I've moved this out of Lisa's thread, as it really is a separate topic (sorry Lisa).

Quote from: Suljo on Today at 02:16
    So do you think is it normal to receive 46-54 cents from XS P+ image.
    I look thru my P+ image sales and I can say they are around 50 cents for XSmall.
    While from 6$ it will must be about 1$_

Quote from Me:
OK, so a P+ image costs 3 credits if bought with a credit bundle.
On this page, http://www.istockphoto.com/buy-stock-prepaid-credits.php it says that ordinary published prices for ordinary credits range from $1.33 to $1.67.
So to make things simple, we could say that an average credit price could be $1.50, so 3 credits is $4.50. 1% of $4.50 is 4.5c is 76.5c.
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/p-images-now-cost-base-price-of-$6/msg295132/#msg295132

Quote from Phil:
Istock pay on the net price, after they have taken their costs out.
They wont say what their costs are or how much the net percentage is, so you will never get 17% of a sale price, looks like you are getting 10-12% of the sale price
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/p-images-now-cost-base-price-of-$6/msg295142/#msg295142

Quote from iStockLawyer:
Can we have a definition of NET?
The kinds of items that we net from the payment include taxes or other withholdings, refunds, bad debts and currency hedging.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=349689&messageid=6797621

Of course, we know that iStock use legalese to wriggle out of all sorts of things, but as I look at it, if a P+ S file is now $6 cash price, and an indy like Suljo gets 17%, he should be getting $1.02 on any cash sale from last night/today?

Because:
taxes are added on at point of sale, i.e. the UK price is $6, then when you go to buy the file, VAT is added on, not affecting the contributor.
refunds are clawed back in full, and should not affect a genuine sale
bad debts - I was assuming [1] that meant if the contributor had a debt, e.g. s/he had withdrawn all their balance then a refund came through putting them in the red.
currency hedging - a scam whereby iStock score a double whammy by hiking up non US$ sales and not sharing that with the contributor, but shouldn't affect the cash sale of $6/$1.02.

[1] and we know where 'assuming' what iStock means gets us (Google).

Anyone know any different?






So your average does seem low, yes.
Maybe your photos are the sort that appeal to corporate buyers who might buy bigger bundles? Though actually unless my arithmetic is wrong (it's 01:26 a.m.), your share of a P+ XS bought with $1.33 credits should be 67c.

Suljo ~
It does seem that you're getting royalties lower than would seem 'normal' with a 17% royalty rate.

Are you aware that cash sales were introduced in early September, whereby a buyer can choose to buy one image (or more) for a 'cash price' rather than with a credit bundle? - that's where the $4.50/$6 figure comes from.

"Introducing Standard Pricing
Our new Standard Pricing makes it easy to buy the files you need when you need them.
    See pricing in cash, not credits
    Add files to your shopping cart and pay with your credit card or PayPal account
    Buy only what you need, when you need it
    No commitments, no math required"
as opposed to:
Save With Prepaid Credits
Prepaid Credits let you pay in advance for files you'll download in the future.
    Buy credits in bulk
    Get faster access to content: pay up front and enjoy click-and-go downloads
    Save time and money with credits- the more you buy, the more you'll save
    Enjoy special offers and promotions on credit packs
http://www.istockphoto.com

At 17% a "$6 sale" can be 25 cents in royalty.  This is because a "$6" sale can be had for $1.50 if bought with credits.

Or as low as 72c with the largest advertised corporate subscription credit bundle, 24c per credit; which would be 12c to the contributor on 17%.