Author Topic: yuri arcurs is IS exclusive (Read 147175 times)

mattdixon · « **Reply #150 on:** May 18, 2013, 12:57 »

This is a huge blow for Shuttterstock and the subs model, Yuri will have been watching his RPI like a hawk and I guess the figures didn't stack up against the production costs.

loop · « **Reply #151 on:** May 18, 2013, 13:00 »

Quote from: gostwyck on May 18, 2013, 12:34

Quote from: fotoVoyager on May 18, 2013, 12:19
I can't imagine Yuri would forgo the earnings from other sites just for the convenience of only having one agent and 20%, so I can only presume he must have negotiated a special percentage rate higher than the 20% offered to other 'special exclusives'.

I certainly don't blame him for accepting a generous deal even if it is with the devil.

Not sure why such generous terms and open exclusivity arrangements shouldn't be open to all though. It's not like it's a unique portfolio or full of rare, hard to obtain images, just lots of really great people images. If only there was a site that specialised in that.

I guess it all depends on who wanted or needed the deal more. What if Istock and Getty have both been haemorrhaging sales/customers/revenue for several months or quarters? If content is king then gaining the exclusive services of "the world's most popular microstock photographer" might boost sales and also help justify their prices. Under such circumstances I could certainly imagine non-standard terms being offered.

If I'm remmebering correctly, somewhere he said he was doing that because of Danish taxes. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Pinocchio · « **Reply #152 on:** May 18, 2013, 13:04 »

Quote from: alistaircotton on May 18, 2013, 12:34

I'm not sure that many of you have been to Cape Town? There are many more reasons why a stock photographer would want to move to Cape Town other than an exchange rate - which is a pretty bum way of measuring the cost of doing business all things considered.

Know Cape Town quite well, but less well now than when I was much younger; have also contemplated moving there. As you point out, there are lots of reasons to go there as any kind of photographer. Spectacular place, very warm people, wonderful climate, some of the best wine in the world, to name a few.

I agree that exchange rates alone are not a good way to measure the cost of business, but in these circumstances it does seem to be relevant. Most of Yuri's cost to create content will surely be local, and most of his sales will be international - smart move, even with the exchange rate risk. I hope Yuri's very successful.

Anyway, I just think more fact would make this discussion more valuable.

Regards

Xanox · « **Reply #153 on:** May 18, 2013, 13:08 »

CapeTown doesnt look so cheap to me.

Xanox · « **Reply #154 on:** May 18, 2013, 13:09 »

Quote from: lisafx on May 18, 2013, 10:29

Actually, I don't see this as a repudiation of microstock. I see it as a repudiation of the factory production model in microstock.

When microstock began, it was small, individual contributors with low production costs, producing a few thousand images at most. The appeal was the low cost and the variety that all those small individual portfolios together provided.

At the time, the big players with high production values were in RM and macro RF, where they belonged. Buyers who wanted that level of images understood they had to pay a premium for them. Microstock was for the buyers who just wanted "good enough" at a low price.

Huge factories like Yuri, Monkeybusiness, etc. upset the balance for everybody, by flooding the micro market with tens of thousands of images that probably didn't belong at that price point in the first place. And Yuri has obviously discovered that YURI's production model doesn't work for micro. I expect Cathy Yeulet, Andres Rodriquez, and maybe a few other big factories will eventually come to the same conclusion.

Perhaps after this period of rebalancing occurs, the market will settle back to mass produced HPV images being sold at high prices, and LPV, inexpensive images by mom & pop producers will once again dominate the micro sites.

the irony is Yuri and other "factories" are the ones who contribute to make microstock famous and by domino effect to "destroy" the old RM model which thanks god is still alive.

no idea if Yuri will stick being 100% RF or he's also entering RM but in any case he's very clear about this being a marketing and business decision and i'm sure it was his goal since launching PeopleImages, why else do you start an agency if not to be distributed by someone like Getty or Corbis ?

all the best agencies are with Getty, it wouldnt make any sense to do it in-house unless you've fat pockets and you know what you're doing but that would be OK for exclusive stuff or paparazzi or reportages, not for stock/RF with models !

i mean what he's selling is very commercial, it's not stuff you sell to Rex Features not it's going in art galleries, there was no other way than Getty or other big distributors and i cant understand why many here are complaining about, it's a business and he's a great businessman, he never pretended to be a great artist and there would be no point being into RF stock if you're an artist.

he's exactly where he belongs now, with Getty, and yes probably other major stockers will follow but since their portfolios are small i dont think they've any chance, PeopleImage has 100K images, that seems to be the minimum to join Getty as an agency unless you're specialized in a profitable niche.

Xanox · « **Reply #155 on:** May 18, 2013, 13:12 »

Quote from: mattdixon on May 18, 2013, 12:57

This is a huge blow for Shuttterstock and the subs model, Yuri will have been watching his RPI like a hawk and I guess the figures didn't stack up against the production costs.

the subs model only makes sense for leftover images or for stuff that is very very cheap to produce.
it's unthinkable professional images can be sold at such low prices.

unfortunately, this is the trend also in many other digital markets, in music for instance they dont even discuss anymore about prices being too low to make a living, they take for granted you can NOT make a living with it !

and same with journalism, blogging, ebooks and much more.

after all we're lucky.

Xanox · « **Reply #156 on:** May 18, 2013, 13:26 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on May 18, 2013, 10:30

"if microstock was on Nasdaq it would lose 90% of its value in a day !"

Lets see what happens to Shutterstock shares on Monday. If you are that confident you could short sell and make $$$$$$s somehow I suspect you wont be doing that

SS is one of the rare cases where it would be wise to invest long term in my opinion (6-12 months).
they're the only ones delivering.

i dont think SS will lose anything from Yuri's announcement, for each one of his images they have dozens of copycats on sale, it's really a non issue for the buyers.

the issue is for micro photographers.
it's indeed a wake-up call.

agencies will never die, by all means they've all the critical mass to survive, it's the photographers who are paying the price to sustain the whole failed model.

cthoman · « **Reply #157 on:** May 18, 2013, 13:47 »

Quote from: Xanox on May 18, 2013, 13:09

...and i'm sure it was his goal since launching PeopleImages, why else do you start an agency if not to be distributed by someone like Getty or Corbis ?

To make money with it and because you think you can sell your images better than the other sites do. You also don't have to conform to the whim of the day. That's why I started my own. That is why I continue to run it (because I proved all of those things true). If distribution deals come along, that's an added bonus. But, I wouldn't think it would be the sole purpose for starting a site.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #158 on:** May 18, 2013, 14:40 »

SS seems to be the only place where Yuri has no longer files which must have been the main request by Getty (all other its fine), that shows their fear of SS and the desperation of selling

interesting to see how exclusives can't have a single file anywhere (except RM), believe they must be very happy about this different treatment

cthoman · « **Reply #159 on:** May 18, 2013, 14:42 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 14:40

SS seems to be the only place where Yuri has no longer files which must have been the main request by Getty (all other its fine), that shows their fear of SS and the desperation of selling

interesting to see how exclusives can't have a single file anywhere (except RM), believe they must be very happy about this different treatment

I would imagine that it is the easiest place to remove files. You just hit the off switch. That and if his issue was with subs, then it's the biggest target too.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #160 on:** May 18, 2013, 14:53 »

"unfortunately, this is the trend also in many other digital markets, in music for instance they dont even discuss anymore about prices being too low to make a living, they take for granted you can NOT make a living with it !"

The market is quite different - you don't pay more for "premium" content its often less. The music biz now seems to make more from live music I'm not sure there is a photographic equivalent. Some female singer whose name escapes me has just shifted more albums than the Beatles so doesn't sound that bad!

leaf · « **Reply #161 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:18 »

Quote from: cthoman on May 18, 2013, 14:42

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 14:40
SS seems to be the only place where Yuri has no longer files which must have been the main request by Getty (all other its fine), that shows their fear of SS and the desperation of selling

interesting to see how exclusives can't have a single file anywhere (except RM), believe they must be very happy about this different treatment

I would imagine that it is the easiest place to remove files. You just hit the off switch. That and if his issue was with subs, then it's the biggest target too.

Agreed, Shutterstock is the only site with a main breaker switch to turn the lights off. All other sites require an image by image deactivation or at least an email sent to someone in the office to disable the account on the back end.

lisafx · « **Reply #162 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:24 »

Quote from: leaf on May 18, 2013, 15:18

All other sites require an image by image deactivation or at least an email sent to someone in the office to disable the account on the back end.

True, and I imagine the other sites, particularly the biggies are going to be pi$$ed (angry, not drunk

). I doubt they will make it as easy for Yuri as writing an e-mail to get the portfolio removed.

ShadySue · « **Reply #163 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:32 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 14:40

interesting to see how exclusives can't have a single file anywhere (except RM), believe they must be very happy about this different treatment

Where are you seeing that?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #164 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:39 »

Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2013, 15:32

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 14:40
interesting to see how exclusives can't have a single file anywhere (except RM), believe they must be very happy about this different treatment
Where are you seeing that?

aren't you seeing his files everywhere?

ShadySue · « **Reply #165 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:42 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 15:39

Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2013, 15:32
Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 14:40
interesting to see how exclusives can't have a single file anywhere (except RM), believe they must be very happy about this different treatment
Where are you seeing that?

aren't you seeing his files everywhere?

I don't see exclusives being very happy about his different treatment.

Poncke v2 · « **Reply #166 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:43 »

Everybody is guessing. Only Yuri and Getty know the truth and no one will ever know what the deal is

ShadySue · « **Reply #167 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:47 »

Quote from: w7lwi on May 18, 2013, 11:31

Since IS has no subscriptions (yet anyway), does this mean he's OK with having his GI content mirrored on IS, even though it's microstock?

iS does have subscriptions, but not as dirt cheap as elsewhere (which is fine by me!) and apparently not as successful.

http://www.istockphoto.com/help/buy-credits/subscriptions

MatHayward · « **Reply #168 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:49 »

Good luck Yuri! That is a huge move and you should be seriously proud of all you have accomplished!

I am assuming that this means Getty has purchased People Images from you and I am hoping that also means that you will be able to open up shop for other shooters now.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #169 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:53 »

Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2013, 15:42

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 15:39
Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2013, 15:32
Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 14:40
interesting to see how exclusives can't have a single file anywhere (except RM), believe they must be very happy about this different treatment
Where are you seeing that?

aren't you seeing his files everywhere?
I don't see exclusives being very happy about his different treatment.

I was being sarcastic....

ShadySue · « **Reply #170 on:** May 18, 2013, 15:55 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 15:53

Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2013, 15:42
Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 15:39
Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2013, 15:32
Quote from: luissantos84 on May 18, 2013, 14:40
interesting to see how exclusives can't have a single file anywhere (except RM), believe they must be very happy about this different treatment
Where are you seeing that?

aren't you seeing his files everywhere?
I don't see exclusives being very happy about his different treatment.

I was being sarcastic....

Sorry.

w7lwi · « **Reply #171 on:** May 18, 2013, 17:44 »

Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2013, 15:47

Quote from: w7lwi on May 18, 2013, 11:31
Since IS has no subscriptions (yet anyway), does this mean he's OK with having his GI content mirrored on IS, even though it's microstock?

iS does have subscriptions, but not as dirt cheap as elsewhere (which is fine by me!) and apparently not as successful.

http://www.istockphoto.com/help/buy-credits/subscriptions

I knew Thinkstock had them but was unaware that Istock had them as well. Has this been around forever or is it a relatively new addition? Not sure how I overlooked it.

ShadySue · « **Reply #172 on:** May 18, 2013, 17:49 »

Quote from: w7lwi on May 18, 2013, 17:44

Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2013, 15:47
Quote from: w7lwi on May 18, 2013, 11:31
Since IS has no subscriptions (yet anyway), does this mean he's OK with having his GI content mirrored on IS, even though it's microstock?

iS does have subscriptions, but not as dirt cheap as elsewhere (which is fine by me!) and apparently not as successful.

http://www.istockphoto.com/help/buy-credits/subscriptions

I knew Thinkstock had them but was unaware that Istock had them as well. Has this been around forever or is it a relatively new addition? Not sure how I overlooked it.

It's been a few years, but I can't remember exactly.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #173 on:** May 18, 2013, 18:06 »

May 2008

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=67639

ShadySue · « **Reply #174 on:** May 18, 2013, 18:13 »

Quote from: jsnover on May 18, 2013, 18:06

May 2008

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=67639

Wow Joanne:
1. Your search skills are good.
2. Time flies, I'd have guessed 2010 if pushed.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: yuri arcurs is IS exclusive (Read 147175 times)

mattdixon

loop

Pinocchio

Xanox

Xanox

Xanox

Xanox

cthoman

luissantos84

cthoman

Pauws99

leaf

lisafx

ShadySue

luissantos84

ShadySue

Poncke v2

ShadySue

MatHayward

luissantos84

ShadySue

w7lwi

ShadySue

Jo Ann Snover

ShadySue

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors