MicrostockGroup

This is a disappointing move by Getty.  I'll be losing a lot of revenue from this.  Half of my monthly Stockxpert earnings in recent months were coming from the Jupiter Unlimited or Photos.com sales affiliation. 

I have 10 times the amount of approved photos on StockXpert than I do on iStock, so this is a real "kick in the crotch" for me.  I really don't understand the sense of this move.  They're going to be losing a lot of images and cutting down the photos.com and JupiterUnlimited collection sizes dramatically, because I'm sure I'm not the only one that has thousands approved on StockXpert but only hundreds on iStock.

I don't have tens of thousands of images, but I have nearly 5k on StockXpert (approx same ones as on istock) and they are going to lose them all from Photos/JIU because I cannot bring myself to swallow this .05/DL slap in the face from Getty.

I think the culling from Photos/JIU has already begun because over the last several days my sub sales there have declined markedly. 

I was looking at the incomes from Photos.com and JIUnlimited and can't see why I would continue to submit to StockXpert after the images are removed from these subagents. The income level would be too low to bother. One of the top 6 quickly becomes also-ran.

Sorry for not paying better attention, but I would like to clarify the references to 5 cents. You aren't saying that you will be paid 5 cents per download, but that you'll be paid 5 cents less than you are being paid now? Is that correct?

(ETA: This is a serious question, because it was my understanding that the non-exclusive payment would be flat 25 cents.Never mind. I understand.)

BigStock has the lowest: $30 for PayPal.  Then Fotolia*, StockXpert and 123RF at $50.  Then Shutterstock at $75.  iStock and Dreamstime bring up the rear at $100.

*Fotolia will let you cash out any time, but hit you with a fee if you have less than $50 in your account.

To me it isn't so much about the 5c it's that I  can't be bothered to go and tick each image individually.  Apparently it's too late to just opt them all in,

I think Stockxpert's days are numbered. Why else would they actually remove the images from the Jupiter distribution channels. What I don't get is why did they go to trouble recently to go through stockxpert's images and remove the ones they considered having copyright issues. Seems like a waste of time.

Yes, you have it right.  Sorry if I wasn't clear.  They are reducing our payout by .05, from .30 to .25.  Which is just incredibly chintzy and insulting. 

I have sold images for .25.  Heck, I still get a few XS sales on istock for that or even less. 

The point for me is they already have my images there, they are selling well. Getty can clearly afford the .30 they are already paying me, but they want to hose me out of a lousy .05 per sale just because they think they can.

I agree with the others here who have mentioned they are going to do everything they can to support Veer in hopes of providing an effective counterweight to Getty's attempts at monopoly.

I am surprised that so many people are are upset for loosing out on the photos.com and JIU sales. There weren't much anyways and I opted out last month, because I thought these little earnings are not worth it submitting to sites which pays as low as 30 cents for a subscription download.
For me nothing changes, but yes its kind of a bad move for Getty trying to lower our commission. My bet is they will just end up with a lot less images.

I think this is going to backfire on Getty & Co. The way they're messing about with the JIU/PC customers is just going to drive them into the arms of the competition. I wonder if they've written to advise them that 3M images are shortly to be removed from the library? The PC forums might make interesting reading in 89-odd days!

Surely SS, DT & FT are the real counterweight to Getty? Veer will have do to extremely well (and spend an awful lot of money) to get anywhere near the current market share of those three within the next 3-4 years.

I definitely think it will backfire too, if enough of us with big ports stay opted out.  Although I am baffled to read a couple of fairly successful independent contributors on istock's forums asking how to opt in to this or complaining that they thought they were opted in but aren't. 

If anyone here is a member of those designer forums gostwyck mentioned they should probably post about this so the designers are aware what's coming, and can at least buy anything they have lightboxed before it vanishes.

On DT, Fotolia and SS, absolutely, they are and have been great counterweights to Getty so far.  I just don't know that all their owners would be immune to being bought out if the price was right.  Because Veer is owned by the only other titan in the industry - Corbis - I think they are not so vulnerable to a buy out.  I don't know that they will succeed, but I sincerely hope so.

At a minimum I would like to make back on Veer what I am losing on StockXpert's demise.

LOL.  If that's the case maybe we should have all jumped at the (possibly-as-low-as) 3 cents that was originally proposed