Let us know how it works out for you.  Remember if you put files on dreamstime you can't take them off for 6 months, so if you do see a drop of 80-85% (which was reported in another thread here) you won't be able to go back exclusive until that time is up.

If anyone is looking at dropping the crown as a 6-months-or-less trial, don't do it. It's not for you.

Why am I getting the feeling that they've almost given up on the site themselves?     

Quote from: KarenH on December 14, 2011, 20:33

Why am I getting the feeling that they've almost given up on the site themselves?     

Because, constrained by targets from Getty/H&F and nobody with any authority to take any meaningful action, they have little choice. It's almost like a patient with a 'Do Not Resuscitate' notice on the end of the bed.

A very fitting analogy.  It does feel like that --often.  But then thinking back, if that's the case, how / why are they coming out with new things like the so-called "cutting edge technology" that they tried to implement that broke the site before they ever got the first bugs fixed.

And tonight the announcement of a new "Facebook E-card App"  -- I don't get it.  It's like doing plastic surgery on that patient with the DNR at the end of the bed (I suck at analogies, but you get the general drift -- it's like why bother).

Hmmmm a poll to gather feelings on iStock?
My opinion ... we do not need a poll.  They are just one of many agencies.  iStock gets far too much press.  Just count the threads.
 

This poll was started a while ago to answer a specific point.
There were some people who would say whenever criticism of IStock came up that it was just a vocal minority that was unhappy with the site and the vast majority still were on board, just scared to say so.
Well the poll results speak for themselves, and actually the threads about IStock have been mercifully free of the claim since it went up

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on December 12, 2011, 21:19

Look, Yuri reported an overall sales decline with losses on Istock that were not covered by increasing "low value subscpirition sales" on SS.  You don't need to look at anyone else considering Yuri has the best statistical sample out there.  If he is down, no "big guy/gal" is up.  End of story.  

Yuri is a top professional, with huge costs (employees, studio, models, ...) and top gear producing 40+ Megapixels pictures - he can earn a lot just from selling XXL compared to smaller sizes. For us, the difference between credits and subs is less, our royalty at IS is ridiculous (17%, most probably down to 16% next year in my case) while at SS we are earning the same % as Yuri, and IS has always been just #2 or #3 (even in good times), never #1.

Between him and complete wannabe photographers there are a lot of intermediate advanced hobbystics - that's how I define myself - which can surpass or at least cover IS losses with more sales at SS.

I'm not rejoicing for the decline of IS, and I am very sorry for fellow photographers which expected most of their income from IS, it must be scary. But from a purely financial point of view, I am not sure this situation is damaging me.

I'm not saying I don't believe what Yuri is reporting - just that his case is not representative for everyone.
You are probably right that his sample is representative of many "big guy/gal"s though.

This ^ is a well thought out reply to my post.
         My point was that if IS goes down in sales as it is reported from the top selling independent artist the personal results are not good.  Another big  selling  independent on here also reports lower overall sales this year which looks like the fault of IS sales falling.  The theory was if Istock goes down and I don't have all my eggs in one basket then I am better off.  It appears that the loss of $$$$ by never going exclusive with IS is not being payed out now that IS sales are falling.  Which means the $1.50 loss suffered per download by not going with IS only is not being made up on the back end of being independent.  So far that bet is not paying off.  If istock lost all the exclusives, the only separation from the sites would be price.  How would the contributor win in that scenario?
           

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on December 15, 2011, 11:21

           

You forget that SS is not the only other site out there. The insurance policy from independence is from the total spread, not just from one site. Last month, SS was 30% of my total income, iS was 16%. It's obvious, though, that one sale transferred from a site with an average payout of $1.50 per sale to one with a payout of 60c per sale is not going to cover all the loss.

It's possible that we may never make up what we have lost through rejecting exclusivity but we'll never know.

On the other hand, if iStock collapses, will unemployed exclusives even get a foot in the door at other sites? At least one is complaining that he can't get accepted at SS. So the insurance might have a long payout period.

In any case, there's no point in crying over spilt milk.

True that the milk is gone, but sharing the story on how it happened could help others.   

I'm in the same boat as Yuri and many others, the sales lost from iStockphoto to Shutterstock has meant less commission in my pocket.

I'm not really finding that. The increase in my SS earnings, mainly through a huge increase in OD sales, has almost exactly compensated for what I've lost at IS. Over the last couple of years they have simply swapped around from 25/40% of earnings respectively before to 40/25% now. Of course we lost money at IS from the commission cuts but then have been compensated by Photo+. I also think that some of SS's gain has been at the expense of FT and possibly DT too. It's not a simple equation.

I have a feeling however that 2012 may well be an extremely turbulent year for our industry. Unless TPTB at Istock can turn their ship around, and quickly, they could have a crisis on their hands before the summer arrives. If sales continue to decline for a few more months then I can't see exclusives sitting on their hands and just accepting it. Istock have been trying to buy themselves time by favouring exclusives in the best match and, if they have any sense, they will attempt to buy more time by reducing RC targets for exclusives __ if their masters allow them to do so. Will Istock impose yet more price increases on their customers? It's going to be interesting.

I have a feeling however that 2012 may well be an extremely turbulent year for our industry. Unless TPTB at Istock can turn their ship around...

Why is the fate of the industry viewed as always being in the hands of istock/getty? istock is not the microstock industry. They're not even the market leader anymore, and really from where I'm sitting, they're hardly even top-5 material.

Frankly I couldn't care less about istock right now or how they'll fare in 2012. This month istock is on pace to represent around 7% of my total microstock earnings, and that number is falling regularly. They're pretty much insignificant to me at this point, as long as they're on this rapid downhill slide. SS is killing it as usual, on pace for back-to-back BMEs. GraphicRiver is surging like crazy. I've already earned double what I earned in November, way past a BME and we're just halfway through December. DT is looking good. GL also, and Veer. Those are the companies I care about and will be watching for growth from in 2012. They are the microstock industry right now, at least from my point of view.

istock can fall apart completely as far as I'm concerned. And I know it gets under the skin of exclusives to hear us independents hoping for the collapse of that company, but I find nothing wrong with hoping for continued growth from companies that seem to be able to still do it right these days, even if it's at the expense of istock or any other company on the decline.

If istock rallies and makes a comeback, great. I'm still uploading (occasionally) there. I'd love to see things pick up and earn something for the time spent. But right now, on the trajectory they seem to be on, I don't see that happening, and I'd be fine with watching them sink into the abyss. That's the benefit of being independent. I have no reason to care if one company sinks because there are always others rising.

No one company is the microstock industry, and no one company dictates where we go from here. Not istock, not SS, not anyone. I'll be watching things closely in 2012, just like everyone else. But istock will probably be the least of my concerns. Well, almost the least anyway. Cutcaster wins that distinction. I think time is just about up for that one.

And I know it gets under the skin of exclusives to hear us independents hoping for the collapse of that company, but I find nothing wrong with hoping for continued growth from companies that seem to be able to still do it right these days, even if it's at the expense of istock or any other company on the decline.

It doesn't get under my skin. I can see exactly why you feel the way you do. I imagine many exclusives feel the way I do, we  aren't all woo-yayers!

I have done very well at IS, I'm convinced I've made far more as an exclusive than I would have done as an independent, based on the information given by independents  in this forum. They don't owe me anything, and I feel I can cut them some slack for a while.
 
However, it is business, and what happens over the next few months will decide my future course. It will be interesting.

Quote from: RT on December 15, 2011, 12:20

I'm in the same boat as Yuri and many others, the sales lost from iStockphoto to Shutterstock has meant less commission in my pocket.

I'm not really finding that. The increase in my SS earnings, mainly through a huge increase in OD sales, has almost exactly compensated for what I've lost at IS. Over the last couple of years they have simply swapped around from 25/40% of earnings respectively before to 40/25% now. Of course we lost money at IS from the commission cuts but then have been compensated by Photo+. I also think that some of SS's gain has been at the expense of FT and possibly DT too. It's not a simple equation.

But in the November sales thread you said:

On IS last month my average sale was $1.73 and on SS it was $0.62. However I sold 4.5x more images on SS so I made a lot more money there.

So taken as an average, every sale you lose from iS to SS costs you $1.11 in lower commission.

Quote from: gostwyck on December 04, 2011, 05:38

On IS last month my average sale was $1.73 and on SS it was $0.62. However I sold 4.5x more images on SS so I made a lot more money there.

So taken as an average, every sale you lose from iS to SS costs you $1.11 in lower commission.

Subs are obviously not the same market as IS single image sales and never have been. With OD/EL sales my average commission at SS is $2.84 __ so on that basis every 'single image' sale that is transferred from IS to SS gains me $1.11. Just depends how you like your statistics served up.

Funnily enough the customer (for single image sales) is paying almost exactly the same average of $9.60 for my images on each site. The difference to me is that SS is paying me 30% of their money and IS only 18%.

Quote from: gostwyck on December 15, 2011, 12:58

I have a feeling however that 2012 may well be an extremely turbulent year for our industry. Unless TPTB at Istock can turn their ship around...

Why is the fate of the industry viewed as always being in the hands of istock/getty? istock is not the microstock industry. They're not even the market leader anymore, and really from where I'm sitting, they're hardly even top-5 material.

Frankly I couldn't care less about istock right now or how they'll fare in 2012. This month istock is on pace to represent around 7% of my total microstock earnings, and that number is falling regularly. They're pretty much insignificant to me at this point

This is why I did not quote your sales.  I quoted the best selling independent contributor.  I can find you smaller istock contributors that had BME last month.  I notice you do not equate their success as istock is doing great.  Therefore, if there is no istock then everybody is selling the same product in different bottles.  How long before buyers realise and go to the cheapest bottler.  It's business 101,  they don't even have to drive to get the product.