MicrostockGroup

My sentiments exactly. 

SS introduced ELs as a way of offering expanded usage rights after contributors complained about their images being printed on coffee cups and mouse pads.  The other sites followed suit.  This move would set back the progress we've made towards the proper licensing of and compensation for our images. 

It is a great feeling. Today was a bonanza with one EL from DT ($25) and one from IS ($21.85 plus the 3.75 regular license). There have been 2 each earlier in the month from FT and SS. Somehow 30 cents x 6 doesn't seem as interesting

I agree, selling EL for 0.30 is not acceptable.

As a fairly new contributor to StockXpert I am wondering if from now on I should only upload smallest allowed sizes. But even then, on SS I could get for them $20 per EL.

I guess time will tell, based on StockXpert final decision I will make my own decision.

This conference is today, but why a conference call. It would be much easier to only read what peoples think in the different forums. This way to reach people seem to me a little ridiculous. My phones are out of batteries after 10 minutes LOL

Joann is my hero!  She's doing an excellent job articulating our concerns. 

Do you guys can make a resume

Heavens! I can't leap any buildings, tall or otherwise

We are to expect something in writing by Monday from them with updates on what they will be doing and when. They did promise that they will not remove the ability for us to delete our portfolio between now and then

The good news was that the Photos.com plus is limited to 750 DLs per month, but they didn't say what the buyer price would be (working on it).

I don't know how well they were listening to the extended license arguments - I heard Patty Vargas say twice that it wasn't any loss as very few ELs were sold via StockXpert although it's the revenue from elsewhere that I'm worried about retaining. 30% of a higher PPD sale ($49 to $299) as a soother for lost extended license revenue (i.e. they argue that it will typically be a larger size and thus PPD not subs) is less appealing when you consider that 30% of $49 is much less commission than $28 from SS or the $25 I from DT (for an extended print run license).

They are apparently looking anew at the StockXpert subs setup (I asked about limiting sizes and vectors). They are willing to consider including our names in the image info - right now it would be Copyright 2008 Jupiter Imges & its licensors. I pointed out that while they said they thought the big revenue opportunity for us was the subscription commissions, 30 cents was the lowest out there, more so when you consider the higher amounts you can earn with more sales at several sites.

Patty said they were just exploring this as a new business and would revisit the commission issue as they learned more. In part that sounded disingenuous given all the Jupiter offerings, but perhaps it's dealing with a gaggle of individual copyright holders that's new - lots of their stuff is wholly owned.

They said they would notify us before any new partner arrangement went live - so we wouldn't find out after the fact

Of concern to those who sell the rights via DT or who are thinking they might go exclusive somewhere: they have up to 90 days to delete images, so they would try to do it quickly but they don't have to. Photos.com plus would be updated once a week from StockXpert, so you'd have to wait up to a week before deleted images would be removed there.

They did stress that electronic distribution was not permitted via the Photos.com EULA. That still leaves print run and physical items ELs (which is still a big deal IMO).

Patty made a pitch that we should remember they had our best interests at heart and were looking for ways to earn us revenue. I pointed out that this was fine as long as they remembered we were partners, and that assuming we'd take everything on just their say-so and go along wasn't a viable way to operate. She repeated the apology that Steve-oh had made at the beginning that they hadn't handled this whole thing well.

Steve, I knew you had never said that you would, but this was just a way of highlighting for those who still are not happy that taking a few days to assess where we are should have zero consequences as everything possible today would still be possible on Monday.

I am surprised none of the big guys (like Yuri etc)haven't expressed their view on the matter.may be I am wrong  I might have missed something?

I also strongly disagree with Patty regarding the occurrence of EL sales.
I guess she might be looking at StockXpert data only (I never had an EL sale with StockXpert, unlike all other micros agencies).

I'm getting on average at least 2 EL sales per month with IS and SS, which is roughly 10% of my revenue with them,  that's not huge but substantial enough.

When SS customers who buy EL sub packages will find out they can buy the same picture for $0.30, they will leave SS to buy a sub package with Photos.com and we will obviously lose money.

Also Patty is wrong when she states that you would need an XL or XXL version to print on T-shirt or mug, an L size is more than sufficient.  I have even seen L sizes blown up on billboards.  And if like she said most customer don't buy to resale, why would that be such a big deal to have a more restrictive EULA with photo plus, especially given that they will go from 350000 medium to low quality pictures to 2 millions plus extra high quality content?

The best scenario for StockXpert is the worst scenario for microstock photographers. Imagine they get a hefty slice of another sites customers. "Another sites", if seeing they sales drop dramatically would end competing too in price. That's the way that comes back to the 0.10 dollars/download.
Acepting this deal, microstock photographer's would hurt the businnes and they own interest.
At the end, it seems that just SS and IS cares for their business and for their contributors.

If I understand this correctly, I'm supposed to be thrilled that I get .30 for what equates to a $28 sale on SS and a $25 sale on DT. Add in the claim that the volume will be amazing and I still need almost 100 sales through photos.com to come close what I would be paid elsewhere for the same use of my image.

I'll join the ranks...I have no idea why I should be excited about this.

StockXpert, I've always liked you, but this seems simply insulting to your submitters. We've done the math. We're unimpressed. In fact, some of us seem baffled at your excitement.

So tell us...unless we're from the school of "I'm just tickled-pink to get any money for my photos"...why should we stick around?