The 'all your eggs in one basket' thing has never held much credulity with me: Marketing images exclusively at one agency is, to me, akin to having a regular 9-5 job with a single employer. This is the normal employment paradigm, and not many seem to have a problem with it.

That is exactly right. You work for Getty, that's why your comments on this forum are so incredibly biased.
The only difference between the exclusive contract and a standard employment one (especially with the new bonus structure) is that you have zero protection if they decide to cut your pay again or in fact change the contract in any other way they see fit.
Enjoy.

I got to second that. Yes Bruce was (is) a nice, fair guy all the way back from Istockpro time.

Quote from: sharply_done on September 21, 2010, 11:30

The 'all your eggs in one basket' thing has never held much credulity with me: Marketing images exclusively at one agency is, to me, akin to having a regular 9-5 job with a single employer. This is the normal employment paradigm, and not many seem to have a problem with it.

That is exactly right. You work for Getty, that's why your comments on this forum are so incredibly biased.
The only difference between the exclusive contract and a standard employment one (especially with the new bonus structure) is that you have zero protection if they decide to cut your pay again or in fact change the contract in any other way they see fit.
Enjoy.

Errr ... no. There are lots of differences. No basic salary, no health insurance, no sick pay, no end-of-service benefits, no job security, no employment contract, no workers' rights, no expense account, no paid for holidays or days off without loss of pay .... in fact, not a single one of those things that make people feel it is safer and better to be an employee rather than self-employed.

Instead, he has all the disadvantages of being self-employed, such as signing a contract in which he personally indemnifies his agent against loss arising from a defect in the goods he supplies, his relationship with the agent can be severed instantly at the agent's discretion losing him what he thinks is his job and he has no right of appeal, and the goods he is supplying can be hidden at the back of the shop any time the agent feels like it, without him having any say in how they are or are not marketed.

Yet he makes his business decisions on the false assumption that he has taken a "job" like any employee and asks not to be given any information that might disabuse him of that notion. It's incredible, really.

Yeah misuse of the word "only" in my last post!
Maybe it would have been better to say "only difference is you get none of the benefits of being an employee"

Quote from: sharply_done on September 21, 2010, 11:30

...I don't really understand why people in this industry are so against exclusivity. Some vehemently. I'm not really interested in learning why, either, so don't bother enlightening me...

I would think anyone might be interested in the anti-exclusivity sentiment if it has to do with how much money you could be making. And that is where a lot of the sentiment comes from. Much as most exclusives don't want to believe it, most would stand to earn more non-exclusively. Look at earnings polls going back for years and for most independent contributors, iStock is not their top earner. For most independents, going exclusive would equal a pay cut. Sometimes a big one. For me, we're talking a few thousand dollars per year.

The debate gets heated when a few exclusives start pushing misinformation out there about working independently, in what I can only imagine is an attempt to scare people away from trying out the competition. I'm not vehemently against exclusivity. I'm against people making poor business decisions based on warm fuzzy feelings rather than numbers and facts. And that's not to say that going exclusive is a bad decision for everyone. Just that it's something that shouldn't be entered into lightly and without doing some research and figuring out if it really is the best move.

So you're saying other people are spreading misinformation but you're basing your opinion that most people would see a decrease on non-exclusive polls and other annecdotal guestimates? How do you know you would drop a few thousand dollars a year? Based on what calculations?

When I went exclusive a couple years ago my earnings jumped to surpass what I was making at a total of 13 sites. Who knows if that's still the case with becoming exlcusive today... I dunno.

And before someone tries to paint me as an Istock fanboy, I'm not. Just presenting facts from my direct exerperience. I said a while ago I wouldn't be surprised if a performance model got rolled out and here it is.

...How do you know you would drop a few thousand dollars a year? Based on what calculations?...

Percentage increase from the canister change, estimated percentage increase from better best match placement, bonus offerings (E+, Getty option, etc), and I even figured it out up to Diamond to see what my max potential income as an iStock exclusive would be. From info I've gleaned from forum discussions about the best match placement effect and canister change, at best I might expect to double my income at my current Gold level, and slightly more than double it at Diamond. Just to be safe, I added another 20% to that to account for any unforeseen extra best match help, and it still just doesn't add up. iStock currently accounts for 20% of my monthly earnings, with a nearly identical portfolio that I have at 13 other sites. I don't see my iStock earnings multiplying 5 times by going exclusive, so as far as I can tell exclusivity equals a big pay cut for me.

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on September 22, 2010, 12:46

...
And before someone tries to paint me as an Istock fanboy, I'm not. Just presenting facts from my direct exerperience. I said a while ago I wouldn't be surprised if a performance model got rolled out and here it is.

Heh, I'm in the same boat. I was an independent longer than I've been an exclusive, but despite that I seem to get jumped on when I say anything even remotely positive about iStock. Given that there aren't too many people in this situation, and even fewer making a living from it, I'd like to think our experiences are worthy of more than derision. That doesn't seem to be the case, though.

Your points are perfectly valid. Until this year it was widely reckoned that exclusivity and independence probably panned out at about the same in terms of earnings. The price revamp for exclusives and the introduction of schemes like exclusive plus and vetta made a lot of people think that the iStock option was probably more lucrative as of the beginning of this year and I know quite a few senior independents who were planning to go exclusive. Then they promptly dropped the double bombshell with thinkstock: first the announcement and then the effort to poach buyers away from iS into TS. That caused a lot people who were about to commit to exclusivity to rethink.

I would need to treble my current iStock earnings to recoup the losses from giving up independence. Today, when I would go to straight to 40% I could probably do that, taking account of Vetta and E+ possibilities. But in January I would be down to 30%, making it unlikely that I could even double my 2010 iS takings in 2011. That would amount to a loss of a third of my current income, while staying independent will cost me just 5% (a 15% fall in iS, but only 5% overall).

So while I don't doubt you when you say that it has worked for you since you made the jump, it clearly wouldn't work for me now. And of course, most people choosing that course today will never get to the 40% level that they might have had before, so unless iS accounts for more than 50% of their total income at the moment, it is unlikely to be a wise move for them.

And you have never said anything derogatory about non-exclusives?  You do edit some of your posts quickly but if you type something derogatory and press the post button, some of us will see it.  Shame I deleted the quote in my reply.

I'm sorry you saw what you saw, sharpshot, but apart from that I challenge you to go through my 1800+ posts here to find anything inflammatory or derogatory. I'm not saying I'm an angel or that I have a holier-than-thou attitude: Sure, I get ticked off sometimes, and sometimes it gets the better of me and I write stuff I shouldn't - but for the most part I come to my senses and either don't post it or delete my post very quickly. It's not a huge jump to say this common to a lot of people.

As far as being exclusive or nonexclusive goes, I couldn't really care less about how most people make their money. There are a few people here I've spoken to privately whom I think would gain significantly if they made the jump, but that's about it. That being said, it does bother me when people who have no experience with exclusivity blather on and on about the pitfalls of being exclusive ... yeah sure, like they know all about it.


Oh, and thank you for editing your reply to my deleted post - your politeness and manners are much appreciated!

Quote from: sharpshot on September 22, 2010, 13:39

And you have never said anything derogatory about non-exclusives?  You do edit some of your posts quickly but if you type something derogatory and press the post button, some of us will see it.  Shame I deleted the quote in my reply.

I'm sorry you saw what you saw, sharpshot, but apart from that I challenge you to go through my 1800+ posts here to find anything inflammatory or derogatory. I'm not saying I'm an angel or that I have a holier-than-thou attitude: Sure, I get ticked off sometimes, and sometimes it gets the better of me and I write stuff I shouldn't - but for the most part I come to my senses and either don't post it or delete my post very quickly. It's not a huge jump to say this common to a lot of people.

As far as being exclusive or nonexclusive goes, I couldn't really care less about how most people make their money. There are a few people here that I've spoken to privately whom I think would gain significantly if they made the jump, but that's about it. That being said, it does bother me when people who have no experience with exclusivity blather on and on about the pitfalls of being exclusive ... yeah sure, like they know all about it.

No problem, there are always going to be tensions between exclusives and non-exclusives.  I enjoy reading your posts most of the time and its good to get the exclusives perspective.  Sometimes it is hard to deal with some of the people in this forum but I still prefer it to any of the sites forums that delete or lock posts they don't like.

it does bother me when people who have no experience with exclusivity blather on and on about the pitfalls of being exclusive ... yeah sure, like they know all about it.

Why does lack of participation invalidate observations? I've never taken cocaine but I don't think that means I can't hold an opinion about whether it would be good for me or not.

That being said, it does bother me when people who have no experience with exclusivity blather on and on about the pitfalls of being exclusive ... yeah sure, like they know all about it.

By definition nobody can know both sides of the fence with any certainty __ other than perhaps for a few short months after going exclusive. Things change all the time (like IS now) and the market moves too so whatever you may once have known becomes invalid if not kept up to date.

Ten of my dollars says Sharply will not be exclusive with Istockphoto in 18 months time. Put this date in your diary __ 22nd March 2012. Will Sharply still be wearing his crown? I doubt it. Any takers for my money?

I will bet you $1,000 he will.
Put your money where your mouth is dude. 

I have done. If the money's too big then it will influence the decision __ $1000 would be several months of Sharp's earnings 

Ten of my dollars says Sharply will not be exclusive with Istockphoto in 18 months time. Put this date in your diary __ 22nd March 2012. Will Sharply still be wearing his crown? I doubt it. Any takers for my money?

Hah - I'll take it alright ... I'll even go for more if you're up to it!

Before we proceed, and for fair warning, you should know that cdwheatley is very much 'in the know' about things with me and iStock - it's a good guess that if he's willing to pony up $1000, there just might be more going on than you expect.