pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Is StockXpert going down?  (Read 10308 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lisafx

« Reply #75 on: June 17, 2009, 15:51 »
0


I think this may be the case, the Photos.com collection is going to look pretty feeble without the StockXpert content, at least in the short term, or perhaps always, with IS upload restrictions and rejections for 'not stock' they may never catch up.

^^ So true.

Not to mention the contributors with large ports that will be opting out because of the lowball commission reduction, and also those that won't take the time to opt thousands of images in one-by-one.


« Reply #76 on: June 17, 2009, 15:58 »
0
Why they keep deactivating files that may violate copyrights or trademarks? Just got messages about two files that show details of luxury cars.

Milinz

« Reply #77 on: June 17, 2009, 16:14 »
0

So, StockXpert guys and girls and all in HAAP MEDIA I really wish to give you credit and my respect for all you've done and you are doing now as true profesionals unlikely as to some amateurs on iStock!

I was hoping for more cap locks here. If this was the iStockphoto Forums your post would have been rejected.


Hopefully this is not iStockphoto Forum  :o

And I am looking this from competition aspect where HAAP MEDIA comes out from good deal for them and iStock pops-in...

It means less work for HAAP MEDIA (StockXpert) and more for iStock - also, money stream is changed from Hungary to Canada!

Well, I am based in Serbia and HAAP MEDIA is in Hungary - so we are neighbours and I like to do business with my neigbours!

Istock gave me only frustration until now... StockXpert made me decent sales and good money.

So, what you were talking about locking? Maybe they should ban me because I say what I think? Sorry all who don't agree with me - it is my right to think, act and talk differently!

Istock guys know exactly what I think about their policy, their reviews, organization and I stated that to them long time ago! Well - that may be one of reasons why my images are 'not needed' there  ::)
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 16:24 by Milinz »

bittersweet

« Reply #78 on: June 17, 2009, 16:59 »
0

Istock guys know exactly what I think about their policy, their reviews, organization and I stated that to them long time ago! Well - that may be one of reasons why my images are 'not needed' there  ::)

You might be on to something there!  ;D

Milinz

« Reply #79 on: June 17, 2009, 17:16 »
0

Istock guys know exactly what I think about their policy, their reviews, organization and I stated that to them long time ago! Well - that may be one of reasons why my images are 'not needed' there  ::)

You might be on to something there!  ;D

LOL!

Really? I don't care about their policy, organization and reviews because all that sucks!

I am sure that founders of iStock didn't had in mind such policy when they've started site.

Anyway I just care to prove that their policy sucks and I already did that with their LCV rejected images on other sites earning money!

The last what I tend to do with them is to get approved as illustrator and upload only ONE vector file just for joke and to make my payout money - then there is bailout and disabling all files I have with them keeping accepted contributor status for some better times ;D
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 17:27 by Milinz »

« Reply #80 on: June 17, 2009, 17:26 »
0
Since there is valid concern within the RF market place that Getty is removing all competition via its acquisitions and pricing controls, then a short note to the United States Department of Justice Anti-Trust Division expressing your concerns would be an appropriate and effective way to voice your opinion.

<a href=" newbielink:http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/newcase [nonactive]" rel="nofollow"> newbielink:http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/newcase [nonactive][/url]

The Sherman Act also makes it a crime to monopolize any part of interstate commerce. An unlawful monopoly exists when only one firm controls the market for a product or service, and it has obtained that market power, not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anticompetitive conduct.

Milinz

« Reply #81 on: June 17, 2009, 17:28 »
0
Since there is valid concern within the RF market place that Getty is removing all competition via its acquisitions and pricing controls, then a short note to the United States Department of Justice Anti-Trust Division expressing your concerns would be an appropriate and effective way to voice your opinion.

<a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/newcase" rel="nofollow">www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/newcase[/url]

The Sherman Act also makes it a crime to monopolize any part of interstate commerce. An unlawful monopoly exists when only one firm controls the market for a product or service, and it has obtained that market power, not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anticompetitive conduct.


Getty decision makers know that better than US government! Trust me on this: They are moving on world theatre... They are not affected by US law... There is Corbis as couner-vague!

What they did now is just making EU positioned company making less and Canadian company making more money.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 17:31 by Milinz »

Microstock InsiderPhotoDune

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
24 Replies
3768 Views
Last post March 01, 2007, 17:09
by a.k.a.-tom
2 Replies
1014 Views
Last post January 05, 2008, 13:22
by madelaide
8 Replies
1650 Views
Last post February 11, 2008, 09:06
by anonymous
8 Replies
1591 Views
Last post April 05, 2008, 03:35
by Peter
3 Replies
1117 Views
Last post July 30, 2009, 00:09
by hayaship

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors