MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: dgilder on September 14, 2010, 15:22
-
I don't know how long this will last on iStock's forums, so I figured I would post here.
It has been a week since Kelly's announcement regarding iStock's future royalty structure. In the past week there has been much (sometimes heated) discussion in the various announcement threads about the reasoning timing behind these changes, the financial impacts to various contributors, and calls for iStock to reconsider its position. Kelly's has made it very clear that iStock will not be reconsidering any of this, and that the changes are required to shift iStock's position in the marketplace in order to make it's continued growth sustainable.
Many contributors (and even customers) were upset, and there have been many pleas to set aside our feelings and look at everything from a pure business perspective. Kelly has said that iStock will do its best to make up the difference through increased sales. From a money standpoint, if sales go up, and the money is the same even at the lower commission, then impacts are minimized.
I have been struggling with this. I have looked at everything from the money perspective, and I do believe that iStock will be able to make up the money difference.
However, I do not make many decisions in life based solely on money, and given that I can survive financially without exclusive income from iStock, I have an easier decision to make than most contributors. Not only have I have decided to remove money from the picture entirely, I am removing my own personal situation from my decision.
iStock is treating its independents, illustrators, videographers, and audio contributors unfairly. If the exclusive's higher percentages were unsustainable, then they should be the only ones impacted and given targets to hit. Cutting independents pay by 10-25% is wrong, and paying less than 20% royalties for something you are only re-marketing is reprehensible. Morally, ethically, I can no longer continue to do business with iStockphoto.
I have just canceled my exclusivity, and will be removing my entire portfolio of images over the next 30 days. To my fellow contributors, good luck on your future endeavors, Farewell.
For any buyers who might need some of my photos after the 30 day period, you will be able to find them at Shutterstock, Dreamstime, and Fotolia.
-
Maybe look into Alamy too they pay a high percentage. I used to like 123RF too. Good luck I'll be waiting until after the new year when I would have hit gold and my pay cut goes into effect, but I've already begun uploading all my better stuff to Alamy as RM. As an exclusive I support you and will be joining you soon unless there is a change.
-
Total hero, now that's what I call moral fortitude.
-
Fwiw David, enjoy the pats on the back, because I think you've made a big error in judgment. Sorry to see you go.
-
Thanks for taking a stand. I appreciate what you're doing, and hope it works to your benefit in the long run.
(And if hawk_eye thinks you've made a mistake, that should be all the reinforcement you need.)
-
Feels good doesn't it!!!! ;)
-
Good for you for taking a stand for what you believe. Not many people these days back up their words with actions.
-
Total hero, now that's what I call moral fortitude.
Absolutely __ very well said David. I only wish my own financial position allowed me to do the same.
If only we could all act together and threaten to delete our ports, on say 2nd January if this goes ahead, then we could bring Istock to it's knees overnight.
-
dgilder, Perfectly worded and I applaud your morals and values.
I will not be too far behind you.
-
I have just canceled my exclusivity, and will be removing my entire portfolio of images over the next 30 days. To my fellow contributors, good luck on your future endeavors, Farewell.
Welcome to the wonderful world of independence!
-
Very, very brave David. I have nothing but admiration for you for taking such a stand on principle.
Wish I could afford to join you. Meanwhile I will be doing whatever I can to direct buyers to the sites you, and the rest of us independents, are going to be selling our images on.
With any luck,in a year's time Istock won't be such a large chunk of income for a lot of us and we can join you in pulling our images.
-
So nice to see and I am another one that would be doing the same, if I could afford to take the loss of earnings. Just a crazy thought but if all of us that can't afford to leave istock at the moment left anyway, it would be amazing. I am sure we would get more respect and perhaps wouldn't lose that much, if enough buyers were willing to jump ship as well.
-
Fwiw David, enjoy the pats on the back, because I think you've made a big error in judgment. Sorry to see you go.
Ditto.
You're actions aren't monumental, but your overreaction is.
-
Like others I can't afford to delete my whole portfolio because I sell a lot of images there and will continue to make a fair amount of commission despite the new 'screw over rate'.
However one course of action I do intend to take, and suggest others may consider doing the same, is to delete all the images in my port that I have that have never sold and based on my experience at iStock will probably never sell there, if we all did the same it might make the site less attractive to new or casual buyers in terms of the number of available images, and yet we'd still 'reap the rewards' (probably the worst analogy given the latest news but couldn't think of another one) on our bestsellers from the buyers that do still shop there.
-
Fwiw David, enjoy the pats on the back, because I think you've made a big error in judgment. Sorry to see you go.
Ditto.
You're actions aren't monumental, but your overreaction is.
Personally, I would hesitate before calling a carefully weighed decision, discussed with a wide variety of individuals, and ultimately decided on ethical grounds, an "overreaction".
Honestly, you two should be ecstatic, I just increased your chances of meeting your quotas for 2010 by some unfathomable amount. Why come here to be boisterous over someone else's decision that ultimately benefits you?
-
I applaud your determination.
-
Oh, and thank you to everyone else, I do appreciate the kind words.
-
I applaud your determination.
I bet you do...I wouldn't expect you to lose sleep over a competitor leaving. :)
-
I applaud your determination.
I bet you do...I wouldn't expect you to lose sleep over a competitor leaving. :)
Surprisingly, nothing to do with that.
-
That's disappointing
-
That's disappointing
Ha! Sorry to burst your bubble ;).
-
David, I share many of your thoughts.
4 1/2 years ago, when I started in microstock, I did so for a matter of testing this area, as some colleagues were saying so many good things about it. Despite insistent invitations from some, I never joined SS because of the subs model. I also hesitated a while before joining IS, because of the low commissions.
After all these years and seeing many sites come, go and change, I am really disappointed with the way many of them went and with the changes they introduced maximing their earnings in detriment of the contributors. It's even more surprising how people may swallow it so easily, perhaps because for them specifically the changes won't hurt so much, and they don't bother about the attitude.
I don't plan to leave right now, but it's something I'm considering before the new changes take place. I know IS will not miss my images. I won't miss their greed either.
I understand those who stay because they need the money, but start considering if there is something else you should do instead. If you have a talent in photography or illustration or whatever, there are many other areas you may try to work without having to be subject to the mood or greed of site owners.
-
Surprisingly, nothing to do with that.
Nothing surprising about it at all, Sean, at least not to me. I've always seen you as somebody with integrity and a good head on his shoulders.
-
Personally, I would hesitate before calling a carefully weighed decision, discussed with a wide variety of individuals, and ultimately decided on ethical grounds, an "overreaction".
Honestly, you two should be ecstatic, I just increased your chances of meeting your quotas for 2010 by some unfathomable amount. Why come here to be boisterous over someone else's decision that ultimately benefits you?
Sorry if you thought I was being boisterous, I was just stating my opinion - which is also carefully weighed.
-
I applaud your boldness. I'm sure it was a tough decision.
-
Here's why nothing will change...
I only wish my own financial position...
Wish I could afford...
doing the same, if I could afford...
I can't afford to ...
There is nothing wrong with the above sentiments. It's just that you can't hope to enact change when you have no bargaining position.
-
^^^ I can afford to stop uploading and I will start deleting images when the commission change happens. Who knows what difference it will make if a lot of people take small steps to reduce the images on istock? It certainly wont help them.
-
I'm not happy to hear about your decision (new competitor), but I respect . out of it, and wish you good luck. I'm following your decision on dumping IStock altogther, although I wasn't a big contributor anyways - never did agree with industry low 20%, not to mention 15%
-
dgilder, that was a hard decision, but I completely understand you, and agree with you. My biggest income from microstock was from audio files at Istock, and I deleted them all and canceled my audio exclusivity. Only after doing it I learned there are audio libraries that sell much better, and share 50/50 with their artists.
After joining few other audio libraries I found some horrible comments about Istock. There is a generalized opinion that Getty treats artist very poorly.
These are some of the comments about Istock from other artists:
http://musiclibraryreport.com/music-libraries-h-to-l/istockphoto/ (http://musiclibraryreport.com/music-libraries-h-to-l/istockphoto/)
No kind words about Istock/Getty
-
BTW, I just used up the last of my purchasing credits on this one:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-6686960-hotel-business-travelers.php (http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-6686960-hotel-business-travelers.php)
I had credits because some clients insisted on getting something from IStock against my strongest objections. From now on, if they want something from IStock, they find a new designer.
-
I don't know how long this will last on iStock's forums, so I figured I would post here.
Not only have I have decided to remove money from the picture entirely, I am removing my own personal situation from my decision.
iStock is treating its independents, illustrators, videographers, and audio contributors unfairly. If the exclusive's higher percentages were unsustainable, then they should be the only ones impacted and given targets to hit. Cutting independents pay by 10-25% is wrong, and paying less than 20% royalties for something you are only re-marketing is reprehensible. Morally, ethically, I can no longer continue to do business with iStockphoto.
I have just canceled my exclusivity, and will be removing my entire portfolio of images over the next 30 days. To my fellow contributors, good luck on your future endeavors, Farewell.
For any buyers who might need some of my photos after the 30 day period, you will be able to find them at Shutterstock, Dreamstime, and Fotolia.
I have to say I have a tremendous amount of respect for you and the values you put into practice. If everyone in the world operated at your level the world would be a much better place.
I will certainly give your port consideration when choosing images in the future.
-
Here's why nothing will change...
I only wish my own financial position...
Wish I could afford...
doing the same, if I could afford...
I can't afford to ...
There is nothing wrong with the above sentiments. It's just that you can't hope to enact change when you have no bargaining position.
David's decision is admirable. However there are other ways to protest being discussed in various threads both on here and on IS, including:
1) Leaving exclusivity
2) Stopping uploading new images
3) Spreading the word to buyers
Certainly each of us can only do small things, but the cumulative effect could be large.
-
...
1) Leaving exclusivity
...
Lisa, did you consider the fact that if an exclusive drops exclusivity, that he/she will play into iStock's hands?
Even though the contributor will be able to upload everywhere else, the same images on iStock will create a higher percentage for iStock than being exclusive.
It would only make sense as an exclusive contributor to drop exclusivity and leave the agency altogether like the OP is doing.
This of course can ONLY make sense if you can sustain (I hate that word by now) your lifestyle without your exclusivity-income. Now the question is, how many exclusives can afford that...?
-
This of course can ONLY make sense if you can sustain (I hate that word by now) your lifestyle without your exclusivity-income. Now the question is, how many exclusives can afford that...?
Oh, I have no guarantee of being able to sustain my lifestyle. Its going to take awhile to work back up to the income level I have right now from iStock. In the meantime I will have to make some cutbacks, canceling internet at the studio, possibly moving to a cheaper studio or doing only on-location shoots for awhile. Its just that I won't be ruined financially by not having income from iStock.
-
This of course can ONLY make sense if you can sustain (I hate that word by now) your lifestyle without your exclusivity-income. Now the question is, how many exclusives can afford that...?
Oh, I have no guarantee of being able to sustain my lifestyle. Its going to take awhile to work back up to the income level I have right now from iStock. In the meantime I will have to make some cutbacks, canceling internet at the studio, possibly moving to a cheaper studio or doing only on-location shoots for awhile. Its just that I won't be ruined financially by not having income from iStock.
Kudos. It's rare to see somebody with that kind of dedication and willing to make sacrifices. I'm sure you're already in the middle of talking to many agencies in order to pump your images to them. If not, I recommend to get in direct touch with them so you're on your way as quickly as possible.
Some agencies will gladly process your images for free so you only have to FTP the images to them. They'll do the keywording and categorizing.
Best of luck!
-
I hope it is worth it. by your admission, seems you've made a bad business decision if all the emotion is removed and you're cutting corners on things like internet access in your studio. anyways, good luck, you're a nice guy...
I have no doubt iStock would welcome you back at any point, that much I have seen with others who went non-exclusive to make a statement over past changes. still trying to find the heroism in cutting off your nose to spite your face...
-
Much respect for standing up for your principles and ethics.
Two quotes I recall come to mind:
"If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"
and
"Better to die on your feet than live on your knees"
-
I hope it is worth it. by your admission, seems you've made a bad business decision if all the emotion is removed and you're cutting corners on things like internet access in your studio. anyways, good luck, you're a nice guy...
I have no doubt iStock would welcome you back at any point, that much I have seen with others who went non-exclusive to make a statement over past changes. still trying to find the heroism in cutting off your nose to spite your face...
hawk_eye, why do you criticize so much people who are not accepting losing so much of their IS earnings? You might say it's too early for a drastic decision, but giving up a partnership that is not working well makes total sense, even if you lose money.
-
hawk_eye, why do you criticize so much people who are not accepting losing so much of their IS earnings? You might say it's too early for a drastic decision, but giving up a partnership that is not working well makes total sense, even if you lose money.
I have to tend to agree. If you think a deal isn't fair, it makes sense to cut your losses and get out. Some of it may be emotional, but when have you ever not gotten emotional over being ripped off.
-
fair enough. but it's my guess you're all happy to watch David flounder while you wait it out to see what happens, so he truly is the only one putting his money where his mouth is and I think it will be to his detriment. I hate to see a valuable contributor do that to himself out of misguided loyalty (not because you don't deserve his loyalty, so don't nail me to that cross please, but simply because it is far too early to be jumping ship).
I think iStock has not been given nearly enough credit in this. that you feel a revolution is the only and best way to get them to listen...anyways, whatever. I'm beating my head against the wall. good luck David, sincerely. I do believe you've made an error and I truly am sad to see you go.
-
Here's why nothing will change...
I only wish my own financial position...
Wish I could afford...
doing the same, if I could afford...
I can't afford to ...
There is nothing wrong with the above sentiments. It's just that you can't hope to enact change when you have no bargaining position.
Bingo. Stopping all uploads and removing our portfolio's is the only way to make istock take notice. It's a shame. Last week we were all calling for blood, and now it seems that most are unwilling to follow through and do what is right to make a difference.
Istock (Getty) is going to come out a winner in all this. They know they have us by the you-know-what, and they are going to get what they want. The scary thing is that other microstock agencies are watching this unfold, and it's only a matter of time before they all start trimming royalties too. Why? Because this whole fiasco is proving that they could get away with it if they want to and 99% of the contributors are going to accept it.
If we accept this, we are sheep.
-
...
1) Leaving exclusivity
...
Lisa, did you consider the fact that if an exclusive drops exclusivity, that he/she will play into iStock's hands?
Even though the contributor will be able to upload everywhere else, the same images on iStock will create a higher percentage for iStock than being exclusive.
It would only make sense as an exclusive contributor to drop exclusivity and leave the agency altogether like the OP is doing.
This of course can ONLY make sense if you can sustain (I hate that word by now) your lifestyle without your exclusivity-income. Now the question is, how many exclusives can afford that...?
actually I calculated it out. and with the lower credit costs for non-exculsive images at iStock, iStock will actually be making LESS off my images when I cancel exclusivity. I put together a spreadsheet to check all the numbers - I used hypothetical 1 credit = 1 dollar (because that was simpler to deal with) and I only have images up to xlarge so the larger sizes don't really matter. attached is a screenshot to show what I mean. feel free (though it probably goes without saying :) ) if anyone sees any errors in my calculations here.
-
actually I calculated it out. and with the lower credit costs for non-exculsive images at iStock, iStock will actually be making LESS off my images when I cancel exclusivity.
...
Yes, that's known by anyone who's taken the time to examine the ins-and-outs of iStock. I think it's even been mentioned a few times on this forum - guess not everyone was paying attention.
-
fair enough. but it's my guess you're all happy to watch David flounder while you wait it out to see what happens, so he truly is the only one putting his money where his mouth is and I think it will be to his detriment. I hate to see a valuable contributor do that to himself out of misguided loyalty (not because you don't deserve his loyalty, so don't nail me to that cross please, but simply because it is far too early to be jumping ship).
I think iStock has not been given nearly enough credit in this. that you feel a revolution is the only and best way to get them to listen...anyways, whatever. I'm beating my head against the wall. good luck David, sincerely. I do believe you've made an error and I truly am sad to see you go.
And if it's downhill for Exclusives at IStock from this point, then he will look like the smartest exclusive at IStock for jumping ship now. I bet you would be the person on the Titanic shouting "don't worry this ship is too big to sink" Some people want to play it smart and if the ship is showing signs of sinking and be the first off
-
it's my guess you're all happy to watch David flounder while you wait it out to see what happens
You're wrong about this, along with so much else. The last thing anyone here wants is for David to suffer. I think he's making the right choice, but I wish the decision hadn't been necessary. iStock broke faith, and he's decided to take swift and decisive action. I respect him for doing so, I hope that his distress will be brief, and I hope he'll emerge in better financial shape when he's all done.
-
meh, why bother. good luck David, truly.
-
Brave move, but the right move. One sleeps better at night I can tell you.
Welcome back in the ranks of the indy's! :)
-
Respect!
First they locked the topic but now they deleted it. They don't wanna let others know what you did.
-
Wait a minute, hes a Gold member, right? wouldnt it have been wiser to stay and fight it out? I mean we can all jack it in but really what do we achieve? nothing really exept a financial loss plus the fact no one has heard the end of this.
Must say Im surprised so many are prepared to just give up, deleating pics, throwing the towell. Anybody can do this!!
Whats the matter with people? dont bother removing ports, youre achieving nothing, show a bit of guts and stay and fight!!
all the best.
-
actually I calculated it out. and with the lower credit costs for non-exculsive images at iStock, iStock will actually be making LESS off my images when I cancel exclusivity.
...
Yes, that's known by anyone who's taken the time to examine the ins-and-outs of iStock. I think it's even been mentioned a few times on this forum - guess not everyone was paying attention.
But what everybody leaves out of the equation: This is only true if you assume the same number of images is bought irrespective of price.
If, OTOH, image buyers are working on a fixed budget it looks different - they may buy more for cheaper prices.
As Istock has mentioned themselves in the announcements (or what I read out of it), their concern is the average commission paid out for the total sum of sales they are making. In that respect, cancelling exclusivity (but leaving the portfolio for sale on Istock) is 100% in line with Istock's goals.
-
I don't want to start deleting until they cut my commission. It has taken years to upload there and my earnings are already way down on 2009. I will pledge to delete at least 20% of my portfolio in January, if the cut goes through. If we all reduce the size of our portfolios, stop uploading and inform any buyers we know, I think it will make a difference. Eventually, I will leave istock but I don't know how long that will take. I have a few months now to work with the other sites and try and get more income outside of microstock.
-
I'm not happy to hear about your decision (new competitor), but I respect . out of it, and wish you good luck. I'm following your decision on dumping IStock altogther, although I wasn't a big contributor anyways - never did agree with industry low 20%, not to mention 15%
I take my hat off to you too Steve. Like David you are most definitely one of the hardest working but principled microstockers in the business.
-
I am also waiting for the changes to take place, or a synchronized action by members. But I won't stay with 15%, that is for sure.
-
David's decision is admirable. However there are other ways to protest being discussed in various threads both on here and on IS, including:
1) Leaving exclusivity
2) Stopping uploading new images
3) Spreading the word to buyers
Certainly each of us can only do small things, but the cumulative effect could be large.
(my edit on the bold/colour)
I agree whole-heartedly. We simply have to draw a line in the sand somewhere and as far as I'm concerned 20% for non-exclusive images is it. Even that is only acceptable on the basis of large volumes of sales at relatively high prices.
It's worth noting that you can negate the lost income on Istock by making certain images exclusive on FT and increasing the prices to the maximum allowed for your ranking. This only works for images that already sell comparatively well on FT and have attained decent sort-order position. Under those circumstances it can work very well though.
-
I don't want to start deleting until they cut my commission. It has taken years to upload there and my earnings are already way down on 2009. I will pledge to delete at least 20% of my portfolio in January, if the cut goes through. If we all reduce the size of our portfolios, stop uploading and inform any buyers we know, I think it will make a difference. Eventually, I will leave istock but I don't know how long that will take. I have a few months now to work with the other sites and try and get more income outside of microstock.
Yeah you and me both Sharpshot
I will be deleting Flame Images when the reductions kick in and do not regard it at all as shooting myself in the foot or pointless as suggested in this thread ::)
The new harsh targets about to be put in place make it impossable to expect any form of resonable payment or exposure with yet another Collection pushing Files even further back in the search for independants so we are going down anyway therefor the way I see it have very little to loose at iStock in the future but allot to gain by protecting my Portfolio elswhere ensureing my best sellers are not available at istock at a unacceptable % return
And David much repect to you for staying true to your Priciples!
-
Wait a minute, hes a Gold member, right? wouldnt it have been wiser to stay and fight it out? I mean we can all jack it in but really what do we achieve? nothing really exept a financial loss plus the fact no one has heard the end of this.
Must say Im surprised so many are prepared to just give up, deleating pics, throwing the towell. Anybody can do this!!
Whats the matter with people? dont bother removing ports, youre achieving nothing, show a bit of guts and stay and fight!!
all the best.
I think what David is doing, would be the only way to fight it, to be honest. The fact that they deleted his post on IS forums seems to show that they (IS) would think so too.
Regardless, well done David, the right move. I would join you if my portfolio was significant enough to make a change, or if enough people did it. For now, I am ashamed to say, I am in the watch-and-see boat, while investigating options.
-
actually I calculated it out. and with the lower credit costs for non-exculsive images at iStock, iStock will actually be making LESS off my images when I cancel exclusivity.
...
Yes, that's known by anyone who's taken the time to examine the ins-and-outs of iStock. I think it's even been mentioned a few times on this forum - guess not everyone was paying attention.
Looks like it. Sorry. :P
-
Bingo. Stopping all uploads and removing our portfolio's is the only way to make istock take notice. It's a shame. Last week we were all calling for blood, and now it seems that most are unwilling to follow through and do what is right to make a difference.
Istock (Getty) is going to come out a winner in all this. They know they have us by the you-know-what, and they are going to get what they want. The scary thing is that other microstock agencies are watching this unfold, and it's only a matter of time before they all start trimming royalties too. Why? Because this whole fiasco is proving that they could get away with it if they want to and 99% of the contributors are going to accept it.
If we accept this, we are sheep.
Just because all people aren't on here or on the IS forum saying what they are doing DOES NOT mean that they aren't doing something. Sometimes a player should not show all the cards in his hand too soon.
I have no doubt Getty/IS will come out the winner. There will be too many people afraid to leave. That's been proven in history over and over, both at Getty and in the world. Each person makes his own decision, and I am only responsible for what I do. I think I am doing the right thing, and I hope that helps the others who have had the courage to take action.
If the sheep decide to stay, that's their decision. What about you? What have you actually done?
I love how there are tons of newbies joining in here, criticizing people who DO take action, criticizing people who DON'T take action, yet have no links to their own port, never say what they themselves are actually doing, etc.
-
Just because all people aren't on here or on the IS forum saying what they are doing DOES NOT mean that they aren't doing something. Sometimes a player should not show all the cards in his hand too soon.
Really excellent point Cathy. It's foolish to box oneself into a corner right now. Other than David (who deserves heaps of respect!), most of the people who are already deleting their entire ports from Istock have few images there and only make a small amount of money.
Hardly anyone making all or a large portion of their living income from Istock is going to pull their entire portfolio less than two weeks after a major announcement.
Historically Istock has always gone back on at least a portion of what they initially announce. I don't know if they will this time or not, but I sure don't intend to delete six thousand images and lose 40% of my total income until I know for sure how this is going to play out.
-
Here's why nothing will change...
I only wish my own financial position...
Wish I could afford...
doing the same, if I could afford...
I can't afford to ...
There is nothing wrong with the above sentiments. It's just that you can't hope to enact change when you have no bargaining position.
Or they wish everyone else can take a stand so that they don't have to. Its easy to watch everyone else do it and applaud them. While I don't agree at all with dgilder's decision, he's doing what he thinks is right to him despite the money issue - so good on ya in that regard
-
I hope it is worth it. by your admission, seems you've made a bad business decision if all the emotion is removed and you're cutting corners on things like internet access in your studio. anyways, good luck, you're a nice guy...
I have no doubt iStock would welcome you back at any point, that much I have seen with others who went non-exclusive to make a statement over past changes. still trying to find the heroism in cutting off your nose to spite your face...
...he says while leaning over the table without a jar of Vasoline in sight ;)
-
next one down, some error happend.
-
Look fellas, you know me, Im a hot-head myself, known for flying off the handle for far less. This time I realize it will earn us nothing, we wont achieve anything by leaving or whatever and Im speaking from experience, AND! how do you know this isnt exactly the effect Getty wants? In the 4 years Ive been with IS, Ive learnt one thing, the Admin are on their contributors side, really and in the end theyve always come up with some sort of a compromize.
All the hard work and long hours by some here and youre prepared to throw it all in over a Getty decision? why give them the satisfaction? youre not hurting them youre in retro hurting IS and somehow I dont think you wanna do that.
-
In the 4 years Ive been with IS, Ive learnt one thing, the Admin are on their contributors side, really and in the end theyve always come up with some sort of a compromize.
I agree with you Christian, that the istock administrators have always been on contributors side. That is why I am absolutely certain that they are no longer making decisions for Istock. These changes are coming from the very top, and I sincerely doubt there's anything the Istock admins can do about them.
Would love to believe you are right and a compromise will be in the works, but I am afraid it may not be so this time. If there is a compromise, it will only be because of people who took some sort of stand against this.
-
If large numbers of high profile independents left IS, and/or large numbers of high profile exclusives (i.e. gold and diamond; big portfolios, big sales) left, Getty would notice and might then try to make changes. Given the losses involved - i.e. I just don't see the other sites picking up the lost business to make contributor income essentially unchanged if that were to happen.
I really dislike my bank, my phone company, cable company, cell phone company, but I continue to do business with them. Why? Because the other choices are also close to equally bad. That's where I find myself with my decision as to what to do with IS.
I completely agree that each time one of the agencies pulls an anti-contributor stunt it just increases the likelihood of one of the others doing the same or worse. Unlike agencies with a large subscription component, stopping uploading at IS is only somewhat effective unless it's for a longer time.
As the business gets bigger it gets harder to apply pressure to bullying agencies without group action. Someone else pointed out (I think in the IS forums) that the SAA had essentially been unable to rein Getty in during their fight over squeezing contributors. It's a hard problem to solve.
Personally, I'm going to wait the rest of the year and see how things pan out. I am about 70 "redeemed credits" shy of 30K, so if I get that to 40K before year end I will get 35% in 2011. My illustrations will drop back to 25% (as I only have a few of those) and it'll be sad to have 40% royalty for a few weeks only to have it get snatched away again.
Depending on how 2011 goes, I can reevaluate at the end (or whenever Getty turns the screws tighter, which might be sooner).
I don't much like myself for doing business with greedy *insult removed*, but enlightened self interest is telling me that's what I think I should do. I really hope that things work out for David. High stakes move on his part.
-
Did I miss the compromise with thinkstock $0.25 subs? They have made some compromises for exclusives but it looks like they have been told to get the average commissions to 20% and it is hard to see how they will come back with a more acceptable deal for me.
It isn't just the cut in commissions that gets me, its the way they try to justify it. I would much rather they told us the real reasons, I presume they want more money to get a higher price when they sell istock.
-
I don't much like myself for doing business with greedy *insult removed*, but enlightened self interest is telling me that's what I think I should do.
Good luck with your decision JoAnne. I just don't think that taking 'no action' is a realistic option in this case for anyone who is losing out. Acting together on many fronts I do think we stand a chance, however small, of getting Istock to think again. Taking no action gives us no chance whatsoever.
Having mulled it over further I remain convinced that if this changes do happen then Istock will lose out too;
a) Fewer new images will be uploaded
b) Some exclusives will hand back their crowns
c) Istock will lose out on those higher-priced exclusive sales
d) Some buyers will shop elsewhere
e) Some independents will leave
f) A staggering amount of goodwill has already been lost __ forever.
Not only that but Istock's competitors will be getting a massive boost of new images too.
All of that will add up to a greater loss than Istock stands to gain from the money-grab. I'm sure of it.
-
Did I miss the compromise with thinkstock $0.25 subs?
I believe the compromises in the TS situation were adding the opt-out, and going to a flat rate graduated royalty for exclusives rather than a % of sale price (which could have been as low as .04), as was originally proposed. Lousy compromises, but more than has been shown in this situation.
-
I'm not happy to hear about your decision (new competitor), but I respect . out of it, and wish you good luck. I'm following your decision on dumping IStock altogther, although I wasn't a big contributor anyways - never did agree with industry low 20%, not to mention 15%
I take my hat off to you too Steve. Like David you are most definitely one of the hardest working but principled microstockers in the business.
Thanks, I appreciate that
-
IS moves have always lead the way for other agencies. We have seen that, for example, in prices. If IS increases prices, they leave space to others doing it as well. If IS decreases contributor margins... here there's another space that maybe will be followed and filled. What would you do then?
-
Just because all people aren't on here or on the IS forum saying what they are doing DOES NOT mean that they aren't doing something. Sometimes a player should not show all the cards in his hand too soon.
Really excellent point Cathy. It's foolish to box oneself into a corner right now. Other than David (who deserves heaps of respect!), most of the people who are already deleting their entire ports from Istock have few images there and only make a small amount of money.
Hardly anyone making all or a large portion of their living income from Istock is going to pull their entire portfolio less than two weeks after a major announcement.
Historically Istock has always gone back on at least a portion of what they initially announce. I don't know if they will this time or not, but I sure don't intend to delete six thousand images and lose 40% of my total income until I know for sure how this is going to play out.
Good points both
As already said I will not act till the new % kicks in mainly because a small part of me still believes that there may be a miniscule chance of IS/Getty coming to their senses and trying to salvage some lost respect and support out of this with a compromise. They have done it in the past and BOY do they need to do it now!
Also as said not everyone tells the world what they are up to or are active in Forums but I suspect Portfolios ARE quietly being deleted or allegiances shifted
Not to mention those out there who are still oblivious as to what is going on ::)
-
actually I calculated it out. and with the lower credit costs for non-exculsive images at iStock, iStock will actually be making LESS off my images when I cancel exclusivity.
...
Yes, that's known by anyone who's taken the time to examine the ins-and-outs of iStock. I think it's even been mentioned a few times on this forum - guess not everyone was paying attention.
But what everybody leaves out of the equation: This is only true if you assume the same number of images is bought irrespective of price.
If, OTOH, image buyers are working on a fixed budget it looks different - they may buy more for cheaper prices.
As Istock has mentioned themselves in the announcements (or what I read out of it), their concern is the average commission paid out for the total sum of sales they are making. In that respect, cancelling exclusivity (but leaving the portfolio for sale on Istock) is 100% in line with Istock's goals.
yes, you could be right. at this point I dont know what iStock's goals are other than exactly what they write. We can conjecture to the end of time, but the only facts I have are what they have written. Add that to the past few years of raising prices, increases credits, the partner program, and whole canister change fiasco (which is now moot) and I have several factors that effect my decision. I'm making my decisions based on what is right for me, not on some vendetta to get back at iStock. maybe, in opting to leave my port on iStock and go independent, I'm being selfish and not altruistic but at this point there's really no incentive for me, personally, to stay as an iStock exclusive but there is still enough to leave my port there and let it continue to earn some money. altho it will be significantly less I think I stand a good chance of making it and even building it up through other avenues of distribution.
-
yes, you could be right. at this point I dont know what iStock's goals are other than exactly what they write. We can conjecture to the end of time, but the only facts I have are what they have written. Add that to the past few years of raising prices, increases credits, the partner program, and whole canister change fiasco (which is now moot) and I have several factors that effect my decision. I'm making my decisions based on what is right for me, not on some vendetta to get back at iStock. maybe, in opting to leave my port on iStock and go independent, I'm being selfish and not altruistic but at this point there's really no incentive for me, personally, to stay as an iStock exclusive but there is still enough to leave my port there and let it continue to earn some money. altho it will be significantly less I think I stand a good chance of making it and even building it up through other avenues of distribution.
I didn't mean to critize you. You absolutely have to decide your actions based on what you feel is best for you.
I only wanted to point out that for me it isn't clear at all whether Istock makes more on exclusive or on non-exclusive content - at least when you take into account that the different pricing may lead to different buyer behavior.
To sum it up in a different way: Would Istock make more money if all content would be available at non-exclusive prices and commissions or if all would be available at exclusive prices and commissions?
I think nobobdy can really answer that, but the outcome is not as clear as it has been argued for in this and several other threads...
So anybody who actually is (wholly or in part) basing his / her decision on the impact it has on Istock moneywise may want to keep that in mind...
-
As already said I will not act till the new % kicks in mainly because a small part of me still believes that there may be a miniscule chance of IS/Getty coming to their senses and trying to salvage some lost respect and support out of this with a compromise. They have done it in the past and BOY do they need to do it now!
This is true, but as we now know, last year's compromise on the canister level change was actually a lie. Perhaps (MAYBE) it wasn't at the time, but at some point within a few months, they certainly decided they'd had enough of compromises, and were going to get what they wanted, consequences be damned.
A large jump in the UL queue size a few months ago. Coincidence? Perhaps, they've done it before in the Summer, only to turn it back (and sometimes tighten it further) a few months later. Bet that won't happen this time -- they know they need all the ULs they can get.
The virtual closing of Vetta within the last 6-9 months (except for a very select few) -- coincidence? Or related to the planned cross-site distribution of Vetta?
If one really wanted to talk about devious planning, could it be that all the changes made at the start of the year (threatened cannister level increases, exclusive price increases & some independent price drops, grandfathering) were made to entice as many independents to become exclusive as possible before the just-announced changes? Knowing that very, very few would chose to become exclusive once these changes were made public, while also knowing that some of those they were able to rope in would find it difficult to leave.
But maybe I'm giving them far too much credit. Maybe it's all a bunch of coincidences, and they really don't know what they're doing ahead of time. Just making it up as they go along.
-
fair enough. but it's my guess you're all happy to watch David flounder while you wait it out to see what happens, so he truly is the only one putting his money where his mouth is and I think it will be to his detriment. I hate to see a valuable contributor do that to himself out of misguided loyalty (not because you don't deserve his loyalty, so don't nail me to that cross please, but simply because it is far too early to be jumping ship).
I think iStock has not been given nearly enough credit in this. that you feel a revolution is the only and best way to get them to listen...anyways, whatever. I'm beating my head against the wall. good luck David, sincerely. I do believe you've made an error and I truly am sad to see you go.
i would agree that removing your portfolio in September/October over something which doesn't take affect until January is acting a bit brashly. Particularly if iStock is a significant amount of your income. However, I would also agree that suspending uploading of new images and openly courting buyers to use other agencies is a fair tactic to use.
Nonetheless, he has listened to his conscious and he obviously knows the impact it will have on him. I applaud him his decision and courage. I only wish my iStock portfolio wasn't so minuscule so that my leaving iStock would have as much meaning as him leaving does.
-
^ I don't think he does know how this will impact his income. Listening to his conscience....come on. This is business. You guys can't have your cake and eat it too. you're all over contributors like me for respecting and trusting iStock, you berate your fellow colleagues regularly, make false and libelous accusations....and now you're heralding acts of conscience. I don't know how your consciences allow most of you to speak to one another the way you do in here.
the loud minority does not represent a massive swath of serious contributors who wouldn't even bother to wade in here.
-
^ I don't think he does know how this will impact his income. Listening to his conscience....come on. This is business. You guys can't have your cake and eat it too. you're all over contributors like me for respecting and trusting iStock, you berate your fellow colleagues regularly, make false and libelous accusations....and now you're heralding acts of conscience. I don't know how your consciences allow most of you to speak to one another the way you do in here.
the loud minority does not represent a massive swath of serious contributors who wouldn't even bother to wade in here.
Aren't the large majority of contributors not talking in here either unaware that here exists, that changes have taken place, don't speak english, or don't like writing in forums? Aren't they also overwhelmingly unhappy about the changes taking place? I don't know too many contributors (besides a few bronze and silver guys that will reach the higher canister a few months early) that think raising prices, cutting commissions and introducing Agency Collection stuff in front of us is a good thing. The changes aren't just a moral issue they hurt our wallets and they hurt IS's prospects going ahead.
-
^ I don't think he does know how this will impact his income. Listening to his conscience....come on. This is business. You guys can't have your cake and eat it too. you're all over contributors like me for respecting and trusting iStock, you berate your fellow colleagues regularly, make false and libelous accusations....and now you're heralding acts of conscience. I don't know how your consciences allow most of you to speak to one another the way you do in here.
the loud minority does not represent a massive swath of serious contributors who wouldn't even bother to wade in here.
Wow! Tell us how you really feel. Does that mean I'm not getting a Christmas card this year? ;D
-
lol...guess not. I'm fairly certain I won't be getting any from people in here. as for other contributors being worried or concerned, sure. I am too. but I'm almost always willing to give iStock the benefit of the doubt. not to mention, many of the people being attacked are friends or good people who sincerely don't deserve it. I have never subscribed to the us versus them mentality. Getty have continued to allow iStock's culture to flourish, with a sense of community. however, that community continues to grow, exponentially. it was clear five years ago that the model was going to change. I think there's going to be increased business and other positive things to come, as has always seemed to happen in the past. so far, in five years, I've never felt screwed over by iStock or Getty for that matter.
I have also said that I feel for independents. but at the same time, you're independent! you haven't committed to any one site, but you expect a certain level of commitment from them. I'm not sure I understand that. I have committed to a site, and taken all the good and bad that has come with it.
I have no doubt iStock is listening, as they always have, but hardly anyone will give them that credit next time. my guess is that we'll all see some form of concession. the worst part about that is you'll all believe it was because you protested. the concession might even leave us worse off, as concessions made regarding the partner program did. meanwhile many of you were high-fiving about that.
-
... it was clear five years ago that the model was going to change. I think there's going to be increased business and other positive things to come, as has always seemed to happen in the past. so far, in five years, I've never felt screwed over by iStock or Getty for that matter.
Five years ago you worked it all out did you??? Funny that considering you've only actually been on Istock for just over 3 years. What utter, utter nonsensical drivel you write.
Move along people __ there's nothing to see in Hawk-eye's posts.
-
Joe - it was through my work in design years before I contributed that brought me to iStock in the first place. if you know my posts as well as you say you do, you would remember that. anyways, this is the kind of stuff that usually keeps me from posting in here. I feel strongly about buyers being pointed away from iStock, but I think I've made that point. I'm sorry for independents and what they will go through, for sure. and less productive exclusives who will also be hit hard. I'll be surprised if something isn't modified by HQ, so you can look forward to that.
-
my guess is that we'll all see some form of concession.
vasoline ;D
-
You presume to know a lot, hawk_eye. Your fear is getting the best of you, and you are starting to sound a bit panicked. Relax, it will all be ok.
If I were using iStock income primarily to buy food and a roof for my family, obviously it would have been a harder decision, as many here understand. There are some things though, that I am perfectly willing to do without, if it means I am not supporting exploitative enterprises.
I will be just fine, thank you for your concern.
-
but I'm almost always willing to give iStock the benefit of the doubt.
Hawkeye, there is no doubt. They made it perfectly clear what they intend to do. If your OK with so be it. Many of us are not.
-
my guess is that we'll all see some form of concession.
If there were to be some form of concession, it will be thanks to David and the others who are taking action to show their displeasure. Not thanks to the Getty apologists who are telling us we should just shut up and go away ::)
As for "benefit of the doubt" - there is NO DOUBT.
-
my guess is that we'll all see some form of concession.
If there were to be some form of concession, it will be thanks to David and the others who are taking action to show their displeasure. Not thanks to the Getty apologists who are telling us we should just shut up and go away ::)
As for "benefit of the doubt" - there is NO DOUBT.
after 3 posts from Kelly on the subject, and not one budge or movement, I am going to go out on a limb here and say that this time there will be very little, if any, concessions made. I think this time they have put their foot down and are going to let the chips fall where they may. The only change I see coming in this new policy will come when they re-evaluate the redeemed credits levels next year. Just my opinion, of course.
-
Lisa - I'm not an apologist, I think your approach on this one couldn't be more wrong. Sadly, hate seeing you on this bandwagon. I resent you and others gouging my livelihood. I hope they don't kowtow, it will set another terrible precedent and I'm tired of these protests.
-
Lisa - I'm not an apologist, I think your approach on this one couldn't be more wrong. Sadly, hate seeing you on this bandwagon. I resent you and others gouging my livelihood. I hope they don't kowtow, it will set another terrible precedent and I'm tired of these protests.
you should resent "iStock" gouging your livlihood...one of us just doesn't get it... *sigh*
-
you should resent "iStock" gouging your livlihood...one of us just doesn't get it... *sigh*
I'm sure a lot of exclusives do resent it but feel effectively trapped. They have so much invested at IStock they feel there is no way out.
However, those who chose to throw there lot in with Getty will be even deeper in in two or three years when they are the ones on 15%.
It's take a stand or take a shafting for the rest of your micro career.
Don't be scared, you might think that you'll have a short term loss in income but it'll beat the long term loss you'll face as Getty slowly continues stripping away your percentage.
It's time to start negotiating with other agencies, it's gonna get harder not easier to disentangle yourselves, sooner the better.
-
my guess is that we'll all see some form of concession.
vasoline ;D
genius :D
-
Lisa - I'm not an apologist, I think your approach on this one couldn't be more wrong. Sadly, hate seeing you on this bandwagon. I resent you and others gouging my livelihood. I hope they don't kowtow, it will set another terrible precedent and I'm tired of these protests.
Do you really believe that iStock (Getty) has your best intentions in mind? Take a stand for yourself and have some respect for your work! Getty (like any corporation) is in business for one reason only: to make money. I can assure you with nearly 100% certainty that they don't give a crap about you or your portfolio - you are merely a number to them (a expendable number) and yet you are defending them to the very end.
I don't mean to sound rude, and I'm not trying to insult you. Take some pride in your work and start branching out. Join other microstock sites. Launch your own website. Dive into macro. IMHO, depending so heavily on one company (Getty) is foolish.
-
Taking a stand based on what? Well done.
-
Taking a stand based on what? Well done.
You really think that Getty is being fair?
-
you should resent "iStock" gouging your livlihood...one of us just doesn't get it... *sigh*
I'm sure a lot of exclusives do resent it but feel effectively trapped. They have so much invested at IStock they feel there is no way out.
However, those who chose to throw there lot in with Getty will be even deeper in in two or three years when they are the ones on 15%.
It's take a stand or take a shafting for the rest of your micro career.
Don't be scared, you might think that you'll have a short term loss in income but it'll beat the long term loss you'll face as Getty slowly continues stripping away your percentage.
It's time to start negotiating with other agencies, it's gonna get harder not easier to disentangle yourselves, sooner the better.
Quoted for truth. Excellent post, and spot on.
-
I'm sure a lot of exclusives do resent it but feel effectively trapped. They have so much invested at IStock they feel there is no way out.
However, those who chose to throw there lot in with Getty will be even deeper in in two or three years when they are the ones on 15%.
It's take a stand or take a shafting for the rest of your micro career.
Don't be scared, you might think that you'll have a short term loss in income but it'll beat the long term loss you'll face as Getty slowly continues stripping away your percentage.
It's time to start negotiating with other agencies, it's gonna get harder not easier to disentangle yourselves, sooner the better.
Yep __ that's about the truth of it. Istock have already put in place the architecture to ensure those RC levels will be raised every year. All but the very top contributors will have their incomes salami-sliced from here on in. Not a nice prospect.
Funny how so recently most of us considered the biggest threat to our microstock incomes to be our fellow contributors and the volumes of images being produced. How wrong we were.
-
Lisa - I'm not an apologist, I think your approach on this one couldn't be more wrong. Sadly, hate seeing you on this bandwagon. I resent you and others gouging my livelihood. I hope they don't kowtow, it will set another terrible precedent and I'm tired of these protests.
I can't see why any independent would refer a buyer to iStock as soon as these new rates kick in. The only person to blame in this is IS for the cuts, not the independents for acting in their own interests as a result.
-
I don't mean to sound rude, and I'm not trying to insult you. Take some pride in your work and start branching out. Join other microstock sites. Launch your own website. Dive into macro. IMHO, depending so heavily on one company (Getty) is foolish.
It's not foolish, people that have been successful exclusives are basically owned by Getty, they are scared to leave and who can blame them.
They are trapped where they are and things are only going to get worse for them.
The new pay structure makes them employees with none of the safeguards or benefits that would normally give you. They have to slave away like burger flippers at Maccy D's to get any sort of decent return, and heaven help you if you miss that target by a single download one year.
-
Funny how so recently most of us considered the biggest threat to our microstock incomes to be our fellow contributors and the volumes of images being produced. How wrong we were.
And if what you suggest will happen at iStock does happen, artists screwed into the ground, you think it won't start happening a your agency next?
-
I can't see why any independent would refer a buyer to iStock as soon as these new rates kick in. The only person to blame in this is IS for the cuts, not the independents for acting in their own interests as a result.
Thanks JoAnn. Having been on both sides of the fence you have a uniquely informed perspective. Glad you understand this is where most of us are coming from. :)
-
Lisa - I'm not an apologist, I think your approach on this one couldn't be more wrong. Sadly, hate seeing you on this bandwagon. I resent you and others gouging my livelihood. I hope they don't kowtow, it will set another terrible precedent and I'm tired of these protests.
I can't see why any independent would refer a buyer to iStock as soon as these new rates kick in. The only person to blame in this is IS for the cuts, not the independents for acting in their own interests as a result.
I don't see why they would refer someone either. But actively canvassing for istock buyers to leave is a whole other thing. And based onisinformation. I hope buyers see through it.
-
.
-
Funny how so recently most of us considered the biggest threat to our microstock incomes to be our fellow contributors and the volumes of images being produced. How wrong we were.
And if what you suggest will happen at iStock does happen, artists screwed into the ground, you think it won't start happening a your agency next?
Just shows how trapped in the mindset of being having your work owned by one agency you are.
We don't have an agency, we have control of our work and chose to place it where we like and point people to whichever agency gives us the best deal.
If another agency pulls the same crap we can pull our work and point buyers elsewhere.
Feels good to be free.
-
Funny how so recently most of us considered the biggest threat to our microstock incomes to be our fellow contributors and the volumes of images being produced. How wrong we were.
And if what you suggest will happen at iStock does happen, artists screwed into the ground, you think it won't start happening a your agency next?
it will if we bend over to IS and beg them for more...
-
Replied to a deleted post ::)
-
I don't see why they would refer someone either. But actively canvassing for istock buyers to leave is a whole other thing. And based onisinformation. I hope buyers see through it.
No its not, its actually pretty much the same, think it through, you'll get this eventually and understand, I have faith in your cognition.
-
I don't see why they would refer someone either. But actively canvassing for istock buyers to leave is a whole other thing. And based onisinformation. I hope buyers see through it.
No its not, its actually pretty much the same, think it through, you'll get this eventually and understand, I have faith in your cognition.
perhaps you are TOO optimistic ;D
-
I don't see why they would refer someone either. But actively canvassing for istock buyers to leave is a whole other thing. And based onisinformation. I hope buyers see through it.
From all your comments I see only fear of leaving Istock. This kind of fear I often see in people who live in a horrible marriage, but are still afraid to break it. The "marriage" between Istock and it's exclusives right now I see only as a weird, little bit sick relationship, where Istock is a sadistic partner, and exclusives are the partner who suffers.
Go out people, branch to other agencies, you can't lose. If you could just look at the situation from outside..... I really don't understand what more do you expect from a business partner like this? Do you expect that you will somehow prosper if you stay exclusive there??
I see only the next "good" change coming next year, and then you will realize that you lost one more year in trusting to someone who doesn't appreciate your talent, your work, and you as a person.
I'm seeing this every day. Istock did something that I see in my country all the time, and that's what scared . out of me.
-
I don't see why they would refer someone either. But actively canvassing for istock buyers to leave is a whole other thing. And based onisinformation. I hope buyers see through it.
From all your comments I see only fear of leaving Istock. This kind of fear I often see in people who live in a horrible marriage, but are still afraid to break it. The "marriage" between Istock and it's exclusives right now I see only as a weird, little bit sick relationship, where Istock is a sadistic partner, and exclusives are the partner who suffers.
Go out people, branch to other agencies, you can't lose. If you could just look at the situation from outside..... I really don't understand what more do you expect from a business partner like this? Do you expect that you will somehow prosper if you stay exclusive there??
I see only the next "good" change coming next year, and then you will realize that you lost one more year in trusting to someone who doesn't appreciate your talent, your work, and you as a person.
I'm seeing this every day. Istock did something that I see in my country all the time, and that's what scared . out of me.
I think you make some very good points. Actions speak louder than words and you can count on those actions being repeated.
-
Lisa - I'm not an apologist, I think your approach on this one couldn't be more wrong. Sadly, hate seeing you on this bandwagon. I resent you and others gouging my livelihood. I hope they don't kowtow, it will set another terrible precedent and I'm tired of these protests.
you should resent "iStock" gouging your livlihood...one of us just doesn't get it... *sigh*
Wow, I've been away and I'm just getting caught up. What a mess.
This thread shows why a union won't work. We're all in the same boat but ultimately it's still everybody for themselves. Even more disturbing, but not surprising, is how many people are happy to worsen the situation for other contributors. Guess what. Bring your vaseline and your torches with you because the rest of the micro sites you're rushing to support are all now thinking "Look what Istock just got away with. We can make whatever changes we want".
And do you really think the majority of buyers care? A small percentage of buyer/contributors care. Another small percentage of buyers active in the community care. The majority of them have jobs and budgets and that comes first. Do they feel bad? Probably some do. Most don't know what we make and don't care as long as they keep getting good cheap images and keep their jobs.
Most of you will probably stay with istock but you're all for driving buyers away? One more time. You are driving buyers away from a place you still earn money at (???). How do you know they'll go to another microstock site? Like a buyer here recently posted that they're fed up with micro and found "good enough" images at free sites and Flickr Creative Commons. Or maybe they're tired of micro and will go to macro where most people here probably don't have portfolios. If you're unhappy, why not just pull your images and stop supporting the site? Does driving buyers away really help any of us?
-
And do you really think the majority of buyers care?
They are going to care a lot more once they see the uninspected crap iStock just blew through the queue and unleashed as 'Agency' images:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=255782&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=255782&page=1)
By the way, you can't turn off just Agency in searches, you have to turn off both Agency *and* Vetta.
-
From all your comments I see only fear of leaving Istock. This kind of fear I often see in people who live in a horrible marriage, but are still afraid to break it. The "marriage" between Istock and it's exclusives right now I see only as a weird, little bit sick relationship, where Istock is a sadistic partner, and exclusives are the partner who suffers.
Go out people, branch to other agencies, you can't lose. If you could just look at the situation from outside..... I really don't understand what more do you expect from a business partner like this? Do you expect that you will somehow prosper if you stay exclusive there??
I see only the next "good" change coming next year, and then you will realize that you lost one more year in trusting to someone who doesn't appreciate your talent, your work, and you as a person.
I'm seeing this every day. Istock did something that I see in my country all the time, and that's what scared . out of me.
This is wise advice and an excellent metaphor, we would do well to heed it.
-
From all your comments I see only fear of leaving Istock. This kind of fear I often see in people who live in a horrible marriage, but are still afraid to break it. The "marriage" between Istock and it's exclusives right now I see only as a weird, little bit sick relationship, where Istock is a sadistic partner, and exclusives are the partner who suffers.
Go out people, branch to other agencies, you can't lose. If you could just look at the situation from outside..... I really don't understand what more do you expect from a business partner like this? Do you expect that you will somehow prosper if you stay exclusive there??
I see only the next "good" change coming next year, and then you will realize that you lost one more year in trusting to someone who doesn't appreciate your talent, your work, and you as a person.
I'm seeing this every day. Istock did something that I see in my country all the time, and that's what scared . out of me.
This is wise advice and an excellent metaphor, we would do well to heed it.
yes it is very good (I think you should post it the istock forum)
-
Its all too easy making deals, promisses, analysis, etc, over something like the Internet.
-
For what it's worth my royalties went up when I left exclusivity and started contributing to other sites. My first year as an independent I made $300 more than what I was making at IS. I wish you the best David.
-
Congrats to the OP for taking a stand. Many talk the talk; very, very, very few walk the walk.
-
@ dgilder - sorry to see you go, though I can understand why given the current debacle - best wishes for the future anyway!
Just a question though - have iStock made any attempt to persuade you to change your mind?
I'd understood that in the past they'd sometimes contact you and try to get you to reconsider if you'd opted to give up exclusivity, but maybe they're a bit too preoccupied just now...
-
No, they haven't, and I don't think they could if they wanted to. Too much legal risk, considering I have a signed and witnessed document that they acknowledge receipt of, that essentially guaranteed me a future 40% royalty in exchange for becoming exclusive at the start of the year.
-
Ouch. Seems like that legal risk is a big reason they SHOULD be contacting you.
-
I don't see why they would refer someone either. But actively canvassing for istock buyers to leave is a whole other thing. And based onisinformation. I hope buyers see through it.
From all your comments I see only fear of leaving Istock. This kind of fear I often see in people who live in a horrible marriage, but are still afraid to break it. The "marriage" between Istock and it's exclusives right now I see only as a weird, little bit sick relationship, where Istock is a sadistic partner, and exclusives are the partner who suffers.
Go out people, branch to other agencies, you can't lose. If you could just look at the situation from outside..... I really don't understand what more do you expect from a business partner like this? Do you expect that you will somehow prosper if you stay exclusive there??
I see only the next "good" change coming next year, and then you will realize that you lost one more year in trusting to someone who doesn't appreciate your talent, your work, and you as a person.
I'm seeing this every day. Istock did something that I see in my country all the time, and that's what scared . out of me.
Well put. That about sums it up. Sometimes you need to back up yo get ahead.