Author Topic: Downloads have Stopped (Read 32871 times)

ShadySue · « **Reply #75 on:** November 17, 2012, 07:25 »

Quote from: hatman12 on November 16, 2012, 20:08

No, this looks like they want to bring the credit system to an end, probably from January, hence the timing and the need to get rid of unused credits.

It certainly looks that way, except that they're still selling credit bundles of all sizes, and saying that they last all year.
Even if they stop selling credit bundles on Monday, they still have to honour any which sold last week.

Oh, but they don't always honour their own terms & conditions or promises.

They must know that buyers will not "use up all their credits", for charity, an ipod or any other incentive (other than a closing down sale). Presumably only a small percentage of credit bundle sales (as opposed to subs where you have to use it or lose it) are bought 'on spec' or just because someone likes a picture. Many will be used on real jobs, which can't be known in advance.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #76 on:** November 17, 2012, 08:39 »

"At face value, it's so they make the $50K donation, but I wonder how they calculate "extra" downloads to meet that target."

They already have all the money from the credits. They don't need it to make the donation.

Difydave · « **Reply #77 on:** November 17, 2012, 08:52 »

Quote from: sjlocke on November 17, 2012, 08:39

"At face value, it's so they make the $50K donation, but I wonder how they calculate "extra" downloads to meet that target."

They already have all the money from the credits. They don't need it to make the donation.

I always forget that they already have the money for the credits. I'd assume that they'd calculate the "extra" as just that. Downloads over and above what is "normal". Whatever "normal" is. I can see a benefit in that the credits will be spent sooner this way, which presumably would mean that a regular buyer at least would need to get more credits. Although if they've already bought the images they needed for projects then they're not going to need them again.
On the face of it, it's difficult to see a real benefit to them / us, although the charity donation is obviously a good thing.

ShadySue · « **Reply #78 on:** November 17, 2012, 09:04 »

Purely as a marketing drive, 'use up all your credits' makes no sense - there has to be a 'hidden agenda'.
"Buy more credits and we'll give 20% to charity" (without impacting on contributors) might bring in a bit more custom from a few switherers in small or one-person companies. (E.g. I once bought a set of fonts I didn't really need but which I had niggling in my brain because the company joined a wide-industry campaign to give a large percentage of the price to an international emergency relief appeal.) Again, that sort of thing probably only appeals to personal buyers. In companies where you have to get everything signed off, that's not going to be a big selling point.
I can't see many attempts to 'use up all our credits' in companies which need approval and sign-off for purchases will be very successful.

Besides, even charitable companies often have their own nominated charities and aren't moved to support others. I'm guessing the 'winning' charity won't be known until the end of the promotion, and am well aware that even some of my favourite charities are at best rated 0 and even disapproved of by other people. So 'not knowing' isn't an incentive for many either.

Wonder whose turn it was to come up with the 'Suggestion of the Week' this week?

I'm suspecting that contributor pledges to 'donate all earnings above last November's earnings' will result in a tiny donation.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #79 on:** November 17, 2012, 09:39 »

A lot of this adds up. Businesses become quiet before a big change.

IS is being band-aided. Pushing for credits to be used up. Moderators have been pretty silent in the forums. Getty was down for maintenance. Some key people have been shuffled or are gone.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #80 on:** November 17, 2012, 10:02 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on November 17, 2012, 09:39

A lot of this adds up. Businesses become quiet before a big change.

IS is being band-aided. Pushing for credits to be used up. Moderators have been pretty silent in the forums. Getty was down for maintenance. Some key people have been shuffled or are gone.

maybe they are just taking too long to fix everything

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #81 on:** November 17, 2012, 10:14 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on November 17, 2012, 10:02

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on November 17, 2012, 09:39
A lot of this adds up. Businesses become quiet before a big change.

IS is being band-aided. Pushing for credits to be used up. Moderators have been pretty silent in the forums. Getty was down for maintenance. Some key people have been shuffled or are gone.

maybe they are just taking too long to fix everything

Yes, they absolutely are taking way too long for a $200M+ revenue company to be fixing things.

I'm in IT so I understand the complexity and know even the smallest "oh that's simple" changes can cause massive problems if not thoroughly tested.

This is different. Their IT team seems to have one priority. Keep the site running. Which means they're focusing their time on something else other than IS.

Monkeyman · « **Reply #82 on:** November 17, 2012, 10:48 »

I agree that you get the feeling that they're just trying to stay alive instead of fixing and improving things. My hope is that they're currently working on a brand new site, written from scratch. So as a nice christmas present we'll get a brand new iStock that is bug free, super fast and with instant and reliable download/stats updates.

But I guess you shouldn't hope too much.

cobalt · « **Reply #83 on:** November 17, 2012, 11:00 »

Here is a different idea: what if instead of removing credits, they are going to introduce credits that can be used across all their different sites with one central account for the buyer?

Maybe not that likely if they are scared of customers seeing the same collection on all sites at different prices, but they could be coming up with more harmonized price systems as well.

Just an idea, probably not.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #84 on:** November 17, 2012, 11:01 »

Quote from: Monkeyman on November 17, 2012, 10:48

I agree that you get the feeling that they're just trying to stay alive instead of fixing and improving things. My hope is that they're currently working on a brand new site, written from scratch. So as a nice christmas present we'll get a brand new iStock that is bug free, super fast and with instant and reliable download/stats updates.

But I guess you shouldn't hope too much.

Either a new site or more likely consolidating IS with GI.

The connector that moves Vetta, Agency, and now E+ content over to GI was probably designed as a data migration tool.

If this is what they're doing it will be interesting to see how they handle the rest of the images. Will they move Photo+ images also? Will only exclusive images get moved? Will some go to Getty Images and the rest to Thinkstock?

ffNixx · « **Reply #85 on:** November 17, 2012, 15:28 »

I think Cobalt is spot on.

Credits are a source of profit for iStock, and have been incorporated in the latest redesign, they're unlikely to go away. What iStock is doing with the campaign is being nice to customers because credits are about to be redefined, their value will change. Customers could be upset by this come the announcement, but with this initiative the potential damage is limited. The new credit system will be presented as better value, so there should be fewer customers saying next year "I wish I hadn't bought that large bundle last year".

For contributors who have files at Getty or TS, this is neutral to good news. For those of us who are iStock only, this is neutral to bad. Getty wins, they will sell more at lower royalty.

ShadySue · « **Reply #86 on:** November 17, 2012, 15:50 »

Quote from: cobalt on November 17, 2012, 11:00

Here is a different idea: what if instead of removing credits, they are going to introduce credits that can be used across all their different sites with one central account for the buyer?

Maybe not that likely if they are scared of customers seeing the same collection on all sites at different prices, but they could be coming up with more harmonized price systems as well.

Just an idea, probably not.

A while back there was a questionnaire aimed at buyers based around this issue - whether they'd like credits to be usable across all Getty Family sites. The problem with this is when the same images are available at TS AND iS or iS AND Getty, at very different prices.

Unless they're going to merge them all into one mega site, and somehow eliminate duplicates as they do so. That would imply a degree of IT expertise. I doubt if this is going to be the scenario. But I bet they'd like to get all exclusive royalties down to 20%, by a side door if necessary.

lisafx · « **Reply #87 on:** November 17, 2012, 17:54 »

Quote from: ffNixx on November 17, 2012, 15:28

I think Cobalt is spot on.

Credits are a source of profit for iStock, and have been incorporated in the latest redesign, they're unlikely to go away. What iStock is doing with the campaign is being nice to customers because credits are about to be redefined, their value will change. Customers could be upset by this come the announcement, but with this initiative the potential damage is limited. The new credit system will be presented as better value, so there should be fewer customers saying next year "I wish I hadn't bought that large bundle last year".

For contributors who have files at Getty or TS, this is neutral to good news. For those of us who are iStock only, this is neutral to bad. Getty wins, they will sell more at lower royalty.

This sounds very plausible.

My concern is that in the past two years or more, there has not been a single policy change or "big announcement" that has not worked against contributors interests.

StanRohrer · « **Reply #88 on:** November 17, 2012, 18:03 »

My guess: Unused credits are a liability on the books. iS already has the money (and likely spent it) but wants to reduce how many credits are hanging over their heads for the next site changes and/or future contributor payouts. How much liability is out there if every buyer held just 10 credits?

dbvirago · « **Reply #89 on:** November 20, 2012, 08:48 »

20/11/2012 5:11 AM MST XSmall Regular $0.08 USD

Another great day at IStock

Monkeyman · « **Reply #90 on:** November 20, 2012, 10:27 »

Seeing top sellers at iStock mentioning that sales are all of sudden down with 30-50% since the september update is not very encouraging...

I really hope it's because of the malfunctioning best match system and not because buyers are leaving (and now they're probably leaving anyway because they can't find what they're looking for with the broken best match...).

My sales would have been down with around 50% too, but a few of my new files have sold really well which has compensated for the loss. Lucky me.

Allsa · « **Reply #91 on:** November 20, 2012, 21:41 »

I have had no downloads on iStock over the past 6 days. I did get one EL on the 19th, but no downloads.

enstoker · « **Reply #92 on:** November 21, 2012, 01:35 »

Quote from: dbvirago on November 20, 2012, 08:48

20/11/2012 5:11 AM MST XSmall Regular $0.08 USD

Another great day at IStock

Oh, You are in the 0,08 $ club as well.
I thought that this joke is for me only

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #93 on:** November 21, 2012, 02:05 »

Cant complain too much about the IS sales but Lisa is right, the majority of sales are going elsewhere and not just to SS. In 7 years I have never seen such skyrocketting sales at DT, as now and on a daily basis.

Im sure the plan from the very start was to seriously weed out micro or at least make a dent in this industry and for better or worse? it looks as if they are somewhat succeeding.

fotografer · « **Reply #94 on:** November 21, 2012, 05:42 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on November 21, 2012, 02:05

I have never seen such skyrocketting sales at DT, as now and on a daily basis.

Same here. I hope that this default search doesn't get changed for a while.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #95 on:** November 21, 2012, 08:29 »

Quote from: fotografer on November 21, 2012, 05:42

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on November 21, 2012, 02:05
I have never seen such skyrocketting sales at DT, as now and on a daily basis.

Same here. I hope that this default search doesn't get changed for a while.

Yup, so do I. Its not only because of the search though. DT, is clever, they pretty much stay out of the limelight of troubles plus the fact its a very good agency, well run, etc. The bosses also take a personal interest in their agency, not just moneywise but the way things are run. That can sometimes make one hell of a differance.
Yes. DT is on its way, BIG time.

fotografer · « **Reply #96 on:** November 21, 2012, 08:32 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on November 21, 2012, 08:29

Quote from: fotografer on November 21, 2012, 05:42
Quote from: ClaridgeJ on November 21, 2012, 02:05
I have never seen such skyrocketting sales at DT, as now and on a daily basis.

Same here. I hope that this default search doesn't get changed for a while.

Yup, so do I. Its not only because of the search though. DT, is clever, they pretty much stay out of the limelight of troubles plus the fact its a very good agency, well run, etc. The bosses also take a personal interest in their agency, not just moneywise but the way things are run. That can sometimes make one hell of a differance.
Yes. DT is on its way, BIG time.

Yes, personally I feel more positive about DT than I do about any of the sites. It was mostly number 1 for me for months with a couple of badish months recently and now it's back at the top.

Mantis · « **Reply #97 on:** November 21, 2012, 08:45 »

Quote from: fotografer on November 21, 2012, 08:32

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on November 21, 2012, 08:29
Quote from: fotografer on November 21, 2012, 05:42
Quote from: ClaridgeJ on November 21, 2012, 02:05
I have never seen such skyrocketting sales at DT, as now and on a daily basis.

Same here. I hope that this default search doesn't get changed for a while.
[/

Yup, so do I. Its not only because of the search though. DT, is clever, they pretty much stay out of the limelight of troubles plus the fact its a very good agency, well run, etc. The bosses also take a personal interest in their agency, not just moneywise but the way things are run. That can sometimes make one hell of a differance.
Yes. DT is on its way, BIG time.
Yes, personally I feel more positive about DT than I do about any of the sites. It was mostly number 1 for me for months with a couple of badish months recently and now it's back at the top.

It's a vicious cycle I tellya, vicious

malamus · « **Reply #98 on:** November 21, 2012, 10:06 »

RE: OPs thread…

Could it be because all istock images are available cheeper on another (unofficial) site?

I am in the downward trend everyone is talking of, but since this new (unofficial) site, that has all of my images for sale, my IS sales have ground to a hault with such a jolt that I didnt make the withdrawal minimum this week (first time since… maybe ever!).

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #99 on:** November 21, 2012, 10:31 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on November 21, 2012, 08:29

...Yes. DT is on its way, BIG time.

DT is a solid number three/four and has been almost since the beginning. I don't see anything changing there although I'm happy for the good weeks when they come around and will put up with "subscription Wednesdays" when that happens.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Downloads have Stopped (Read 32871 times)

ShadySue

Sean Locke Photography

Difydave

ShadySue

PaulieWalnuts

luissantos84

PaulieWalnuts

Monkeyman

cobalt

PaulieWalnuts

ffNixx

ShadySue

lisafx

StanRohrer

dbvirago

Monkeyman

Allsa

enstoker

ClaridgeJ

fotografer

ClaridgeJ

fotografer

Mantis

malamus

Jo Ann Snover

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors