Author Topic: yuri interview on John Lund (Read 42613 times)

Sean Locke Photography · « **on:** January 21, 2011, 17:29 »

Surprised nobody ( including Yuri

) has posted this today:
http://blog.johnlund.com/2011/01/yuri-arcurs-leading-microstock.html

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #1 on:** January 21, 2011, 17:47 »

Thanks for posting that. I note that the plagiarism example noted in the interview has resulted in the offending copy being removed from SS. AFAIK they don't insist on a photo reference to which you hold the copyright which makes that sort of thing easy to do for someone with no scruples.

Interesting to see that he thinks agencies without exclusivity are missing the boat - must make you feel a ton better about your choice Sean

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #2 on:** January 21, 2011, 17:54 »

Wow! Yuri really cut loose on his opinions. Good stuff though. The diplomatic gloves have come off.

Interesting that he's really big on Istock and their future. Never would have expected that.

And he made the leadership of the other companies sound like amateurs. Kind of expected that.

Opla · « **Reply #3 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:13 »

Really interesting read, thanks for that.

lisafx · « **Reply #4 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:18 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 21, 2011, 17:54

Interesting that he's really big on Istock and their future. Never would have expected that.

And he made the leadership of the other companies sound like amateurs. Kind of expected that.

I noticed the same thing. His faith in Istock's future seems to be much greater than general opinion of the moment. Maybe he has some inside scoop that is inspiring such confidence. Or maybe he has some vested interest in promoting Istock. Almost sounds like he is courting them for a special exclusive deal.

I don't know what could have transpired to sour him on the leaders of the other micros. They appear to be doing quite well, AFAIK, and none seems to have mismanaged their sites like Istock is currently doing.

Perhaps he feels these are just growing pains for Istock? Without being privy to whatever info he's basing his opinions on it is impossible to tell.

It was certainly an interesting article, and as usual, Yuri has given plenty of food for thought

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #5 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:21 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:18

I don't know what could have transpired to sour him on the leaders of the other micros. They appear to be doing quite well, AFAIK, and none seems to have mismanaged their sites like Istock is currently doing.

I'm guessing he's had quite a bit of direct interaction with all of them which most contributors probably don't. Here's the key part.

Quote

The problem is also that the primary CEO's of the non-exclusive agencies are amateur photographers at best and often don't know good design, good pictures from less good ones, and really don't care too much about the "whine" in the design world. iStock is way better at this and when we start getting out of our current economic crisis, they are prepared for nurturing the high paying customers. Non-exclusive agencies will be the "leftovers", but the CEO's will probably disagree to the grave, not realizing that they have been check-mated for a couple of years and iStock has been earning bulk in those years.

Sounds like they're kicking their feet up on the desk and ignoring the need to proactive and make changes.

melastmohican · « **Reply #6 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:23 »

I guess most import component of success in any venture is to be in right place on right time. Rest is a history :-)

gostwyck · « **Reply #7 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:37 »

Interesting stuff although he did appear to contradict himself on a few issues.

He says iStock are streets ahead of the other agencies and that exclusivity is best ... but then decides it is not for him at the moment. Why then bother to support all the other agencies of which he is so dismissive?

He says "the primary CEO's of the non-exclusive agencies are amateur photographers at best and often don't know good design, good pictures from less good ones, and really don't care too much about the "whine" in the design world." Huh? Where does he place Kelly Thompson in that scenario? Is Kelly a 'pro photographer' now? I hadn't realised. Jon Oringer might not be the world's best photographer __ but he is a very good businessman and that probably counts for more when it comes to running a business. Personally I still think that Shutterstock will win out in the end, simply because they are led by a shrewd businessman who takes the long view, rather than short-term Flash Harrys who are out to make a quick buck.

He reckons he can't produce images for less than $20 a pop but also reveals that his return per image topped $9 in 2009 and is predicted to be under $6 in 2011. That suggests a 4-year payback for his current work at today's prices __ which have already tumbled more than 30% in the last couple of years. If returns continue to dwindle at that pace then his outlay for today's shoots might actually take 6-7 years to pay back. By 2012 the payback could be more like 10 years per image. I'd say that's plenty to be concerned about.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #8 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:43 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 21, 2011, 18:37

He says iStock are streets ahead of the other agencies and that exclusivity is best ... but then decides it is not for him at the moment. Why then bother to support all the other agencies of which he is so dismissive?

There's just no way he could. His RF stuff is scattered to the winds. He's got to support the other agencies.

Quote

He reckons he can't produce images for less than $20 a pop but also reveals that his return per image topped $9 in 2009 and is predicted to be under $6 in 2011. That suggests a 4-year payback for his current work at today's prices __ which have already tumbled more than 30% in the last couple of years. If returns continue to dwindle at that pace then his outlay for today's shoots might actually take 6-7 years to pay back. By 2012 the payback could be more like 10 years per image. I'd say that's plenty to be concerned about.

One might say that's a good argument for not training your competition, but I guess not.

lisafx · « **Reply #9 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:44 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 21, 2011, 18:21

Quote
The problem is also that the primary CEO's of the non-exclusive agencies are amateur photographers at best and often don't know good design, good pictures from less good ones, and really don't care too much about the "whine" in the design world. iStock is way better at this and when we start getting out of our current economic crisis, they are prepared for nurturing the high paying customers. Non-exclusive agencies will be the "leftovers", but the CEO's will probably disagree to the grave, not realizing that they have been check-mated for a couple of years and iStock has been earning bulk in those years.

Sounds like they're kicking their feet up on the desk and ignoring the need to proactive and make changes.

I guess I got hung up in that paragraph on the term " 'whine' in the design world". What does that mean?

As for not being proactive, making changes is only a good thing if the changes are actually an improvement. The other sites all change and improve, but usually without disastrous fallout, so nobody notices. Taking a slow, deliberative approach to site changes isn't as likely to strike terror in either your buyers or your sellers....

You are right that Yuri would be in a much better position than most of us to know the site owners personally, however, so he is certainly entitled to his opinions.

Makes one wonder if he is, perhaps, in the process of getting a special RF exclusivity deal with Istock and withdrawing from the other micros. Otherwise I can't imagine a clever businessman like Yuri burning his bridges with the other site owners.

I realize that Istock doesn't openly offer special exclusivity deals, but with the advent of Agency photographers that policy seems to be in flux. And if an exception could be made, surely it would be for "the most successful photographer in the world".

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #10 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:47 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:18

...I don't know what could have transpired to sour him on the leaders of the other micros. They appear to be doing quite well, AFAIK, and none seems to have mismanaged their sites like Istock is currently doing. ...

I think there was a time relatively recently when Yuri stopped uploading to DT because of some difference of opinion (I think over rejections for similars) which he couldn't resolve by appealing to the owner. I would expect that at some level there was a bit of a clash of egos - all these guys who have started something that got big (which is the case for FT, DT and SS which are still run by their founders). Yuri probably see himself as their equal and they're nervous by having someone that big and successful giving them suggestions about what they should be doing.

I think there's a distinction between liking iStock/Getty's overall plans and liking the pitiful state of implementation at present. And it isn't just IS - the portal to the partner program has been busted for months and the ingestion of Vetta & Agency into Getty ran into all sorts of technical hiccups (they didn't elaborate in the forums, so I don't know any details).

I think that it's pretty understandable for those who stand to benefit from some industry change to be all for it, and those who are going to be left behind, worse off, etc. to be less enthusiastic. I'm guessing that given Yuri's position, he's pretty confident that someone will want to make him happy and keep his images coming to their site regardless of what happens over the next couple of years.

I'm hoping that iStock/Getty don't forget about small businesses and budget-conscious designers as they go on their collection-creating binge coming up with new higher priced imagery. IOW I wish they'd do something to sort out the ability to filter collections and keep a robust set of "regular" priced images in front of buyers (not 100 pages back buried by Vetta/Agency). None of that matters to Yuri, but I think if that area's ignored, it'll hurt the business in the long run (especially if it allows a newcomer to do to them what they did to traditional stock way back when).

ShadySue · « **Reply #11 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:49 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:44

I guess I got hung up in that paragraph on the term " 'whine' in the design world". What does that mean?

I thought maybe he meant 'buzz', but maybe not ...?

gostwyck · « **Reply #12 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:51 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:18

I don't know what could have transpired to sour him on the leaders of the other micros. They appear to be doing quite well, AFAIK, and none seems to have mismanaged their sites like Istock is currently doing.

I get the impression that he is prone to sulking if he doesn't get his own way. Remember that spat he had with DT because they rejected a few of his images? Went on for months until he and Serban kissed & made up at the Dublin event. He used to love SS when he was selling 1100 images a day but, when the numbers started to fall, then so did his enthusiasm for them. I think he blames the static market on the CEO's __ but strangely not IS. Maybe he is trying to negotiate a special deal between himself & IS.

lisafx · « **Reply #13 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:53 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 21, 2011, 18:51

Maybe he is trying to negotiate a special deal between himself & IS.

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:44

Makes one wonder if he is, perhaps, in the process of getting a special RF exclusivity deal with Istock and withdrawing from the other micros.

Looks like the same thing occurred to both of us

gostwyck · « **Reply #14 on:** January 21, 2011, 18:55 »

Quote from: sjlocke on January 21, 2011, 18:43

There's just no way he could. His RF stuff is scattered to the winds. He's got to support the other agencies.

That's what I've always understood but in his interview he indicates that he does have a choice.
One might say that's a good argument for not training your competition, but I guess not.

One might indeed say that!

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #15 on:** January 21, 2011, 19:34 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 21, 2011, 18:37

...
He reckons he can't produce images for less than $20 a pop but also reveals that his return per image topped $9 in 2009 and is predicted to be under $6 in 2011. That suggests a 4-year payback for his current work at today's prices __ which have already tumbled more than 30% in the last couple of years. If returns continue to dwindle at that pace then his outlay for today's shoots might actually take 6-7 years to pay back. By 2012 the payback could be more like 10 years per image. I'd say that's plenty to be concerned about.

The exception is Vetta and Agency pricing at IS and Getty. That would, I think, be very appealing to Yuri given his cost structure. Which might explain his interest in IS exclusivity.

nruboc · « **Reply #16 on:** January 21, 2011, 19:42 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 21, 2011, 19:34

Quote from: gostwyck on January 21, 2011, 18:37
...
He reckons he can't produce images for less than $20 a pop but also reveals that his return per image topped $9 in 2009 and is predicted to be under $6 in 2011. That suggests a 4-year payback for his current work at today's prices __ which have already tumbled more than 30% in the last couple of years. If returns continue to dwindle at that pace then his outlay for today's shoots might actually take 6-7 years to pay back. By 2012 the payback could be more like 10 years per image. I'd say that's plenty to be concerned about.

The exception is Vetta and Agency pricing at IS and Getty. That would, I think, be very appealing to Yuri given his cost structure. Which might explain his interest in IS exclusivity.

+ uno

lisafx · « **Reply #17 on:** January 21, 2011, 19:47 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 21, 2011, 19:34

The exception is Vetta and Agency pricing at IS and Getty. That would, I think, be very appealing to Yuri given his cost structure. Which might explain his interest in IS exclusivity.

Good thinking. I guess Istock exclusives with a lot of Vetta and Agency are finding that the high prices more than compensate for the reduction in sales volume? Anyone willing to weigh in on that one?

Suljo · « **Reply #18 on:** January 21, 2011, 19:52 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:18

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 21, 2011, 17:54
Interesting that he's really big on Istock and their future. Never would have expected that.

And he made the leadership of the other companies sound like amateurs. Kind of expected that.

I noticed the same thing. His faith in Istock's future seems to be much greater than general opinion of the moment. Maybe he has some inside scoop that is inspiring such confidence. Or maybe he has some vested interest in promoting Istock. Almost sounds like he is courting them for a special exclusive deal.

I don't know what could have transpired to sour him on the leaders of the other micros. They appear to be doing quite well, AFAIK, and none seems to have mismanaged their sites like Istock is currently doing.

Perhaps he feels these are just growing pains for Istock? Without being privy to whatever info he's basing his opinions on it is impossible to tell.

It was certainly an interesting article, and as usual, Yuri has given plenty of food for thought

I dont understand why they (iStock) dont buy him (with big cheky amount of money) in the first place, or make with him more exclusive contract than with other members (like they have with some old scanned archives, or gettys outdated agency images?) without they crap stories about too similar images, few wrong keys, low upload limits or other bullies which we ordinary mortals have with them?

Elenathewise · « **Reply #19 on:** January 21, 2011, 20:01 »

I am a bit confused by this statement:

"My return per image topped at 9.1 USD in 2009, and in 2010 it topped at 7.10 USD. It is continuously falling and I expect it to top at 5.6 USD in 2011."

When Yuri is talking about return per image - is it return per image per year?? Or per image per month?? Probably not per day:) but still what's the time frame?

pancaketom · « **Reply #20 on:** January 21, 2011, 20:03 »

For all the IS bashing we do here (myself included), they have tried to do a number of very positive things. Unfortunately they don't usually do a very good job of it in my mind, or it is closed to exclusives only.

For example, the CV combined with all the data they collect on search terms and sales could really make searches precise and great and punish the spammers. Instead they sort of muddled it.

another example - they continue to increase prices, which in general as a photographer I agree with. Unfortunately that is coupled with decreasing royalties, moving canister goal posts, and us vs. them exclusive only deals.

another - putting higher value images into higher priced collections = good. IS implementation = a mess / exclusive only.

and so on. If some other site (or IS) could do these things right, they would rule the microstock world.

It does sound like he has some sort of sweetheart deal in the works though.

SNP · « **Reply #21 on:** January 21, 2011, 20:09 »

that was really good. I'm surprised how open Yuri was. it was nice to read his gloves-off responses to some pretty loaded questions. I read his blogs and about his work frequently and have never seen comments quite as blunt as these out of him.

thanks for posting the link Sean. I hadn't seen the interview yet. and thanks Yuri for the great interview.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #22 on:** January 21, 2011, 20:21 »

Quote from: pancaketom on January 21, 2011, 20:03

...
another - putting higher value images into higher priced collections = good. IS implementation = a mess / exclusive only.
...

But just think about this proposition for a minute - or at least what the issue is if you think that the higher price collections should be open to exclusives only. You can't have a high price collection if the same stuff is selling for less elsewhere.

I know Getty's already doing that with some of its many properties - $12 for a Comstock image via an "image pack" at Thinkstock vs. $370 if you buy it at Getty or Jupiter Images.

Or the sale on Agency Collection Images which varies depending on which Getty "family" site you get it from - 25% off at Punchstock, 15% off at Jupiter Images or full price at Getty unless you purchased an annual Thinkstock subscription in which case it's 25% off.

They could address this with image exclusivity and a very strict policy on similars, but even the IS policy on similars in Agency/Vetta is very loose, so I don't know how reasonable this would be to implement.

Even 123rf and Fotolia's Infinite collection had some rules that you couldn't be selling the same image anywhere else for less.

Sadstock · « **Reply #23 on:** January 21, 2011, 22:07 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:53

Quote from: gostwyck on January 21, 2011, 18:51
Maybe he is trying to negotiate a special deal between himself & IS.

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:44

Makes one wonder if he is, perhaps, in the process of getting a special RF exclusivity deal with Istock and withdrawing from the other micros.

Looks like the same thing occurred to both of us

----------------------------------------
My take on it is that he wants to start earning Vetta like dollars while not being an Istock exclusive, which makes sense given his cost structure. It sounds to me like he's trying to scare the non-exclusive sites into doing something Vetta-like by hinting that he's open to a big offer from Istock. Sounds like he has asked them to do so already and they are not interested, so he's frustrated and is getting in their faces a bit by pegging them as amateurs, hoping this will get things to move. Or maybe that we will start pressuring the non-exclusives to move on this.

I think its also very interesting later in the interview where he says if this does not happen, the independents will fade, Istock will dominate, and he will go independent selling from his own site rather then go exclusive with Istock. Seems to contradict his hint at being interested in an exclusive deal, but again seems designed to push the non-exclusive micros to evolve with the times.

Noodles · « **Reply #24 on:** January 21, 2011, 22:14 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 21, 2011, 18:44

I guess I got hung up in that paragraph on the term " 'whine' in the design world". What does that mean?

There is currently a thread on SS asking to guess how many images will be accepted from a batch of 19 Apparently, 14 were accepted, but I would bet that number would be close to zero from 19 on iStock . And there lies the reason perhaps, why us designers sometimes "whine" at sites like SS. iStock clearly understand good design and quality will always sell. While their technical upgrades may be less than professional, iStock's direction is surely heading the right way long term.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: yuri interview on John Lund (Read 42613 times)

Sean Locke Photography

Jo Ann Snover

PaulieWalnuts

Opla

lisafx

PaulieWalnuts

melastmohican

gostwyck

Sean Locke Photography

lisafx

Jo Ann Snover

ShadySue

gostwyck

lisafx

gostwyck

Jo Ann Snover

nruboc

lisafx

Suljo

Elenathewise

pancaketom

SNP

Jo Ann Snover

Sadstock

Noodles

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors