pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: my recent Interview to Stocksy CEO Bruce Livingstone  (Read 6555 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 07, 2013, 07:56 »
+9


« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2013, 08:21 »
+1
it's online now, and it will be translated into Chinese by a volunteer

« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2013, 08:59 »
+9
Interesting questions and interesting answers. Thanks very much for posting.

Funny how Bruce nowadays insists that photographers should be paid a minimum of 50% royalty. He wasn't saying that in 2004 when I joined Istock. Back then he thought we should be grateful for the 20% that Istock paid to all contributors.

« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2013, 09:12 »
+1
Funny how Bruce nowadays insists that photographers should be paid a minimum of 50% royalty. He wasn't saying that in 2004 when I joined Istock. Back then he thought we should be grateful for the 20% that Istock paid to all contributors.

That was coming from a different perspective, having started as a free exchange platform, right?

And then again, while Bruce was there I don't remember iStock having cut any royalties, only risen over time, isn't it?

« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2013, 09:14 »
+3
Funny how Bruce nowadays insists that photographers should be paid a minimum of 50% royalty. He wasn't saying that in 2004 when I joined Istock. Back then he thought we should be grateful for the 20% that Istock paid to all contributors.

I'm not sure I remember being told I should be grateful, although that's certainly the impression you get nowadays for the 15%.  I guess perspective changes over time, and with experience and knowledge.

Hey, I got a mention! lol...

mlwinphoto

« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2013, 09:21 »
0
Should be required reading by TPTB at iStock, in particular.

Interesting that he suggests contributors spread their portfolios over many outlets until such time as royalty rates rise. 

« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2013, 09:43 »
0
This was a great read... Thank You

« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2013, 09:59 »
+4
Nice interview. He is very negative on the industry, but I can't say that I disagree. There's a lot to be negative about. I thought him saying that artists need to be paid more but that most of them suck (paraphrased) was kind of funny. I also was wondering if he purposefully didn't mention artists opening personal sites or that he just hasn't thought about it. It just seemed noticeably absent to me.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 10:05 by cthoman »

« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2013, 10:09 »
+9
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 14:09 by Audi 5000 »

mlwinphoto

« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2013, 11:16 »
0
Should be required reading by TPTB at iStock, in particular.

Interesting that he suggests contributors spread their portfolios over many outlets until such time as royalty rates rise.
Doesn't make sense to me.  Spread your work to low paying and low royalty sites until they pay more?  What incentive do they have to pay more if they already have the contributor's images?

Maybe he wasn't talking about micro sites.  Which ones aren't 'low paying and low royalty sites'?  And, please, don't tell me that iStock isn't one of them.  It may be better than the other micro sites (in that regard) but it's still low on both counts.

Poncke v2

« Reply #10 on: May 07, 2013, 11:21 »
+1
Should be required reading by TPTB at iStock, in particular.

Interesting that he suggests contributors spread their portfolios over many outlets until such time as royalty rates rise.
Why is he running an image exclusive agency then?

« Reply #11 on: May 07, 2013, 11:28 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 14:09 by Audi 5000 »

mlwinphoto

« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2013, 11:36 »
0
Should be required reading by TPTB at iStock, in particular.

Interesting that he suggests contributors spread their portfolios over many outlets until such time as royalty rates rise.
Why is he running an image exclusive agency then?

He said to spread yourself out until such time as royalty rates rise.  Perhaps he feels that he is paying a fair rate......it's certainly better than some/many others I can think of.

« Reply #13 on: May 07, 2013, 11:43 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 14:09 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #14 on: May 07, 2013, 11:48 »
+2
I'm not sure I remember being told I should be grateful, although that's certainly the impression you get nowadays for the 15%.  I guess perspective changes over time, and with experience and knowledge.

I certainly remember being told to be grateful as previously no royalties were paid at all. It was also pointed out to me that the Members' Agreement at the time didn't legally oblige Istock to actually pay any royalties __ in effect they were a 'gift' paid out at Istock's discretion.

Somewhat ironically if Bruce had been a tad more generous in his previous life, when he introduced exclusivity, then he could have stopped the competition in it's tracks. Istock might then have enjoyed a virtual monopoly of microstock and be worth $B's now. Had he not sold out then Istock could quite conceivably be worth more than Getty by now.

mlwinphoto

« Reply #15 on: May 07, 2013, 12:14 »
0
Should be required reading by TPTB at iStock, in particular.

Interesting that he suggests contributors spread their portfolios over many outlets until such time as royalty rates rise.
Why is he running an image exclusive agency then?
He said to spread yourself out until such time as royalty rates rise.  Perhaps he feels that he is paying a fair rate......it's certainly better than some/many others I can think of.
Hard to spread your portfolio out when it's image exclusive.  So by spreading out your portfolio you think he meant taking some images that would be spread across ten different microstock sites and instead putting those images on one site, Stocksy?  That doesn't seem like the most likely interpretation of what he's saying.

Well, since he said to spread it out until royalty rates rise he may have meant to do so until you find an agency that pays 'fairly' and then put the majority of your effort there.  That may be Stocksy for those that get in there, too early to tell.

Or, maybe he's saying to spread yourself thin in an effort to force agencies that value exclusive material to pay a higher rate, thus keeping the exclusives they have and attracting more in the process; rather than what's happening at iStock where a number of exclusives are leaving.

I don't know, guess we would have to ask him.

As far as I'm concerned just do what you are comfortable and happy with.  If that's SS with subscription rates or Getty RM who cares as long as it works for you.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 12:23 by mlwinphoto »

Poncke v2

« Reply #16 on: May 07, 2013, 12:18 »
+1
I think your comment needs editing as I cant make anything of it as is

mlwinphoto

« Reply #17 on: May 07, 2013, 12:24 »
0
I think your comment needs editing as I cant make anything of it as is

Just did.  Thanks.  Guess it helps to preview first.

« Reply #18 on: May 07, 2013, 12:28 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 14:10 by Audi 5000 »

« Reply #19 on: May 07, 2013, 12:33 »
0

« Reply #20 on: May 07, 2013, 12:48 »
0
the spread out as broad as possible part doesn't make much sense (at least thinking of Stocksy's exclusivity) unless Bruce is so honest telling contributors that they aren't ready in terms of amount buyers

or is he talking about all the persons not interested/outside Stocksy?

« Reply #21 on: May 07, 2013, 13:00 »
+1
the spread out as broad as possible part doesn't make much sense (at least thinking of Stocksy's exclusivity) unless Bruce is so honest telling contributors that they aren't ready in terms of amount buyers

or is he talking about all the persons not interested/outside Stocksy?

Apparently he has a different perspective now. He was the one who invented the concept of agency exclusivity if I am not mistaken. Before iStock, my understanding was some agencies asked only for image exclusivity.

It was an interesting interview.  Would be more interesting if he was asked how Stocksy is doing since its launch.

Poncke v2

« Reply #22 on: May 07, 2013, 13:02 »
+3
Good interview, Bruce was fairly open to the questions asked about IS and why and how he sold it. Fair play.

I just didnt understand the comment on 'stocksy being the first agency without upload limits'. As far as I know only IS and GL have that and PD is someway. SS, CanStockPhoto, FT, DP, 123 all have unlimited uploads.

Also, about Stocksy having special images, there is a fair amount of your plain stock images on Stocksy, so I dont think that argument is just. Dont make it sound more special then it is.

I do understand now why I am rejected. Still didnt get an email telling me so  ;)

Poncke v2

« Reply #23 on: May 07, 2013, 13:05 »
+1

It was an interesting interview.  Would be more interesting if he was asked how Stocksy is doing since its launch.

I dont know what is agreed on the inside, between them, on what is shared on the outside, but if Stocksy had taken off like a rocket, we would have heard about it in the forum.

« Reply #24 on: May 07, 2013, 14:00 »
0
I just didnt understand the comment on 'stocksy being the first agency without upload limits'. As far as I know only IS and GL have that and PD is someway. SS, CanStockPhoto, FT, DP, 123 all have unlimited uploads.

I didn't get that either. Didn't he (or the site) say something like that when Stocksy opened about being the first to pay 50%?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
30 Replies
10694 Views
Last post September 30, 2008, 01:03
by RacePhoto
54 Replies
10204 Views
Last post March 26, 2009, 06:18
by Peiling
269 Replies
35945 Views
Last post February 10, 2013, 15:09
by leaf
6 Replies
1709 Views
Last post September 16, 2013, 04:43
by gillian
13 Replies
1891 Views
Last post November 18, 2015, 17:49
by etudiante_rapide

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors