MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: Freedom on May 01, 2009, 22:57
-
Do you like the idea of Photos.com and Jupiter Unlimited subscriptions?
-
As StockXpert contributor I do not really care. I have been there already.
-
I'm there already. I will just wait to see who will pay me more.
-
Hate it. Non-exclusives can submit there already and having duplicate content available cheaper elsewhere totally undermines the exclusivity program!
-
I'm at StockXpert so my files are already at photos.com. Under the current model I would make less on the same images if iStock sold them there. This feels like a decision that most heavily affect exclusives. Photos.com already has micro images on it.
At iStock I have 34 files vs hundreds for an exclusive. At Photos.com I have 500 established files with non-iStock keywording. Exclusives are going into a market where they have less advantages and a lot of competition. StockXpert has 2,615,445 images already online there.
-
Don't forget, Getty owns photos.com and Jupiter, they can change the current fee structure for non exclusives any time they like. I won't count on getting a better deal than the exclusives. However I do see declined sales for non exclusives because they will try to sell more exclusive photos to keep the exclusives happy.
-
Don't forget, Getty owns photos.com and Jupiter, they can change the current fee structure for non exclusives any time they like.
Yes, this is something to think about.
However I do see declined sales for non exclusives because they will try to sell more exclusive photos to keep the exclusives happy.
No offense, but it doesn't look to me like keeping exclusives happy is high on the priority list....
-
/sigh
I disabled JUI and Photos.com sales thru StockXpert because they never reported them correctly.
I disabled subs, because I liked getting $5 for a vector sale, instead of just $.30.
I have subs on at iStock, because the prices we get from them are reasonable, but they were the only site that offered a reasonable sub plan, IMO.
Until they limit the size of image that is offered through the sub plan, I don't see any incentive to enable sales thru iStock.
Gebbie
-
Wherever there is subscription, I dislike it.
-
At this time, it seems they are going to have vectors included in this plan. They haven't released the pricing structure, but I'm sure it won't be good.
I feel sorry for the vector artists that are at iStock. What a kick in the face this is gonna be!
-
However I do see declined sales for non exclusives because they will try to sell more exclusive photos to keep the exclusives happy.
No offense, but it doesn't look to me like keeping exclusives happy is high on the priority list....
Good deducement Mr(s). Watson (lisafx) ! Unless this is yet another smokescreen by the gods to give the impression that the omnipotent is levelling the playing field, this move is a curved ball for IS exclusives.
But as an athiest, I 've never believed gods existed for the good of photo contributors , at least not in microstock. ;)
-
We don't know yet who pays more. If StockXpert pays more, then it is easy to opt out from IS. If IS pays more, I will not opt out from StockXpert because I have more images there and opting out is not per image. So until I know this I will just wait and see...
-
I sure hope you are right. If they get rid of the exclusive program, we are all created equal. :)
No offense, but it doesn't look to me like keeping exclusives happy is high on the priority list....
-
i didn't vote , i'm too young to vote ;D
you can see here i am still naked and not even know how to wear a diaper
http://www.snapvillage.com/PictureDetail.aspx?vcb6uh=OfOrGcxLK7bvo1kHKyrVEkBGToYngHMGvyNQ2ZD5T19Pc8T5hOJ%2fjSeDkWI8jzR6 (http://www.snapvillage.com/PictureDetail.aspx?vcb6uh=OfOrGcxLK7bvo1kHKyrVEkBGToYngHMGvyNQ2ZD5T19Pc8T5hOJ%2fjSeDkWI8jzR6)
um, does that mean being with Stockxpert, i am now a foster child to IStock? :-*
-
In one of the threads on IS they state that non-exclusives will get 20% and exclusives will get 22.5% of the monthly payment as it is used daily. Canister rank will play no part in the payment.
Kelly posted
Minimum payouts: keep in mind these only happen if someone was to use their entire download allotment in a day.
It also varies depending on the package purchased. So the answer to that question is:
3¢, 4¢, 5¢, 6¢, 8¢, 21¢, 39¢, or 72¢ at the 20% payment level.
The sticky Q&A states
As Kelly mentioned, royalties will be calculated and paid monthly. The royalty rate will be 20% for non-exclusives, and 22.5% for exclusives. The royalty paid will be 20% or 22.5% of the value of each download, which in turn is calculated by dividing the monthly value of the subscription by the number of downloads in that subscription that month (much like is currently done on iStock subscriptions, but monthly instead of daily). We’re projecting the average royalty payout to be 30¢ – 55¢—a significant upside to similar competitive subscriptions.
-
In one of the threads on IS they state that non-exclusives will get 20% and exclusives will get 22.5% of the monthly payment as it is used daily. Canister rank will play no part in the payment.
Kelly posted
Minimum payouts: keep in mind these only happen if someone was to use their entire download allotment in a day.
It also varies depending on the package purchased. So the answer to that question is:
3¢, 4¢, 5¢, 6¢, 8¢, 21¢, 39¢, or 72¢ at the 20% payment level.
The sticky Q&A states
As Kelly mentioned, royalties will be calculated and paid monthly. The royalty rate will be 20% for non-exclusives, and 22.5% for exclusives. The royalty paid will be 20% or 22.5% of the value of each download, which in turn is calculated by dividing the monthly value of the subscription by the number of downloads in that subscription that month (much like is currently done on iStock subscriptions, but monthly instead of daily). We’re projecting the average royalty payout to be 30¢ – 55¢—a significant upside to similar competitive subscriptions.
This info should include the disclaimer that the update posted yesterday suggests they might revisit some of these points. (Just thought you might want to provide all the available info?)
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=87998 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=87998)
I don't have high hopes that the revised plan is going to be something I'll want to participate in, but we'll see.
-
I'll have to go back and look for that update. One of my biggest pet peeves has always been that the only place to get info is some obscure post in the middle of a 27 page thread.
-
You shouldn't have any problem. It's on the newsfeed on the front page of the site.
-
nothing to say at this juncture , really..
but like to put this thread on the top of the page so it doesn't disappear out of site.