Author Topic: Thinkstock is alive? (Read 41132 times)

disorderly · « **Reply #50 on:** July 11, 2010, 00:21 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on July 10, 2010, 18:47

I don't remember IS giving contributors a raise. When did that happen? They've raised prices which I'm glad they did. I think all micro sites should raise prices. But they're also talking about increasing the canister level requirements which effectively would delay commission raises for most contributors.

What commission raises would those be, Paulie? As an independent at iS, my commission is frozen at 20%. The only benefit to higher canisters is an increase in upload slots.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #51 on:** July 11, 2010, 05:17 »

Quote from: disorderly on July 11, 2010, 00:21

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on July 10, 2010, 18:47
I don't remember IS giving contributors a raise. When did that happen? They've raised prices which I'm glad they did. I think all micro sites should raise prices. But they're also talking about increasing the canister level requirements which effectively would delay commission raises for most contributors.

What commission raises would those be, Paulie? As an independent at iS, my commission is frozen at 20%. The only benefit to higher canisters is an increase in upload slots.

Yeah, I left a word out. ...would delay commission raises for most exclusive contributors

loop · « **Reply #52 on:** July 11, 2010, 06:25 »

I don't see any incentive for IS exclusives to fed TS. Sub sales are one of the reasons because many of us are Exckusives at istock; many of us don't like them, except in the istock form. Just one or two XLarge or XXLarge sold at TS instead from istock eats all the possible profit made from subs at TS (I even got and e-mail from a costumer asking me to put one specific photo at TS; I didn't do it at she finally bougth it big at Istock). And PPD sales... getting just 20%, like independants that can upload everywhere else?? I don't get the point, neither I feel motivated to upload anything there. All I would consider would be old and sullen pics that I delete from Istock.

cathyslife · « **Reply #53 on:** July 11, 2010, 07:35 »

Quote from: cdwheatley on July 10, 2010, 16:15

I think if Getty wanted to destroy Istock they would just sell cheap subs through Istock. No one is holding a gun to your head making you submit to thinkstock or any of the other sites that pop up hourly. More likely they have just found a way to cut into the competition with minimal damage to Istock. Thinkstock and sub sites in general should only sell dated or slow sellers, leave the better or new stuff priced higher until demand falls like most products on the market. All you can eat buffets usually have mediocre food.

If your sales are dropping on Istock as a nonexclusive, it's not hard to see what one of biggest factors might be. best match is littered with Vetta files. If E+ files ever get a push it will only get worse. Low visibility=low sales. As mentioned before, in the past Istock made more money off of nonexclusive files, that is not the case anymore.

Actually, IS does sell cheap subs. See this page:

http://www.istockphoto.com/istock_thinkstock_subscription.php

cdwheatley · « **Reply #54 on:** July 11, 2010, 09:48 »

Quote from: cclapper on July 11, 2010, 07:35

Actually, IS does sell cheap subs. See this page:

http://www.istockphoto.com/istock_thinkstock_subscription.php

My last 10 Istock subs commissions:

3.80-m
.76- xs
1.90-s
.76-xs
1.58-xs
3.80-s
.76 -xs
1.90-s
3.80-m
.76-xs

Nothing over medium size and the average commission is pretty good.

I don't think advertising thinkstock is the same as selling thinkstock images from Istock searches, same goes for getty images. I would be worried about that site if they forced us to upload there.

Lisa,
The istock forum is a mixed bag with plenty of BME and "what . happened to my sales"

It's also summer which doesn't bode well for most.
Vetta images have an affect on everyone exclusive or not. If you are lucky enough to have a bunch then things are looking up for you, even a few will help. I haven't had the best luck, but keep trying. As far as falling downloads in general: comparing the past to present is tough with how fast things are growing, returns are less, I don't expect to get as many downloads off a shoot today compared to 2007-2008. If your money is up regardless of download #'s, then life is good, no?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #55 on:** July 11, 2010, 10:26 »

If anyone wants to know how exclusive sales are going day to day, just read the "race" threads in the off-topic forum. 50% of the posts in those are just whines about lack of sales.

cdwheatley · « **Reply #56 on:** July 11, 2010, 11:22 »

Quote from: sjlocke on July 11, 2010, 10:26

If anyone wants to know how exclusive sales are going day to day, just read the "race" threads in the off-topic forum. 50% of the posts in those are just whines about lack of sales.

That graph in the "race for gold" thread is pretty sad. I guess the sky is falling after all.

madelaide · « **Reply #57 on:** July 11, 2010, 12:33 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on July 10, 2010, 18:47

They've raised prices which I'm glad they did. I think all micro sites should raise prices.

They have been raising prices eveyr year, but I think they never raise prices of subs plans. This only makes subs more entiving for a frequent buyer, even if he doesn't need dozens of images a day.

Digital66 · « **Reply #58 on:** July 11, 2010, 14:37 »

Quote from: gostwyck on July 10, 2010, 16:08

Quote from: Allsa on July 10, 2010, 14:58
But what plans? What actions? What can we, as individuals, do?

Don't support TS with your content. Without content it can never become a threat. Simples.

Good advice.

VB inc · « **Reply #59 on:** July 12, 2010, 02:59 »

Quote from: cthoman on July 10, 2010, 19:21

But complaining about agencies that I don't even participate at is just silly.

Do you really believe TS will not have any effect on istock or any other agencies? I think it would be more silly to complain while your participating (bending over) to Thinkstock.

iclick · « **Reply #60 on:** July 12, 2010, 04:05 »

To answer your Q it seems to be limping along, the bigger picture of course is that for Contributers sake rather than Gettys it fails

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #61 on:** July 12, 2010, 10:51 »

Quote from: iclick on July 12, 2010, 04:05

To answer your Q it seems to be limping along, the bigger picture of course is that for Contributers sake rather than Gettys it fails

I'm not sure that I would celebrate the failure of any microstock site? Aren't we cheering for MORE competition; not LESS?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #62 on:** July 12, 2010, 16:46 »

Quote from: cdwheatley on July 11, 2010, 11:22

Quote from: sjlocke on July 11, 2010, 10:26
If anyone wants to know how exclusive sales are going day to day, just read the "race" threads in the off-topic forum. 50% of the posts in those are just whines about lack of sales.

That graph in the "race for gold" thread is pretty sad. I guess the sky is falling after all.

I'm sure that I can't be the only one for whom downloads as well as dollars are growing over 2009. I post that every so often, but it just gets lost in the shuffle - perhaps because I'm a pretty small contributor, perhaps because the current "story" is how downloads are declining.

lisafx · « **Reply #63 on:** July 12, 2010, 16:54 »

Quote from: jsnover on July 12, 2010, 16:46

I'm sure that I can't be the only one for whom downloads as well as dollars are growing over 2009. I post that every so often, but it just gets lost in the shuffle - perhaps because I'm a pretty small contributor, perhaps because the current "story" is how downloads are declining.

Actually, I am really happy to read this. Must have missed it in the June thread. It means a lot when a long-timer with a mature portfolio is seeing that kind of growth.

Maybe after all those of us getting hit with this (dismal!) downturn are just on the wrong side of the best match, rather than an overall decline in sales.

Impossible to know for sure, but the increased crankiness of some admins in the IS forums lately does not inspire much confidence.

cathyslife · « **Reply #64 on:** July 12, 2010, 17:05 »

Quote from: jsnover on July 12, 2010, 16:46

I'm sure that I can't be the only one for whom downloads as well as dollars are growing over 2009. I post that every so often, but it just gets lost in the shuffle - perhaps because I'm a pretty small contributor, perhaps because the current "story" is how downloads are declining.

When I look at all my stats over 2009, I have shown growth in both areas too. But since the start of 2010, things seem to be falling off. I was hoping that growing my port and improving my skills would mean a continual uptick, but that is not happening and that is where I (and a lot of others) are becoming concerned.

When things are busy and successful, most people don't take the time to post in forums...they are too busy making money! But when things are on the downside, more people come to the forums to commiserate...misery loves company. I think that's why we are seeing a lot of shuffling. I have no doubt there are a good number of contributors out there doing well. It is no surprise to me that you are, too, jsnover!

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #65 on:** July 12, 2010, 17:57 »

my earnings are still increasing, and this is good

my earnings are incresing less than proportionally compared to the number of new images in my port, and this is not so good

so I am not sure whether I should be happy (and how much longer) or not

gostwyck · « **Reply #66 on:** July 13, 2010, 06:39 »

Quote from: jsnover on July 12, 2010, 16:46

I'm sure that I can't be the only one for whom downloads as well as dollars are growing over 2009. I post that every so often, but it just gets lost in the shuffle - perhaps because I'm a pretty small contributor, perhaps because the current "story" is how downloads are declining.

Joanne __ As I've pointed out before you've pretty much doubled your portfolio in the last year. Of course your sales and income have been growing. You've done about as much work on your port in the last year as you had in the previous five years put together. Blithely commenting that 'sales are growing' without mentioning that little factor is somewhat disingenuous.

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #67 on:** July 14, 2010, 17:27 »

still havent sold a single image from the former StockXpert stable and my IS stuff is still not there... guess I suck.

=tom

iclick · « **Reply #68 on:** July 15, 2010, 03:00 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on July 12, 2010, 10:51

Quote from: iclick on July 12, 2010, 04:05
To answer your Q it seems to be limping along, the bigger picture of course is that for Contributers sake rather than Gettys it fails

I'm not sure that I would celebrate the failure of any microstock site? Aren't we cheering for MORE competition; not LESS?

Sorry let me clarify I am referring to is Getty's attempts with TS to dominate the subscription market (which used to be a dirty word over at IS) and drive prices down, and indeed away from IS

My sales there of late have been atrocious even by summer slump standards

RacePhoto · « **Reply #69 on:** July 19, 2010, 14:07 »

Quote from: a.k.a.-tom on July 14, 2010, 17:27

still havent sold a single image from the former StockXpert stable and my IS stuff is still not there... guess I suck. =tom

Me Too, one sale from the StockXpert collection for 25 cents since Feb. Best part is it was shot that was refused by every other agency except StockXpert! Ancient Neolithic Dwelling.

Which makes me ask... how much can ThinkStock be hurting the market if they aren't selling much of anything?

There's a place down the street selling cheap subs same prices as SS and others, (not cheaper than Deposit Photos by the way) but they have no business and no customers, plus their product is mostly old re-cycled leftovers.

Lets pretend for a moment, that StockXpert/ThinkStock doesn't exist. As far as all reports from everyone here, the sales there are minimal if any at all.

Then where are the customers going? ThinkStock is getting blamed, called out, people write nasty-grams, but the place can't logically be the cause, if ThinkStock sales suck?

etienjones · « **Reply #70 on:** July 19, 2010, 15:50 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on July 19, 2010, 14:07

Quote from: a.k.a.-tom on July 14, 2010, 17:27
still havent sold a single image from the former StockXpert stable and my IS stuff is still not there... guess I suck. =tom

Me Too, one sale from the StockXpert collection for 25 cents since Feb. Best part is it was shot that was refused by every other agency except StockXpert! Ancient Neolithic Dwelling.

Which makes me ask... how much can ThinkStock be hurting the market if they aren't selling much of anything?

There's a place down the street selling cheap subs same prices as SS and others, (not cheaper than Deposit Photos by the way) but they have no business and no customers, plus their product is mostly old re-cycled leftovers.

Lets pretend for a moment, that StockXpert/ThinkStock doesn't exist. As far as all reports from everyone here, the sales there are minimal if any at all.

Then where are the customers going? ThinkStock is getting blamed, called out, people write nasty-grams, but the place can't logically be the cause, if ThinkStock sales suck?

ThinkStock isn't hurting the market, but it is pushing it to the inevitable 3 tiered system of Maco, Exclusive, and 25 cent-ers.

By the way, where in . did you find that shot . . . . . it looks a little like my place

Gannet77 · « **Reply #71 on:** July 19, 2010, 17:27 »

^
It's Skara Brae on the Orkney Islands in Scotland, isn't it?

shiyali · « **Reply #72 on:** July 20, 2010, 03:24 »

Quote from: RacePhoto on July 19, 2010, 14:07

Quote from: a.k.a.-tom on July 14, 2010, 17:27
still havent sold a single image from the former StockXpert stable and my IS stuff is still not there... guess I suck. =tom

Me Too, one sale from the StockXpert collection for 25 cents since Feb. Best part is it was shot that was refused by every other agency except StockXpert! Ancient Neolithic Dwelling.

Hey, I thought you need a property release for interior shots?

RacePhoto · « **Reply #73 on:** July 20, 2010, 12:50 »

Quote from: Gannet77 on July 19, 2010, 17:27

^
It's Skara Brae on the Orkney Islands in Scotland, isn't it?

Yes, it is Orkney. Kind of rough but after a few thousand years it's still there. Film photo taken 1988.

Restrictions at Maas Howe were no video, but I could take still shots. Who knows where they get some of these regulations. Inside some buildings Windsor Castle for example, no photos at all. They claim something about security.

Speaking of property shots: Under strict rules, the National Trust bans the commercial use of photographs taken at its properties. "This section of the 1965 National Trust byelaws is the basis on which the Trust's photographic policy is based. Our policy is explicit in welcoming people to take photographs out of doors at properties for personal use and research but the Trust does not permit photography for profit or publication without permission. ....The byelaw protecting the Trust relates to all National Trust property, including non-paying properties such as coastlines and landscapes. "

Coastline and landscapes? They want to own the rights to everything? This is what's behind the restrictions at Uluru/Ayers Rock. The religious claim is just thrown in for the politically correct, so they can tug on our heart strings. It's not a rock, it's a small mountain. How can they claim to own all rights to a mountain? The National Trust wants to grab all rights to all images and had been perusing removal of images on a number of agency sites.

Meanwhile, that was my only sale of StockXpert photos on ThinkStock in six months. ThinkStock is a collection of collections, recycled old photo agencies that were languishing on their own, now under one roof. People don't seem to see past the end of their own nose. ThinkStock is not dependent on IS partner shots or the StockXpert collection, it's the other 80-90% of their old material that's being exposed to buyers at bargain prices.

Subscriptions are already here at many sites. I don't know why some people are picking at thsi one so much, when there are others that sell subscription plans, to buyers for much less. Price undercutting will hurt the market much more than ThinkStock ever will!

People should not confuse crummy pay and commissions with low prices. ThinkStock is matching the general market for prices, not undercutting it. We need to be concerned with the health of the entire market and upholding price levels, not individual percentages. If the prices go down, the profits go down, for us and the agencies.

With that, some new upstart with lower subscription rates for buyers is a worse problem and threat, than ThinkStock. But as I've pointed out before and been ignored, some people send that type of parasitic agency hundreds of images, because they can get a 25c upload stipend while complaining that 25c a download isn't enough. So it's OK to sell out for a quarter and weaken the market, but it's not OK to sell images for 25c?

I still don't get it!

sharpshot · « **Reply #74 on:** July 20, 2010, 17:18 »

Have any new sites that paid for uploads weakened the market? I don't think so, none of them have enough buyers. I am sure thinkstock has lost me money. There is still a huge gap between subs and pay per download prices. Subs prices were moving up but how can other sites raise prices if thinkstock is a success? Some pay per download buyers will move to subs sites if the gap in prices carries on, I just don't believe they are two completely separate markets.

And I still don't see why I should be grateful for 25 cents from thinkstock when other sites pay 35 cents or more, it just isn't appealing to me.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Thinkstock is alive? (Read 41132 times)

disorderly

PaulieWalnuts

loop

cathyslife

cdwheatley

Sean Locke Photography

cdwheatley

madelaide

Digital66

VB inc

iclick

WarrenPrice

Jo Ann Snover

lisafx

cathyslife

microstockphoto.co.uk

gostwyck

a.k.a.-tom

iclick

RacePhoto

etienjones

Gannet77

shiyali

RacePhoto

sharpshot

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors