I suspect that the Exclusivity programme has proved far more popular than they ever expected. It wasn't until multimedia.de's chart came out that I was aware that 80%+ of contributors of Gold and above were exclusive __ staggering really. There seems to be such an overwhelming desire for Exclusive status that maybe they feel they don't need to try too hard.

Istock do appear to be treating the lower canister levels with a certain distain. They probably cost a little more in terms of admin, relative to the income they produce, and reducing their commission is one way of clawing that back. They've been quite frank that they are targetting Diamond level independents with this latest move.

As has been mooted before this all may be part of H&F's exit strategy. This may be the last time that Istock can impose such a huge increase in prices (without frightening away the buyers) and the exponential growth that they've enjoyed for so many years must begin to flatten out sooner or later. I wouldn't be surprised to see Istock sold on sometime next year.

I agree with Avril.  These changes will definitely hit lower level canisters the hardest.  A pretty clear sign that IS wants to raise the barriers to entry, both to the site in general, and especially to the higher, better paying levels.

Gostwyck and Sharpshot also make a really good point about this looking like an exit strategy.  H&F pumping up the short term revenues to make the whole thing look more attractive to prospective buyers. 

It's very hard to know for sure if this is more about attracting diamond independents (a long term strategy) or pumping up cash flow to sell (short term strategy).  I certainly hope it is the former since that would make exclusivity a much more appealing prospect.

 

In a effort to try and sound less biased than I am, is that bad to discourage a few photographers? 500 dls can take a while but does prove a certain commitment. Besides all that, going exclusive is a poor move, IMO.

Not in my book.  I think some more barriers to entry are a good idea, and 500 dls is not unreasonable if you are serious about what you are doing.

I think the ones who are getting the worst deal are the silvers and golds who are not on the verge of the next cannister.  They have already proven their commitment.

Quote from: Zeus on December 12, 2009, 11:50

In a effort to try and sound less biased than I am, is that bad to discourage a few photographers? 500 dls can take a while but does prove a certain commitment. Besides all that, going exclusive is a poor move, IMO.

I think the ones who are getting the worst deal are the silvers and golds who are not on the verge of the next cannister.  They have already proven their commitment.

Thanks for saying that; I've been thinking the same thing.

And I think that may be proven true when they come back with their revised plan. I suspect those who are not on the verge of the next cannister will be the ones left out in the cold. I hope I'm wrong.

I wonder if istock will be sold separately or combined with Getty?

I do not think they will break it up. IS is the bit which isn't losing money but it is also the model for how the rest of the business can be run at low cost. The contributors do all the work, the keywording etc. Even the QC. The job isn't finished until the IS model has more or less replaced much of what was Getty.

As they evolve the various collections I think IS will gradually replace all of Getty's RF business. The Vetta content is as innovative in many cases as anything on the creative side at the main Getty site. It's often kind of indy and hip. A bit like much of Flickr. Or else just very high quality. Perhaps Vetta and future collections will move under the Getty branding later. The Getty brand has gravitas. So they have to merge the IS economic model with the Getty branding. Different IS collections make sense.

RM is more complicated because those deals involve more human intervention. Most editorial can be RF which is cheaper to administer.

In the past Getty was criticized for paying very low royalties. The amounts paid to IS diamonds are huge by comparison. But clever tuning of the best match and prices etc would allow them to seem to continue to pay a higher percentage. In theory. It's a model now which can be carefully tuned. It might be better to not be a diamond down the road. You might be looking at a greater percentage of less volume.

Microstock posed a threat to them so they bought it. The only thing which will pose a threat to them again will be a completely different distribution model which they cannot buy. I've been around stock since before Getty existed. At every stage they have paid photographers less of a wedge. But the photographers have made it up on volume. It's a mixed bag with Getty.

In the past Getty was criticized for paying very low royalties. The amounts paid to IS diamonds are huge by comparison. But clever tuning of the best match and prices etc would allow them to seem to continue to pay a higher percentage. In theory. It's a model now which can be carefully tuned. It might be better to not be a diamond down the road. You might be looking at a greater percentage of less volume.

Yikes!  I can't believe this scenario never occurred to me, but it does make sense. 

If Getty really wants to maximize profits, they can push the bronze and silver content to the front since their margins are so much better on those images.

But how much of a drop in exposure will top exclusives tolerate?  I am guessing not much.  Wouldn't they bolt and start uploading their lucrative portfolios to the competition?

My head is starting to hurt from looking at all the possible outcomes here...

I don't think it is that difficult to reach 500 downloads.  I don't see why some people are so desperate to go exclsuive. 

I'm not in any way talented, so for me it's way hard to reach 500 (about 190 now). I must admit I abandoned IS for a while, silly me. At some point in the future, when I have about 1000 decent images, I would like to go exclusive somewhere.

In the long run I think IStock is shooting themselves in the foot, by making it ever harder for new contributors.  

I live near the Mall of America so I'm an expert in retail    from watching the stores come and go.  There's pattern.  A new store has at least some interesting stuff you don't see elsewehere. After a year or two, the unusual stuff disappears as they refocus on the 80% that makes the real money.  Gradually the store becomes more and more generic, until its identity is lost. Then it folds, and you don't even notice its gone because you lost interest in it long ago.

IS is trying to reward the contributors that make the big sales and put the newbies and wannabes over the side.   They might as well hang a "Not Hiring" sign on the door.

It works for a while, but it's a mortgage on the future.  What happens when all these big number exclusives are old and gray and their stuff is dated?   Oh wait, on the web, there is no 'future' beyond a year from today.  

Quote from: alias on December 12, 2009, 14:33

In the past Getty was criticized for paying very low royalties. The amounts paid to IS diamonds are huge by comparison. But clever tuning of the best match and prices etc would allow them to seem to continue to pay a higher percentage. In theory. It's a model now which can be carefully tuned. It might be better to not be a diamond down the road. You might be looking at a greater percentage of less volume.

Yikes!  I can't believe this scenario never occurred to me, but it does make sense. 

If Getty really wants to maximize profits, they can push the bronze and silver content to the front since their margins are so much better on those images.

But how much of a drop in exposure will top exclusives tolerate?  I am guessing not much.  Wouldn't they bolt and start uploading their lucrative portfolios to the competition?

My head is starting to hurt from looking at all the possible outcomes here...

Making a wild assumption that the game plan is already laid out, I would assume that, like a predator targeting the weak, young or sick, you first squeeze the lower level exclusives.

You don't do much to target independents (because they have choices) but you do take the price drop (XL sizes and up) out of their hide so you can say to buyers that you've dropped some prices without making your upset exclusives shoulder that burden.

Once you've pushed that phase of the plan through you target squeezing the diamond exclusives 'cause that's who you're paying the most money to. Your success in the first part of the plan makes it easier to pull off - they won't like it but only some will become independent.

Fotolia'd perhaps still have that level playing field program so they could become emeralds or rubies or whatever there. SS probably wouldn't offer any incentives but with the easy FTP uploads and large bumps for new content I'll bet it wouldn't take long for a former exclusive diamond to get the higher SS commission levels.

If you lose too many diamond exclusives perhaps you ease the upload restrictions on diamond independents a bit 'cause there are lots of images that never make it to iStock that are perfectly saleable. As long as you have some exclusive content you hope to have the marketing edge. And Vetta's the lure to many - open only to exclusives - which should keep a new thread of exclusive content coming in.

I think in the long run they'll try to push all the royalties down toward 20% if they can. May take several steps to get there.

When I was explaining the gossip about Mayonnaise HQ packaging Getty up for sale so they could get their money out to my husband, his comment (regarding my angst over not turning diamond at 25K downloads next year) was "You're screwed".

Whoever suggested that Corbis buy iStock should bite their tongue. I can't imagine anything worse - I don't think Corbis gets microstock and having another owner that doesn't get it sounds painful.

I don't think IS is closing the door..  Rather raising the bar a tad.

If you look at some of the stuff that appears in the newest uploads thing on the home page you'll see there is a lot of errr, junk, that gets in.  Imagine how much of that doesn't get in?

Make it harder for newb's to get to higher upload limits and you reduce the overhead of having to teach them.

The microstock industry I think is suffering from the headache it's own early advertising caused 'Sell your photos, make money'.  IS is raising the bar rather than buying more aspirin.

I am concerned what the latest changes mean for me as a non-exclusive Silver with a pretty average port.  But I'm not going to loose sleep over it, as I've got my eggs in 5 baskets...

Cheers, Me.

Right now, at 500, there is no acceptance requirement.  Apparently, the new rule next year will be over 500 and over 50%.

Latest developments regarding 'logo' on iStock made very interesting consequences with many designers became former buyers there. They went to other places as Dreamstime or Shutterstock and similar.
Closing the door is only what iStock can do now because they need to protect their own interest and lower on-site competition. That is why bar is rising.
Their inspectors which are also contributors with many images and many downloads have some earnings which must be persistant and even grow. So, why would they allow some new competition? They are fine with their number and their products. The question is for how long it will last?