three clicks to get to best match, but someone arriving for the first time would assume it was the best match.
2. refine search doesn't work, as in if you type e.g. woman in the main top search field, then try to refine it via the left hand column, nothing happens. (However, inputting woman, dog to the top search field does work.)
3. If you type woman, dog and choose illustrations only, it works, but if you then search e.g. man, cat, it defaults back to photos only*, whereas probably if someone chose illos only for the first search then tried another, there's presumably a better than 50-50 chance they'd want illos for the second.
* Actually that was only in FF, logged in. In IE, logged out, the second search defaulted to photos, illos and video. Still, you might think it would keep illos unless the buyer chose otherwise.

ShadySue · « **Reply #7 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:43 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:29

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:24
"...said Ellen Desmarais, the new general manager at iStockphoto..."

Did I miss that one?
Never 'eard of 'er.

Maybe that is the new announcement Lobo promised in the exclusive forum, firstly for Friday, then for first thing yesterday (Monday) morning.
Hasn't appeared yet.

Ploink · « **Reply #8 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:45 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:43

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:29
Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:24
"...said Ellen Desmarais, the new general manager at iStockphoto..."

Did I miss that one?
Never 'eard of 'er.
Maybe that is the new announcement Lobo promised in the exclusive forum, firstly for Friday, then for first thing yesterday (Monday) morning.
Hasn't appeared yet.

Ellen, the new and improved Rebecca?

Ploink · « **Reply #9 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:51 »

Just found this: Click

ShadySue · « **Reply #10 on:** July 16, 2013, 04:57 »

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:51

Just found this: Click

Having worked at Dow Jones, is she the one who doens't know what 50% actually means?

Ploink · « **Reply #11 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:00 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:57

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:51
Just found this: Click

Having worked at Dow Jones, is she the one who doens't know what 50% actually means?

Come on, what's a few percent compared to the "...site's commitment to its 'by creatives, for creatives' heritage..." and a "...a remarkable ability to drive impactful results...".

Impactful - what a word - but, yes, indeed...

ShadySue · « **Reply #12 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:15 »

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 05:00

Impactful - what a word - but, yes, indeed...

When I saw it, I thought "That's not a real word", but I checked, and apparently it is.
At least, it's in Merriam-Webster, but possibly not in the OED.
However, according to Washington State University:
"Many people in business and education like to speak of things that have an impact as being “impactful,” but this term does not appear in most dictionaries and is not well thought of by traditionalists. Use “influential” or “effective” instead. "

And in the Urban Dictionary:
"1. impactful
September 23, 2009 Urban Word of the Day
A non-existent word coined by corporate advertising, marketing and business drones to make their work sound far more useful, exciting and beneficial to humanity than it really is. This term is most frequently used in "team building" seminars and conferences in which said drones discuss the most effective ways to convince consumer zombies to purchase crap they clearly do not need or even want."
2. impactful
Something that conveys significance.
I.e. utter marketing gash, it's words like this that make society bad and help meaningless marketing plebians ascend the rungs of their pointless evil careers and step on anyone creative in their path. For shame marketing ... for shame.

Ploink · « **Reply #13 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:20 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 05:15

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 05:00
Impactful - what a word - but, yes, indeed...
When I saw it, I thought "That's not a real word", but I checked, and apparently it is.
At least, it's in Merriam-Webster, but possibly not in the OED.
However, according to Washington State University:
"Many people in business and education like to speak of things that have an impact as being “impactful,” but this term does not appear in most dictionaries and is not well thought of by traditionalists. Use “influential” or “effective” instead. "

And in the Urban Dictionary:
"1. impactful
September 23, 2009 Urban Word of the Day
A non-existent word coined by corporate advertising, marketing and business drones to make their work sound far more useful, exciting and beneficial to humanity than it really is. This term is most frequently used in "team building" seminars and conferences in which said drones discuss the most effective ways to convince consumer zombies to purchase crap they clearly do not need or even want."
2. impactful
Something that conveys significance.
I.e. utter marketing gash, it's words like this that make society bad and help meaningless marketing plebians ascend the rungs of their pointless evil careers and step on anyone creative in their path. For shame marketing ... for shame.

That's the reason why I love to come here: Not only is it entertaining, but you learn something new every day - thank you!

ShadySue · « **Reply #14 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:29 »

Quote from: fotoVoyager on July 16, 2013, 04:18

Press release from Yuri Acurs and iStock:

http://www.sys-con.com/node/2737094

Glorious example of double-new-speak:
"New Unique Content: The Arcurs Collection - Only at iStockphoto
iStockphoto is now the only site where the Arcurs Collection of photo, video, audio and vector elements can be found. Thousands of files are available today at http://istockphoto.com/yuri with more than 85,000 available by the fall of this year."
So I thought, Oh, has Yuri closed People Images, but I see he hasn't, though the front page is considerably cheapened by nasty big text over the banner slideshow:
http://peopleimages.com

(I'm trying to get my head around, "Purchase additional site credits if you need more money" Must check it on The Motley Fool.)

ShadySue · « **Reply #15 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:30 »

So if I declare some of my work as the ShadySue Collection, I can have other stuff elsewhere?

Oh, that's called 'image exclusivity'.

gostwyck · « **Reply #16 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:35 »

Read all about it in the Sacramento Bee too;

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/15/5569175/getty-images-names-ellen-desmarais.html

I notice that she lives in Manhattan and is based in Getty's NY office. I'll bet she's got no immediate plans to move to Calgary.

Yuri's stuff is still available at DT too.

ShadySue · « **Reply #17 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:36 »

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:45

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:43
Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:29
Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:24
"...said Ellen Desmarais, the new general manager at iStockphoto..."

Did I miss that one?
Never 'eard of 'er.
Maybe that is the new announcement Lobo promised in the exclusive forum, firstly for Friday, then for first thing yesterday (Monday) morning.
Hasn't appeared yet.

Ellen, the new and improved Rebecca?

iS ~~CEO~~ boss seems to be as much a Killer Job as manager of the Scotland football team.

Ploink · « **Reply #18 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:37 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 05:30

So if I declare some of my work as the ShadySue Collection, I can have other stuff elsewhere?
Oh, that's called 'image exclusivity'.

Go ahead, write them an e-mail asking them to consider the ShadySue Collection, but be sure to make it impactful

gostwyck · « **Reply #19 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:38 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 05:36

Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:45
Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:43
Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 04:29
Quote from: Ploink on July 16, 2013, 04:24
"...said Ellen Desmarais, the new general manager at iStockphoto..."

Did I miss that one?
Never 'eard of 'er.
Maybe that is the new announcement Lobo promised in the exclusive forum, firstly for Friday, then for first thing yesterday (Monday) morning.
Hasn't appeared yet.

Ellen, the new and improved Rebecca?
iS CEO seems to be as much a Killer Job as manager of the Scotland football team.

She's the GM ... as was Rebbecca. The previous numpty was actually the COO.

ShadySue · « **Reply #20 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:40 »

Quote from: gostwyck on July 16, 2013, 05:38

She's the GM ... as was Rebbecca. The previous numpty was actually the COO.

Tx, it's all the same to me, but I've made the correction.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:47 »

oh I was waiting for something exciting, is that all Yuri?

gostwyck · « **Reply #22 on:** July 16, 2013, 05:55 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 16, 2013, 05:40

Quote from: gostwyck on July 16, 2013, 05:38
She's the GM ... as was Rebbecca. The previous numpty was actually the COO.
Tx, it's all the same to me, but I've made the correction.

There's a huge difference between being GM and CEO (or MD). Essentially one is responsible for internal matters and the other is responsible for external matters and strategy. On a warship or submarine for example the captain is the CEO who decides where the craft should be, how fast it travels, etc, to achieve it's mission whereas the First Lieutenant's job (the GM) is to makes sure the decks are clean and the crew are properly trained, etc.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #23 on:** July 16, 2013, 06:09 »

Wow, they certainly are liars, aren't they?

"iStockphoto is now the only site where the Arcurs Collection of photo, video, audio and vector elements can be found."
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-4431227-whats-that-up-there.php
http://peopleimages.com/image/whats-that-up-there-eye-beautiful-portrait

"iStockphoto customers will also notice substantial cost reductions with half of the library now at half the price. This long-term pricing change reassures time-pressed creatives that they no longer have to shop around for a better deal. Almost half of the iStock library includes unique content that is not available outside of the Getty Images family."

Nice how they talk about "half the price" - independent collection, and then switch to talking about the half that is exclusive. And we know that they are believable when they've promised things in the past, so "long-term" is certainly believable.

"With more enhancements on the way, iStock recently updated the way search results are displayed with a streamlined grid and rollover capabilities that offers customers a cleaner, faster and simpler way to find specific content and the information they need."

Faster, with a loupe that takes seconds to load, simpler, with how you have to move the mouse around to see the next loupe, and cleaner, with the double grey frame on images.

"new "Only from iStock" and "Editors' Pick" icons that make it easy to identify and purchase the perfect, stand-out content,"

And we all know what lies those are. Wow.

Gio · « **Reply #24 on:** July 16, 2013, 06:18 »

Lies are the foundation of almost any marketing. Sadly.

fotorob · « **Reply #25 on:** July 16, 2013, 06:32 »

I just check, the so-called "only from iStock" images from Yuri are about 83% cheaper on his own site:

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #26 on:** July 16, 2013, 06:35 »

I take it that the promise to reassess inde material and promote it out of the "main" collection is superceded by the promise never, ever to raise its price again.

83% cheaper, Rob? Surely not?

gillian vann · « **Reply #27 on:** July 16, 2013, 06:52 »

if iS lowers the price of all the indie stuff (that is also on FT, DT, SS etc) won't that mean those other agencies will be forced to lower their prices too?

I think they've played this really well and the goal may be to smash the competition (at our expense, of course).

jjneff · « **Reply #28 on:** July 16, 2013, 07:02 »

Would it be safe to ask in the iStock forum if exclusive artists can sell from their own site now? Yuri peopleimages as an example, along with the press release how could they say no?

ShadySue · « **Reply #29 on:** July 16, 2013, 07:05 »

Quote from: jjneff on July 16, 2013, 07:02

Would it be safe to ask in the iStock forum if exclusive artists can sell from their own site now? Yuri peopleimages as an example, along with the press release how could they say no?

You try; I can't.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #30 on:** July 16, 2013, 07:05 »

their goal is very confusing, looks like they want all indies collection due to the 999 slots and also because of the recent half stock collection for half price advertising AND as a desperate measure too dropping drastically the pricing

OTOH they are dumping files at thinkstock trying to compete with SS and other, bigger buyers can purchase them there instead of iStock

so it looks they want it all and we know what happens with very ambitious persons/companies

as many said here istock will be exclusive and thinkstock for indies, in the meantime they dream of recovering buyers...

Ploink · « **Reply #31 on:** July 16, 2013, 07:08 »

Quote from: jjneff on July 16, 2013, 07:02

Would it be safe to ask in the iStock forum if exclusive artists can sell from their own site now? Yuri peopleimages as an example, along with the press release how could they say no?

That post would have a half time of approx. 3.983 milliseconds, only slightly exceeded by your posting privileges on the forum. But go ahead, try it, what good is physics without an experiment?

halfshag · « **Reply #32 on:** July 16, 2013, 07:23 »

The new Rebecca has chosen to base their new strategy on deceit? Surely they're a couple of well written blogs away from another uncomfortable backfire. Very odd.

EmberMike · « **Reply #33 on:** July 16, 2013, 08:02 »

Quote from: halfshag on July 16, 2013, 07:23

The new Rebecca has chosen to base their new strategy on deceit?...

Wait, deceit is a new strategy at istock?

Seems more like business-as-usual to me.

yuliang11 · « **Reply #35 on:** July 16, 2013, 08:30 »

I noticed all of my photos are 1/2 of their values in istockphoto. Anyone has the script to delete all your photos from istock ? i'm considering a permanent removal of all my photos there.

jjneff · « **Reply #36 on:** July 16, 2013, 08:30 »

Well, I am smart enough to not post that. It dose irk me to see the double standard for being exclusive. Now from a business point I think iStock is making the right moves in the market. Pricing was to high for a lot of buyers so the cut is good for buyers and long term health of the company. Next iStock has different level pricing which other sites have as well, example "OffSet" which is another completely different site from the SS main site. I am still feeling bullish on the iStock changes.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #37 on:** July 16, 2013, 08:32 »

Quote from: yuliang11 on July 16, 2013, 08:30

I noticed all of my photos are 1/2 of their values in istockphoto. Anyone has the script to delete all your photos from istock ? i'm considering a permanent removal of all my photos there.

http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_addDeactivationColumn.user.js

yuliang11 · « **Reply #38 on:** July 16, 2013, 08:53 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on July 16, 2013, 08:32

Quote from: yuliang11 on July 16, 2013, 08:30
I noticed all of my photos are 1/2 of their values in istockphoto. Anyone has the script to delete all your photos from istock ? i'm considering a permanent removal of all my photos there.

http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_addDeactivationColumn.user.js

thanks. does it runs on chrome ?

BoBoBolinski · « **Reply #39 on:** July 16, 2013, 09:05 »

Just contact Customer Relations, they will quickly delete your account.

mlwinphoto · « **Reply #40 on:** July 16, 2013, 09:30 »

Quote from: BoBoBolinski on July 16, 2013, 09:05

Just contact Customer Relations, they will quickly delete your account.

It takes 30 days to get your images off the site after giving notice. Removing them yourself is alot quicker.
Not sure I would give notice before making your next payout. Even though they say you will receive your balance at the end of termination I no longer trust them to do that. I've got another $7+ to go, which could take months at this rate.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #41 on:** July 16, 2013, 09:43 »

Quote from: yuliang11 on July 16, 2013, 08:53

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on July 16, 2013, 08:32
Quote from: yuliang11 on July 16, 2013, 08:30
I noticed all of my photos are 1/2 of their values in istockphoto. Anyone has the script to delete all your photos from istock ? i'm considering a permanent removal of all my photos there.

http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_addDeactivationColumn.user.js

thanks. does it runs on chrome ?

It did back in February when I deactivated almost all my iStock portfolio

You just have to get Chrome to accept something not from the "Chrome store"

http://www.howtogeek.com/120743/how-to-install-extensions-from-outside-the-chrome-web-store/

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #42 on:** July 16, 2013, 10:06 »

I don't know if you remember the unlamented KK Thompson saying that iStock paid out $1.7 million a week to contributors in September 2010, and that he expected it to go up to $2 million a week in 2011:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322

Apparently weekly payouts are back to $1.7 million a week, unless Monday's Getty press release got it wrong (look at the end, in the "About iStockphoto" section)

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/15/5569175/getty-images-names-ellen-desmarais.html

Possibly it's just lazy editing (given the horrible pseudo English in the rest of the release, that's an option), but possibly it reflects just how much more Getty is soaking up from what customers are paying, combined with a drop in business.

I think Ms Dow Jones has no idea what she's signed up to try and fix - getting designers to come back and shop at iStock when you know squat about those businesses, designers, illustrators, etc. seems like classic business school hubris. Any business is the same as any other business; you just work a few levers and presto...

cobalt · « **Reply #43 on:** July 16, 2013, 10:26 »

I don't understand why they make it so easy for their competitors to point out all the issues with "exclusive images" that are available elsewhere for 83% less.

They must really believe the customers have no connections with the designers that upload the content, or that the design world is not interconnected. It would have been easy to do this in the eighties, but now where customers can compare prices with a mouseclick?

But maybe it all works well and they find their way back to the top....who knows...

Yuri going exclusive is in principal a good move for them.

dingles · « **Reply #44 on:** July 16, 2013, 10:29 »

iStock customers must live in a bubble...really who doesn't shop around for best prices...and google makes it so easy to find any image elsewhere...they also make it easy to steal images too...but that is a different issue

Ploink · « **Reply #45 on:** July 16, 2013, 10:32 »

On logging on to IS I was just asked to fill out a survey. Once I identified myself as a contributor the only question was: "How could we serve you better?".

I gave them a few hints...

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #46 on:** July 16, 2013, 10:44 »

More from Yuri Acurs:

http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/16/scoopshot/

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #47 on:** July 16, 2013, 10:48 »

Quote from: fotoVoyager on July 16, 2013, 10:44

More from Yuri Acurs:

http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/16/scoopshot/

Odd. We've already learned that neither "citizen journalism" stock nor "assignment" stock works as a paradigm. Already many such businesses out of business.

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #48 on:** July 16, 2013, 10:51 »

Ah, but flipping the company to the next investor who doesn't believe that does...

Pauws99 · « **Reply #49 on:** July 16, 2013, 10:55 »

Just got Dreamstimes circular promoting some Yuri images - will they be saying the COLLECTION rather than some individuall pics are available exclusively through them?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #50 on:** July 16, 2013, 11:07 »

Quote from: fotoVoyager on July 16, 2013, 10:44

More from Yuri Acurs:

http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/16/scoopshot/

investing 1.2M? his he washing money? never seen anything as terrible, people talk about crapstock, what can we call scoopshot?

foap is like state of art comparing to them

cobalt · « **Reply #51 on:** July 16, 2013, 11:19 »

Interesting. So he is investing his money (from getty?) in a business that will take away income from the getty news empire.

5 dollars 50% is an easy to market business model. Not surprised it is so popular.

Ron · « **Reply #52 on:** July 16, 2013, 11:27 »

Buyers cant be that blind, are they? They see the same images on other agencies? Some should report false advertising.

gostwyck · « **Reply #53 on:** July 16, 2013, 11:52 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on July 16, 2013, 10:48

Quote from: fotoVoyager on July 16, 2013, 10:44
More from Yuri Acurs:

http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/16/scoopshot/

Odd. We've already learned that neither "citizen journalism" stock nor "assignment" stock works as a paradigm. Already many such businesses out of business.

Even odder ... I thought Yuri told us that "Professionals deal with professionals". So why is he buying into the efforts of amateurs with phone cameras?

Maui · « **Reply #54 on:** July 16, 2013, 12:30 »

Never mind...

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #55 on:** July 16, 2013, 12:35 »

Quote from: gostwyck on July 16, 2013, 11:52

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on July 16, 2013, 10:48
Quote from: fotoVoyager on July 16, 2013, 10:44
More from Yuri Acurs:

http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/16/scoopshot/

Odd. We've already learned that neither "citizen journalism" stock nor "assignment" stock works as a paradigm. Already many such businesses out of business.

Even odder ... I thought Yuri told us that "Professionals deal with professionals". So why is he buying into the efforts of amateurs with phone cameras?

He's only dealing with management. The crowdsourced plebs are nothing to do with him.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #56 on:** July 16, 2013, 13:38 »

Ms. Desmarais looks about 12, but is probably turning 30 this year (Milford, MA High School class of 1991 according to her Facebook page). There are a couple of interesting things I found doing a quick web search.

One was from Wharton's Alumni magazine (story starts on page

, "Passionate about Media"

http://issuu.com/wcnynews/docs/2011-whartonny-interact-200dpi

It says she wanted to make a change from finance to "media" and went to Wharton to accomplish that

I wondered why she left Dow Jones (given all the gushing about how wonderful it was in the Wharton article) and found a general article about layoffs at Dow Jones/WSJ as part of News Corp's split into two companies, with a June deadline for those accepting a buyout offer:

http://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2013/06/26/job-cuts-looming-at-dow-jones-wall.html

And the Wharton article mentions FINS (job search web site) that she helped launch. That was sold last year:

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2012/06/6102791/more-layoffs-dow-jones-following-sale-career-website-finscom

Perhaps those changes made a move to Getty look like a good idea? Just seems like a bit of a step down for her.

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #57 on:** July 16, 2013, 13:54 »

Quote from: Ron on July 16, 2013, 11:27

Some should report false advertising.

Us?

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #58 on:** July 16, 2013, 13:57 »

Quote from: Beppe Grillo on July 16, 2013, 13:54

Quote from: Ron on July 16, 2013, 11:27
Some should report false advertising.

Us?

Ask yourself this:
A) are you suffering as the result of false advertising?
B) Will you be happy having the authorities tell GI that Beppe Grillo has lodged a complaint against them, so they are now subject of legal proceedings?

ShadySue · « **Reply #59 on:** July 16, 2013, 15:32 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 16, 2013, 13:57

Quote from: Beppe Grillo on July 16, 2013, 13:54
Quote from: Ron on July 16, 2013, 11:27
Some should report false advertising.

Us?

Ask yourself this:
A) are you suffering as the result of false advertising?
B) Will you be happy having the authorities tell GI that Beppe Grillo has lodged a complaint against them, so they are now subject of legal proceedings?

I don't know about other countries, but in the UK:
1. There is no necessity that you have suffered as a result, it just has to be false advertising which you report. You don't need to have been affected in any way, just to have seen the advert.
1b It's arguable that we are suffering by finding ourselves contributing to such a dishonest company.
2. The ASA promise not to reveal your name.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #60 on:** July 16, 2013, 16:16 »

Well, that's good to know, Sue. Thanks for the input.

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #61 on:** July 17, 2013, 01:36 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on July 16, 2013, 13:57

Quote from: Beppe Grillo on July 16, 2013, 13:54
Quote from: Ron on July 16, 2013, 11:27
Some should report false advertising.

Us?

Ask yourself this:
A) are you suffering as the result of false advertising?
B) Will you be happy having the authorities tell GI that Beppe Grillo has lodged a complaint against them, so they are now subject of legal proceedings?

ShadySue answered you better than I could do (in english) - the situation is similar in all Europe Union.

And yes I suffer about false advertising, I suffer about unfair and inequitable behavior.

Ron's post: "Some should report false advertising" remembered me a french saying: « armons nous et partez… » I don't know if it exists in english, but it could sound like "Let us arm and let you go…"

luissantos84 · « **Reply #62 on:** September 10, 2013, 17:38 »

just seen this ad

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #63 on:** September 10, 2013, 17:58 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on September 10, 2013, 17:38

just seen this ad

Funny how they just make up numbers and pretend they are real advertising points.

Yesterday's email said "Our seasonal galleries are handpicked by our editors and perfect for the season (or holiday or current event or trending topic) everybody's talking about.", except they are nothing but search result returns. Unless their editoris handpicked 55,000 autumn images.

gbalex · « **Reply #64 on:** September 10, 2013, 17:58 »

Quote from: gillian on July 16, 2013, 06:52

if iS lowers the price of all the indie stuff (that is also on FT, DT, SS etc) won't that mean those other agencies will be forced to lower their prices too?

I think they've played this really well and the goal may be to smash the competition (at our expense, of course).

Business plans @ our expense is the micro mantra these days. This group has never been fair and they get uglier every day. It is long past time to afford them the benefit of doubt. They have proved who they are time after time, year after year.

We only have ourselves to blame if we leave our images on IS and BS.... the giant * sound is getting louder.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #65 on:** September 10, 2013, 20:25 »

True and apparently Gillian hasn't been informed about the "Race to the Bottom". This is how a new industry or technology weeds out the weak. Everyone operates on the principle that buyers will come to them for the lowest prices alone, and that quality or customer service are of no consequence. They are dead wrong and soon to be a historical footnote.

I know many of you have some sales and marketing background, and one of the most basic foundations is, competing on price alone is the worst way to grow or sustain a business.

IS should be raising prices and commissions to knock out the competition. But maybe it's just too late. Then we'll start to see desperation and last gasps. Things like half price sales. Oh Oh, what's 50% off?

Quote from: gbalex on September 10, 2013, 17:58

Quote from: gillian on July 16, 2013, 06:52
if iS lowers the price of all the indie stuff (that is also on FT, DT, SS etc) won't that mean those other agencies will be forced to lower their prices too?

I think they've played this really well and the goal may be to smash the competition (at our expense, of course).

Business plans @ our expense is the micro mantra these days. This group has never been fair and they get uglier every day. It is long past time to afford them the benefit of doubt. They have proved who they are time after time, year after year.

We only have ourselves to blame if we leave our images on IS and BS.... the giant * sound is getting louder.

wds · « **Reply #66 on:** September 10, 2013, 20:46 »

Regarding raising prices, iStock raised prices for years which may be part of the reason customers started to leave.

gillian vann · « **Reply #67 on:** September 10, 2013, 22:48 »

how could I not have heard of the race to the bottom... it's all people talk about around here. They've also been predicting the fall of iS for a number of years.

Supermarket chains do exactly this to squeeze out independent competitors, they drop prices ridiculously low on certain items (esp f&v) knowing they can cover their bottom lines with other products. once the competitor is gone they can slowly increase prices again. (actually they don't increase prices, they reduce of the size of the product so you don't notice).

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #68 on:** September 11, 2013, 00:11 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on September 10, 2013, 17:58

...Yesterday's email said "Our seasonal galleries are handpicked by our editors and perfect for the season (or holiday or current event or trending topic) everybody's talking about.", except they are nothing but search result returns. Unless their editoris handpicked 55,000 autumn images.

Yesterday's e-mail also touted how wonderful the new search is:

"Type "tiger" and get images of tigers – not orange tabby cats or tiger-print tuxedos or little league teams from towns starting with T – but the actual stripey beautiful beasts themselves. "

So I thought I'd try and a search for Tiger, new images first. It had 2 tabby cats, one Cornish Rex, a cheetah, leopards, lions, a kid with some sort of tiger applique on his pillow, some stuffed animals, a woman with a leopard print fabric pretending to be Cleopatra and a gorge in China, all on the top half of the first page.

To be fair there were some tigers, but you'd think they'd check out the example they were going to promote to be sure you'd actually get decent results with it...

It'd be funny except that many people are trying to make a living from this business and their agent is doing a lamentable job.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #69 on:** September 11, 2013, 01:27 »

Tiger does work for me, nothing but tigers. Spaniel works, too. They have done something to sort out the search.

Imagenomad · « **Reply #70 on:** September 11, 2013, 02:20 »

Quote from: Beppe Grillo on July 17, 2013, 01:36

...a french saying: « armons nous et partez… » I don't know if it exists in english, but it could sound like "Let us arm and let you go…"

The equivalent English language saying is, "Let's you and him fight".

I know the posts are from a few months back but I can also confirm that 60 days after closing my iS account, they paid me all that was due assuming that the PP payments were correct too.

ShadySue · « **Reply #71 on:** September 11, 2013, 06:08 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on September 11, 2013, 01:27

Tiger does work for me, nothing but tigers. Spaniel works, too. They have done something to sort out the search.

Tiger mostly works for me (a few non-tigers, nothing like as many as before), though the 'new' search shows they're seldom checking keywording - many 'tiger skin's or 'tiger fabric's, both of which have their own DA.

Not checking new files is really a cost saving too much. E.g. looking at 'iceberg' sorted by new, there are a LOT of photos of ice cubes all by the same person, and we can see that the translation of 'berg' (mountain) to iceberg, which I first reported to them in 2009, hasn't been sorted yet.

If they have chosen not to inspect keywords on submission, no wonder they allow new files to drop rapidly in the best match. I uploaded one last week which fell below the first 25% of files for its main keyword well inside 48 hours of acceptance. So there is no reward for keywording new files accurately.

ShadySue · « **Reply #72 on:** September 11, 2013, 06:39 »

One of the problems is that so often, the DAs you're asked for on uploading aren't the same as the options people get when searching. Taking tiger as an example:

One of the options for a searcher is 'tiger print', but that isn't an option when uploading; though you can input 'tiger print' which is in the CV, a lot of people keyword tiger prints as 'tiger skin' and/or 'tiger'

bunhill · « **Reply #73 on:** September 11, 2013, 08:16 »

Quote from: ShadySue on September 11, 2013, 06:39

One of the problems is that so often, the DAs you're asked for on uploading aren't the same as the options people get when searching. Taking tiger as an example:

One of the options for a searcher is 'tiger print', but that isn't an option when uploading; though you can input 'tiger print' which is in the CV, a lot of people keyword tiger prints as 'tiger skin' and/or 'tiger'

1. Your pre - search example is offering everything with tiger as the stem. It's a mixture of disambiguation options and CV terms with 'tiger' as the stem. That seems perfectly sensible and as it should be. I cannot understand why you believe it is a problem.

2. I do not understand why you are saying that 'tiger print' is not an option when uploading. As you say it is in the CV. So it is an option.

And if you look at the hierarchy, 'tiger print' is a disambiguation option for 'tiger skin'. A contributor entering 'tiger skin' is offered the option to choose 'tiger print'. They can choose how precise and accurate they want to be. All of this makes good sense given that search is based on relevancy data. So prints that are wrongly disambiguation as skins will drop down in searches for skins.

Back up the thread someone else was complaining that search by new files contained lots of poorly keyworded new content. That is to be expected surely - lots of contributors use irrelevant keywords. Or they irritatingly edit their files to add irrelevant bulk and spurious keywords after acceptance. The apparently renewed focus on relevancy should make that sort of practice counter productive (like at Alamy but done slightly differently).

I don't believe that it will take buyers long to figure that new file searches tend to be less focused. That won't always be a bad thing.

ShadySue · « **Reply #74 on:** September 11, 2013, 09:21 »

Quote from: bhr on September 11, 2013, 08:16

1. Your pre - search example is offering everything with tiger as the stem. It's a mixture of disambiguation options and CV terms with 'tiger' as the stem. That seems perfectly sensible and as it should be. I cannot understand why you believe it is a problem.

2. I do not understand why you are saying that 'tiger print' is not an option when uploading. As you say it is in the CV. So it is an option.

As many people choose 'tiger' or 'tiger skin' for tiger print, it's an issue.

Quote

And if you look at the hierarchy, 'tiger print' is a disambiguation option for 'tiger skin'. A contributor entering 'tiger skin' is offered the option to choose 'tiger print'. They can choose how precise and accurate they want to be. All of this makes good sense given that search is based on relevancy data. So prints that are wrongly disambiguation as skins will drop down in searches for skins.

But as they're dropping new files rapidly even when correctly keyworded, there's no incentive to do it properly, because once files sink, it's really difficult to get them 'up' again.

Quote

Back up the thread someone else was complaining that search by new files contained lots of poorly keyworded new content. That is to be expected surely - lots of contributors use irrelevant keywords. Or they irritatingly edit their files to add irrelevant bulk and spurious keywords after acceptance. The apparently renewed focus on relevancy should make that sort of practice counter productive.

It's often easy to see when people have added keywords, as their accepted words are often alphabetised and their additions come on top of these.
They should pay the inspectors to at least delete the most obvious bad keywords, like iceberg in photos of ice cube, or lettuce or some cocktail. And if someone has pointed out a mistake, like a mistranslation in the CV of 'berg', it's a pretty simple fix (actually they have sorted other mistakes I pointed out in the past [when I could], I don't know why that one remains as I pointed it out more than once).

But I only chose 'tiger' as it was mentioned earlier in the thread, and 'iceberg' because it's one of my regular check searches. There are many CV/DA/search problems much more serious than these.

Red Dove · « **Reply #75 on:** September 11, 2013, 09:59 »

I started to think IS had been taken over by 12 year olds - but I'm beginning to believe IS thinks their customers are 12 years old.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New Pricing (Read 19952 times)

EmberMike

BoBoBolinski

mlwinphoto

Ron

Beppe Grillo

Beppe Grillo

Uncle Pete

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors