Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2012, 16:50

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors


« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print

Topic: Revised targets  

(Read 2854 times)
ShadySue
« on: December 22, 2011, 17:45 »

Istock have revised their targets downwards.
Felicitations to those who will benefit.  Smiley


Ignore | Logged


DepositPhotos.com
fotografer
« Reply #1 on: December 22, 2011, 17:50 »

I will still be going from 18% to 17%, pathetic!!!!!!  Even sites like 123rf and bigstock are starting to catch up


Ignore | Logged


PaulieWalnuts


iStock Gauge
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2011, 17:51 »

Istock have revised their targets downwards.
Felicitations to those who will benefit.  Smiley


Here, let me help you with the link


Ignore | Logged


Perry



« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2011, 17:53 »

LOL they moved my next target from 40,000 to 35,000 (-12,5%) but in the meantime my sales are down -50% from previous year.


Ignore | Logged


ShadySue
« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2011, 17:54 »

Istock have revised their targets downwards.
Felicitations to those who will benefit.  Smiley


Here, let me help you with the link


Whoops  Embarrassed Tx.


Ignore | Logged


Freedom


« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2011, 18:16 »

Congrats to those who will benefit!

I have reached my target for this year, the revision still gives me a more realistic goal to work towards to next year. I am glad that iStock has listened.


Ignore | Logged


luissantos84

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2011, 18:18 »

2009: 48 downloads
2010: 336 downloads (1403 credits)
2011: 629 downloads (3476 credits)

what will we have in 2012?


Ignore | Logged


KB

iStock Gauge
« Reply #7 on: December 22, 2011, 18:35 »

I have reached my target for this year, the revision still gives me a more realistic goal to work towards to next year. I am glad that iStock has listened.
How is that? These revisions don't imply a thing really about what next year's targets might be.

This year's targets were set the same as the initial targets for last year. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see the same targets once again being used for 2013's targets.

As for iStock listening; sorry, I don't buy that a bit. They have shown far too many times that they don't listen. Whatever reason they had for lowering the targets to these numbers, it had nothing to do with listening.


Ignore | Logged


lthn


« Reply #8 on: December 22, 2011, 18:41 »

I heard the rumor that they soon gonna revise the independent percentage tiers too:

15%
15.1%
15.2%
15.3%
15.3% + a happy meal
15.3% + a happy meal + a krispy kreme donut

the inside source said that after some brainstorming they simply figured the current tiers weren't insultive enough


Ignore | Logged


kelby


« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2011, 18:44 »

this mean that istock has sold less content than the previous year, in particular for photos !!???!!!???
nothing to be happy  Sad


Ignore | Logged


ShadySue
« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2011, 18:45 »

this mean that istock has sold less content than the previous year, in particular for photos !!???!!!???

They revised downwards last year too.


Ignore | Logged


KB

iStock Gauge
« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2011, 18:46 »

this mean that istock has sold less content than the previous year, in particular for photos !!???!!!???

They revised downwards last year too.
But this year's downwards revisions are larger than last year (i.e., lower).

If they had lowered them to this level last year, I'd be a bit less pissed at them!  Grin


Ignore | Logged


wolfman

New Member


« Reply #12 on: December 22, 2011, 18:52 »

=
« Last Edit: December 22, 2011, 18:56 by wolfman »

Ignore | Logged


wolfman

New Member


« Reply #13 on: December 22, 2011, 18:55 »

Congrats to those who will benefit!

I have reached my target for this year, the revision still gives me a more realistic goal to work towards to next year. I am glad that iStock has listened.

Dude if you think they've listened you are dillusional.

A lot of people are experiencing 40% drops since last year and istock reduce some levels 12.5% - do the maths and tell me who's winning in this scenario.


Ignore | Logged


Freedom


« Reply #14 on: December 22, 2011, 19:12 »

I interpret it differently. It means that iStock has had a bigger profit margin in 2011 (due to higher prices), so it can afford to let more contributors into higher RC levels and remain "sustainable". I see this as a good sign, and not a doom's day signal.

this mean that istock has sold less content than the previous year, in particular for photos !!???!!!???
nothing to be happy  Sad


Ignore | Logged


gostwyck

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #15 on: December 22, 2011, 19:32 »

Congrats to those who will benefit!

I have reached my target for this year, the revision still gives me a more realistic goal to work towards to next year. I am glad that iStock has listened.

Dude if you think they've listened you are dillusional.

A lot of people are experiencing 40% drops since last year and istock reduce some levels 12.5% - do the maths and tell me who's winning in this scenario.

Yes but they can't possibly admit to just how far sales have fallen can they? It's both commercially sensitive and extremely embarassing for Istock. Expect more of the same in future years. The dam has been breached. The only question now is at what point they'll be able to stem the flow.


Ignore | Logged


jsnover
« Reply #16 on: December 22, 2011, 20:11 »

The change means nothing to me. Last year I had almost 45K RCs and this year it looks like I'll be just under 30K. The good news is that it's only from 18% to 17% and sales are so crappy, it matters less and less what happens there.

Why did the illustrators get royally shafted? I read masses of reports of people experiencing large drops in sales and yet all but one level of illustrator stays exactly the same. I know the issue of the real disparities between the media was worked over when this sorry system was introduced, but looking at what it takes to get to the highest level of illustration royalties versus for photos, it's reverse unfairness. You just about double the 40/19% level and you get 45/20 if you're an illustrator, but for a photographer you have to make almost 10x the 40/19% level to get 45/20.

Reminds me of gerrymandered congressional districts drawn in weird and whacky shapes to suit those in power.


Ignore | Logged


WarrenPrice

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #17 on: December 22, 2011, 20:17 »

The change means nothing to me. Last year I had almost 45K RCs and this year it looks like I'll be just under 30K. The good news is that it's only from 18% to 17% and sales are so crappy, it matters less and less what happens there.

Why did the illustrators get royally shafted? I read masses of reports of people experiencing large drops in sales and yet all but one level of illustrator stays exactly the same. I know the issue of the real disparities between the media was worked over when this sorry system was introduced, but looking at what it takes to get to the highest level of illustration royalties versus for photos, it's reverse unfairness. You just about double the 40/19% level and you get 45/20 if you're an illustrator, but for a photographer you have to make almost 10x the 40/19% level to get 45/20.

Reminds me of gerrymandered congressional districts drawn in weird and whacky shapes to suit those in power.

Are you from Texas?   Roll Eyes


Ignore | Logged


gostwyck

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #18 on: December 22, 2011, 20:21 »

Reminds me of gerrymandered congressional districts drawn in weird and whacky shapes to suit those in power.

Well obviously it is 'gerrymandered' in that the system is precisely designed to produce the outcome that they want. If things change then they simply adjust the targets to suit __ or maybe not, but always in their favour anyway. Heads Istock wins, tails you lose.


Ignore | Logged


Sadstock


« Reply #19 on: December 22, 2011, 20:36 »

Reminds me of gerrymandered congressional districts drawn in weird and whacky shapes to suit those in power.

Well obviously it is 'gerrymandered' in that the system is precisely designed to produce the outcome that they want. If things change then they simply adjust the targets to suit __ or maybe not, but always in their favour anyway. Heads Istock wins, tails you lose.


-------------------------------------------------------

So true.  Why else would they be adjusting the 40% targets for illustration and flash but not for the other percentages? 


Ignore | Logged


jsnover
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2011, 20:37 »

...
Reminds me of gerrymandered congressional districts drawn in weird and whacky shapes to suit those in power.

Are you from Texas?   Roll Eyes

No, but I lived in Austin for 3 years, so I do follow along. That skinny district snaking from Austin to San Antonio caught my attention...


Ignore | Logged


Sadstock


« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2011, 20:45 »

Istock have revised their targets downwards.
Felicitations to those who will benefit.  Smiley


Here, let me help you with the link


-----------------------------------------


All the people in the thread thanking Istock for its generosity makes me ill.  It was Istock's decisions that put these folks percentage at risk, so Istock does not deserve any praise for the change.

Note who announced this news?  "iStockHQ"!  Guess nobody there has the guts to put their name out there and take responsibility for the RC system and the grief they will get about it.  


Ignore | Logged


Freedom


« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2011, 21:17 »

They probably won't admit bad news, but they have to answer to their bosses and shareholders. If they have lost profits, they will definitely not be handing out candies.

Congrats to those who will benefit!

I have reached my target for this year, the revision still gives me a more realistic goal to work towards to next year. I am glad that iStock has listened.

Dude if you think they've listened you are dillusional.

A lot of people are experiencing 40% drops since last year and istock reduce some levels 12.5% - do the maths and tell me who's winning in this scenario.

Yes but they can't possibly admit to just how far sales have fallen can they? It's both commercially sensitive and extremely embarassing for Istock. Expect more of the same in future years. The dam has been breached. The only question now is at what point they'll be able to stem the flow.


Ignore | Logged


jbarber873


« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2011, 21:18 »

   Big change downward in the video targets as well. One of the rarely commented on issues at Istock is their antiquated, soviet-era upload system for video, and the insanely long time for reviews. They get woo-yays and fawning thanks from the regulars when the queue gets down to 6 weeks. Non-exclusives can wait 2 months or more, usually more. Meanwhile the other outlets for video are selling better, reviewing in week or less, and make uploading much easier. Given that SS pays better than Istock for non-exclusive video sales, I have been submitting less and less of my content to Istock. But now, with that extra 1%-  woo-yay!


Ignore | Logged


pixdeluxe


iStock Gauge
« Reply #24 on: December 23, 2011, 01:12 »

After talking with iStock about the RC targets, their announcement was a lot more generous than I was hoping for. Overall, 2011 has been a steady year with steady growth. Downloads are down 8% but overall revenue up about 15% and there was some good momentum during the last few months, I hope that is carried into 2012 and beyond..
Biggest change for 2011 has been the introduction of exclusive vetta & agency content to Getty which adds 10% revenue monthly.

I think (and hope) the old dog has some life in her yet.


Ignore | Logged


Envateo Photo ToolsMicrostock Insider
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Kelly announces slightly downsized RC targets « 1 2 ... 7 8 »
iStockPhoto.com
ShadySue 198 12526 Last post January 20, 2011, 06:13
by ShadySue
Will you benefit from Istock's revised RC credit targets? « 1 2 »
iStockPhoto.com
lisafx 42 3016 Last post February 11, 2011, 21:57
by VB inc
Second delay in RC targets « 1 2 »
iStockPhoto.com
gclk 32 2612 Last post April 01, 2011, 05:13
by ProArtwork
IS New Members Per Year - Revised
iStockPhoto.com
RacePhoto 6 484 Last post November 10, 2011, 19:23
by Mantis
2012 RC targets. Postoponed again because of their desperate best match change?
iStockPhoto.com
wut 18 971 Last post December 27, 2011, 17:11
by ShadySue

TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc