Author Topic: Hold on to your wallets! "There are irregularities with October's PP royalties" (Read 98680 times)

Ron · « **Reply #100 on:** January 07, 2014, 05:40 »

Dubbelpost

Ron · « **Reply #101 on:** January 07, 2014, 05:41 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 07, 2014, 04:43

Quote from: Ron on January 07, 2014, 04:41
Quote from: klsbear on January 06, 2014, 23:20
Quote from: jamirae on January 06, 2014, 22:08
so not that I want to drag you all off the topic of Lobo - but going back to the original post - has anyone read anything more about the "Irregularity" issue? I briefly looked around the IS forums but didn't really see anything or the original post.

I know.. I probably could have spent more than 5 minutes poking around there but that was my limit before I really just wanted to get out of there.

The thread is somewhat hidden in the Partner Program forum. There are probably lots of people over there that have no idea what could be coming. Lobo posted that there will be an update later this week but it won't be Tuesday. http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=358476&messageid=6973868

His first update was they would have an update last week, the update after that was they would have an update early this week, his latest update is he will have an update later this week, his next update will be they will have an update next month. And in the end, come July your balance will be in the red and your RCs will still not be fixed.

You're a pessimist, Ron. I'm sure they will take the money off us much, much more quickly than that. In fact, I reckon that this is one problem that they will solve in record time. Their corporate communications have already improved dramatically to prepare us for the big day.

Well, it depends, if the mistake was in our favor or their favor. lol But you are right, the RC problem wont be fixed soon, the claw back will happen asap.

ShadySue · « **Reply #102 on:** January 07, 2014, 07:00 »

Quote from: Ron on January 07, 2014, 04:41

Quote from: klsbear on January 06, 2014, 23:20
Quote from: jamirae on January 06, 2014, 22:08
so not that I want to drag you all off the topic of Lobo - but going back to the original post - has anyone read anything more about the "Irregularity" issue? I briefly looked around the IS forums but didn't really see anything or the original post.

I know.. I probably could have spent more than 5 minutes poking around there but that was my limit before I really just wanted to get out of there.

The thread is somewhat hidden in the Partner Program forum. There are probably lots of people over there that have no idea what could be coming. Lobo posted that there will be an update later this week but it won't be Tuesday. http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=358476&messageid=6973868

His first update was they would have an update last week, the update after that was they would have an update early this week, his latest update is he will have an update later this week,

Not so. On Friday (3rd Jan) Lobo posted that there would be an update on the issue 'next week' which is this week, which gives them up to Saturday to have him keep his original promise.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=358476&messageid=6972926
quoted in the OP of this thread on 4th Jan:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/hold-on-to-your-wallets!-%27there-are-irregularities-with-october%27s-pp-royalties%27/msg359497/#msg359497

Ron · « **Reply #103 on:** January 07, 2014, 07:20 »

Sue, if you are on a mission to constantly prove me wrong, you have your work cut out for you. Just make sure you still have time to take photos in between.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=358452&page=1

Posted Thu Jan 2 1:18PM

Quote

We should have an update soon. Probably not before the end of the week, but early next week.

Which is about the RC, I am just illustrating a scenario.

ShadySue · « **Reply #104 on:** January 07, 2014, 07:38 »

Quote from: Ron on January 07, 2014, 07:20

Sue, if you are on a mission to constantly prove me wrong, you have your work cut out for you.

Unfortunately, in this case, you made it too easy.
Don't force me to defend iStock, please.

Quote

Just make sure you still have time to take photos in between.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=358452&page=1

The only quote by Lobo I can see on that page is the last post, asking someone to make a report about a keyword/search issue in a different forum.

Quote

Posted Thu Jan 2 1:18PM
Quote
We should have an update soon. Probably not before the end of the week, but early next week.

Which is about the RC, I am just illustrating a scenario.

Yeah, but you said Lobo said he would give an update on the PP fiasco last week.
If they don't come up timeously with a promised update on RCs, that's a perfectly valid, but totally different issue.

Ron · « **Reply #105 on:** January 07, 2014, 08:37 »

Sometimes I really think you and Ruxperiencediam make a perfect match

Red Dove · « **Reply #106 on:** January 07, 2014, 10:33 »

If I'm being honest I suspected all along that October royalties were not entirely kosher. Its just that I wanted to believe IS had finally pulled their socks up and were generating real folding money again.

In hindsight, perhaps people would have been better off keeping their cake holes closed and leaving IS to find the error sometime in January 2064

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #107 on:** January 07, 2014, 16:22 »

Quote from: Red Dove on January 07, 2014, 10:33

In hindsight, perhaps people would have been better off keeping their cake holes closed and leaving IS to find the error sometime in January 2064

No. It is very important that the figures should be accurate and mistakes should be exposed, whichever way they go. If we keep quiet about strange patterns in the accounting they could start consistently underpaying us. I'd still like to know why, when 2012 turned into 2013, my PP sales suddenly dropped about 30% and stayed at the new level for six months. For all I know I've been being underpaid for the whole of 2013.

Canonbabe · « **Reply #108 on:** January 08, 2014, 04:45 »

I thought, for the percentage they make when they sell one of my images, I mean that 85% they could hire some qualified people to manage the shop!
With Istock being one of the lowest paying sites in the business and all these problens they have on the site I wonder how many of us will actually stay there.
The PP sales were OK and the amount we received in november was a nice surprise.
December sales were poor, compared to other sites and till today there isn't much happening in january too!

Red Dove · « **Reply #109 on:** January 08, 2014, 07:42 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 07, 2014, 16:22

Quote from: Red Dove on January 07, 2014, 10:33
In hindsight, perhaps people would have been better off keeping their cake holes closed and leaving IS to find the error sometime in January 2064

No. It is very important that the figures should be accurate and mistakes should be exposed, whichever way they go. If we keep quiet about strange patterns in the accounting they could start consistently underpaying us. I'd still like to know why, when 2012 turned into 2013, my PP sales suddenly dropped about 30% and stayed at the new level for six months. For all I know I've been being underpaid for the whole of 2013.

I was being facetious sir.

In any event, as Canonbabe points out above it is reasonable to expect an agent who helps themselves to such a large slice to provide a reliable and accurate business service. Alas, along with most other corporations these days money is spent on maintaining their place at the pig trough by marketing and sales as opposed to service, quality and reliability.

As always, IS will elaborate when they're good and ready and whether we like it or not. Pigs.

dingles · « **Reply #110 on:** January 08, 2014, 09:36 »

Quote from: Canonbabe on January 08, 2014, 04:45

I thought, for the percentage they make when they sell one of my images, I mean that 85% they could hire some qualified people to manage the shop!
With Istock being one of the lowest paying sites in the business and all these problens they have on the site I wonder how many of us will actually stay there.
The PP sales were OK and the amount we received in november was a nice surprise.
December sales were poor, compared to other sites and till today there isn't much happening in january too!

This is a great point. They take such a large slice that it isn't unreasonable for us to expect near perfection. Another good point is made is that we either take it or leave it, they really have the upper hand unfortunantly

StanRohrer · « **Reply #111 on:** January 08, 2014, 10:07 »

You know - If iStock runs on the fiscal year end of Dec 31, this glitch ought to make for a little additional fun for their accountants to close the year end books. Ha! Ha!

Canonbabe · « **Reply #112 on:** January 08, 2014, 10:20 »

Quote from: dingles on January 08, 2014, 09:36

Quote from: Canonbabe on January 08, 2014, 04:45
I thought, for the percentage they make when they sell one of my images, I mean that 85% they could hire some qualified people to manage the shop!
With Istock being one of the lowest paying sites in the business and all these problens they have on the site I wonder how many of us will actually stay there.
The PP sales were OK and the amount we received in november was a nice surprise.
December sales were poor, compared to other sites and till today there isn't much happening in january too!

This is a great point. They take such a large slice that it isn't unreasonable for us to expect near perfection. Another good point is made is that we either take it or leave it, they really have the upper hand unfortunantly

In case all contributors all leave, all that remains is an empty site and they still have their overhead costs etc. It is about time they realize that WE are their income.
The more images WE produce and upload on their site, the more money WE generate for them.

After spending the most of november without any stats and no decent explanation for this, we not receive a belated X-mas gift: another "donation" to Istock because "something" was wrong in their calculations? C'mon: I only make a f%&*)ing 15% when I sell my images (I wonder if I ever reach 16%?) so their is 85% left for a) proffessional people, b) a compensation for the mistake. It wouldn't be more than "fair" if we share the difference. Afterall, we have to rely on Istocks honest system, we cannot influence sales, we cannot check the earnings, we cannot do anything except generate money, mainly for them.
Any compensation given to the contributor will be considered as "costs". No problem for those overpaid accountants closing the books by now:)

I feel like a sitting duck with a camera!

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #113 on:** January 08, 2014, 10:56 »

Quote from: Canonbabe on January 08, 2014, 10:20

It is about time they realize that WE are their income.

Getty's approach for the last several years - and they've been sticking it to their contributors with contract changes for Getty Images as well, not just iStock - has been that they have sufficient power in the marketplace that contributors will have no choice but to suck it up when Getty takes more and more of the sale and on less and less favorable terms. Because Getty is too large a percentage of contributors' income (or all of it).

It's a power struggle and Getty thinks they have more power and thus can profit from exercising it to their benefit.

They've also been bulking up iStock with lots of Getty collections, some of it wholly owned content (like the Hulton archive), so even if 100% of the "real" iStock contributors left, there'd still be content on the site - and I'm sure Yuri would hang around as he's a professional hanging with professionals

The disgraceful mis-management of the iStock site reflects Getty's priorities (influenced by their private equity part owners) - spend as little as possible on site maintenance. That and a history of mangled software releases that stands out even in a business that regularly ships bugs along with new features.

Ron · « **Reply #114 on:** January 08, 2014, 11:14 »

All you can do is wait until Getty buckles under their massive debt and they will be declared bankrupt. Once the cancer is removed from the patient, we will see a healthy growth in royalties again.

JPSDK · « **Reply #115 on:** January 08, 2014, 11:47 »

The sooner the better.

topol · « **Reply #116 on:** January 08, 2014, 12:41 »

Quote from: Ron on January 08, 2014, 11:14

All you can do is wait until Getty buckles under their massive debt and they will be declared bankrupt. Once the cancer is removed from the patient, we will see a healthy growth in royalties again.

Wouldn't bet on it. They are likely to be acquired by a private equity firm. (private equity is just the new name for hostile leveraged buyout firms, worst of worst corporate raiders)

gostwyck · « **Reply #117 on:** January 08, 2014, 13:07 »

Quote from: topol on January 08, 2014, 12:41

Quote from: Ron on January 08, 2014, 11:14
All you can do is wait until Getty buckles under their massive debt and they will be declared bankrupt. Once the cancer is removed from the patient, we will see a healthy growth in royalties again.

Wouldn't bet on it. They are likely to be acquired by a private equity firm. (private equity is just the new name for hostile leveraged buyout firms, worst of worst corporate raiders)

Hasn't that already happened? Didn't Carlyle buy Getty and then borrow most of the money against Getty to pay themselves back? I don't think that there is any room for more 'leveraging'.

Ron · « **Reply #118 on:** January 08, 2014, 13:51 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 08, 2014, 13:07

Quote from: topol on January 08, 2014, 12:41
Quote from: Ron on January 08, 2014, 11:14
All you can do is wait until Getty buckles under their massive debt and they will be declared bankrupt. Once the cancer is removed from the patient, we will see a healthy growth in royalties again.

Wouldn't bet on it. They are likely to be acquired by a private equity firm. (private equity is just the new name for hostile leveraged buyout firms, worst of worst corporate raiders)

Hasn't that already happened? Didn't Carlyle buy Getty and then borrow most of the money against Getty to pay themselves back? I don't think that there is any room for more 'leveraging'.

Anyone buying Getty now is crazy or has waaaaaay too much money to burn.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #119 on:** January 08, 2014, 13:52 »

Slightly off-topic...did they let tickstock go? No rah-rahs from him? her? in quite a while.

ShadySue · « **Reply #120 on:** January 08, 2014, 13:56 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on January 08, 2014, 13:52

Slightly off-topic...did they let tickstock go? No rah-rahs from him? her? in quite a while.

Could be on holiday, I guess.
I don't think even he could spin this as being a Good Thing, but I did expect him to be in all cokka with his Dec and 2013 figures, being one of a few who were doing well through the year.

dingles · « **Reply #121 on:** January 09, 2014, 10:18 »

Quote

We've established that there were some irregularities with Oct(Sept) and Nov(Oct) Partner Program royalties. We've been investigating these irregularities and hope to have additional information some time next week. What this means is the royalty payments for September and October are being reviewed at this time.

We will have an update on this issue next week.

UPDATE: January 9, 2014.

We’ve had the Finance team go back over the royalty payments for September and October and have discovered some issues with a portion of the Partner Program participants payments. This issue impacts approximately 25,000 contributor accounts. We will be sending the affected contributors email notifications of the total amount over paid as well as a recoupment schedule in the very near future.

Has the issue that caused this over payment been addressed?
- Yes, we discovered it in December 2013 prior to the delivery of the November Partner Program royalties.

Why wasn’t the contributor base notified earlier?
- We weren’t able to identify the extent of the issue until early January 2014.

How will the affected contributors be contacted?
- We will be sending email notifications to the impacted contributors in the next week. We will notify this thread as soon as the emails start going out. Please note, if you don’t receive an email then your account isn’t affected.

* ;(

Ron · « **Reply #122 on:** January 09, 2014, 10:24 »

Can you delete all files through deepmeta?

dingles · « **Reply #123 on:** January 09, 2014, 10:33 »

Oddly enough all of their errors always equate to an over payment...never an under payment...what a smart system they have there.

$:-\$

ShadySue · « **Reply #124 on:** January 09, 2014, 10:44 »

Quote from: dingles on January 09, 2014, 10:33

Oddly enough all of their errors always equate to an over payment...never an under payment...what a smart system they have there. $:-\$

They've had underpayments before, but sometimes it's been impossible to tell whether we were repaid the correct amount. I questioned one in the past, got a canned reply that didn't match my question, and when I queried it again it disappeared off my ticket list. It was probably only a few cents, but a few cents from all the contributors ...

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Hold on to your wallets! "There are irregularities with October's PP royalties" (Read 98680 times)

Ron

Ron

ShadySue

Ron

ShadySue

Ron

Red Dove

BaldricksTrousers

Canonbabe

Red Dove

dingles

StanRohrer

Canonbabe

Jo Ann Snover

Ron

JPSDK

topol

gostwyck

Ron

Shelma1

ShadySue

dingles

Ron

dingles

ShadySue

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors