Author Topic: E+ Sales on Getty - very nice... (Read 6437 times)

Gannet77 · « **on:** December 20, 2012, 09:39 »

Just got the first returns from iStock's E+ move to Getty program, for November - not many DLs, but the RPD is nice, over $20 per sale.

I don't know that it will make up for the losses in other areas, but it's nice to have something positive in return for sticking with being Exclusive.

I guess we'll see how it goes.

ShadySue · « **Reply #1 on:** December 20, 2012, 09:44 »

AFAICS, I had two Vetta sales on GI, no E+.
I thought we used to be able to see which specific files had sold? All I can see now is the files which have ever sold, but not when.

Gannet77 · « **Reply #2 on:** December 20, 2012, 10:09 »

There is one of Sean's scripts that runs on the GI Sales page, I don't have a link handy but if you look in the Tools/Apps forum it's somewhere in the sticky thread.

Then order the GI Sales page by sales and run the script.

ShadySue · « **Reply #3 on:** December 20, 2012, 10:43 »

Thanks. I discovered that it was the same V file which sold three times, twice on the 30th at the same time, so presumably to the same buyer. I'd assumed that was one sale.
Useful!
Disappointing not to have any E+ sales - yet.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #4 on:** December 20, 2012, 11:16 »

E+ for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the Getty site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular Getty contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. Getty has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #5 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:00 »

Quote from: Zeus on December 20, 2012, 11:16

E+ for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the Getty site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular Getty contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. Getty has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.

Getty for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the iStock site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular iStock contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. iStock has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.

lisafx · « **Reply #6 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:00 »

Quote from: Zeus on December 20, 2012, 11:16

E+ for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the Getty site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular Getty contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. Getty has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.

Interesting. I expect this is another bone being thrown to disgruntled Istock contributors, much like the suspension of RC royalty rate drops for next year. They are realizing just how badly they have screwed over their top sellers at Istock and trying to prevent a mass exodus.

aspp · « **Reply #7 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:17 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 20, 2012, 12:00

I expect this is another bone being thrown to disgruntled Istock contributors

I think that more likely it would be to do with these files having been recently ingested. But I wonder whether he is not actually searching by 'newest' rather than 'best match'. IS contributors have been noticing that in many searches E+ files are way down the list and at are the back of their portfolios when ordered by best match - after Vetta, after Getty RF and mostly after RM where applicable.

ShadySue · « **Reply #8 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:20 »

It seems to depend on the search. I've got some right at the top of searches, and some about halfway down.
When they arrived, they were all right at the bottom, which others were reporting (some had lost all their keywords).

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #9 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:25 »

Quote from: aspp on December 20, 2012, 12:17

Quote from: lisafx on December 20, 2012, 12:00
I expect this is another bone being thrown to disgruntled Istock contributors

I think that more likely it would be to do with these files having been recently ingested. But I wonder whether he is not actually searching by 'newest' rather than 'best match'. IS contributors have been noticing that in many searches E+ files are way down the list and at are the back of their portfolios when ordered by best match - after Vetta, after Getty RF and mostly after RM where applicable.

Yeah, from what I've heard, E+ is at the back of their sort.

lisafx · « **Reply #10 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:38 »

Quote from: sjlocke on December 20, 2012, 12:25

Quote from: aspp on December 20, 2012, 12:17
Quote from: lisafx on December 20, 2012, 12:00
I expect this is another bone being thrown to disgruntled Istock contributors

I think that more likely it would be to do with these files having been recently ingested. But I wonder whether he is not actually searching by 'newest' rather than 'best match'. IS contributors have been noticing that in many searches E+ files are way down the list and at are the back of their portfolios when ordered by best match - after Vetta, after Getty RF and mostly after RM where applicable.

Yeah, from what I've heard, E+ is at the back of their sort.

Ah. I was going on the assumption that this had changed, based on the OP.

Would be smart to sweeten the pot for Istock exclusives by bumping their files in Getty searches. If they aren't doing it, they should.

Gannet77 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 20, 2012, 12:47 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 20, 2012, 12:38

Quote from: sjlocke on December 20, 2012, 12:25
Quote from: aspp on December 20, 2012, 12:17
Quote from: lisafx on December 20, 2012, 12:00
I expect this is another bone being thrown to disgruntled Istock contributors

I think that more likely it would be to do with these files having been recently ingested. But I wonder whether he is not actually searching by 'newest' rather than 'best match'. IS contributors have been noticing that in many searches E+ files are way down the list and at are the back of their portfolios when ordered by best match - after Vetta, after Getty RF and mostly after RM where applicable.

Yeah, from what I've heard, E+ is at the back of their sort.

Ah. I was going on the assumption that this had changed, based on the OP.

Would be smart to sweeten the pot for Istock exclusives by bumping their files in Getty searches. If they aren't doing it, they should.

No, from what I see, E+ is definitely at the back of the GI best match sort - all I was saying in my OP was that I was pleased with my results for November.

It's not a huge bonus but still very welcome.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #12 on:** December 20, 2012, 13:40 »

Quote from: lisafx on December 20, 2012, 12:38

...Would be smart to sweeten the pot for Istock exclusives by bumping their files in Getty searches. If they aren't doing it, they should.

But they have another whole constituency to keep happy as well - the Getty photographers who I am sure are less than thrilled to see iStock content showing up on Getty. Unless sales are growing overall - versus just Getty profits - it will be hard to keep everyone happy by robbing from Peter to pay Paul.

pro@stockphotos · « **Reply #13 on:** December 20, 2012, 14:50 »

Quote from: fotoVoyager on December 20, 2012, 12:00

Quote from: Zeus on December 20, 2012, 11:16
E+ for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the Getty site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular Getty contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. Getty has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.

Getty for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the iStock site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular iStock contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. iStock has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.

Yah, I think the getty "overated" and "overpriced" collection which are often 10 years old being shoved down the throats of istock buyers with the new title of "agency" for the last 3 years can't be made up for with any move to getty for exclusives.

They had to make istock handsome for 2 sales and now the traffic/sales have tanked. Look at alexa. SS and IS have switched. Not that SS contributors income is on par with IS exclusives in 2010. That money went to Jon (400,000,000 dollars)

I predict that IS is on a verge of a total collapse as far as traffic and downloads in 2013. Exclusives have been demoralized even a top ten exclusive who has made more the a million dollars in 5 years say they aren't going to invest in photo shoots. IS has a big problem with lack of new content being created by the people who made it great. It is just not worth being ripped off by them just so a private equity firm can make 2 billion dollars on the next sell.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #14 on:** December 20, 2012, 15:06 »

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on December 20, 2012, 14:50

Quote from: fotoVoyager on December 20, 2012, 12:00
Quote from: Zeus on December 20, 2012, 11:16
E+ for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the Getty site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular Getty contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. Getty has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.

Getty for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the iStock site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular iStock contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. iStock has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.

Yah, I think the getty "overated" and "overpriced" collection which are often 10 years old being shoved down the throats of istock buyers with the new title of "agency" for the last 3 years can't be made up for with any move to getty for exclusives.

They had to make istock handsome for 2 sales and now the traffic/sales have tanked. Look at alexa. SS and IS have switched. Not that SS contributors income is on par with IS exclusives in 2010. That money went to Jon (400,000,000 dollars)

I predict that IS is on a verge of a total collapse as far as traffic and downloads in 2013. Exclusives have been demoralized even a top ten exclusive who has made more the a million dollars in 5 years say they aren't going to invest in photo shoots. IS has a big problem with lack of new content being created by the people who made it great. It is just not worth being ripped off by them just so a private equity firm can make 2 billion dollars on the next sell.

Dont get fooled by what IS exclusives etc, say! when the going gets rough they all say that, in the next breath they are uploading like crazy. Its been like that for the past 3 years.
Same here at the MSG, whatever they do, in the next breath we are * up like little squirts. Its about the money involved.

gostwyck · « **Reply #15 on:** December 20, 2012, 15:38 »

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on December 20, 2012, 14:50

Look at alexa. SS and IS have switched. Not that SS contributors income is on par with IS exclusives in 2010. That money went to Jon (400,000,000 dollars)

Isn't 'that money' less than half what H&F paid themselves as a special 'dividend' earlier this year (except that the money hadn't actually been earned but was simply added to the GI debt instead)?

At least the money that Jon made was via his own enterprise, over the last 8 years, and the vast majority of it is still invested in SS.

Equus · « **Reply #16 on:** December 20, 2012, 16:16 »

Quote from: gostwyck on December 20, 2012, 15:38

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on December 20, 2012, 14:50
Look at alexa. SS and IS have switched. Not that SS contributors income is on par with IS exclusives in 2010. That money went to Jon (400,000,000 dollars)

Isn't 'that money' less than half what H&F paid themselves as a special 'dividend' earlier this year (except that the money hadn't actually been earned but was simply added to the GI debt instead)?

At least the money that Jon made was via his own enterprise, over the last 8 years, and the vast majority of it is still invested in SS.

Just out of interest, how do you know that?

gostwyck · « **Reply #17 on:** December 20, 2012, 16:20 »

Quote from: Equus on December 20, 2012, 16:16

Quote from: gostwyck on December 20, 2012, 15:38
Quote from: pro@stockphotos on December 20, 2012, 14:50
Look at alexa. SS and IS have switched. Not that SS contributors income is on par with IS exclusives in 2010. That money went to Jon (400,000,000 dollars)

Isn't 'that money' less than half what H&F paid themselves as a special 'dividend' earlier this year (except that the money hadn't actually been earned but was simply added to the GI debt instead)?

At least the money that Jon made was via his own enterprise, over the last 8 years, and the vast majority of it is still invested in SS.

Just out of interest, how do you know that?

Because JEO still owns 56% of SS.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1549346/000104746912005905/a2209364zs-1.htm

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: E+ Sales on Getty - very nice... (Read 6437 times)

Gannet77

ShadySue

Gannet77

ShadySue

PeterChigmaroff

fotoVoyager

lisafx

aspp

ShadySue

Sean Locke Photography

lisafx

Gannet77

Jo Ann Snover

pro@stockphotos

ClaridgeJ

gostwyck

Equus

gostwyck

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors