|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ARTPUPPY
1
« on: July 24, 2016, 03:34 »
Wow, that just stinks. Sorry for all involved. To anyone affected, you need to contact the Attorney General of Texas, Ken Paxton, and notify him of this fraudulent business and it's owner. I hear a lot of people have gotten good results dealing with shady companies by going this route. A helpful link is here: https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/cpd/file-a-consumer-complaintSeen Craig's new website. Full of pointless marketing quotes... http://doyoulove.marketing/about/Here's one he forgot to post, LOL. 
2
« on: September 10, 2015, 17:23 »
It's a shame the original artist doesn't get the credit for this they deserve. I don't think Shutterstock is going to do much about it. If they try to enforce it, they can get too much bad publicity - fears of what Getty was doing with their "Settlement Demand" letters that caused a lot of bad press and confused possible clients of the service. Maybe an EL for it, but that's it.
The artist (Olga Angelloz) should probably do this instead: Release a PR statement with her photo surrounded by her works. Something along the lines of "Meet the real artist behind the Provo Rocks T-shirts" - & how she was surprised and disappointed by not getting the credit she deserves. At the end of the statement - she should offer (for free or a low fee) a unique one of a kind design for a new Provo Rocks shirt for the city. (with her signature attached to the artwork) If she reaches out to the town they might do this to save face. In the end she can get her story out there, any Google search for "Provo Rocks" and her name should up, and earn some free publicity and get her work known. A win-win for everybody.
3
« on: August 09, 2015, 17:19 »
So that seems like perhaps a different conversation and probably not much connected with the thing that ARTPUPPY is referencing. So I am going to post my original question again so that it isn't buried behind the diversion. This question relates to some specific announcement about Sept 2015:
In September they are planning some "exciting news" about the istock exclusivity.
Where was this (pre) announced? Please 
Mentioned in the "A few thoughts on the launch of Adobe Stock" old forum thread. http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=367353&page=3 Lobo: "We will have something on the state of RC targets and the like closer to September."
4
« on: August 09, 2015, 03:40 »
You're preaching to the choir here. All good points. To answer your question, "Why is istock doing this?" - well istock isn't doing anything since it ceased to be a real independent business a while ago. It is now just a shell controlled by Getty Images which in turn is controlled by it's owners the Carlyle Group. Also, Getty Images was previously owned by Hellman & Friedman which gave Getty almost a billion in debt by rewarding itself a dividend before selling the company to the Carlyle group. Basically, the company is in a lot of debt and it's credit of cash is running out. The Carlyle Group needs to see a return on it's investment so it means we the contributors, aren't going to see any increase in earnings, just less. It's like going to a casino and realizing all of the machines are rigged. Exclusivity means nothing. Thanks to subscriptions, they are already drinking your milkshake. It is foolhardy to continue to upload more images to them since you will only earn pennies on the dollar. (I stopped uploading too)
Getty Images business model is this: They earn 80% on the sale from your work and you get 20%. They call it the "industry standard" and they would like nothing better than to earn even more than that if they could. Istock's model was different (under the old canister system) since you could make 45% from each sale. Since that goes against the Getty business model, that had to change. In turn, they lost contributors, customers, and destroyed a perfectly well run business. They do not care about us, nor will they say "sorry" or even comment on these issues since it could pull them into lawsuit territory.
In September they are planning some "exciting news" about the istock exclusivity. I am guessing they are scrapping it for a straight flat rate royalty. So long as subscriptions are in place, it doesn't matter what they do with it. The website is terrible because all of the good IT people who made it work are long gone and they don't want to spend the money to fix things. I still believe layoffs and a possible office closing in Calgary will be happening too. Not fun times ahead.
Trying to make your voice heard is pointless. It's was done before with Rebecca Rockefeller and she quit when she realized she was talking to a corporate brick wall. I tried to speak with the people of the Carlyle Group and got deaf ears. If they only listened to us, they wouldn't be in the mess they're in now. The only way out of this is to get up and leave the Getty Casino and go out on your own.
5
« on: August 08, 2015, 15:17 »
Not surprised. The only way you're going to make money on Shutterstock is if you short the stock as it continues to fall. It still has a P/E ratio of 60 so it's still overpriced. Also as the news of Adobe getting into the game starts to sink in, more people will be looking at the figures more closely and asking more questions about the marketplace. Jon Oringer is going to be in for a fun ride as he deals with angry investors seeking answers to their losing investments. Oh well, you live by the sword... If you want to buy a stock, you'd be better off buying Apple instead. (Adobe is also overpriced) This just in, someone at Cantor Fitzgerald has been taking cat drugs: "Cantor Fitzgerald Analyst Reaffirmed $72.0 Price Target on Shutterstock (NYSE:SSTK) stock, While Reiterating Buy Rating" - Sweet mother of god... http://www.octafinance.com/cantor-fitzgerald-analyst-reaffirmed-72-0-price-target-on-shutterstock-nysesstk-stock-while-reiterating-buy-rating/
6
« on: May 23, 2015, 07:36 »
If you're a Canadian and want to save on the paypal exchange fees, you can also open a US savings account with Harris Bank (BMO) without leaving the country. You'll need a photocopy of your passport and $100 to start with. Also, there's a monthly fee of $5 if the balance is under $1000. You can save money since it also will link up to paypal easily so if you ever make ebay purchases or need to pay with paypal you can pay straight from your US account and avoid paying more in CND. If you're able to, funnel all your earnings into your US bank account and hold if for awhile, wait till the Canadian dollar falls more and then write yourself a cheque to deposit in your Canadian account to make a little more. https://www.bmoharris.com/main/personal/checking-accounts/everydayAnother option is TDCanada Trust, I believe they have a US account but you'll have to speak to the right person at your branch to get it. Royal Bank also has the same setup. All banks & paypal have an exchange rate and there's no way around it, that's how the "house" makes a little from your money.
7
« on: May 03, 2015, 18:28 »
Well he only gets the money in 2019 if he stays and if the share price goes up to $161.88 on average in a certain time period (good luck with that). It's basically a shout of confidence to shareholders/investors saying Oringer is staying and don't worry, your investment is safe with us. I think the reality is the honeymoon period is over and investors are going to wonder when are they getting a return on their shares since they don't pay a dividend. When the full news comes out that all Adobe products will feature Fotolia images to sell and nobody else, you'll see Shutterstock take a hit. At today's price of $67 it's still way over valued with a P/E of 111. (Apple stock has a P/E of about 15) Shutterstock's book value is only about $6-7.
The only way I see Oringer can improve is to take over the Editorial market from Getty, or start to buy up other microstock suppliers to increase the "value". I any case, if you're a contributor, you're not going to see much of a raise in the future. Yeah, stock options stink, but this $28 million bonus is like two millionaires betting a dollar on a golf game. Mostly show. Expect to see more press releases in the future.
8
« on: January 12, 2015, 04:02 »
ARTPUPPY, thanks a lot for your detailed suggestions!
Do you have only your own vector selling website without selling your images at Shutterstock, iStockphoto etc? My big concern is how to drive decent traffic to my website to make sales.
Btw, haven't you ever sell your work on shutterstock for 60-100$? I did, many of us did and looks like it's possible...
Ariene, you mean single sale like extended license or enhanced license for one image? Or monthly income?
I'm still exclusive with istock but will be going out on my own soon. How to drive traffic? Ask yourself "Who will buy my work?" On a budget, take advantage of low color printing costs for postcards, business cards and full page flyer/brochure. Start where you live if you're in or near a big city. Grab the phone book and find advertising agencies, marketing, graphic designers and art directors of local newspapers and magazines. What is your local media? Pick up the phone and call to get contact names or contact directly. Create a promotional piece that you can deliver/mail (or better yet meet in person and hand it to them). A full color brochure or full page flyer showing who you are and your work and your website. Attach your business card to it as well. As a "bribe" you can also attach a candy bar to it. Shouldn't cost you more than a couple of bucks per person. Maybe an illustration of you at your drawing board surrounded by your illustrations. You want them to know who you are, what you are creating, and where they can go to purchase your work. At the very least you might be able to get some freelance work from it down the road. Create and build a contact list from this. Other options: Facebook - set up a facebook account/page for Toonstyle & become friends with people in the industry like art directors of agencies and media. When you create a new illustration, post it. Linkedin - great for professionals in the industry. Again, create your profile and find your contacts that you made locally and then find their contacts, groups, etc. to spread out. Fiver.com - for $5/job you can get some online marketing created for you. For a $100 budget that could be a big help. PRWeb.com - Create your own press release, useful to launch your website. Or once you have a collection of Editorial cartoons. If you can't write one, fiver.com has someone who can. MailChimp - create email newsletters. For monthly updates or just holidays/events for your client list. Plan your 2015 year - what will you do for Easter? Can you create a Christmas card? Joke/cartoon of the month? Simple fun reminders that will keep Toonstyle in the minds of your clients. If you're thinking of editorial cartoons, find business/political blogs/commentators or magazines/newsletter media and send your contact/info promo piece to them. They can add your illustrations to their newsletters/magazines if they know who you are. Lots of info on low budget marketing just by searching. Here's one: http://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2014/10/01/marketing-ideas-for-small-businesses#.
9
« on: January 12, 2015, 00:32 »
Great start on your website! Your illustrations are very well done also. Love the editorial stuff. My thoughts: You upgraded your pricing and it is still too low. Minimum should be $10 at least, but try for higher. Pricing should also be across the board and simple, no cents - I see odd prices here ($9.90, $4.90, $2.90) Also, for every illustration, you have five options to purchase - four JPEG sizes and the Vector artwork. Only offer one option - the vector illustration with a JPEG version included. Here is what is going to happen if you don't - a client will visit your website and select an illustration, then pick one of the lowest priced JPEG options. If they are going to use it in a newspaper or in some ad, they will buy the small version and blow it up for whatever they need it for. Most people don't know the difference between a vector or a JPEG and will say "Why should I buy the $9.90 vector when I can buy a small JPG for only $2.90 instead?" You'll wind up undercutting yourself. If you haven't bought the "Graphic Artists Guild Hand book for Pricing and Ethical Guildlines" then I suggest you run and grab a copy, it has everything you need if you're going to freelance and is a rough guide to industry pricing. Editorial cartoons - yes it's not what it used to be but there is still a market for them. You now have the entire world at your doorstep and you just have to market yourself. You might try contacting Daryl Cagle and submit your work here - http://www.cagle.com/ as he and other cartoonists are marketing their work to the media. You need to make more political cartoons with other figures. How about the G8 leaders for starters? Once you get more work under your belt, contact the art directors of newspapers, magazines and political blogs with some sort of promotional postcard or letter to get noticed. Think clever. Your website - when I look at your home page I see text on the top "News" and "Watch how it's Made". Shove that down and feature a large horizontal image on your homepage. Big group shot of all your characters - show em what you can do. Better yet feature several images that are timed in a "slider" fashion. An example of a website I did for a friend: http://cmurraygolf.com/ Look at the professional microstock websites - big images. That upper section of your home page is first thing a client sees. Make it good. If you want to be professional in this business your pricing needs to reflect it. When you hire a professional lawyer he doesn't say "Um, well yeah I'll charge you $80, no make it fifty bucks... um let's do $30 is that OK with you?" He looks you in the eye and says "My fee is $250 an hour." and that is that. Market yourself, sell yourself. Become Toonstyle the professional. Forget the Shutterstock sub. model. Question: Why do people pay $80,000 for an Audi or a Porsche, or a Cadillac? People are buying the "assurance of quality" brand. Create your brand and value it wisely. Don't piss it away for pennies.
10
« on: November 29, 2014, 16:49 »
I also agree that any relation to any IPO makes not that much sense. Accounting related the royalties are still due payments, they are not added to their profit margin. And based on the last numbers we know, we are probably talking about $10 millon payouts delayed by a month, given the current interest rates, we are talking about less than $20,000 a month that could be earned in interests.
It is likely that they are going to make more savings from removing the additional acccounting and tax departments they had to keep running in Calgary. And that's what I think is the most important reason for the change.
Roughly 10 million a month, held in a 30 day investment vehicle (for example a Bank of Montreal short term investment certificate) that has a 0.600% rate can earn them $60,000 in a month. For one year that's roughly $720,000 in free money. And if you can invest up to 10mil a month you can get a better rate than that. What that gives Getty is "float", basically making money from other peoples money. It's how Buffett made billions from people's insurance premiums.
11
« on: November 26, 2014, 17:11 »
More crappy news from a crappy business. So Getty is taking over istock's finances/payments. They can hold our money for up to 70 days, all the while using it for a 60 day bond or T-bill and make a little money from our money. The artists supply agreement is a joke too: "If we don't hear from you within that time, we will have deemed you to agree to the agreement". Of course it's not a legal contract folks. Istock is also passing that over to Getty as well. That is important, expect more changes in the future now and in the realm of US law. Another plus for Getty is the possible layoff of the financial people at istock. The Istock Christmas party is going to be a real fun one this year. I stand by belief that the Calgary offices will be gutted soon. If you're a Canadian contributor, all you need is to fill out an W-8 form and send it to Getty/istock to state you're are not an American and not subject to withholding tax. I do it all the time for freelance clients, not a big deal. But istock may subject my earnings to US withholding tax and then send me a T5 as well for Canadian taxes - So istock is in charge, but not really in charge. At this point it doesn't really matter, when you are only making pennies from awful sales, who is going to tax them.
12
« on: November 24, 2014, 06:41 »
I guess I'll chip in here - I think what he's getting at is this: Duayenist was an exclusive with istock and only uploaded his images there. His assistant opened up a shutterstock account and uploaded some of his istock images and in a different name/ID (and possibly copyright) without his knowledge. Somehow Istock discovered the shutterstock account and came to the conclusion that some of these images might be from another photographer. At that point istock goes into "Shut em Down" mode and deleted Duayenist's account and took whatever money he had as "Administrative Costs". That's istock's policy since it tells it's customers it will stand by and guarantee that any exclusive image it buys original and owned by an istock contributor. The customer doesn't have to worry about being sued down the road for using stolen images since an istock image is an original image. I'm afraid to say that Duayenist has now become radioactive waste in istock's eyes and won't ever deal with you again. You have become to them a legal liability and risk. I guess you can try to appeal but I don't think istock will care. You're only hope is to switch to another distributor/sell it yourself, and take your assistant to court and try to claim damages for acting without your consent.
13
« on: November 09, 2014, 10:16 »
That's pretty disturbing. Using photos of children to an adult website. I wonder if the free images from Getty will encounter the same problem. Somebody creates an adult blog page in the hopes of getting ad revenue and uses our images. I would suggest contacting the FCC since all adult websites have to be regulated (all models have to be 18 years old/consent age) They might be able to help and shut it down since it crosses the line.
14
« on: October 18, 2014, 14:15 »
I think offering stock subscriptions is just a way of adding a "all in one" feature to their products. Stay in Adobe indesign, and just download their images as you want them. The reality is Adobe is being slowly pushed out of the marketplace as more and more handheld devices are being sold instead of the computers. Ipad and iphone come built in with Apple's video editing and you can buy or download free apps to handle photos, no Adobe needed. Of course Adobe will still maintain its market share for graphic design/creative - for now. Another factor to remember is that most of the patents that Adobe has on it's products are expired after 15/20 years. That's why you're now seeing clone products now popping up. Remember Microsoft Office? Now you have Openoffice and Google Drive for free. That's also why you have subscriptions now, to lock you in to Adobe while other less costly options start to appear. Who knows? Maybe Getty Images is already doing another "sweetheart deal" with Adobe as we speak. Another $12 (or less) for an image perhaps? 
15
« on: September 12, 2014, 15:24 »
What Getty/istock is trying to pull off is selling all images for either one credit or three, hoping that customers don't add up what a credit is worth in dollar terms. It is their way of trying to simplify the collection and the price ranges. Unfortunately illustrators are going to be an afterthought in all this, the main goal is "sell it all for one or three credits". As usual, I am sure there will be lots of site bugs when they are trying to pull this off. The fact is the customers have left the building, I'm not getting the views I had before on my work, and any freelance work I got via istock has stopped. These to me are my "dead canaries" in the istock coal mine that this avenue is a dead end.
Exclusivity is pointless now anyway, since the big push is "Every single image on iStock available with our Signature Subscription" - in other words, all of our work is now available at rock bottom prices. Upload any new illustrations? Congrats, you're now selling them for pennies on the dollar thanks to istock subs. The RC targets are nothing more than a paper tiger anyway, it's not enforceable since you are also selling the subscription plan on the same website. Istock cannot tie us in to the RC system while also offering the subscription plan. By offering the same royalty rates as 2014, it is their way of avoiding a class action. Regardless, what customers there are have wised up to the many price increases that istock have done in the past, and are probably going to turn to subscriptions and max it out. There is no future in istock unless you like making pennies for your work.
16
« on: September 01, 2014, 23:04 »
Everyone is affected, AFAIK.
As per usual, Lobo says they know about the problem, and will fix it "soon". That was back in June, I believe, when they stopped updated.
Perhaps this is Getty's way of saying they are dropping the RC system? Everyone will get 15% / 30% from next year, on. Or maybe 10% / 20%, ha. 
I have to wonder if you are correct about "dropping the RC system". They have grandfathered in levels for two years, and they are not even counting the new subs into RCs at all which doesn't make any sense. Who knows.
They're no doubt up to something, and it probably won't be to our benefit.
Or else they're even more monumentally incompetent than we previously thought.
Is there any third option?
Changes are happening to the RC system by 2015. It has to. You cannot lock exclusives into an RC agreement while at the same time selling a subscription service on the same website that takes away RC sales. It is going to run into a class action lawsuit on behalf of exclusives. My guess is they will scrap the program and offer a "good news everybody!" flat rate royalty that will of course be lower than what the RC system now allow but will offer a "promise" to hold that royalty for a few years. There will be enough suckers people to sign on to it. Keep exclusivity? It won't matter because thanks to subscriptions, "your milkshake got drank all up" anyway.
17
« on: July 08, 2014, 09:26 »
Not a mystery. Since Shutterstock has more images (like what, 30 million now?) it's moved istock to second place and the Carlyle Group has been taking notice. So the solution has been to dump as many images as Getty has into istock and lower the standards for acceptance. They are hoping to improve sales (good luck) and for each image added, it can be counted as an asset on the books. If they cannot improve the sales then they can at least say "But we've have increased our total images from this million to that million" and try to use that as positive news. What you're seeing is a corporate version of "keeping up with the Joneses".
18
« on: June 21, 2014, 02:47 »
Well I finally got around to seeing what the video is about. My take is this - It's basically a little presentation to the movers and shakers in the advertising industry to say "Hey, we're Getty Images, you used to use us all the time in the glory years and we're still relevant today. We need each other, so please don't leave us behind." So you take off your suit and tie and hang out with the young advertising hipsters. (who are too young to know who Princess Diana is, thank god Mr Klein explained it to them) Yes, images are important and are powerful, that's been going on for thousands of years even before the camera. The problem here is with every passing year of new technology, Getty Images is becoming more and more a thing of the past for the advertising industry. It's true, it's quite possible for almost anyone to make a great image. And thanks to the internet, you don't have to go to Getty and pay $600 (or more) for a single image for your ad campaign. More and more I see corporations turning to low cost models to get more value out of their ad dollars. Tim Hortons I recall asked their customers to submit photos of themselves holding a cup of Tim Hortons Coffee. They compiled the best images and created a commercial out of it. How many "Shoot your own commercial for our product and win $1000!" have you seen? Expect more in the future.
Getty Images is stuck because their old model is failing. But to turn to the new model (microstock) will open another can of worms, that there is a lot of low cost options out there like shutterstock. So now Getty is trying to sell itself as the "Great Advertising Image Guide" with the insider knowledge of "concepts". The problem is that the creative people in the advertising industry know all about the events of istock, and the corporation of Getty Images, not to mention the failed business of "istock selling logos". (they also have shutterstock accounts) The last people in the world you can try and Bulls**t are the advertising creatives because they're in the business and they know what stinks.
And the mention of the "10 concepts" in advertising is nothing more than a gimmick to make him seem like an industry insider. It has no more value to me than the "Mr. Senator, in my hand I hold a paper that contains the names of 130 communists who are in American government today!" Advertising is simply two things: A need/desire/question. And an answer/fulfillment/benefit. So in the case of the funeral home, you plant the question: "What will happen to my loved ones when I die? Will they suffer because I don't have a plan?" and then give an answer "But if you buy a prearranged funeral plan from us... no worries."
With regards to illustration in the ad industry, I would think it's mostly commissioned work for the big stuff and Getty can't address that need with stock illust. You'd be better off selling yourself for that market.
19
« on: June 12, 2014, 22:20 »
I guess I'll look into my crystal ball and toss in my two cents... Getty Images/istockphoto - they are saddled with the H&F debt as well as the Caryle Group probably giving themselves a generous dividend (another debt) and trying to sell off the whole package again. The Getty family may attempt to buy up the rest. I predict istock HQ in Calgary will be closed and absorbed into Getty USA since that is how corporate works. Question: How do I lose 30 pounds? Corporate answer: Cut off your right leg. Ask the people who used to work at Veer. Exclusivity will be a thing of the past, as the actions of 2014 are already putting that in motion. (istock subs) A flat 20% (or less) for everybody. I also predict some shake-ups at the top office floors as they are unable to meet any expectations or have a solid plan of action.
Shutterstock - yes the stock is horribly overvalued and it will come down - it has to. Just like Yahoo, it will undergo a dramatic "plunge" and the CEO will soon be facing angry stockholders (mostly mutual fund managers) who will demand more value and scream bloody murder if you try and increase royalties. Also their contributors will be asking for some kind of increase after so many years and with eyes on the company earnings being made public. It may buy up some smaller companies or partner with some big boys (Google?) in an attempt to shore up it's business. Also I should point out here that both Getty and Shutter will be looking more towards the east for image markets and supply. Why pay an American to photograph that apple when I can get someone to do it in China or India for a few cents?
The smaller companies/agencies - some will change, some will consolidate, and a few will go "tits up". Like the early days of the car, there were hundreds of businesses, and now there are a few. (RIP Packard)
However - all is not lost, I predict more will simply tire of the nonsense and go off on their own to brand themselves and become 100% independent. Also I predict we'll see small groups of artists form their own private markets. Stocksy is a good example, Symbiostock is another. And you can bet that there will be more solutions in the future. We live in a great time, we all have the ability to create great work in the comfort of our home businesses, and instantly access millions of people from around the world. We all have the power to become our own little Getty or Shutterstock. No, it's not easy, you need to work at it. But it's not impossible either.... Glass half full or empty? Forget the glass, there's plenty of water right here in the lake!
20
« on: June 06, 2014, 13:46 »
Oh, and as noted on another thread here, it's a subs site, so nothing much to cheer about. (my reply above amended).
Looks like the highest price per full-sized image would be 90yuan/image, or 8.56 / $14.40 of which we'd get 15% or 20%. As usual, the bigger the package, the lower the price.
And even that payment rate isn't fully clear in the email we got, nor in Lobo's OP, and I see others have interpreted it differently.
You also have to remember that Fotomore will take it's share of the pie first, then Getty (80%), then the contributor. So your 20% might really only be 10% in the end. It seems Getty "forgot" to tell us that. Funny how they always get kind of fuzzy when it comes to full accounting of royalties whenever they make these announcements.
21
« on: June 02, 2014, 08:50 »
As an exclusive since 2007 I can tell you that I am not sure about the future of istock as it stands. Shutterstock seems to be taking over in the sales race. Istock is owned by Getty Images which only pays out a flat 20% royalty so in the long run, it doesn't make business sense to pay exclusives more. A change is coming with regards to exclusives and the RC system since istock is now openly advertising their subscriptions on the website. Also you need to factor in the risk involved - Google Drive - who knows if another deal is in the works? If you become exclusive your images could be included and be rendered worthless if they set up another secret deal. Since your income is low and you're more in the "hobby business" right now, I would look into Symbiostock and work towards becoming 100% independent. Start up costs would be low and if you can't set up your site in wordpress, you can hire an overseas programmer to build it for you for very little. Once you get it up and running with a little extra time you can build your portfolio there and make nearly 100% of the royalties and sleep well at night. If you want to be doing this for the long term (10 years+) then ask yourself what you want to be doing in year 5, 10 etc. Will it be extra work? Sure, but work hard now to get it up and running and it could pay off later... at least you'll be the captain of your own ship.
22
« on: May 23, 2014, 07:03 »
I'm wondering if that's a glitch or some kind of way istock can uptick the search results for Yuri. If he has one photo that they "kick up", will it help the rest of his portfolio in search results.
23
« on: May 18, 2014, 07:09 »
Thanks everybody for the comments. Will try to draw up another one soon!
24
« on: May 13, 2014, 14:39 »
Well the RC system is a mess to begin with, but this year we have a bit of a legal issue regarding exclusive contributors. You cannot tie in exclusives to a RC system while marketing a subscription service on the same website that has the ability of taking sales away from us and offer no RC value. Some sort of change has to take place this year - I doubt we will return to the old system, since Getty Images really only wants to pay 20% (or less) to contributors. I hope they come up with an answer to all this by mid year so we can decide for once and for all to either stay or leave.
25
« on: May 11, 2014, 23:31 »
Episode four: 
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
