MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Buyers Bailing on Istock  (Read 327317 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

lisafx

« Reply #75 on: September 10, 2010, 09:24 »
0
For Exclusives at IS thinking about alternatives I have some help for them which is found here below.

It is a submission portal called Isyndica (url supplied below)

http://vds.isyndica.com/Affiliate/sumos


Well, this may be very good information, Sumos, but you seem to be spamming the site by posting the same thing to every single thread in the IS forum. 

Not to mention it is totally OT, as this is a thread about buyers and their intentions to buy at other sites instead of Istock.


« Reply #76 on: September 10, 2010, 10:46 »
0
For Exclusives at IS thinking about alternatives I have some help for them which is found here below.

It is a submission portal called Isyndica (url supplied below)

http://vds.isyndica.com/Affiliate/sumos


Well, this may be very good information, Sumos, but you seem to be spamming the site by posting the same thing to every single thread in the IS forum. 

Not to mention it is totally OT, as this is a thread about buyers and their intentions to buy at other sites instead of Istock.


Seriously, stop spamming sumos, no one cares

« Reply #77 on: September 10, 2010, 10:47 »
0

lisafx

« Reply #78 on: September 10, 2010, 15:48 »
0
Here's another buyer bailing.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&messageid=4645982


Thanks for posting that link Nancy.  Just to add to the summary that Thomas is compiling, here's the relevant portion of Leremy's comments:

"I am a contributor and also a buyer at istock. I still have 26 credit. I have so far only buy images from istock (I had spent about usd500 so far since 1 year ago), and with this recent development that really irritate me, I will definitely not buy anymore credits from istock. Yes, there are plenty other agencies out there that I can buy pictures from. Just a side note, one of them has helped me in making 6x times more money than what I have made here. The more I think of it, the more it make sense for me to buy elsewhere."

« Reply #79 on: September 10, 2010, 15:51 »
0

lisafx

« Reply #80 on: September 10, 2010, 15:56 »
0
Another one : http://www.emberstudio.com/blog/?p=193


Fantastic article.  Yay Ember Studios!  This is so well written and explains the problem so succinctly, this will probably be the blog I link to in my future e-mails explaining the situation.    Thanks for posting Eric :)

Microbius

« Reply #81 on: September 10, 2010, 16:10 »
0
Yeah I thought about posting a link to it on Facebook

« Reply #82 on: September 10, 2010, 16:14 »
0
I got more than 50 referred buyers on Istock. Maybe I could ask them for the opinion?

helix7

« Reply #83 on: September 10, 2010, 16:16 »
0
Another one : http://www.emberstudio.com/blog/?p=193


Sorry to disappoint, but that's my blog. :)

I keep a separate website and blog for my design business. But in light of this week's news, I figured a little overlap was needed. ;)

Glad everyone likes the post. Feel free to link to it wherever.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2010, 16:18 by helix7 »

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #84 on: September 10, 2010, 16:17 »
0
Another one : http://www.emberstudio.com/blog/?p=193


Sorry to disappoint, but that's my blog. :)

I keep a separate website and blog for my design business. But in light of this week's news, I figured a little overlap was needed. ;)

Glad everyone likes the post. Feel free to link to it wherever.


I thought that was yours....great post by the way. It describes what was going on exactly how it is.

helix7

« Reply #85 on: September 10, 2010, 16:20 »
0
Thanks. Just trying to spread the word any way I can. My design site/blog gets a decent amount of traffic from marketing professionals, other designers, etc., so it seemed like a good place to share some info and opinion on what's going on in stock.

« Reply #86 on: September 10, 2010, 16:24 »
0
Maybe the reviewers are on strike too?  Aren't they all exclusives?  Think they are happy>?

Maybe the review payments were reduced too?  ;D

I had a bunch of files reviewed in the last 24 hours ... evidently the reviewers were distracted for a day or so while they read all the forum threads and calculated their new commission levels, then got back to work.

SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #87 on: September 10, 2010, 16:33 »
0
I doubt most buyers are the lemmings they are being made out to be. this is another fiasco a la istock forums. the very fact that TPTB haven't shut it down proves its relative impotence. no business is going to sit there and let their suppliers bitch and moan to the detriment of their survival. anyone with half a brain reading that thread is going to think it is exactly what it is, a collection of pissed off, knee jerk reactions.

Lisa - you're always going to be one of the best, nicest contributors out there and I do sincerely feel for non-exclusives like you. I hope for the ultimate well-being of your business, but I was surprised to see you start this thread and applaud some of the attitudes and actions taking place. you're so much better than that.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2010, 16:50 by hawk_eye »

« Reply #88 on: September 10, 2010, 16:33 »
0
yet another one (found via the istock threat):

http://www.emberstudio.com/blog/?p=193

« Reply #89 on: September 10, 2010, 16:34 »
0
Never mind.

« Reply #90 on: September 10, 2010, 16:34 »
0

modellocate

  • Photographer
« Reply #91 on: September 10, 2010, 21:34 »
0
Istock seems to be evolving further towards higher priced images. I'd not be surprised if they're happy to loose all but the top layer of contributors. Though I'm puzzled how the new commission schedule will attract new sellers. For someone like me, ShutterStock is still the place to be. However I'm earning more in other royalties in a few months than I ever did with microstock -- so maybe microstock in general won't be my main focus at all.

« Reply #92 on: September 10, 2010, 22:42 »
0
Lisa - you're always going to be one of the best, nicest contributors out there and I do sincerely feel for non-exclusives like you. I hope for the ultimate well-being of your business, but I was surprised to see you start this thread and applaud some of the attitudes and actions taking place. you're so much better than that.
Hahaha. Maybe she has some honestly left.

lisafx

« Reply #93 on: September 10, 2010, 23:24 »
0

Lisa - you're always going to be one of the best, nicest contributors out there and I do sincerely feel for non-exclusives like you. I hope for the ultimate well-being of your business, but I was surprised to see you start this thread and applaud some of the attitudes and actions taking place. you're so much better than that.

Thanks a lot for the kind words.  You know I think highly of you too :)

I have not been on board with bashing of exclusives, so that is not an attitude I have supported, but I certainly do support protesting this terrible change.  And as people with much more business acumen than I have said the best way to protest is to direct buyers to sites that offer a fairer commission, then that seems like a good starting place.

I know that as a person with the highest integrity (which I think describes you very well) you would do the same if it is what you thought was right...

Microbius

« Reply #94 on: September 11, 2010, 03:23 »
0
I doubt most buyers are the lemmings they are being made out to be. this is another fiasco a la istock forums. the very fact that TPTB haven't shut it down proves its relative impotence. no business is going to sit there and let their suppliers bitch and moan to the detriment of their survival. anyone with half a brain reading that thread is going to think it is exactly what it is, a collection of pissed off, knee jerk reactions.
I really hope you are wrong. I am sorry that as an exclusive your fate is tied so closely that of IStock, but as an independent I feel that if IStock is allowed to get away with this there will be no end to the shafting we'll get from the industry.
Independents have historically had to put up with one of the lowest rates in the industry from IStock and now they want to cut it by 25%.
We are the ones who have supported the site and helped to bankroll a lot of benefits for exclusive that we just don't get as non exclusives. There is only so far people can be pushed.
I for one will continue to spread the word that IStock should not be supported by buyers because of its treatment of contributors.

« Reply #95 on: September 11, 2010, 03:52 »
0
Buyer's bailing on iStock? That is the real question. The new royalty structure will hurt some contributors, but not all. What will hurt all contributors though, and iStock themselves, is if buyers do start bailing.

These messages that keep coming out from Kelly which are getting worse sounding, and more insulting to the contributors each time, could be the real start of the downfall of iStock.

I assume these messages are a collective thought process of all the admins at iStock, but obviously they are all a bit clueless on what to put out there at this point considering the backlash from contributors increases with each new post from KK.

This is the more worrysome part. People laugh at the inept sounding replies, but they are really no joke. They could hurt the company and in turn hurt the contributors even more than the new royalty scheme changes.

At this point I think the best thing everyone can hope for is that iStock decides to hire a proper PR firm to try and clean up the PR disaster started by Kelly.

Knowing that Kelly probably doesn't have a strong enough corporate management background to properly deal with the spiraling situation he started means that he should take a back seat at this point and let someone who is more capable handle the situation.

Getty, who are a bunch of serious corporate players, have to be scratching their heads at this point wondering if they have the right team in place at iStock to handle this sort of corporate disaster.

I am sure iStock admins are giving Getty assurances they have it under control, that this is just the usual ranting and raving that goes on from contributors when they make changes, and that it will all comfortably blow over very soon.

I am afraid it might not be the case though time time and iStock might have opened up a can of whoop-ass on themselves this time around that they are not capable of handling.

Lets hope they get things back under control very soon for the greater good of everyone.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 03:54 by TylerCody »

Microbius

« Reply #96 on: September 11, 2010, 04:03 »
0
Buyer's bailing on iStock? That is the real question. The new royalty structure will hurt some contributors, but not all. What will hurt all contributors though, and iStock themselves, is if buyers do start bailing.

Nope, those buyers will not stop buying images, just buy elsewhere. IStock have just made themselves the worst place for independents to sell work, the only thing that prevents independents pulling portfolios is the volume of sales. Once those sales move to other sites there will be no reason to keep on with IStock (or what's left of it). We'll still get our money, just from other sites that pay and are managed better.

« Reply #97 on: September 11, 2010, 04:07 »
0
Buyer's bailing on iStock? That is the real question. The new royalty structure will hurt some contributors, but not all. What will hurt all contributors though, and iStock themselves, is if buyers do start bailing.

Nope, those buyers will not stop buying images, just buy elsewhere. IStock have just made themselves the worst place for independents to sell work, the only thing that prevents independents pulling portfolios is the volume of sales. Once those sales move to other sites there will be no reason to keep on with IStock (or what's left of it). We'll still get our money, just from other sites that pay and are managed better.

I agree with you 100%. I think you might have slightly misunderstood my post though. I did not say buyers would stop buying images, but might start bailing on iStock, which means buying images elsewhere. So I am in full agreement with you. Please reread what I wrote. Cheers. Tyler.

« Reply #98 on: September 11, 2010, 04:08 »
0
Now is the time to move buyers to our better paying sites. A 25% cut and 15% base is not good enough, so heres what everybody should do:

1: Stop linking to Istock from your website, your blog, and from forum threads. This will help better paying agencies move up in Google rank, thus getting in more buyers.

2: Stop buying images at IS, try everyone else before going there. Why put money in to venture bankers pockets, when you can put money in to artists pockets.

3: Tell everyone in your network to please do the same as the above. And tell them to tell their network too.

4: Tell everyone around you, that buying at IS, is just putting money in to bankers pockets, and tell everone you know that they exploit artists by paying them as litte as 15%.

5: Do the storytelling on your website, on your blok, on twitter, in magacines etc. all over the world.

Following the above will quickly lead to a massive raise in sales in the better paying agencies, god for all independent artist - bad for greedy bankers.

Now GO and ACT!
[/color]
« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 04:12 by Nordlys »

Microbius

« Reply #99 on: September 11, 2010, 04:13 »
0
Buyer's bailing on iStock? That is the real question. The new royalty structure will hurt some contributors, but not all. What will hurt all contributors though, and iStock themselves, is if buyers do start bailing.

Nope, those buyers will not stop buying images, just buy elsewhere. IStock have just made themselves the worst place for independents to sell work, the only thing that prevents independents pulling portfolios is the volume of sales. Once those sales move to other sites there will be no reason to keep on with IStock (or what's left of it). We'll still get our money, just from other sites that pay and are managed better.

I agree with you 100%. I think you might have slightly misunderstood my post though. I did not say buyers would stop buying images, but might start bailing on iStock, which means buying images elsewhere. So I am in full agreement with you. Please reread what I wrote. Cheers. Tyler.

Sorry I was referring to the bit I quoted "What will hurt all contributors though.... is if buyers do start bailing." I was pointing out that it would not hurt all contributors.

I did read your post carefully, I agree with everything else you said, I think the evaluation of the situation in IStock was spot on.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
30 Replies
14693 Views
Last post October 23, 2010, 14:12
by gbalex
18 Replies
5151 Views
Last post November 24, 2011, 15:34
by lagereek
162 Replies
25713 Views
Last post May 14, 2012, 10:27
by jbryson
20 Replies
6007 Views
Last post February 14, 2013, 17:41
by Poncke
9 Replies
3854 Views
Last post January 15, 2014, 19:56
by djpadavona

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle