MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: click_click on October 21, 2010, 19:06
-
What the heck is this about?
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=906&utm_source=Oct2110&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ArtistCS (http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=906&utm_source=Oct2110&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ArtistCS)
After everything they put us through they feel the need to blow their unsustainable cut on frigging, useless awards.
Geez, just have some decency will ya?
-
Oh goody another
brown-nosing popularity s*cking-up contest.
yawn.
-
Yeah, seems everything is unsustainable except the parties.
-
WTH (What The H*ck?)
iStock has always had room for people who make inexplicable, unclassifiable or just downright bizarre things. This is the prize for all of those head-scratchers.
Does Istock really have room for this kind of category or is this the category for the drivvel we find featured on http://www.badstockart.com/ (http://www.badstockart.com/)?
-
Oh goody another brown-nosing popularity s*cking-up contest.
yawn.
I don't care - they can have contests until their lights go out - fine with me, really.
But $2,000 prize money just after the disgusting news about paycuts? Come on.
Does an agent have to blow the money amongst all its signed artists?
Can you imagine what Johny Depp would tell his agent if they started handing out parts of their cuts to other actors?
Danged, $2,000 each - 10 times. Bah.
-
My guess is that someone thinks that they can rebuild community with crap like this.
We don't have any say, however, in how they spend the portion of the take they keep, so other than not participating (entering or voting) I'm not sure what I can do to voice my displeasure with their choices.
If they were spending additional money on advertising, or using some of their cash-grab dollars (I know it's not January yet but they upped Vetta prices, dropped the commission and raised the prices on a bunch of existing files by putting them into the Agency collection) to woo buyers or try and bring in some new buyers, or ... just about anything else but a contest, I'd be a whole lot less angry.
-
And still no love to the buyers. At least with stupid Punctum day the iStock selected (by one person) DOTWs from that particular year were eligible.
I see there are still plenty of iStock kool-aid drinking Woo-Yays to go around on that thread though.
I actually can't believe they have the gall to announce this contest so close to all the unsustainable talk. What a bunch of idiots there.
-
(double yawn)
not impressed at all more cringe factor off the scale, blatantly obvious attempt to get contributers back on side after ruthless and unfair cuts in Royalties. Kinda like giving a Plaster for a stab wound
It will be many a day before the warm glow is back at that place, who needs another popularity contest anyway ::)
-
not impressed at all more cringe factor off the scale, blatantly obvious attempt to get contributers back on side after ruthless and unfair cuts in Royalties...
Bingo. And from the looks of the discussion thread over there, everyone is buying into it. Sad.
-
[loud fart noise] I mean wooyay! ;D
-
They really probably should have called it "The Clubbys".
-
I'd rather stay at 20%. Cancel all the battle royals and other BS like this.
-
I'd rather stay at 20%. Cancel all the battle royals and other BS like this.
Does the battle royal come with cheese?
-
Not only they put more pressure on me to perform to get a fair pourcentage of my sales. Now they want me to compete with let say 1000 photographers and have 10 chances to get an extra 2000$.
I feel like a donkey carrying Istock holding a carrot in front of my nose
-
Well, of course their forums are wooing, they expunged the naysayers. Gee, I wonder what happens to people who surround themselves with yesmen, oh wait... Enron.
Just another sign that they are having serious financial issues from contributors spreading the word to shop elsewhere.
-
They really probably should have called it
"Money isn’t going to be what makes you all happy!"
They really probably should have called it "The Clubbys".
-
Well, of course their forums are wooing, they expunged the naysayers. ...
In addition to those they banned, there are those, like me, who won't participate but consider it either (a) beating a dead horse or (b) rude to continue saying in the forums how p#%sed off I am that they followed the cash grab with a cheap attempt to buy back the community they nuked.
That's our money they're spending on this contest.
-
...That's our money they're spending on this contest.
This was exactly my initial point when starting this post.
I think it's disgusting to cut our commissions and turn around and throw away money (out of their unsustainable cut) for some really useless "awards".
No wonder their business is unsustainable when tossing the cash out of the window like that. Use your brains! >:(
-
mucky b*stards, they really think they can buy people off by * a pittance of their own money back at them after robbing them.
Oh wait, they probably can.
-
mucky b*stards, they really think they can buy people off by a pittance of their own money back at them after robbing them.
Oh wait, they probably can.
they can, 'what fun', 'how cool', how stupid are these people?
-
They really probably should have called it "The Clubbys".
lol Exactly!
-
mucky b*stards, they really think they can buy people off by a pittance of their own money back at them after robbing them.
Oh wait, they probably can.
they can, 'what fun', 'how cool', how stupid are these people?
this just about pisses me off to a whole new level. Someone posted this in the "where do we go .." thread regarding this latest development, and I have to say that it pretty much describes it:
"Panem et circenses" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panem_et_circenses)
-
Maybe they should make a Vatican Branch of Istock. They can try to cancel out each others bad news and bad moves.
-
HahHahAhah
$20,000 = 15 minutes of istocks earnings stolen from contributor revenue anytime after 2011.
Didnt do the math but im sure my message is clear
-
Well, of course their forums are wooing, they expunged the naysayers. ...
In addition to those they banned, there are those, like me, who won't participate but consider it either (a) beating a dead horse or (b) rude to continue saying in the forums how p#%sed off I am that they followed the cash grab with a cheap attempt to buy back the community they nuked.
That's our money they're spending on this contest.
I feel like you do, jsnover. They've already digusted me so much that I just don't have too many more words to say about the whole thing. And it disgusts me even more, the people who are still on board with them. Whatever.
Someone posted this in the "where do we go .." thread regarding this latest development, and I have to say that it pretty much describes it:
"Panem et circenses"
Ha! That's it exactly!
-
No one here seems to understand marketing. Instead of whining about your 10th of a cent going towards the stocky award, maybe you should think about how much of the tax money is wasted by your government. Jeez...
-
What I know about marketing is.
Lying, embellishment, distraction and mistrust
It's like any magician making his show. For the other comment, I goes to a protest last year against G.W. Bush coming in Montreal, we throw shoes it was nice :)
-
What I know about marketing is.
Lying, embellishment, distraction and mistrust
Then I'd say you don't know much.
Years ago I worked at Sun Microsystems on the marketing team for programming tools. A competitor was making a big deal about the quality of their compiler optimizations (which produce faster performance for your programs), and my marketing director wanted us to do something similar. So I went to the engineering director in charge of our compilers' code generators to get the story. She refused to cooperate. In her eyes, marketing served no useful purpose; if your products were good, your customers would naturally find out about them, and if they weren't, all marketing could do was lie.
Both views were wrong. A story's only as good as the people who tell it, and the ways they get it to you. And no product is universally good or bad. It's our job to make sure the customer knows about the strengths and can put the weaknesses in context. Often people get caught up in features that don't matter, or that just don't matter to them. Our job was to make sure they cared about the right things.
Marketing often acts as a translator between the people who create the product or service and the people who want to use it. Those two groups rarely speak the same language, which is why they need us. I won't say that marketing can rescue a crap product, but the lack of marketing can sink a good one. Happens all the time.
-
OK don't blast me, but I think I am going to enter some of my illustrations into this contest. I am ineligible to win any money since I live in Florida but my reasons are purely selfish (I do not drink the IS kool aid, never have never will). BUT I have a tiny portfolio and I am only a part-time contributor so I can use any kind of exposure I can get to make some sales. I am trying to do as much as I can to wring out the last of my 20% royalty as I will be dropping to 15% in 2011.
This is my first post to this group. I have been lurking for awhile now and I think most posters here are pretty reasonable. Glad to be here.
-
OK don't blast me, but I think I am going to enter some of my illustrations into this contest. I am ineligible to win any money since I live in Florida but my reasons are purely selfish (I do not drink the IS kool aid, never have never will). BUT I have a tiny portfolio and I am only a part-time contributor so I can use any kind of exposure I can get to make some sales. I am trying to do as much as I can to wring out the last of my 20% royalty as I will be dropping to 15% in 2011.
This is my first post to this group. I have been lurking for awhile now and I think most posters here are pretty reasonable. Glad to be here.
Yeah, if you win, your exposure will be off the charts, wowzers.. But don't despair, if you don't win, 15% is still a respectable commission and I'm sure you can quit your day job....wooyay, wooyay
-
I stand corrected.
I have no chance of winning since it will probably be the usual popularity contest and my stuff ain't that good. The exposure I was referring to was having my images in promoted (on the front page) lightboxes, as all entries will be put in.
-
Hate to tell you this, but it's unlikely any buyers will even look at those lightboxes. Well, maybe if those buyers are also contributors. But then they will only buy if they have the need for your illustrations. I think the "exposure" such contests generate is highly over-rated and may even be fabricated.
-
What I know about marketing is.
Lying, embellishment, distraction and mistrust
Then I'd say you don't know much.
Years ago I worked at Sun Microsystems on the marketing team for programming tools. A competitor was making a big deal about the quality of their compiler optimizations (which produce faster performance for your programs), and my marketing director wanted us to do something similar. So I went to the engineering director in charge of our compilers' code generators to get the story. She refused to cooperate. In her eyes, marketing served no useful purpose; if your products were good, your customers would naturally find out about them, and if they weren't, all marketing could do was lie.
Both views were wrong. A story's only as good as the people who tell it, and the ways they get it to you. And no product is universally good or bad. It's our job to make sure the customer knows about the strengths and can put the weaknesses in context. Often people get caught up in features that don't matter, or that just don't matter to them. Our job was to make sure they cared about the right things.
Marketing often acts as a translator between the people who create the product or service and the people who want to use it. Those two groups rarely speak the same language, which is why they need us. I won't say that marketing can rescue a crap product, but the lack of marketing can sink a good one. Happens all the time.
If only you was in charge of the H2O Vac advertising, my life would be 2x better, since their commercial are 50% of what Canadians see everyday.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUd7qTF7rAA[/youtube]
-
No one here seems to understand marketing. Instead of whining about your 10th of a cent going towards the stocky award, maybe you should think about how much of the tax money is wasted by your government. Jeez...
::) you have totally missed the points here, and if it's simply Marketing you are about imo they have failed miserably as given the timing I suspect it will offend more than it will encourage
Talk about Robbing Peter to pay Paul ::)
-
Instead of whining about your 10th of a cent going towards the stocky award, maybe you should think about how much of the tax money is wasted by your government. Jeez...
Whining about tax waste would not be on topic here.
-
No one here seems to understand marketing.
Including yourself it would seem..... the idea of marketing is that it's aimed at potential buyers, this contest is for suppliers.
-
If only you was in charge of the H2O Vac advertising, my life would be 2x better, since their commercial are 50% of what Canadians see everyday.
[youtube][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUd7qTF7rAA[/url][/youtube]
That marketing worked on me. I want that vacuum. LOL
-
No one here seems to understand marketing.
Including yourself it would seem..... the idea of marketing is that it's aimed at potential buyers, this contest is for suppliers.
And, uh, why exactly wouldn't you want to keep your suppliers happy?
-
Hate to tell you this, but it's unlikely any buyers will even look at those lightboxes. Well, maybe if those buyers are also contributors. But then they will only buy if they have the need for your illustrations. I think the "exposure" such contests generate is highly over-rated and may even be fabricated.
Not so sure about unlikely.
Before I was a buyer/contributor I was just a buyer and I often look through themed lightboxes to add to my private ones. But really the bottom line is self-promotion. If I get buyers (even if only a handful) to look at my illustrations and then my portfolio it could mean a sale, and I make so few sales that each one is still exciting to me. :D
-
No one here seems to understand marketing.
Including yourself it would seem..... the idea of marketing is that it's aimed at potential buyers, this contest is for suppliers.
And, uh, why exactly wouldn't you want to keep your suppliers happy?
You keep your suppliers happy by paying them a fair royalty, and by investing in advertising to keep the buyers coming. All the silly contests and woo yay community crap amounts to little more than a big steaming pile of BS, if you ask me. To hell with games, you want to make us happy, then pay us a fair wage and treat us with a little respect!!!
-
Contests are something you do in addition to treating your suppliers well, not a substitute for it. Studies have shown that workers work harder when they're given attention periodically, even if as in this case they have little chance of benefiting directly. But so close to an attack on suppliers' compensation, this kind of thing is more likely to do harm than good. Adding insult to injury, as the old saying goes.
-
Contests are something you do in addition to treating your suppliers well, not a substitute for it. Studies have shown that workers work harder when they're given attention periodically, even if as in this case they have little chance of benefiting directly. But so close to an attack on suppliers' compensation, this kind of thing is more likely to do harm than good. Adding insult to injury, as the old saying goes.
You may want to be more specific about the "studies" you seem to be referring to. Besides, I'm not sure why this has turned into a "substitute" discussion. I have learned in management that recognition is important for employees, more important than salaries. People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Again, I don't know if people have done their math, but I find it naive if contributors think the shared wealth of $20,000 among more than 50,000 contributors amounts to much.
-
Yeah, seems everything is unsustainable except the parties.
That sums it up perfectly, Cathy!
Kinda like the string quartet on the Titanic kept playing as the ship went down...
-
Anyone that thinks this istock scheme of rewarding ten contributors among thousands is great marketing is clearly naive. At best, is a slight distraction. I'd be impressed if they had up to 50 winners, but im sure 10 was the absolute minimum they can get away with. Many will try it out, only ten will be hooraying in the end.
-
Again, I don't know if people have done their math, but I find it naive if contributors think the shared wealth of $20,000 among more than 50,000 contributors amounts to much.
It's the principle.
-
People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Nothing says "I value you" more than cash compensation. :D
Even the best jobs breed resentment if you are working as hard as you can with ever decreasing returns.
-
Hate to tell you this, but it's unlikely any buyers will even look at those lightboxes. Well, maybe if those buyers are also contributors. But then they will only buy if they have the need for your illustrations. I think the "exposure" such contests generate is highly over-rated and may even be fabricated.
Not so sure about unlikely.
Before I was a buyer/contributor I was just a buyer and I often look through themed lightboxes to add to my private ones. But really the bottom line is self-promotion. If I get buyers (even if only a handful) to look at my illustrations and then my portfolio it could mean a sale, and I make so few sales that each one is still exciting to me. :D
Well, good luck to you. I hope it works out. As for me, I didn't have much success finding anything I wanted the few times I looked at themed lightboxes for images. I'd much rather just conduct my own search than trust that someone else thinks they know what I want. Now lightboxes that contributors have made of their own similar images are a different story.
However, the lightboxes for this contest cover such a vague and wide range of concepts, that I really can't see them being particularly useful to buyers, IMO.
-
You may want to be more specific about the "studies" you seem to be referring to. Besides, I'm not sure why this has turned into a "substitute" discussion. I have learned in management that recognition is important for employees, more important than salaries. People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Again, I don't know if people have done their math, but I find it naive if contributors think the shared wealth of $20,000 among more than 50,000 contributors amounts to much.
I will speak for myself. Recognition is great to receive, but NOTHING is more important than my salary. A raise in salary automatically reflects that I have done a good job and management is showing me that with the extra $$. Not sure where "management" got the idea that recognition is MORE important than salaries. Maybe the same management that wants to not give raises and in fact lower peoples' salaries so that they can continue with their BMWs, trips to Europe and vacation homes at the beach.
-
You may want to be more specific about the "studies" you seem to be referring to. Besides, I'm not sure why this has turned into a "substitute" discussion. I have learned in management that recognition is important for employees, more important than salaries. People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Again, I don't know if people have done their math, but I find it naive if contributors think the shared wealth of $20,000 among more than 50,000 contributors amounts to much.
$20,000 split among 50,000 contributors is nothing. $20,000 by itself is a helluva lot of money. For instance, maybe it could go towards paying a good IT guy to fix just one of the problems with the website (like maybe the search) instead of pissing it away on yet another contest. Fixing the website would go a long ways towards helping the buyers with a better buying experience.
-
Again, I don't know if people have done their math, but I find it naive if contributors think the shared wealth of $20,000 among more than 50,000 contributors amounts to much.
$20,000 split among 50,000 contributors is nothing. $20,000 by itself is a helluva lot of money. For instance, maybe it could go towards paying a good IT guy to fix just one of the problems with the website (like maybe the search) instead of pissing it away on yet another contest. Fixing the website would go a long ways towards helping the buyers with a better buying experience.
Brilliant point!
-
Thanks caspixel for the good wishes. I have always enjoyed reading your posts in the designer and other forums at IS and the same goes for here as well. :)
Maybe you could click on the contest lightbox just for shits and grins (are we allowed to use language here?)
4 posts down and 7 to go before I lose the spam moniker. I will try to be relevant.
-
Thanks caspixel for the good wishes. I have always enjoyed reading your posts in the designer and other forums at IS and the same goes for here as well. :)
Maybe you could click on the contest lightbox just for shits and grins (are we allowed to use language here?)
4 posts down and 7 to go before I lose the spam moniker. I will try to be relevant.
Well, thanks. At least someone did. Apparently enough people didn't because I have been banned from the iStock forums.
I will try to remember to check out the contest lightbox and maybe I'll even vote for some poor sod who is not in "the club". :D
-
People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Nothing says "I value you" more than cash compensation. :D
Even the best jobs breed resentment if you are working as hard as you can with ever decreasing returns.
That's Another fallacy. Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
-
Again, I don't know if people have done their math, but I find it naive if contributors think the shared wealth of $20,000 among more than 50,000 contributors amounts to much.
It's the principle.
"It's the principle". Huh, what does that mean? No arguments? Just because "I said so"? When people run out of arguments, that's what you get.
-
That's Another fallacy. Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
I know of several people who aren't making as much money as years past. And they even admit it on the iStock forums, so you must be missing those posts.
-
Geez caspixel I had no idea you were banned. Unless you were abusive (which I doubt) that is just shameful.
I thought you were absent from the forums as a silent protest, never thought you WERE silenced. Do they just give you a timeout or is the ban for lifetime?
Oh yeah you can vote for my stuff, not only am I not in the "club" they won't even let me bus the tables or valet the cars.
-
Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
I earned less in 2009 than in 2008, despite vastly increasing my port in that time.
I was heading upwards this year, but October has been ghastly so far (unlike previous years), so who knows?
-
That's Another fallacy. Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
Yup, decreasing returns here. 2008 close to $20000, 2009 closer to 16000, this year I'll be lucky to break 14000. My story is very far from unique for non independents at IStock with medium sized portfolios.
I can't believe you are still trying to defend them after all the screw ups and screw overs of the last few weeks.
You can't see why this is another kick in the teeth. People have just heard about a 25% paycut and IStockj are doing nothing about cutting the bloat and promoting frivolous give-aways?
I can only assume you work for IStock or have just taken a break from banging your head into a padded wall to post here.
-
No one here seems to understand marketing.
Including yourself it would seem..... the idea of marketing is that it's aimed at potential buyers, this contest is for suppliers.
And, uh, why exactly wouldn't you want to keep your suppliers happy?
I think you are missing the point, this obviously hasn't made suppliers happy, it's just another little smack in the face, so if it was meant as a marketing ploy it's backfired.
Look around you, are there many people here jumping for joy about it? I count exactly one.
-
One person? I'm quite sure there are going to hundreds losing come 1/2011. Your argument is senseless.
-
One person? I'm quite sure there are going to hundreds losing come 1/2011. Your argument is senseless.
I think you are agreeing with me, I was saying people (we contributors) aren't happy about what is going on. That only zzz seems happy that they are cutting our pay while giving away $20000.
-
Sorry, I should have quoted zzz. Thats who I was referring to.
-
I'll point you to someone who has had decreasing returns this year despite doubling his portfolio: me.
Granted, I have a small portfolio and have only been on iStock a little over 2 years but it's not a trend I was hoping or expecting to see.
Ultimately only 10 contributors out of the thousands they have will benefit from this contest. I suspect there are other ways to spend that $20,000 that would benefit more than 10 of us/them. It will turn into a popularity contest and those participating will be all giddy about iStock until reality sinks in Jan 1, 2011. I'm sure TPTB just wanted to have a thread to read that was well accepted by at least some contributors. Nice try, maybe it will work for awhile.
For me personally, thanks but no thanks.
People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Nothing says "I value you" more than cash compensation. :D
Even the best jobs breed resentment if you are working as hard as you can with ever decreasing returns.
That's Another fallacy. Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
-
That's Another fallacy. Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
Yup, decreasing returns here. 2008 close to $20000, 2009 closer to 16000, this year I'll be lucky to break 14000. My story is very far from unique for non independents at IStock with medium sized portfolios.
Decreasing returns at Istock here too, despite adding over 1200 pictures over the past year (a portfolio increase of 20%). Comparing the last four months of this year with the same months in 2009 I am down:
Sept: -13%
Aug: -17%
Jul: -25%
Jun: -13%
I hope the trend reverses and I can salvage the year end totals with a higher total than last year, but it's looking unlikely at this point.
-
Geez caspixel I had no idea you were banned. Unless you were abusive (which I doubt) that is just shameful.
I thought you were absent from the forums as a silent protest, never thought you WERE silenced. Do they just give you a timeout or is the ban for lifetime?
Oh yeah you can vote for my stuff, not only am I not in the "club" they won't even let me bus the tables or valet the cars.
I'm thinking permanent ban. I guess my humor was seen as abusive by some. LOL
Do they at least let you wash the dishes?
-
I can look at my iStock revenues in two ways. Year over year I'm up a grand .9% (yes, with a decimal point), despite pushing through a thousand new images. Or I could combine iStock and StockXpert, in which case I'm down 26%. Either way, I'm looking at a lot of effort for no gain. Or I should say I was; a few more days and I'll be done deleting my Dollar Bin images, after which I go after the main collection.
-
From what I see, you are among the pages with no downloads club on Istock. 37 pages on 62 (about 2400 images) of your latest images with less than 100 downloads. I would of stop before but I guess you compensate with other agencies.
But for Istock, I don't see any advantages to keep making efforts. The new images are lost in searches, since months
-
People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Nothing says "I value you" more than cash compensation. :D
Even the best jobs breed resentment if you are working as hard as you can with ever decreasing returns.
That's Another fallacy. Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
Dude, you can't be serious. I think you need to lay off the kool-aid if you really believe this ridiculous statement.
-
I will leave this place for good. When I joined microstockgroup in June 2009 I was hoping to find out more about RM but what I found instead was that this is a forum where mostly disgruntled contributors hang out. My perception is that 90% of the posts are just bitching and moaning. Even worse a lot of posters here are downright rude. A lot of half truths are disseminated that turn into facts for many and the statistics in the polls here are highly skewed.
Many people here hate to accept the truth. I've posted just 34 times and have 8 people who put me on ignore. I rather just continue to drink my koolaid and feel happy in my little bubble. I don't want to be associated with this place and I'm glad I never revealed my identity.
-
Your name should be "waa" instead of "zzz".
LOL
-
No one here seems to understand marketing.
Including yourself it would seem..... the idea of marketing is that it's aimed at potential buyers, this contest is for suppliers.
And, uh, why exactly wouldn't you want to keep your suppliers happy?
I didn't say that they shouldn't keep their suppliers happy, I was just pointing out that you were wrong in your statement about marketing because marketing is not aimed at suppliers it's aimed at buyers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing)
If you're going to criticise people on this forum who have expressed their opinion on something try and use the correct terminology otherwise it makes you look silly and detracts any value from your posts.
-
For what is worth, my earnings have been incresing, year after year, I surpassed whole 2009 earnings in the last days of September. Less downloads, yes, but more money. Prices and Vettas play a role here, so is understeable that some non-exclusives can't make it.
-
I will leave this place for good. When I joined microstockgroup in June 2009 I was hoping to find out more about RM but what I found instead was that this is a forum where mostly disgruntled contributors hang out. My perception is that 90% of the posts are just bitching and moaning. Even worse a lot of posters here are downright rude. A lot of half truths are disseminated that turn into facts for many and the statistics in the polls here are highly skewed.
Many people here hate to accept the truth. I've posted just 34 times and have 8 people who put me on ignore. I rather just continue to drink my koolaid and feel happy in my little bubble. I don't want to be associated with this place and I'm glad I never revealed my identity.
Brilliant, yes everyone is crazy but you :D
Why do start arguments by demanding evidence, if when the evidence is presented you throw your toys out of the pram?
You were happy enough to spout anecdotal rubbish about Fotolia (people can check your past posts) but when people discuss your beloved IStock it's boo hoo hoo.
This isn't the first time you've threatened to leave, I just hope you have the verve to go through with it this time, and I'm not even one of the ones who has you on ignore!
-
I will leave this place for good. ... A lot of half truths are disseminated .....
Would that be halftruths like:
"Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums."
If you read the how was your ...last month? forums through, you'd find that even some diamond/admins say that their sales and $$$ are well down from two years ago.
Also, several people have stated on the iStock forums that they don't post when their sales are down, either because of embarrassment (sic) or because of not wanting to be negative.
I am however, prepared to concede that overall earnings for the site have generally risen, and of course some/many people will be earning more year on year.
The interesting thing was that when I and a few others said we were having a dire October, neither Lobo nor RogerMexico jumped in to say that overall sales this month are well up, which is what would usually happen.
Anyway, if you want to buy several Vetta ELs from me before the month is out, I'll be forced to 'admit' I got more this October than last October. ;D
Of course, that might just have been tact, given the commission clawbacks which are about to happen. i guess they're in a lose-lose situation on that one!
-
My perception is that 90% of the posts are just bitching and moaning.
That's your preception. Another way of looking at it is that since certain uncomfortable truths are not acceptable in the forums of the micros, this is an area where these concerns can be aired (as well as other useful functions too, of course!)
-
When I joined microstockgroup in June 2009 I was hoping to find out more about RM
So why hang out in the iStock forum?
-
People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Nothing says "I value you" more than cash compensation. :D
Even the best jobs breed resentment if you are working as hard as you can with ever decreasing returns.
That's Another fallacy. Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
Oct 2007 - 148 - $118 (exclusive)
Oct 2008 - 108 - $161 (first full month after dropping exclusivity - best month of any between 2003 and 2010)
Oct 2009 - 79 - $87 (independent)
Oct 2010 - 31 - $40 (independent)
Uploaded 150 images from 2008 to 2010.
The contest is simply a ploy to try to get your mind off the last few weeks. Several states and countries are ineligible due to laws and the there is one $2,000 prize. Not $2,000 per category. Even though they can't win they are encouraging people from the banned states/countries to enter so that their images will be in the lightbox, the images will just be disqualified in the contest. In addition they have removed the "previous year" rule. So you can nominate anything you want - as long as you don't delete it from the site.
If others are doing what I'm doing then they need this contest to stop people from deleting their portfolios one image at a time.
-
Many people here hate to accept the truth.
And you are one of them if you seriously believe that there are really no contributors who have seen significant declines from year to year, when my personal statistics speak otherwise, as do those of quite a few other people who post here. We aren't really allowed to discuss such things on istock's forums. For you to say that we are all just making it up to "skew" some poll results is, in my opinion, rude.
iStock can say that their overall profits are up from year to year... but how many thousands of new contributors have been added over that year?? It simply doesn't translate into everyone's overall numbers being up, despite what they would like everyone to believe. I'm sure that some people are up, but plenty are down, and for you to say that that is a fallacy and not fact, is... well, a fallacy.
-
there is one $2,000 prize. Not $2,000 per category. Even though they can't win they are encouraging people from the banned states/countries to enter so that their images will be in the lightbox, the images will just be disqualified in the contest. In addition they have removed the "previous year" rule. So you can nominate anything you want - as long as you don't delete it from the site.
If others are doing what I'm doing then they need this contest to stop people from deleting their portfolios one image at a time.
I read this differently, not that I have interest in entering:
"On December 15 we will award 10 Stockys to iStock artists in categories like Artistic Vision, Technical Achievement, and Most Useful. Each award comes with a fancy icon, pride, and $2000 cash."
-
..."On December 15 we will award 10 Stockys to iStock artists in categories like Artistic Vision, Technical Achievement, and Most Useful. Each award comes with a fancy icon, pride, and $2000 cash."
Yes, I read it the same way.
-
It will be interesting to see how many of these go to non exclusives. I'm guessing.....errr.....zero ?
-
Anyway, if you want to buy several Vetta ELs from me before the month is out, I'll be forced to 'admit' I got more this October than last October. ;D
Hey, how spooky is this: I went out for a few hours after writing the above and now that I'm back, I find I've sold a Vetta EL: on a Sunday!!!
-
My perception is that 90% of the posts are just bitching and moaning.
Everyone is wrong except you? Nice
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSwZW5G12ksaehrjQl1xPCW8feAITy61eoQ3OspL_XNiIEi-8w&t=1&usg=__QM6hdWpCiIyE9u-OVVXeh-PGFgc=)
-
Hey, how spooky is this: I went out for a few hours after writing the above and now that I'm back, I find I've sold a Vetta EL: on a Sunday!!!
Nice job. Look like there is a designer late on the deadlines. Forums are useful after all
-
Might be sunday in the west, but dont forget that its monday in different parts of the world.
-
It will be interesting to see how many of these go to non exclusives. I'm guessing.....errr.....zero ?
Nah __ they'll be at least one token independent chosen as a newbie who they're pretty sure will go exclusive as soon as able. Same thing happens on the 'Hot Shots' thingy they send out. It's a painfully predictable formula that they work to.
-
It will be interesting to see how many of these go to non exclusives. I'm guessing.....errr.....zero ?
Nah __ they'll be at least one token independent chosen as a newbie who they're pretty sure will go exclusive as soon as able. Same thing happens on the 'Hot Shots' thingy they send out. It's a painfully predictable formula that they work to.
+1
-
If the 'Stockys' are genuinely awarded by true popular vote, it'll be interesting to see what 'the community' goes for.
At Participate / Contributor Lounge / Trends, the second highest rated file is a six year close-up of a screw, the only image left by Umbris after he removed the rest of his portfolio in disgust. 196 ratings in the last three months. ;D
-
If the 'Stockys' are genuinely awarded by true popular vote, it'll be interesting to see what 'the community' goes for.
At Participate / Contributor Lounge / Trends, the second highest rated file is a six year close-up of a screw, the only image left by Umbris after he removed the rest of his portfolio in disgust. 196 ratings in the last three months. ;D
An appropriate image to be second highest, it really should be first. That will be funny if some similar type of image wins this year. :D
-
If the 'Stockys' are genuinely awarded by true popular vote, it'll be interesting to see what 'the community' goes for.
At Participate / Contributor Lounge / Trends, the second highest rated file is a six year close-up of a screw, the only image left by Umbris after he removed the rest of his portfolio in disgust. 196 ratings in the last three months. ;D
An appropriate image to be second highest, it really should be first. That will be funny if some similar type of image wins this year. :D
Incidentally, the 'Screw' image (#308048) has been screwed itself. An admin obviously decided to get rid of the embarrassment by giving it a somewhat harsh 1 / 5 review.
-
there is one $2,000 prize. Not $2,000 per category. Even though they can't win they are encouraging people from the banned states/countries to enter so that their images will be in the lightbox, the images will just be disqualified in the contest. In addition they have removed the "previous year" rule. So you can nominate anything you want - as long as you don't delete it from the site.
If others are doing what I'm doing then they need this contest to stop people from deleting their portfolios one image at a time.
I read this differently, not that I have interest in entering:
"On December 15 we will award 10 Stockys to iStock artists in categories like Artistic Vision, Technical Achievement, and Most Useful. Each award comes with a fancy icon, pride, and $2000 cash."
As usual IS has posted conflicting information. From the last bullet point under "How this works"
"From November 22-December 3 the whole iStock community is invited to cast one vote in each category. Voting will give you an entry into a draw for $2000 and 2000 iStock credits."
-
$20,000 is nothing for propaganda. Whether it's working, it's another issue.
-
If the 'Stockys' are genuinely awarded by true popular vote, it'll be interesting to see what 'the community' goes for.
At Participate / Contributor Lounge / Trends, the second highest rated file is a six year close-up of a screw, the only image left by Umbris after he removed the rest of his portfolio in disgust. 196 ratings in the last three months. ;D
An appropriate image to be second highest, it really should be first. That will be funny if some similar type of image wins this year. :D
Incidentally, the 'Screw' image (#308048) has been screwed itself. An admin obviously decided to get rid of the embarrassment by giving it a somewhat harsh 1 / 5 review.
That's a shame. Maybe we should get another appropriate image up there. I'm thinking this one sums up IStock at the moment:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php (http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php)
-
$20,000 is nothing for propaganda. Whether it's working, it's another issue.
Agreed, it's not much if it worked, their problem is that it has totally backfired. You can't screw your contributors for millions then chuck back loose change to some sycophants and hope that's going to help heal the rift.
It just feels like a slap in the face.
-
$20,000 is nothing for propaganda. Whether it's working, it's another issue.
Agreed, it's not much if it worked, their problem is that it has totally backfired. You can't screw your contributors for millions then chuck back loose change to some sycophants and hope that's going to help heal the rift.
It just feels like a slap in the face.
That's just a re-distribution of the Punctum Adwards, wich existed long before the comission changes.
-
Agreed, it's not much if it worked, their problem is that it has totally backfired. You can't screw your contributors for millions then chuck back loose change to some sycophants and hope that's going to help heal the rift.
It just feels like a slap in the face.
Has it backfired? The people who are done with istock aren't going to enter anyway. The people for whom these contests were created, exclusives, "club members", and cheerleading woo-yayers, are going to participate. Mission accomplished. Does it change anything for me? I was disgusted a long time ago, this just goes on top of the pile of stupid pet tricks. But then they don't give a rats ass if I participate anyway.
-
Has it backfired? The people who are done with istock aren't going to enter anyway. The people for whom these contests were created, exclusives, "club members", and cheerleading woo-yayers, are going to participate. Mission accomplished. Does it change anything for me? I was disgusted a long time ago, this just goes on top of the pile of stupid pet tricks. But then they don't give a rats ass if I participate anyway.
I don't know, Cathy. You could get your entry printed on a ceramic mug, take it there personally and hit someone over the head with it! :D
-
Has it backfired? The people who are done with istock aren't going to enter anyway. The people for whom these contests were created, exclusives, "club members", and cheerleading woo-yayers, are going to participate. Mission accomplished. Does it change anything for me? I was disgusted a long time ago, this just goes on top of the pile of stupid pet tricks. But then they don't give a rats ass if I participate anyway.
I don't know, Cathy. You could get your entry printed on a ceramic mug, take it there personally and hit someone over the head with it! :D
You're so funny! :D
-
$20,000 is nothing for propaganda. Whether it's working, it's another issue.
If only it was just $20,000. How much additional money is going into this thing in the form of salaries for the employees who run the thing and moderate it? Site development to add the awards features, voting system, etc?
This was my issue years ago with all of these so-called perks of iStock. They cost money, and not just prize money or the cost of printing some special business cards or organizing events. These things take manpower, manpower costs money, and that additional money has to come from somewhere. Guess who really foots the bill for this stuff.
iStock might be a little more "sustainable" if they weren't pissing away money on all of these silly perks, events, and other distractions. I suggested years ago that iStock should cut the free business card program and convert the financial resources involved in that to a royalty increase for exclusives. Of course they wouldn't do that because they do far better by keeping these silly programs and making people think they are getting something valuable in exchange for their loyalty to iStock.
It's all garbage, it all costs money (more than we'll ever know), and it's all just a distraction to keep us from remembering how much less money we're making at iStock these days.
-
Agreed, it's not much if it worked, their problem is that it has totally backfired. You can't screw your contributors for millions then chuck back loose change to some sycophants and hope that's going to help heal the rift.
It just feels like a slap in the face.
Has it backfired? The people who are done with istock aren't going to enter anyway. The people for whom these contests were created, exclusives, "club members", and cheerleading woo-yayers, are going to participate. Mission accomplished. Does it change anything for me? I was disgusted a long time ago, this just goes on top of the pile of stupid pet tricks. But then they don't give a rats ass if I participate anyway.
I think it has. The woo-yays didn't need winning over. It's the rest of us this stuff is targeted at winning over.
-
I think it has. The woo-yays didn't need winning over. It's the rest of us this stuff is targeted at winning over.
I'm not so sure it's backfired. Taking a look at the current Stockys thread over there, you can find plenty of complementary posts from people who were as vocal as anyone else in the "Where do we go from here" thread. Seems plenty of people have been easily swayed by the chance to win a little money.
Mission accomplished, iStock.
-
I think it has. The woo-yays didn't need winning over. It's the rest of us this stuff is targeted at winning over.
I'm not so sure it's backfired. Taking a look at the current Stockys thread over there, you can find plenty of complementary posts from people who were as vocal as anyone else in the "Where do we go from here" thread. Seems plenty of people have been easily swayed by the chance to win a little money.
Mission accomplished, iStock.
well you can count me as another one who it did NOT work for. I won't even go into that thread because the whole thing just gets my blood pressure up on how stupid the whole contest is what with iStock being 'unsustainable' and all. so glad that royalty cut is paying for 10 people (out of thousands) to win.
Anyhow, glad that the wooyayers have a thread to stay in. personally, too much sugar-loaded koolaid makes me throw-up.
-
Anyhow, glad that the wooyayers have a thread to stay in. personally, too much sugar-loaded koolaid makes me throw-up.
LOL :D
-
This is a long term battle. But I'm not giving up.
Unfortunately for me I can't forgive them (I tried), and I'm not giving up.
I haven't uploaded a single image since the announcement.
No purchases whatsoever from IStock.
Every single day I make a point of reminding people I know, (or don't know), to never buy from IStock again.
I will delete my port before the change takes place.
I will not vote/participate in any way to the competition.
They tell me I don't matter.
But I know I do.
-
If the 'Stockys' are genuinely awarded by true popular vote, it'll be interesting to see what 'the community' goes for.
At Participate / Contributor Lounge / Trends, the second highest rated file is a six year close-up of a screw, the only image left by Umbris after he removed the rest of his portfolio in disgust. 196 ratings in the last three months. ;D
An appropriate image to be second highest, it really should be first. That will be funny if some similar type of image wins this year. :D
Incidentally, the 'Screw' image (#308048) has been screwed itself. An admin obviously decided to get rid of the embarrassment by giving it a somewhat harsh 1 / 5 review.
That's a shame. Maybe we should get another appropriate image up there. I'm thinking this one sums up IStock at the moment:
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php[/url])
-----------------------
OMG This is the saddest rating ever! It was done by an Istock admin DoctorEvidence, who gave it a 1/5 cameras. http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=862744 (http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=862744)
So some admin is pissed off about this image being so popular, so he gives it a bogus rating while hiding behind a screen name. How old are we now?
Usually Lobo eliminates such BS ratings and blocks the offending member's ability to so in the future.
Pieman, will you step up to the plate?
-
Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if DoctorEvidence was an alias for Lobo.
-
That's a shame. Maybe we should get another appropriate image up there. I'm thinking this one sums up IStock at the moment:
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php[/url])
-----------------------
OMG This is the saddest rating ever! It was done by an Istock admin DoctorEvidence, who gave it a 1/5 cameras. [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=862744[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=862744[/url])
So some admin is pissed off about this image being so popular, so he gives it a bogus rating while hiding behind a screen name. How old are we now?
Usually Lobo eliminates such BS ratings and blocks the offending member's ability to so in the future.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The 1/5 rating seems to be gone now; at least I can't see it.
-
Where do you go to know what has been submitted or can you? I'm curious to see what kind of crap has been entered.
I quit uploading when all this began back in September and am in no way going to enter the stupid thing.
-
^^^ I havent uploaded a thing since this happened either. From what i see from the latest uploads page (for vectors anyway) alot of the better contributors have stopped also.
Even if I wasn't censored from the forums I still wouldn't post in the Stocky's thread. Quite frankly I hope it dies in the a$$ before it gets to 300. Funnily enough it looks like the majority of replies in there are from admins anyway & the tin foil hat in me says they're attempting to pad it out.
Even though it seems as if we as a community (not Istock) are disjointed and isolated from one another, It is the collective mind that binds us. A Microcosm of the world at large. A factor I think George Orwell couldn't have forseen given the existence of the internet.
Chins up people!
ETA - I went and had a look at that 1/5 rating from the aptly named "DoctorEvidence". Yet another Dick move from the minions. Not surprising.
-
DoctorEd
There you go. Fixed him. He's not gonna screw with anyone now. ;D
-
That's a shame. Maybe we should get another appropriate image up there. I'm thinking this one sums up IStock at the moment:
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php[/url])
-----------------------
OMG This is the saddest rating ever! It was done by an Istock admin DoctorEvidence, who gave it a 1/5 cameras. [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=862744[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=862744[/url])
So some admin is pissed off about this image being so popular, so he gives it a bogus rating while hiding behind a screen name. How old are we now?
Usually Lobo eliminates such BS ratings and blocks the offending member's ability to so in the future.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The 1/5 rating seems to be gone now; at least I can't see it.
-------------------------------
Shockingly its still there. You have to click "view 20 more" about 6 or 7 times and it will then appear. I feel so let down that Istock has not addressed this travesty of ratings :-)
-
They've introduced a stupid 1-to-5 ratings system. They'd look even more stupid if they then turned around and told people they can't give anything other than a rating of 5. It's there. It's meaningless. Ignore it.
-
That's a shame. Maybe we should get another appropriate image up there. I'm thinking this one sums up IStock at the moment:
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-2386660-where-are-my-keys.php[/url])
-----------------------
OMG This is the saddest rating ever! It was done by an Istock admin DoctorEvidence, who gave it a 1/5 cameras. [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=862744[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=862744[/url])
So some admin is pissed off about this image being so popular, so he gives it a bogus rating while hiding behind a screen name. How old are we now?
Usually Lobo eliminates such BS ratings and blocks the offending member's ability to so in the future.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The 1/5 rating seems to be gone now; at least I can't see it.
-------------------------------
Shockingly its still there. You have to click "view 20 more" about 6 or 7 times and it will then appear. I feel so let down that Istock has not addressed this travesty of ratings :-)
You can have a rating removed from one of your own files by contacting CR.
I found a 1/5 rating on one of my best sellers, apparently by a buyer who said it wasn't a high enough resolution for his needs. I found that bizarre, as the filesize is clearly shown when buying (it's an old slide scan). I never bothered to ask for it to be removed: it was many months afterwards that I discovered it, and it hasn't stopped sales.