Author Topic: Istock F5 epic fail (Read 268196 times)

alias · « **Reply #675 on:** January 26, 2011, 14:48 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 26, 2011, 01:54

Getty may be happy to steal $20 sales from iStock and turn them into $2 Thinkstock sales, which is a net gain for Getty, but the owners are likely to side with iStock in seeing it as a net loss.

Probably total spend > price per image especially now.

Minimum spend at IS is $18.50. Minimum spend at Thinkstock is $59.

IS sell 120 credits at $175 or 300 credits at $430. 1 month sub at Thinkstock = $299. Looks like a deal. Monthly subscription clients may spend more on average.

Though Shutterstock looks like better value at $249 for similar plan.

Ploink · « **Reply #676 on:** January 26, 2011, 16:27 »

Ladies and gentlemen - we proudly present: The partner program fiasco:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=296742&page=1

jamirae · « **Reply #677 on:** January 26, 2011, 16:37 »

Quote from: Ploink on January 26, 2011, 16:27

Ladies and gentlemen - we proudly present: The partner program fiasco:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=296742&page=1

the continuing saga! (so glad I never opted in to that thing)

tundraphoto · « **Reply #678 on:** January 26, 2011, 16:56 »

Quote from: Ploink on January 26, 2011, 16:27

Ladies and gentlemen - we proudly present: The partner program fiasco:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=296742&page=1

Wow, it seems the only thing right now that's "sustainable" over there is the continuing development of coding errors and payment delays!

lisafx · « **Reply #679 on:** January 26, 2011, 17:05 »

Quote from: Ploink on January 26, 2011, 16:27

Ladies and gentlemen - we proudly present: The partner program fiasco:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=296742&page=1

To quote Andrew (Rogermexico): Any December royalties already paid out to should have been based on the royalty percentage you had at the time - your canister level then. We've had discrepancies in the first few days that have already been paid, where people were paid a lower rate based on their current (post Jan 11) iStock royalty percentage - we are tracking those down and will correct them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this the first time an admin has said that PP subscription royalties will now be based on Istock RC percentages rather than canisters? Seems like a pretty big deal to just add as a side note in a thread about technical glitches.

jamirae · « **Reply #680 on:** January 26, 2011, 19:06 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 26, 2011, 17:05

Quote from: Ploink on January 26, 2011, 16:27
Ladies and gentlemen - we proudly present: The partner program fiasco:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=296742&page=1

To quote Andrew (Rogermexico): Any December royalties already paid out to should have been based on the royalty percentage you had at the time - your canister level then. We've had discrepancies in the first few days that have already been paid, where people were paid a lower rate based on their current (post Jan 11) iStock royalty percentage - we are tracking those down and will correct them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this the first time an admin has said that PP subscription royalties will now be based on Istock RC percentages rather than canisters? Seems like a pretty big deal to just add as a side note in a thread about technical glitches.

I am not in the PP but just assumed that whatever your royalty percentage is, that's what your PP royalty is. So why wouldn't it change then with the upheaval and switch to RC royalty calculation? or did they specifically say the PP would be based on canisters still or did they just never say? (until now, of course)

not trying to emphasize one over the other, just wondering.

ShadySue · « **Reply #681 on:** January 26, 2011, 19:16 »

Quote from: jamirae on January 26, 2011, 19:06

Quote from: lisafx on January 26, 2011, 17:05
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this the first time an admin has said that PP subscription royalties will now be based on Istock RC percentages rather than canisters? Seems like a pretty big deal to just add as a side note in a thread about technical glitches.
I am not in the PP but just assumed that whatever your royalty percentage is, that's what your PP royalty is. So why wouldn't it change then with the upheaval and switch to RC royalty calculation? or did they specifically say the PP would be based on canisters still or did they just never say? (until now, of course)

The thing is that they don't count PP downloads towards your iStock RCs because "they're not iStock downloads", and now, apparently unannounced, they're using your iStock downloads to calculate your PP cents-per-download. Previously, if exclusive, the cents-per-download was based on your canister.
AKA having their cake and eating it.

jamirae · « **Reply #682 on:** January 27, 2011, 10:47 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 26, 2011, 19:16

Quote from: jamirae on January 26, 2011, 19:06
Quote from: lisafx on January 26, 2011, 17:05
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this the first time an admin has said that PP subscription royalties will now be based on Istock RC percentages rather than canisters? Seems like a pretty big deal to just add as a side note in a thread about technical glitches.
I am not in the PP but just assumed that whatever your royalty percentage is, that's what your PP royalty is. So why wouldn't it change then with the upheaval and switch to RC royalty calculation? or did they specifically say the PP would be based on canisters still or did they just never say? (until now, of course)
The thing is that they don't count PP downloads towards your iStock RCs because "they're not iStock downloads", and now, apparently unannounced, they're using your iStock downloads to calculate your PP cents-per-download. Previously, if exclusivw, the cents-per-download was based on your canister.
AKA having their cake and eating it.

ah yes. And it appears that it never has been a "fair" deal in the first place since the PP downloads also never counted towards your canister either, correct? so they are just continuing the shite-storm on contributors.

Allsa · « **Reply #683 on:** January 27, 2011, 11:38 »

I just have to wonder how long this mess will go on before iStock implodes or falls apart completely. I can't understand how they've managed to stay in business this long! Getty is taking a serious gamble here. And I hate them.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #684 on:** January 28, 2011, 14:14 »

I had understood that they specifically excluded the partner program from having any connection with the new levels. I can't remember why I thought that, but I was quite convinced of it.

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #685 on:** January 29, 2011, 04:42 »

This post, part of a far longer one in the 'Should we upload or not?' thread, was allowed to remain far longer than normal but has now , not surprisingly, been removed. The last line is a killer! (posted by borchee, who was the OP)

I believe there should always be 2 priorities: for customers...so that they can buy images and for contributors to get fair treatment and fair competition.
I don't give a fffff about missing left column, missing portfolio link, 2010 payout callendar...

This double canister ignorance is insulting. It started AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MONTH and still nothing. I have more than 20 images infected (and 20 more from Christmas). I have 100 more images to upload. Was carefully planning when to upload. Working whole autumn and winter. My only income is from iStock. Some files are getting buried. Competition is not fair. Some are searchable some are not. You can not even suggest me to stop uploading. Do you guys have a single deadline? If not...I know you have some experiences how long something takes from the phase 'we are looking into' -> 'they are working on it' to 'finally fixed'? Just say something, please. Something true.

Thanks for all the royalties... but It's not fair. I'm tired of this crap and I hate you.

gostwyck · « **Reply #686 on:** January 29, 2011, 08:37 »

^^^ That post has not been removed or the thread locked (at least at the moment). It's here;

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=296062&page=4

caspixel · « **Reply #687 on:** January 29, 2011, 10:09 »

What is with this double canister bug? Was this part of the "fix" that they rolled out a week or so ago? I see the "newly reported problems" list keeps getting longer. Heads really should be rolling over there.

ShadySue · « **Reply #688 on:** January 31, 2011, 09:04 »

NO search results at all via FF and Chrome:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=298222&page=1
Also 'view portfolio' not working.
Plus I've just tried 'horse' on IE and got nothing.
Added: working again, so 'only' about half an hour down.

Graffoto · « **Reply #689 on:** January 31, 2011, 09:47 »

Seems to be back up now.

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #690 on:** January 31, 2011, 10:05 »

But with portfolio's backdated to 2 days ago so my new images have now disappeared

helix7 · « **Reply #691 on:** January 31, 2011, 10:23 »

"iStockphoto: Still the #1 Microstock Agency (in site bugginess)"

jamirae · « **Reply #692 on:** January 31, 2011, 10:52 »

Quote from: helix7 on January 31, 2011, 10:23

"iStockphoto: Still the #1 Microstock Agency (in site bugginess)"

seriously. this is really getting out of control. just when I thought things were starting to settle down and work as they are supposed to.

lisafx · « **Reply #693 on:** January 31, 2011, 14:31 »

Quote from: jamirae on January 31, 2011, 10:52

just when I thought things were starting to settle down and work as they are supposed to.

That was your first mistake

jamirae · « **Reply #694 on:** January 31, 2011, 15:19 »

Quote from: lisafx on January 31, 2011, 14:31

Quote from: jamirae on January 31, 2011, 10:52
just when I thought things were starting to settle down and work as they are supposed to.

That was your first mistake

*sigh*

you got that right.

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #695 on:** January 31, 2011, 15:24 »

I'm thinking about contacting Warren Hellman to ask if he knows that a bunch of fools are running his company.

Equus · « **Reply #696 on:** January 31, 2011, 15:50 »

I thought it was his instructions that were causing the problems. More profit, squeeze everybody.

ShadySue · « **Reply #697 on:** January 31, 2011, 16:06 »

Quote from: Equus on January 31, 2011, 15:50

I thought it was his instructions that were causing the problems. More profit, squeeze everybody.

That's what I'm assuming, though either Kelly or JJ said not.

Graffoto · « **Reply #698 on:** January 31, 2011, 16:43 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 31, 2011, 16:06

Quote from: Equus on January 31, 2011, 15:50
I thought it was his instructions that were causing the problems. More profit, squeeze everybody.
That's what I'm assuming, though either Kelly or JJ said not.

What else are they going to say?
I have been lied to right to my face by corporate leaders in the past.
Different business same tactics.

I now take anything said by TPTB with a large grain of salt.

ShadySue · « **Reply #699 on:** January 31, 2011, 17:06 »

Quote from: nosaya on January 31, 2011, 16:43

Quote from: ShadySue on January 31, 2011, 16:06
Quote from: Equus on January 31, 2011, 15:50
I thought it was his instructions that were causing the problems. More profit, squeeze everybody.
That's what I'm assuming, though either Kelly or JJ said not.

What else are they going to say?
I have been lied to right to my face by corporate leaders in the past.
Different business same tactics.

I now take anything said by TPTB with a large grain of salt.

Absolutely; but it did seem odd that they were shouldering the blame when they could have said nothing.
But like you say, large grain of salt with everything.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Istock F5 epic fail (Read 268196 times)

alias

Ploink

jamirae

tundraphoto

lisafx

jamirae

ShadySue

jamirae

Allsa

BaldricksTrousers

vlad_the_imp

gostwyck

caspixel

ShadySue

Graffoto

vlad_the_imp

helix7

jamirae

lisafx

jamirae

vlad_the_imp

Equus

ShadySue

Graffoto

ShadySue

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors