Author Topic: iStock fails to recover ground (Read 64994 times)

Cogent Marketing · « **on:** November 16, 2011, 15:17 »

Site analytic's most recent update - apologies if this is shown somewhere else...

IS in trouble.

http://siteanalytics.compete.com/istockphoto.com/

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #1 on:** November 16, 2011, 15:21 »

Funny how the IS graph states there is no competitor information to show, there is, it's here.....

gostwyck · « **Reply #2 on:** November 16, 2011, 15:37 »

Come on __ keep up! We've been discussing those graphs for the last couple of days on this thread;

http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/istock-raises-prices-for-some-e-files-and-video/msg227753/?topicseen#new

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #3 on:** November 16, 2011, 15:42 »

Thanks gostwyck for your usual ignorant response. I had to log out to read your response because like so many other members here I have you on ignore as well. Take a guess why

That'll be 30 seconds I'll never get back again.

Perhaps if you were not so trigger happy with your smart rebukes (as well as being a complete recognised knob) you'll have seen my text stating apologies if this has been mentioned before.

EDIT: and for the record look down three to see nruboc's response.

lagereek · « **Reply #4 on:** November 16, 2011, 15:48 »

Well I knew via a few "insiders" the situation was bad but this smells of catastrophy. At this rate I doubt they will be around at all in 2012. Anyhow, what do they care, I mean they have Lobo, right. He will no doubt save the situation.

BTW, dont mind gotswyck, this is his happy-hour, after a few shots he gets sour.

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #5 on:** November 16, 2011, 15:56 »

Quote from: lagereek on November 16, 2011, 15:48

Well I knew via a few "insiders" the situation was bad but this smells of catastrophy. At this rate I doubt they will be around at all in 2012. Anyhow, what do they care, I mean they have Lobo, right. He will no doubt save the situation.

BTW, dont mind gotswyck, this is his happy-hour, after a few shots he gets sour.

I know - hopefully he'll fall asleep. I posted the link from above on the IS site - within ten minutes my forum privileges have been suspended! That has got to be a record, they were only re-introduced following a nine month ban last week and today was my first post, they said, and I quote
"The administration team at iStockphoto has locked your forum privileges. Comments from iStockphoto Administrators (if any):"

Result. PS The discussion topic has been removed. I think their a little touchy. My post is below.

nruboc · « **Reply #6 on:** November 16, 2011, 16:04 »

Thanks for the embedded links, they didn't catch my attention in the other thread.

This chart matches what I'm seeing at ShutterStock, explosive growth, couldn't have happened to a better company. I love watching IStock's demise!!!!!

lagereek · « **Reply #7 on:** November 16, 2011, 16:15 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 16, 2011, 15:56

Quote from: lagereek on November 16, 2011, 15:48
Well I knew via a few "insiders" the situation was bad but this smells of catastrophy. At this rate I doubt they will be around at all in 2012. Anyhow, what do they care, I mean they have Lobo, right. He will no doubt save the situation.

BTW, dont mind gotswyck, this is his happy-hour, after a few shots he gets sour.
I know - hopefully he'll fall asleep. I posted the link from above on the IS site - within ten minutes my forum privileges have been suspended! That has got to be a record, they were only re-introduced following a nine month ban last week and today was my first post, they said, and I quote
"The administration team at iStockphoto has locked your forum privileges. Comments from iStockphoto Administrators (if any):"

Result. PS The discussion topic has been removed. I think their a little touchy. My post is below.

Bloody hell! you posted this in the IS forum? no wonder they exploded, they must have had a major coronary occlusion.

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #8 on:** November 16, 2011, 16:18 »

Quote from: lagereek on November 16, 2011, 16:15

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 16, 2011, 15:56
Quote from: lagereek on November 16, 2011, 15:48
Well I knew via a few "insiders" the situation was bad but this smells of catastrophy. At this rate I doubt they will be around at all in 2012. Anyhow, what do they care, I mean they have Lobo, right. He will no doubt save the situation.

BTW, dont mind gotswyck, this is his happy-hour, after a few shots he gets sour.
I know - hopefully he'll fall asleep. I posted the link from above on the IS site - within ten minutes my forum privileges have been suspended! That has got to be a record, they were only re-introduced following a nine month ban last week and today was my first post, they said, and I quote
"The administration team at iStockphoto has locked your forum privileges. Comments from iStockphoto Administrators (if any):"

Result. PS The discussion topic has been removed. I think their a little touchy. My post is below.

Bloody hell! you posted this in the IS forum? no wonder they exploded, they must have had a major coronary occlusion.

I know. I couldn't resist it. It got three responses before it got flamed (with me). One was from Sean which was really funny, he said "we know there has been some stagnation!!!!!!!" I responded with This is not stagnation. Stagnation is usually a flat line, maybe slightly dipping. I think that was what did it. The END.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #9 on:** November 16, 2011, 16:26 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 16, 2011, 15:56

Quote from: lagereek on November 16, 2011, 15:48
Well I knew via a few "insiders" the situation was bad but this smells of catastrophy. At this rate I doubt they will be around at all in 2012. Anyhow, what do they care, I mean they have Lobo, right. He will no doubt save the situation.

BTW, dont mind gotswyck, this is his happy-hour, after a few shots he gets sour.
I know - hopefully he'll fall asleep. I posted the link from above on the IS site - within ten minutes my forum privileges have been suspended! That has got to be a record, they were only re-introduced following a nine month ban last week and today was my first post, they said, and I quote
"The administration team at iStockphoto has locked your forum privileges. Comments from iStockphoto Administrators (if any):"

Result. PS The discussion topic has been removed. I think their a little touchy. My post is below.

I salute you, sir.

lagereek · « **Reply #10 on:** November 16, 2011, 16:28 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 16, 2011, 16:18

Quote from: lagereek on November 16, 2011, 16:15
Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 16, 2011, 15:56
Quote from: lagereek on November 16, 2011, 15:48
Well I knew via a few "insiders" the situation was bad but this smells of catastrophy. At this rate I doubt they will be around at all in 2012. Anyhow, what do they care, I mean they have Lobo, right. He will no doubt save the situation.

BTW, dont mind gotswyck, this is his happy-hour, after a few shots he gets sour.
I know - hopefully he'll fall asleep. I posted the link from above on the IS site - within ten minutes my forum privileges have been suspended! That has got to be a record, they were only re-introduced following a nine month ban last week and today was my first post, they said, and I quote
"The administration team at iStockphoto has locked your forum privileges. Comments from iStockphoto Administrators (if any):"

Result. PS The discussion topic has been removed. I think their a little touchy. My post is below.

Bloody hell! you posted this in the IS forum? no wonder they exploded, they must have had a major coronary occlusion.
I know. I couldn't resist it. It got three responses before it got flamed (with me). One was from Sean which was really funny, he said "we know there has been some stagnation!!!!!!!" I responded with This is not stagnation. Stagnation is usually a flat line, maybe slightly dipping. I think that was what did it. The END.

Ha, ha, well I say this, you do have some guts, for sure. Anyway, you didnt care did you. Typical polite and wry answer from Sean though. Dont think he cares too much either, by the sound of it.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #11 on:** November 16, 2011, 16:30 »

Well, the graph actually looks better than the monthly report thread over there. I wonder how long it will be before we're told that individuals don't have a broad enough view of the sales position, so the subject shouldn't be discussed.

I'm still waiting to see how TS did in October but, of course, it is verboten even to ask when they think that the stats run might start, by order of Reichsmarshal Lobo (in what is possibly the most stupid forum ruling of all).

Perry · « **Reply #12 on:** November 16, 2011, 16:39 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 16, 2011, 15:56

I posted the link from above on the IS site - within ten minutes my forum privileges have been suspended!

iStock acts like a communist state. "Everything is going fine, don't believe the rumors about the sinking sales, it's capitalist propaganda. Remember, it's not money that is going to make you happy, only work and production is going to make us happy. P.S. If you disagree you will put in jail and tortured."

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #13 on:** November 16, 2011, 16:42 »

lagereek Ha, ha, well I say this, you do have some guts, for sure. Anyway, you didnt care did you. Typical polite and wry answer from Sean though. Dont think he cares too much either, by the sound of it.
[/quote]
I don't really care, but I do have some sympathy for their loyal exclusives being treated like mushrooms. My port on IS is so small it is completely insignificant, me and my company (were) exclusive buyers from IS for about three years solid - I decided to change that about two years ago and now it's DT and SS (occasionally FT). It's their loss too, I actually approved over 1400 image downloads from IS in the first year we were with them (on behalf of clients), but frankly, now, they don't deserve my business and no longer get any.

Above all, nothing gives me (and a few in the office) greater pleasure than taking the **** out of Lobo.

PS- Have you noticed there are no locked threads in the month of November? New IS policy - simply remove the thread. Looks better to the uninitiated?

oboy · « **Reply #14 on:** November 16, 2011, 17:13 »

Here is some competitor information information

nruboc · « **Reply #15 on:** November 16, 2011, 17:17 »

Quote from: oboy on November 16, 2011, 17:13

Here is some competitor information information

I think I'm going to frame this and put it on my wall.

lisafx · « **Reply #16 on:** November 16, 2011, 17:26 »

Thanks for posting that graph Oboy. I haven't figured out how to do comparisons in the same graph on Compete. Would like to see one with Fotolia included.

I'm actually pretty distressed to see the increase in traffic at 123 because it isn't reflected in my sales at all.

I am absolutely shocked to see Istock is on a par with Depositphotos. Did DP even exist a year ago?

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #17 on:** November 16, 2011, 17:40 »

Traffic is a very imprecise indicator of performance. If iS and Deposit Images get the same traffic and sell the same number of images, iS will generate many, many times as much revenue.
123's ranking looks odd to me as well. Of course, unique visitors include buyers and sellers so the spike might be due to sellers as much as it is to buyers. A growth in the number of sellers doesn't favour established suppliers. Some sites seem to favour established artists, others push new material.
Any set of indicators probably fails miserably to represent what different individuals are experiencing because we are all "special cases" in some way or other.

oboy · « **Reply #18 on:** November 16, 2011, 17:48 »

Here it is with Fotolia included

compete use to this function directly on their website, now you have to embed this into website.

Code: [Select]

<a href='http://siteanalytics.compete.com/'><img src='http://grapher.compete.com/shutterstock.com+fotolia.com+istockphoto.com+123rf.com+dreamstime.com_uv.png' /></a>

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #19 on:** November 16, 2011, 17:52 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on November 16, 2011, 17:40

Traffic is a very imprecise indicator of performance. If iS and Deposit Images get the same traffic and sell the same number of images, iS will generate many, many times as much revenue.
123's ranking looks odd to me as well. Of course, unique visitors include buyers and sellers so the spike might be due to sellers as much as it is to buyers. A growth in the number of sellers doesn't favour established suppliers. Some sites seem to favour established artists, others push new material.
Any set of indicators probably fails miserably to represent what different individuals are experiencing because we are all "special cases" in some way or other.

True, but. (there's always a but).

This site is using a level playing field in regard to the criteria they use to measure unique visitors. Therefore as a trending tool it is useful to observe - the trends of 'hits' is what is important, not necessarily the 'value' of what those hits 'create', ie sales/downloads.

Inevitably, if you get fewer and fewer 'hits' does it not follow that in the end you will get fewer and fewer sales? aka your market attraction is diminishing month after month?

lisafx · « **Reply #20 on:** November 16, 2011, 17:54 »

Quote from: oboy on November 16, 2011, 17:48

Here it is with Fotolia included

compete use to this function directly on their website, now you have to embed this into website.

Code: [Select]
<a href='http://siteanalytics.compete.com/'><img src='http://grapher.compete.com/shutterstock.com+fotolia.com+istockphoto.com+123rf.com+dreamstime.com_uv.png' /></a>

Cool. Thanks for the explanation and for including FT

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #21 on:** November 16, 2011, 18:00 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 16, 2011, 17:52

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on November 16, 2011, 17:40
Traffic is a very imprecise indicator of performance. If iS and Deposit Images get the same traffic and sell the same number of images, iS will generate many, many times as much revenue.
123's ranking looks odd to me as well. Of course, unique visitors include buyers and sellers so the spike might be due to sellers as much as it is to buyers. A growth in the number of sellers doesn't favour established suppliers. Some sites seem to favour established artists, others push new material.
Any set of indicators probably fails miserably to represent what different individuals are experiencing because we are all "special cases" in some way or other.
True, but. (there's always a but).

This site is using a level playing field in regard to the criteria they use to measure unique visitors. Therefore as a trending tool it is useful to observe - the trends of 'hits' is what is important, not necessarily the 'value' of what those hits 'create', ie sales/downloads.

Inevitably, if you get fewer and fewer 'hits' does it not follow that in the end you will get fewer and fewer sales? aka your market attraction is diminishing month after month?

Yes, a decline in hits has to be bad news for the company as a general principle. My point wasn't that iStock is not losing market position, it was that 123's stats are not necessarily a reflection of how well suppliers to that site are doing (with reference to Lisa's post). Long term, the growth in 123 traffic has got to result in good things for that site regardless of whether it is mainly from buyers or sellers but right now we may not see that in our own earnings.

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #22 on:** November 16, 2011, 18:08 »

Yes, a decline in hits has to be bad news for the company as a general principle. My point wasn't that iStock is not losing market position, it was that 123's stats are not necessarily a reflection of how well suppliers to that site are doing (with reference to Lisa's post). Long term, the growth in 123 traffic has got to result in good things for that site regardless of whether it is mainly from buyers or sellers but right now we may not see that in our own earnings.
[/quote]

Sorry, I misunderstood your point. I agree with your point now.

KelvinJay has site mailed me stating why my posting of the link to Site Analytics was removed from IS, see below:

Written by "kelvinjay" at 03:50 PM, November 16, 2011:

Hi,

I just moderate the forums and try to keep things on topic and civil. If doing either of those things seems to be beyond you, please feel free not to partake in the forums.

Cheers
Kelvin

I simply pasted the link. Nothing else. What a strange little man....

cobalt · « **Reply #23 on:** November 16, 2011, 18:12 »

The stats wouldn´t worry me at all, if the istock management openly commented on what we see and gave us their own view where istock stands in the general marketplace.

It is the fact that they ignore the subject and apparently ban all discussion about it that makes the problem huge, scary and threatening.

Every exclusive I know is following these statistics. It´s been a major discussion topic for most of the year

Personally, as long as the competitors don´t post how much they pay out to contributors every week, I will assume that the 1.9 Mio that istock pays out every week means that istock is still leading in royalty payouts. I am sure if anyone else came close to the 1 Mio Dollar mark, they would advertise it.

There is a lot of smoke and mirrors in a competitive market. But istock has the power to end the discussion, by either explaining what we see or simply reversing the visible trend.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #24 on:** November 16, 2011, 18:17 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 16, 2011, 18:08

KelvinJay has site mailed me stating why my posting of the link to Site Analytics was removed from IS, see below:

Written by "kelvinjay" at 03:50 PM, November 16, 2011:

Hi,

I just moderate the forums and try to keep things on topic and civil. If doing either of those things seems to be beyond you, please feel free not to partake in the forums.

Cheers
Kelvin

Wow! I doubt if we'll ever discover what was "off topic" or "uncivil" about your posts. Perhaps he meant "sycophantic and supine" rather than "on topic and civil". Some people have trouble expressing themselves clearly.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: iStock fails to recover ground (Read 64994 times)

Cogent Marketing

Cogent Marketing

gostwyck

Cogent Marketing

lagereek

Cogent Marketing

nruboc

lagereek

Cogent Marketing

Noedelhap

lagereek

BaldricksTrousers

Perry

Cogent Marketing

oboy

nruboc

lisafx

BaldricksTrousers

oboy

Cogent Marketing

lisafx

BaldricksTrousers

Cogent Marketing

cobalt

BaldricksTrousers

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors