MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

How Much Has Your Income Dropped On iStock Since The Peak In 2012?

My iStock income hasn't dropped at all and I am an indepdendent
38 (18.4%)
My iStock income hasn't dropped at all and I am exclusive with iStock
4 (1.9%)
My iStock income has dropped by about 20% and I am an indepdendent
19 (9.2%)
My iStock income has dropped by about 20% and I am exclusive with iStock
11 (5.3%)
My iStock income has dropped by 50% or more and I am an indepdendent
56 (27.1%)
My iStock income has dropped by 50% or more and I am exclusive with iStock
32 (15.5%)
My iStock income is only about 20% left of what it was before and I am an indepdendent
5 (2.4%)
My iStock income is only about 20% left of what it was before and I am exclusive with iStock
8 (3.9%)
My iStock income is less than 20% of what it was before and I am an indepdendent
15 (7.2%)
My iStock income is less than 20% of what it was before and I am exclusive with iStock
8 (3.9%)
My iStock income has increased by 10% or more and I am an indepdendent
8 (3.9%)
My iStock income has increased by 10% or more and I am exclusive with iStock
3 (1.4%)

Total Members Voted: 200

Author Topic: How Much Has Your Income Dropped On iStock Since The Peak In 2012? - Poll!  (Read 22559 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: June 07, 2016, 06:48 »
0
So far looks like the extreme drops have hit both indies and exclusives pretty hard.

True, but what is very interesting so far (as of this moment) is that 6 indies have voted to say that they have seen no drop in income at all (which is amazing in itself) whereas not one exclusive has voted to say they have had no drop in income.

So far, every exclusive who has voted has had some sort of drop in income and I think we can assume that exclusives are also more inclined to add new content to the site on a regular basis versus independents who may not upload to iStock as regularly since they are presumably contributing to multiple sites and less focused on iStock itself than exclusives are.

The one thing I can say is that if things were the way they should be for exclusives, then shouldn't those 2 figures actually be in complete reverse?

Some may have started doing video to offset image income declines.  So while they may have serious declines in images, they make it up with video.  Just a theory.

I am an example of this. Exclusive on both stills and video. Last month was my BME (previous one was March 2016) on total iStock income. I am submitting more video since last 2 years. The GI income from mirrored stills/videos is balancing and even improving a lot recently.

We're talking about 4-digit numbers by the way. Just to give you an impression.

Thank you for the data. Two questions please:

1 - What year did you first start uploading to iStock as an exclusive? Was it around 2010?
2 - Have you continued to upload regularly since you became exclusive with iStock?

1- Yes, I started in January 2010.
2- Yes, I am not the biggest uploader but I can say that it's been regular without any long breaks.

Great, thank you. So it is really the GI sales from both stills and video you feel which has increased your income and provided the BME recently?

Also, have you seen an overall drop in income though on stills on the iStock site since 2012?


« Reply #76 on: June 07, 2016, 07:23 »
0
So far looks like the extreme drops have hit both indies and exclusives pretty hard.

True, but what is very interesting so far (as of this moment) is that 6 indies have voted to say that they have seen no drop in income at all (which is amazing in itself) whereas not one exclusive has voted to say they have had no drop in income.

So far, every exclusive who has voted has had some sort of drop in income and I think we can assume that exclusives are also more inclined to add new content to the site on a regular basis versus independents who may not upload to iStock as regularly since they are presumably contributing to multiple sites and less focused on iStock itself than exclusives are.

The one thing I can say is that if things were the way they should be for exclusives, then shouldn't those 2 figures actually be in complete reverse?

Some may have started doing video to offset image income declines.  So while they may have serious declines in images, they make it up with video.  Just a theory.

I am an example of this. Exclusive on both stills and video. Last month was my BME (previous one was March 2016) on total iStock income. I am submitting more video since last 2 years. The GI income from mirrored stills/videos is balancing and even improving a lot recently.

We're talking about 4-digit numbers by the way. Just to give you an impression.

Thank you for the data. Two questions please:

1 - What year did you first start uploading to iStock as an exclusive? Was it around 2010?
2 - Have you continued to upload regularly since you became exclusive with iStock?

1- Yes, I started in January 2010.
2- Yes, I am not the biggest uploader but I can say that it's been regular without any long breaks.

Great, thank you. So it is really the GI sales from both stills and video you feel which has increased your income and provided the BME recently?

Also, have you seen an overall drop in income though on stills on the iStock site since 2012?

Yes, GI income (stills + video) and regular video sales is helping at the moment. There is definitely a drop on stills side since 2012. Both number of downloads and $ per download.

« Reply #77 on: June 07, 2016, 16:08 »
+1
So far looks like the extreme drops have hit both indies and exclusives pretty hard.

True, but what is very interesting so far (as of this moment) is that 6 indies have voted to say that they have seen no drop in income at all (which is amazing in itself) whereas not one exclusive has voted to say they have had no drop in income.

So far, every exclusive who has voted has had some sort of drop in income and I think we can assume that exclusives are also more inclined to add new content to the site on a regular basis versus independents who may not upload to iStock as regularly since they are presumably contributing to multiple sites and less focused on iStock itself than exclusives are.

The one thing I can say is that if things were the way they should be for exclusives, then shouldn't those 2 figures actually be in complete reverse?

Some may have started doing video to offset image income declines.  So while they may have serious declines in images, they make it up with video.  Just a theory.

I am an example of this. Exclusive on both stills and video. Last month was my BME (previous one was March 2016) on total iStock income. I am submitting more video since last 2 years. The GI income from mirrored stills/videos is balancing and even improving a lot recently.

We're talking about 4-digit numbers by the way. Just to give you an impression.

Thank you for the data. Two questions please:

1 - What year did you first start uploading to iStock as an exclusive? Was it around 2010?
2 - Have you continued to upload regularly since you became exclusive with iStock?

1- Yes, I started in January 2010.
2- Yes, I am not the biggest uploader but I can say that it's been regular without any long breaks.

Great, thank you. So it is really the GI sales from both stills and video you feel which has increased your income and provided the BME recently?

Also, have you seen an overall drop in income though on stills on the iStock site since 2012?

Yes, GI income (stills + video) and regular video sales is helping at the moment. There is definitely a drop on stills side since 2012. Both number of downloads and $ per download.

Great, glad to hear you are still doing so well. And thank you for kindly sharing all that information with us.

« Reply #78 on: July 28, 2016, 11:01 »
+4
why you dont put some other choices like 80% ? my istock revenue 80% dropped On iStock Since The Peak In 2012 due to vary bad and very cheap subsciption plans... yes, that is so true and bite fact... and I am still exclusive too... I am amazed that why Istock contributors doesnt show enough counter reaction to ... or boycott, strike or something like... are everybody happy to lose?
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 12:46 by madman »

« Reply #79 on: July 28, 2016, 16:20 »
+3
This much - actual rpi in blue, flattened trend in 6 month blocks in red

« Reply #80 on: July 29, 2016, 04:10 »
+2
my monthly revenue constatnly decreasing for past 3 years although increasing portfolio 6 times more ... in july, I've passed one level more, my july revenue down 40% compared to last month, it seems really never and never end recession trend on istock, really.... istock heads doesnt make any improvement for this, what about you guys? Why we aren't doing anything? why we can't react... ???

« Reply #81 on: July 29, 2016, 04:32 »
0
my monthly revenue constatnly decreasing for past 3 years although increasing portfolio 6 times more ...

Are you iStock exclusive or independent?

« Reply #82 on: July 29, 2016, 05:50 »
0
my monthly revenue constatnly decreasing for past 3 years although increasing portfolio 6 times more ...

Are you iStock exclusive or independent?

exclusive.

« Reply #83 on: July 29, 2016, 12:30 »
+3
normal image prices are too expensive, 3 credits $33, who pay with this so expensive price for one image? on the other hand, our images selling by "almost no price" under the name that subscription plan... quality of images has been so down since 3 years, everywhere fully covered garbage, they will accept when I take my ... photo also... I totally see it as a big disgrace...

« Reply #84 on: July 29, 2016, 14:20 »
+6

My iStock income is now about 1/10th of what it was a few years ago. And falling still.

They pushed too far with pricing. $10 per image has always been the sweet spot for single on-demand images. iStock seems to have wanted to venture into the midstock model and get up to $50 per image. Obviously $33 is even too high a price, the market just won't bear it.

People here (myself included) have said for years that iStock could rebound if they just reverted back to sensible pricing and a simple purchasing system. But their stubbornness will never let them do that, so the decline will continue.

gyllens

« Reply #85 on: July 30, 2016, 00:32 »
+5
Close to Black-Diamond here and independent since 2005 down 50% if not a bit more. I strongly believe Getty is doing its very best to keep IS down. They bought it and mismanaged it.

« Reply #86 on: July 30, 2016, 05:02 »
0
 they are doing everything to destroy the istock ... they make it very well.  >:(

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #87 on: July 30, 2016, 05:15 »
0
This much - actual rpi in blue, flattened trend in 6 month blocks in red

Did something big/bad happen in November/December 2012? I was on a couple of sites back then, but not iStock.

« Reply #88 on: July 30, 2016, 05:37 »
+1
This much - actual rpi in blue, flattened trend in 6 month blocks in red

Did something big/bad happen in November/December 2012? I was on a couple of sites back then, but not iStock.
The bad thing happened in 2006 when Getty bought istock.  It took them a couple of years to start ruining istock but since 2008, it has been one bad thing after another.  No idea what happened in 2012, I had gone past caring by then.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #89 on: July 30, 2016, 05:43 »
+1
In Oct 2012, the best match changed so that it was difficult for new files to get traction. For some reason, that has more or less continued through various best match iterations until now with credit sales, not so for subs, apparently.

« Reply #90 on: July 30, 2016, 06:01 »
0
they must be lowering credit sale prices to make improvement for sales, one image sell for $33 for many years, this is a ridiculous logic... at least prices must be 1-2-3 credits by size, but not, because they coluldnt destroy istock completely....  >:(

what about collect our signatures and give our demands to istock heads? Let's make a topic about it?
« Last Edit: July 30, 2016, 09:23 by madman »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #91 on: July 30, 2016, 11:11 »
+2
they must be lowering credit sale prices to make improvement for sales, one image sell for $33 for many years, this is a ridiculous logic... at least prices must be 1-2-3 credits by size, but not, because they coluldnt destroy istock completely....  >:(

what about collect our signatures and give our demands to istock heads? Let's make a topic about it?

First of all, you'd need to get everyone to agree on the same demands.
Secondly, they'd just say 'take it or leave it', knowing enough people would stay, especially now that SS are apparently now on the same sticky slope.

gyllens

« Reply #92 on: July 30, 2016, 11:43 »
+2
Yes if there was a poll about SS right now I bet most replies would probably be the same.

« Reply #93 on: July 31, 2016, 00:55 »
0
50% down, portfolio 100% bigger. Credit sales are a trickle

« Reply #94 on: August 02, 2016, 05:47 »
0
they must be lowering credit sale prices to make improvement for sales, one image sell for $33 for many years, this is a ridiculous logic... at least prices must be 1-2-3 credits by size, but not, because they coluldnt destroy istock completely....  >:(

what about collect our signatures and give our demands to istock heads? Let's make a topic about it?

First of all, you'd need to get everyone to agree on the same demands.
Secondly, they'd just say 'take it or leave it', knowing enough people would stay, especially now that SS are apparently now on the same sticky slope.

how bad we couldnt control prices of our own products on everywhere... someone wins and we are loose everytime... I think there must be "microstock trade unions" to protect and defend our rights.. am I right? please ... I'd love to get your feedback... we have a saying there, "baby cant get nipples if dont cry"  so I want to ask all the complainant microstockers, how we announce our voices to make a call to our rights?
« Last Edit: August 02, 2016, 05:59 by madman »

« Reply #95 on: August 03, 2016, 15:38 »
+1
who cares...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
43 Replies
11155 Views
Last post May 18, 2012, 17:50
by djpadavona
36 Replies
11364 Views
Last post September 08, 2012, 18:25
by luissantos84
3 Replies
2121 Views
Last post March 20, 2013, 03:26
by gillian vann
13 Replies
5801 Views
Last post June 07, 2016, 06:43
by Anyka
15 Replies
6067 Views
Last post October 24, 2020, 04:03
by Free_Soul

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle