pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: iStock raises the bar  (Read 33821 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: December 09, 2008, 22:34 »
0
An istock admin has confirmed that the Premier Collection is for istock exclusive contributors only.

Thanks for the information averil ... then this is just a price increase wrapped up in fancy wrapping paper .... if there is nothing being offered for the independents then they are going to continue to lose market share as they have this year .... I am surprised at that ... or maybe not ...


« Reply #51 on: December 09, 2008, 22:39 »
0
Why do you say they are losing market share?

bittersweet

« Reply #52 on: December 09, 2008, 22:51 »
0
if there is nothing being offered for the independents  ...

Do they not benefit from all of the other announcements except the Premier collection??

« Reply #53 on: December 09, 2008, 22:56 »
0
Why do you say they are losing market share?
Alexa, google trends, etc .... I know most/many exclusives quibble with the methodology used but at some point they cannot all be wrong, can they? I mean they all show the same thing .... I am not saying IS does not have the majority of the market (it still clearly does) - I am simply saying that IS's growth has slowed (in fact it may have peaked) whereas the other sites continue on an upward trend - hence it is losing market share ...

« Reply #54 on: December 10, 2008, 01:12 »
0
if there is nothing being offered for the independents  ...

Do they not benefit from all of the other announcements except the Premier collection??

Yeah, i would think so.  Prices are increased across the board, so in that regard everyone benefits.

« Reply #55 on: December 10, 2008, 01:31 »
0
if there is nothing being offered for the independents  ...

Do they not benefit from all of the other announcements except the Premier collection??

Yeah, i would think so.  Prices are increased across the board, so in that regard everyone benefits.

I meant offering nothing to entice independents to at a minimum upload exclusive content to IS (of course price increases will provide higher royalties) - if Istock's best content is way more expensive than equally good content that is available on other microsites then their not offering anything that a buyer cannot get elsewhere ...   

bittersweet

« Reply #56 on: December 10, 2008, 01:34 »
0
Whether you think you can or whether you think you cant, youre right. Henry Ford

DanP68

« Reply #57 on: December 10, 2008, 02:00 »
0
Theme based collections I find very interesting. This caste system of high price collections and sale-priced stuff doesn't do much for me.


I agree JoAnn.  More importantly it puts the onus on iStock to determine the caste system, when logically it should be the buyers who determine this.  Provided 200,000 exclusive files will be placed into the "upper caste" in Q1 2009, I see no reason why Sean won't get a fair number of files selected based on his talent.  I would think some of your photos would be eligible too, though I don't know how they will treat your vector work (which I like, but iStock in general seems to want to push back). 

Good luck.  One thing I can say with certainty is that independent contributors will likely see another earnings drop no matter what iStock ultimately does.

DanP68

« Reply #58 on: December 10, 2008, 02:06 »
0
Does anyone remember the threads here with images (which FT then pulled) from the then-new "infinite" collection that were laughably awful?


Oh my goodness, yes.  I still chuckle every time I think about those example pictures you kept posting.  Especially that "ticket" picture. The Infinite Collection, indeed!   :D  As usual, Fotolia hit one out of the park.

« Reply #59 on: December 10, 2008, 02:17 »
0
An istock admin has confirmed that the Premier Collection is for istock exclusive contributors only.

Good. Let them charge 10x as much for exclusive content, that would improve our sales. I doubt buyers care if an image is exclusive or not especially when there is no difference in quality between the two.

DanP68

« Reply #60 on: December 10, 2008, 02:28 »
0
Why do you say they are losing market share?

First, look at the unbiased earnings rankings.  Did anyone expect 1 year ago that iStockphoto would be ranked 4th as of December 10, 2008?

Now let's confirm it with hard, unbiased data from Compete.com:

Yearly traffic increase/decrease

Fotolia +98%
Shutterstock +44%
Dreamstime +25%
iStockphoto -32%


It looks like clear evidence to me that iStockphoto has lost considerable market share.  Personally iS has dropped as a percentage earner for my portfolio from 28% one year ago to 12% today.  Almost every company I contribute to has significantly outpaced them.  Just browsing the boards, it appears almost every non-exclusive contributor says the same thing. 

« Last Edit: December 10, 2008, 02:59 by DanP68 »

lagereek

« Reply #61 on: December 10, 2008, 03:44 »
0
No, come on fellas!

Give credits when due!  if IS can pull this off and the new best match etc its a stroke of genious and as Jonathan says, these guys cant afford to be anything else.
I love Mid-stock, it can be very strong indeed.

Although Im a bit baffled why we non-exclusives were used as fall-guys in between. Never mind, sounds like past history.

« Reply #62 on: December 10, 2008, 03:51 »
0
No, come on fellas!

Give credits when due!  if IS can pull this off and the new best match etc its a stroke of genious and as Jonathan says, these guys cant afford to be anything else.
I love Mid-stock, it can be very strong indeed.

Although Im a bit baffled why we non-exclusives were used as fall-guys in between. Never mind, sounds like past history.

Fair enough my good sir -  but do explain how they are going to manage to pull this off if the higher priced images are not open to independents at least on an exclusive image basis? What makes this any different to istockpro that failed so miserably? Why would we buy that higher priced image at istock if we can get the same quality elsewhere? All this is is a badly disguised price increase that will continue to drive buyers to other micro sites .... come on ... convince me as a buyer otherwise !!

« Reply #63 on: December 10, 2008, 04:02 »
0
One more point that comes to my mind: What to do with files they move into the new "value" collection?
I understand they want to establish a collection with low prices (compared to their competitors) to lure buyers into the shop. But as a (non-exclusive) contributor, this means they combine low prices with the lowest comission in the industry.
Do I want to sell that way? And possibly support buyers to move from other sites (that pay higher percentage) to Istock, so that I receive less? Or would I rather delete those files?
Until now Istock could get away with paying such a low comission due to (slightly) higher prices and high volume.
The second point has changed drastically - according to all I read here, but also in my own small, humble portfolio - in the recent months, if they now take away the first point as well (for some images), what to do?

DanP68

« Reply #64 on: December 10, 2008, 04:06 »
0
No, come on fellas!

Give credits when due!  if IS can pull this off and the new best match etc its a stroke of genious and as Jonathan says, these guys cant afford to be anything else.
I love Mid-stock, it can be very strong indeed.

Although Im a bit baffled why we non-exclusives were used as fall-guys in between. Never mind, sounds like past history.


I'm only bearish on iStock's market share.  I have no idea how this will play out, and I am excited at the possibility of images being valued higher tomorrow than they are today.  However I fail to see how the mid-stock aspect applies to anyone but exclusives.  What am I missing lagereek?  I usually defer to your expertise in these situations.   :)

e-person

« Reply #65 on: December 10, 2008, 04:58 »
0
An istock admin has confirmed that the Premier Collection is for istock exclusive contributors only.

They keep changing the original text, Big Brother style.

If we go there next month, we'll find a completely different version of it.


« Reply #66 on: December 10, 2008, 05:38 »
0
An istock admin has confirmed that the Premier Collection is for istock exclusive contributors only.

Good. Let them charge 10x as much for exclusive content, that would improve our sales. I doubt buyers care if an image is exclusive or not especially when there is no difference in quality between the two.

exactly !!  Like I already said, micro content is easily to reproduce in most cases.  If many exclusive images cost X times more than non-exclusives, ...  I think they are putting the rope around their neck themselves ... ...

The only thing they hang on is to their 'exclusives content' which in fact there isn't one.  If SS is smart, they expand their 'on demand' .. then I would like to see what happens
« Last Edit: December 10, 2008, 05:40 by Perrush »

grp_photo

« Reply #67 on: December 10, 2008, 06:03 »
0
One more point that comes to my mind: What to do with files they move into the new "value" collection?
I understand they want to establish a collection with low prices (compared to their competitors) to lure buyers into the shop. But as a (non-exclusive) contributor, this means they combine low prices with the lowest comission in the industry.
Do I want to sell that way? And possibly support buyers to move from other sites (that pay higher percentage) to Istock, so that I receive less? Or would I rather delete those files?
Until now Istock could get away with paying such a low comission due to (slightly) higher prices and high volume.
The second point has changed drastically - according to all I read here, but also in my own small, humble portfolio - in the recent months, if they now take away the first point as well (for some images), what to do?
Exactly i'm not going to support them!

bittersweet

« Reply #68 on: December 10, 2008, 07:06 »
0
An istock admin has confirmed that the Premier Collection is for istock exclusive contributors only.

They keep changing the original text, Big Brother style.

If we go there next month, we'll find a completely different version of it.



Okay, I will concede the possibility that this is true. I can't prove otherwise because I do not have a copy saved of the original announcement. However, I read the original announcement within the first five minutes of it being posted, and my impression was that this collection would include exclusive content. In fact, until your post on page 8, I never considered otherwise (and it was being discussed by several people up to that point as being an exclusive collection). When I saw your post, I went back and re-read the original announcement, and it said what I thought it had said at the beginning.

Is there no possibility that you were the one who misinterpreted what you read?
« Last Edit: December 10, 2008, 07:08 by whatalife »

« Reply #69 on: December 10, 2008, 07:21 »
0
Why do you say they are losing market share?

First, look at the unbiased earnings rankings.  Did anyone expect 1 year ago that iStockphoto would be ranked 4th as of December 10, 2008?

Now let's confirm it with hard, unbiased data from Compete.com:

Yearly traffic increase/decrease

Fotolia +98%
Shutterstock +44%
Dreamstime +25%
iStockphoto -32%


It looks like clear evidence to me that iStockphoto has lost considerable market share.  Personally iS has dropped as a percentage earner for my portfolio from 28% one year ago to 12% today.  Almost every company I contribute to has significantly outpaced them.  Just browsing the boards, it appears almost every non-exclusive contributor says the same thing. 

You're looking at it as a group of independent individuals.  You can say that for independents, market share is dropping, but you don't know that overall, market share is dropping.  Exclusives could be more than making up the difference.

« Reply #70 on: December 10, 2008, 07:23 »
0
The announcement about exclusive content didn't change.  I made a post on my blog as soon as I saw the announcements, and quoted a line from it, which I haven't changed:
In May we will release a premiere collection of our best, exclusive content.

« Reply #71 on: December 10, 2008, 07:41 »
0
This paragraph was changed.

We'll start tagging content in January for inclusion into this collection. Exclusives will have the ability to nominate their files they'd like to see included. And again, we'll be looking to put about 200,000 images in the collection by the end of the second quarter.

It used to state that Independants would have to be invited to have images in the premiere collection. Later it was clarified that the premiere status is only open to exclusives.

bittersweet

« Reply #72 on: December 10, 2008, 08:22 »
0
This paragraph was changed.

We'll start tagging content in January for inclusion into this collection. Exclusives will have the ability to nominate their files they'd like to see included. And again, we'll be looking to put about 200,000 images in the collection by the end of the second quarter.

It used to state that Independants would have to be invited to have images in the premiere collection. Later it was clarified that the premiere status is only open to exclusives.

Oh okay, it must have happened during the four minutes before I got there, and seven other pages of people didn't seem to notice it either.

Thanks for getting to the bottom of it!

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #73 on: December 10, 2008, 08:57 »
0
Why do you say they are losing market share?

First, look at the unbiased earnings rankings.  Did anyone expect 1 year ago that iStockphoto would be ranked 4th as of December 10, 2008?

Now let's confirm it with hard, unbiased data from Compete.com:

Yearly traffic increase/decrease

Fotolia +98%
Shutterstock +44%
Dreamstime +25%
iStockphoto -32%


It looks like clear evidence to me that iStockphoto has lost considerable market share.  Personally iS has dropped as a percentage earner for my portfolio from 28% one year ago to 12% today.  Almost every company I contribute to has significantly outpaced them.  Just browsing the boards, it appears almost every non-exclusive contributor says the same thing. 



Isn't market share usually determined by sales revenue? And is it possible for traffic to decrease while sales revenue increases? And even if some individuals' sales are decreasing does that mean Istock's revenue is decreasing?
« Last Edit: December 10, 2008, 08:59 by PaulieWalnuts »

« Reply #74 on: December 10, 2008, 09:41 »
0
This really makes my day!
How professional is this?
Post an announcement, listen to all exclusives in chorus go 'Yay, The best, Awesome, I'm so happppy, Love you Istock! Kisses!!! ', while in the back, 10 minutes later, the geniuses at Istock were rushing to change the post.
Complete failures!
I haven't uploaded to Istock for the past 2 months. And I know I'm not the only one.
Their waiting file list is now less than half the one at DT.
I know they don't care, but they should, they should. 


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
42 Replies
10925 Views
Last post August 26, 2009, 05:39
by Karimala
7 Replies
6641 Views
Last post December 21, 2009, 10:32
by cthoman
Istock raises upload limits

Started by lisafx « 1 2  All » iStockPhoto.com

42 Replies
15918 Views
Last post September 22, 2010, 11:21
by Pixel-Pizzazz
26 Replies
15252 Views
Last post November 16, 2011, 19:08
by Jo Ann Snover
39 Replies
12404 Views
Last post June 11, 2014, 18:41
by Jo Ann Snover

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle