MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: franckreporter on July 12, 2011, 17:13
-
I notice a new best match shake this evening....check your portfolio....
I do not understand why they need to shake, now we have the filter ...
seems to have been given a boost with new images
-
Well, whatever they've done has resulted in me not having a sale in the last couple of hours. That NEVER happens on a weekday.
Just keeps going from bad to worse over there ::)
-
all very strange....i don't know this logic...
Now buyers that are accustomed to seeing more or less the same pictures in the same positions they will need 2 days to get used to look for those who thought they found in a particular position ...
ETA: big boost to all E+ images
-
That explains it, thought there was a holiday today.
-
That explains it, thought there was a holiday today.
no, it was live from 2/3 hours ago only
-
Yep, this is a big one. Looks like it's the "try to make everybody happy" shake.
Top results now have a stronger mix of editorial and non-exclusive files while Agency/Vetta have been diluted.
Both "+" collections seem to be getting a boost
-
Yep, this is a big one. Looks like it's the "try to make everybody happy" shake.
Top results now have a stronger mix of editorial and non-exclusive files while Agency/Vetta have been diluted.
Both "+" collections seem to be getting a boost
God, I hope so. Sales have literally ground almost to a halt.
If the boost for + files is going to last awhile I might add some more to it. Currently I am several hundred under my limit.
Weird - I just had a 50 jump in my $ total, with no sales showing to explain it...?? Update - Nevermind, it was an EL that was slow to show on my stats bar. Well, YAY anyhow :)
-
Well, whatever they've done has resulted in me not having a sale in the last couple of hours. That NEVER happens on a weekday.
Just keeps going from bad to worse over there ::)
Maybe its the tens of thousands of new "+" collection images in front of yours ::)
-
Well, whatever they've done has resulted in me not having a sale in the last couple of hours. That NEVER happens on a weekday.
Just keeps going from bad to worse over there ::)
Maybe its the tens of thousands of new "+" collection images in front of yours ::)
Sorry, not quite following your point...
-
Well, whatever they've done has resulted in me not having a sale in the last couple of hours. That NEVER happens on a weekday.
Just keeps going from bad to worse over there ::)
Maybe its the tens of thousands of new "+" collection images in front of yours ::)
Sorry, not quite following your point...
A boost to the + collections takes up slots. if your images were being shown at the first three pages, maybe they are at page 7 now. im just guessing but everything factors in here and a boost IMO is definately a big factor. I would use up all my + slots now if i were u.
-
A boost to the + collections takes up slots. if your images were being shown at the first three pages, maybe they are at page 7 now. im just guessing but everything factors in here and a boost IMO is definately a big factor. I would use up all my + slots now if i were u.
Yeah, I should probably do that. ^^
In my case, a boost to the + images isn't likely to knock mine out of the top slots, because as a non-exclusive, my stuff hasn't been up front for a loooooong time ;)
-
Big change. The search results look much better now. No more V/A with zero downloads in front. Very nice mix.
-
Looks like my leading files in a search are nearer the front but if I have a lot of files on that term then the bulk of them get pushed further backwards, even if they have + status.
Not good so far.
-
Big change. The search results look much better now. No more V/A with zero downloads in front. Very nice mix.
Well, then, that's the second retreat on vetta in a matter of days. First the sliders, then the match itself. It must mean something.
-
I love it! I have images in the first 3 rows for the 4 of my most important search terms :)
-
Well, then, that's the second retreat on vetta in a matter of days. First the sliders, then the match itself. It must mean something.
Wondering if the Bigstock ad might be a contributing factor?
-
Well, then, that's the second retreat on vetta in a matter of days. First the sliders, then the match itself. It must mean something.
Wondering if the Bigstock ad might be a contributing factor?
Yeah, they finally unStuck the A/V files from the top positions ;)
-
Interesting. Let's see how long this lasts.
-
what is the point to push the E+ file forward when there is a filter that works very well ?
Perhaps not all customers know how to use the filter?
booo !!
-
Now buyers that are accustomed to seeing more or less the same pictures in the same positions they will need 2 days to get used to look for those who thought they found in a particular position ...
I think only the contributors are so obsessed with search results that they'd spot the difference ;) . I don't understand why, since your images get placed where they do and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it, but some ppl really are obsessed with best match placement. I don't waste my time with it, I do a few searches a month just out of curiosty (when I have time to spare), to see where my bestsellers are placed. Really not something to get completely mental about.
-
They've implemented some sort of slot system - of the first 200, Agency gets 28, Vetta 52 and everything else 120 - in all but one of the test searches I keep track of. Not sure how many deviate - sexy woman is the only one in my list of searches
-
John Lund just did a thing on Pickerells evaluation of Getty's slot system.
-
When you see the chart in Lund's blog post ( (http://blog.johnlund.com/)Pickerell's) you see how few slots Vetta, TAC and the iStock Vectors/Exclusive get. Compare to Flickr collection's 20...
Tough business :(
-
no use, no sale at all >:(
-
Mine is a weird mix of everything.
But a lot of audio.
-
Well, in looking at my images and how they fare in this latest shift if I can't make sales now I never will.....of course, considering how bad July is so far it won't take much to see an improvement.
-
Looks better! well a heck of a lot better then before anyway. Now if it results in more sales or not, that remains to be seen. It should! if the traffic is there.
-
Are we allowed to discuss Best Match ?
-
Shank, I just put you on 'ignore'.
-
Looks good to me for photos.
Videos too much saturated all my video file is top of my portfolio.
-
no use, no sale at all >:(
I just wanted to say that. SS exploaded, just like they had a best match shake up. If I think of all the threads that are being opened during the course of the last few months, no best match has ever affected me in a big way, to be honest I've never even really noticed it. Only April was bad and at the end of June sales start to decrease, which is normal for the beginning of the summer.
-
They've implemented some sort of slot system - of the first 200, Agency gets 28, Vetta 52 and everything else 120 - in all but one of the test searches I keep track of. Not sure how many deviate - sexy woman is the only one in my list of searches
---------------------------------------------
Just wanted to thank you for tracking and posting this info over time. Very helpful
-
now seems everything is back to normal
-
^^He said normal. LOOL!
-
normal for the paranormal
-
Shank, I just put you on 'ignore'.
LOL I gotta do nasty things around here, everyday my ignore list goes up, on 13 :P
-
Shank, I just put you on 'ignore'.
Can someone tell him i dont care :)
-
Shank, I just put you on 'ignore'.
Can someone tell him i dont care :)
he (shank_ali) doesnīt care :)
-
The Best Match sort on Istockphoto has a particular aim which never wavers..It's to give the buyers a good mix of content in there search results if they stay with the sites default.
I have been uploading continually since becoming a member in November 2007.I have never noticed a huge drop/rise in my sales because HQ decides to alter/tweek the search results.I have enough diverse content uploaded over a period of 3+ years to be covered by any change.
Continue....
-
No you wouldnt notice much change,this is a typical TS-search, too much of, as you say yourself, "diverse stuff" so it doesnt really matter one way or the other, does it? at the moment the new best match, at least in my searches, looks like a total paradise for the generalist, almost identical to TS, i.e. nothing spectacular.
'
If you are nieched or slightly creative in any way, I would say youre in trouble.
Oh well, when I looked at it early this morning, it looked OK, now they are tweaking it and its going down.
-
That little experiment didn't last long! So today it's a slightly higher "regular" count than before the slots.
@shank. Diversity isn't your issue, but that your sales patterns and volume aren't such that you can see what happens.
It has happened to many people, many times - overnight drops so large it was like turning off a tap. And that's exactly what it was. You shouldn't extrapolate from your own situation and assume that's true for all - a sample size of one over 1/3 of iStock's time in business isn't statistically significant.
-
That little experiment didn't last long! So today it's a slightly higher "regular" count than before the slots.
@shank. Diversity isn't your issue, but that your sales patterns and volume aren't such that you can see what happens.
It has happened to many people, many times - overnight drops so large it was like turning off a tap. And that's exactly what it was. You shouldn't extrapolate from your own situation and assume that's true for all - a sample size of one over 1/3 of iStock's time in business isn't statistically significant.
Thanks! but Im not too sure I follow you here. What exactly do you mean? :-\
best.
-
I think she is counting the number of files with a one or two point rating in her column. So the normal collection, not e+, vetta or agency. At least that is the way I understand it.
Looks like V/A content in search results is going back up. If this is what the buyers want, fine, but I see so many files with few sales. There must be a really huge margin for them to make it worthwhile to lose the volume sales.
-
That little experiment didn't last long!..
Thanks! but Im not too sure I follow you here. What exactly do you mean? :-\
best.
Is it the chart that's the puzzle or the comment to shank? They're two separate thoughts.
The chart just showed that yesterday's slot system has gone. The comment to shank that he thinks his diversity and regular uploading renders him immune from best match changes was that I think he's wrong to assume that means best match changes are not relevant.
-
Best Match is very relevent for the buyers and Istock as a business.We(contributors) have no say or control over any change.Off course we notice and comment on that change,especially if the sales wane, but i have never noticed any ill effect on my beautiful crafted imagery.
Think posative and some content might surface that you forgot about...Cream always rises.
-
best match changes everything.. how can you say it is only about buyers? pictures are from who? from buyers too??
if we are contributors and sell our pictures and the best match changes we will feel that on the earnings, of course the more you sale the more you will feel, once it might be good or worst.. in my case it never changes once I sell just 2 or 3 pics per day there so I cannot say much.. but I am sure it affects everybody it just impossible not to..
-
best match changes everything.. how can you say it is only about buyers? pictures are from who? from buyers too??
if we are contributors and sell our pictures and the best match changes we will feel that on the earnings, of course the more you sale the more you will feel, once it might be good or worst.. in my case it never changes once I sell just 2 or 3 pics per day there so I cannot say much.. but I am sure it affects everybody it just impossible not to..
He is mumbling lots of mumbo jumbo, I bet he doesnt even know what he is talking about. Its as if he is sent over here to patronize and tone things down.
-
The Best Match sort on Istockphoto has a particular aim which never wavers..It's to give the buyers a good mix of content in there search results if they stay with the sites default.
Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?! Buyers want good quality images at reasonable prices. What Istock's best match has been giving them for a very long time now is good-to-mediocre images at exorbitant prices.
Surely none of us really is naive enough to think, at this late date, that the best match is anything other than a way to put the maximum amount of dollars in the coffers, regardless of buyer's needs.
-
The Best Match sort on Istockphoto has a particular aim which never wavers..It's to give the buyers a good mix of content in there search results if they stay with the sites default.
Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?! Buyers want good quality images at reasonable prices. What Istock's best match has been giving them for a very long time now is good-to-mediocre images at exorbitant prices.
Surely none of us really is naive enough to think, at this late date, that the best match is anything other than a way to put the maximum amount of dollars in the coffers, regardless of buyer's needs.
What's up with you !
I think Best Match is just that for the designers who spend there money at Istockphoto.
-
you "seem" to know a lot LOL best match is used for what % of buyers/designers??
-
I think Best Match is just that for the designers who spend there money at Istockphoto.
LOL!! Yeah, that's why the "Buyers Bail" thread is at 55 pages now. Filled with quotes from happy buyers who are finding all the great stock they want at awesome low prices! WooYAY!!!!!!
-
I think Best Match is just that for the designers who spend there money at Istockphoto.
LOL!! Yeah, that's why the "Buyers Bail" thread is at 55 pages now. Filled with quotes from happy buyers who are finding all the great stock they want at awesome low prices! WooYAY!!!!!!
Normally I would blow off the, Best Match issues and sales are falling, complaints and whining. It's never ending, so like rain, no one notices another few more drops here and there.
Well it's official now. I haven't had a download on IS in 30 days!
Small collection or not, I've never had a dry spell for that long. Considering I've had the same pictures and at least some monthly downloads for years, I can only guess, that I don't exist and I just haven't realized it yet, or sales have fallen off a cliff! (calling all Lemmings) Not one CrapStock shot sold in a month? Impossible!
Wait, when Mostphotos passes IS, we'll all know it's the end of the world! ;D (is it 2012 yet?)
-
Normally I would blow off the, Best Match issues and sales are falling, complaints and whining. It's never ending, so like rain, no one notices another few more drops here and there.
Well it's official now. I haven't had a download on IS in 30 days!
Small collection or not, I've never had a dry spell for that long. Considering I've had the same pictures and at least some monthly downloads for years, I can only guess, that I don't exist and I just haven't realized it yet, or sales have fallen off a cliff! (calling all Lemmings) Not one CrapStock shot sold in a month? Impossible!
Wait, when Mostphotos passes IS, we'll all know it's the end of the world! ;D (is it 2012 yet?)
LOL! This is so typical. Dismiss the complaints of others as whining until the same thing happens to you. Then it is a real problem. ::)
-
you "seem" to know a lot LOL best match is used for what % of buyers/designers??
42%
-
you "seem" to know a lot LOL best match is used for what % of buyers/designers??
42%
LOL if so eheh we donīt need to worry about best match.. thats nothing ;D
-
'Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?'
Actually, I think the relevancy factor does a pretty good job of showing what other buyers were happy with. Within that, the mix of collections is what it is.
-
'Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?'
Actually, I think the relevancy factor does a pretty good job of showing what other buyers were happy with. Within that, the mix of collections is what it is.
For a long time a lot of searches were dominated by zero-sale vetta/agency images. I'm not sure you can say buyers were happy with stuff they never bought thereby justifying P1 display.
On the other hand, in the individual collections where there is some sales volume, yes, they are ordered with significant weight given to their historic sales performance.
-
This best match, is better then the last one, I agree to that but its not what it used to be. However come on fellas, I mean lets be honest, any best match change is done in the hope of generating more revenue or else, whats the point?
True, most of these zero Vettas, etc, are gone, just wondering what they were doing there in the first place? Anyway Ive got nothing against Vettas up front, good selling tool but only if they are commercially the best.
Recon they are going to keep tweaking this I just hope they dont keep tweaking us over the edge, as before.
-
Best Match is very relevent for the buyers and Istock as a business.We(contributors) have no say or control over any change.Off course we notice and comment on that change,especially if the sales wane, but i have never noticed any ill effect on my beautiful crafted imagery.
Think posative and some content might surface that you forgot about...Cream always rises.
Master baiter.
-
'Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?'
Actually, I think the relevancy factor does a pretty good job of showing what other buyers were happy with. Within that, the mix of collections is what it is.
Indeed it is what it is - an unqualified disaster. If they had left it strictly at relevancy, without monkeying around with the various collection placements, I have no doubt it would have been great.
-
Normally I would blow off the, Best Match issues and sales are falling, complaints and whining. It's never ending, so like rain, no one notices another few more drops here and there.
Well it's official now. I haven't had a download on IS in 30 days!
Small collection or not, I've never had a dry spell for that long. Considering I've had the same pictures and at least some monthly downloads for years, I can only guess, that I don't exist and I just haven't realized it yet, or sales have fallen off a cliff! (calling all Lemmings) Not one CrapStock shot sold in a month? Impossible!
Wait, when Mostphotos passes IS, we'll all know it's the end of the world! ;D (is it 2012 yet?)
LOL! This is so typical. Dismiss the complaints of others as whining until the same thing happens to you. Then it is a real problem. ::)
Not really, I'm admitting that I finally see the results of the complaint, and before I didn't always see anything.
If you want an example, read messages going back for four years about how the best match has screwed sales and everything is wrong. It gets a little boring to see people crying and wringing their hands for month after month and year after year, with nothing changing.
So I'm admitting, for the first time, I saw a change! ;D
When the new improved (pick a version, I think they all kind of suck) best match changed before and it hadn't even been implemented, people saw a change. People see a change based on the phases of the Moon or what color shirt the newscaster is wearing. A little less voodoo and more science would be nice. And of course now that I've said that, I suppose a flood of sales that were missing from reporting will suddenly appear and I'll be wrong about that too? ::)
Until then I'll stick to my theory that the best match changes all the time. Sometimes older photos get moved to the front. Another day/hour/minutes or location, and new photos get pushed to the front. Sometimes best sellers go forward and others, most views get a heavier weighting. It's always changing, so people like us, can't game the system and try to jam our images up in the front of the searches.
As for my own, I don't know why a search would make a difference, I still don't know why anyone buys anything I have up on IS. Well maybe that one picture, but the rest is "isolated on black" or things I found around the office. When I do come up with something good, IS rejects it for EXIF date doesn't match the editorial image, or lighting/color balance, when it's spot on. If that's what they want, CrapStock, that's what they get. So I can't complain about sales, when anything is appreciated.
ps, SS has been doing fine and now passed IS again. Supposed to be slow July and SS has jumped ahead. Two months ago SS was dying. If I had an answer I'd do something about it, but it appears that "stuff happens" and the IS trends are unpredictable.
'Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?'
Yeah, better said in many less words. I'm not sure that best match does anything and CV seems to be good for some people, while it's in outer space for others. I haven't decided because sometimes my subjects just don't exist in ISCV. ;)
-
Best Match is very relevent for the buyers and Istock as a business.We(contributors) have no say or control over any change.Off course we notice and comment on that change,especially if the sales wane, but i have never noticed any ill effect on my beautiful crafted imagery.
Think posative and some content might surface that you forgot about...Cream always rises.
Master baiter.
I use to call one of our teachers that..Mr Bates.I had to squint to read your reply :D
-
'Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?'
Actually, I think the relevancy factor does a pretty good job of showing what other buyers were happy with. Within that, the mix of collections is what it is.
Indeed it is what it is - an unqualified disaster. If they had left it strictly at relevancy, without monkeying around with the various collection placements, I have no doubt it would have been great.
I dunno, I don't think there's anything wrong with displaying a mix of all collections. Anyhow, the pricing filter makes it a non-issue.
-
I dunno, I don't think there's anything wrong with displaying a mix of all collections. Anyhow, the pricing filter makes it a non-issue.
Well, clearly it is still an issue. With people reporting halved or stalled sales overnight, most buyers are apparently still using default sorting.
AFAIK the debate wasn't whether there should or shouldn't be XYZ collection on the front page. It's about whether the best match is directed at what serves buyers best, vs. lining Getty's pockets.
Are you saying you really don't think maximizing revenues plays a part in the best match? That it is ENTIRELY geared toward buyers needs with no other motivation? Because that was Shank's position, and that was what I was responding to. When you start to agree with Shank it's time to take a look at where you logic broke down ;)
-
Are you saying you really don't think maximizing revenues plays a part in the best match? That it is ENTIRELY geared toward buyers needs with no other motivation? Because that was Shank's position, and that was what I was responding to. When you start to agree with Shank it's time to take a look at where you logic broke down ;)
Well, we all know he's on acid, lol.
No, I think you've got a mix of strict relevancy (previous buyer interest, plus downloads, etc.) and the interest ( agency, and consequently, contributor) in display of various collections (pricing levels).
-
Try this for size: (Nov 2006) and it's never stopped since. :D
Yesterday was my worst Thursday for a long time. I was wondering why, and made a Best Match search on penguins. Normally the best match search will show one of my penguins on the 3third or so place. But now they moved to the second page.
What happend? What I discovered, that all the images which are ranked before my images are images from exclusive Photographers. Is it a coincidence or did they really changed the best match search in favor of the exclusiv Photographers?
-
Are you saying you really don't think maximizing revenues plays a part in the best match? That it is ENTIRELY geared toward buyers needs with no other motivation? Because that was Shank's position, and that was what I was responding to. When you start to agree with Shank it's time to take a look at where you logic broke down ;)
Well, we all know he's on acid, lol.
No, I think you've got a mix of strict relevancy (previous buyer interest, plus downloads, etc.) and the interest ( agency, and consequently, contributor) in display of various collections (pricing levels).
Pricing filter? beginning of last week, a buyer mail me on my private mail, wanting 2 files, high-res, mechanic with jet-engine and aircraft being serviced on ground. This buyer has bought from me before, in 2009, so he is an old buyer. This time he cant see the files and he isnt even aware of this pricing filter, third time this happens.
We did business, I sent him the high-res files.
I think we can assume this price-filter is used by just a few buyers, its messy and with all collections, sliders, etc, its even more messy, especially for the majority who just quickly wants to find a pic.
-
The mix seems really weird this morning and for the first time I took the time to write it down to get an even better sense.
I sell a lot of sexy high heel shoes (I blame it on my wife, she always adds to her collection) so my search was for "high heels" photos only, full range of prices, best match and 200 images on the page. The breakdown was as follows:
Vetta: 144 images / 72%
Regular: 25 / 12.5%
Agency: 23 / 11.5%
Exclusive+: 8 / 4%
I had one image on the first page, a Vetta. About 18-24 months ago I was dominating this search which has now gradually decreased to today's 1, on a subject that I most likely sell the most of anyone in the world... Let's just say that I'm not pleased.
-
72% of the first page of any search from what I believe to be 1-2% of the collection is incredible.
All the searches look a strange mix and personally I'm looking to be dead in the water this week.
Every time it seems to be settling back to something like "normal" they change it again.
The whole thing really needs sorting so that buyers don't find it a complete turn off and disappear completely before it's too late. (How often has this been said now?)
The price filter is a welcome addition, but not if they are going to completely fill the unfiltered results with their preferred content, presumably to make up for the people who are using the filter.
-
Hi Dave! how goes.
As it happens this best match aint too bad but I still think its a lost cause Dave. No matter what they do, it wont help, it seems. Im not sure its a best match problem anymore, I think the plain truth is, they simply dont have the traffic like in the "old" days.
The differance of the IS today and the one we knew is just astronomical. Other agencies are taking the driving seats, I mean at SS, I just have one EL upon another, almost every day.
You have a nice port Dave! we have known each other for some time now, my advice is, you need to look around, look at some of the other main 3 agencies, and some of the others etc. I know its tough, being exclusive and all that goes with it, but its gone sour. The price-filter? well, sounds nice, looks nice but thats just about all.
Yesterdays best match change looked OK, but only for a short time, then the tweaking started and soon it was all lost, yet again. This is unfortunately what you are going to have to live with.
all the best Dave ( Im still a non smoker, thanks to you, really) and congrats to the Diamond.
-
Well whenever you raise the price you lose customers. That is a completely predictable, normal market behaviour.
By creating a best match that in the first 200 images (or first three pages) had a dominance of files that were 20-50 times more expensive than the regular collection it was clear that customers will go elsewhere to fill their needs. On top of that the artistic vetta images, although fascinating and inspiring are not generic (thatīs what gives them their edgy appeal) and so will not be sold in large volume.
Shutterstock has overtaken istock, dreamstime is probably next. Traffic on istock has dropped in equal proportion.
But is istock as a company making less money?
Because of the very high prices they can probably afford to lose very large number of buyers. And they also pay the contributors less than on the normal collection.
Maybe some of you remember my comparison with the coffee and wine producers. It is possible that although we as contributors, especially the "coffe producers" (generic, high volume images) are losing out, istock is making so much more money with their "wine producers" (artistic, edgy and expensive) that it worth shifting istock towards this more specialized market.
best match gives you a crystalclear direction of the buyer groups they are targeting. If expensive files dominate, they have decided to focus on a much smaller market. Losing customers then isnīt a problem for the agency, just for us (coffee). Wine producers will rejoice and istock will probably become the center for the more edgy, artistic type of artists.
I still hope they find a better balance, but maybe it is financially not worth it to focus on both buyer groups. Getty has other, cheaper agencies (photos.com, thinkstock) that can target the buyers of generic, high volume images. My sales at the partner collections are going up, which is the result of aggressive marketing and a dedicated sales team.
Since I have images on getty, istock and the partner agencies it can still work out for me as a "coffee producer". I just have to look at the bigger picture, not just istock. However guidance from HQ how to best target image production and which customer groups are being catered to by the different agencies and collections would be very, very helpful. If they want us to work with the "big picture", then please let us know.
-
Well whenever you raise the price you lose customers. That is a completely predictable, normal market behaviour.
By creating a best match that in the first 200 images (or first three pages) had a dominance of files that were 20-50 times more expensive than the regular collection it was clear that customers will go elsewhere to fill their needs. On top of that the artistic vetta images, although fascinating and inspiring are not generic (thatīs what gives them their edgy appeal) and so will not be sold in large volume.
Shutterstock has overtaken istock, dreamstime is probably next. Traffic on istock has dropped in equal proportion.
But is istock as a company making less money?
Because of the very high prices they can probably afford to lose very large number of buyers. And they also pay the contributors less than on the normal collection.
Maybe some of you remember my comparison with the coffee and wine producers. It is possible that although we as contributors, especially the "coffe producers" (generic, high volume images) are losing out, istock is making so much more money with their "wine producers" (artistic, edgy and expensive) that it worth shifting istock towards this more specialized market.
best match gives you a crystalclear direction of the buyer groups they are targeting. If expensive files dominate, they have decided to focus on a much smaller market. Losing customers then isnīt a problem for the agency, just for us (coffee). Wine producers will rejoice and istock will probably become the center for the more edgy, artistic type of artists.
I still hope they find a better balance, but maybe it is financially not worth it to focus on both buyer groups. Getty has other, cheaper agencies (photos.com, thinkstock) that can target the buyers of generic, high volume images. My sales at the partner collections are going up, which is the result of aggressive marketing and a dedicated sales team.
Since I have images on getty, istock and the partner agencies it can still work out for me as a "coffee producer". I just have to look at the bigger picture, not just istock. However guidance from HQ how to best target image production and which customer groups are being catered to by the different agencies and collections would be very, very helpful. If they want us to work with the "big picture", then please let us know.
Good and valid points!
Weather or not they are making less or more money is ofcourse for us mortals, unimportant since we dont see any of it. Maybe the top 50 see it all, I dont know but if ordinary Diamonds like myself are suffering, then its no good is it?
I dont think they have any option but to gear their business towards the high end, etc, since they have wrecked all other avenues of lets say ordinary buyers, funny policy indeed, I must say, but you might be right on this one.
Losing buyers AND contributors, can not be a clever strategy, no matter who you are, look at SAAB, GM, etc.
best.
-
Photographers/Creative artists are a dime a dozen. We create digital products that can be sold worldwide at lightspeed.
They can source artists from all over the world and with istockīs excellent feedback system/forums/Lypses they will always have enough creative talent to find the few gems they need who will become contributors for the high end collections and getty. istock is an excellent talent scout. I know, Iīve received fantastic feedback and I will always be grateful.
I think what I am trying to say, that hopefully things are not as bleak for exclusives or "coffee artists" like me. But my income will become spread over several sites, not just istock.
I sincerly hope what is happening is part of a careful strategy.
My worst nightmare is that there is some internal power struggle with different people pulling directions to different buyer groups. Or best match changes that come from panic and bad predictions. Somebody has to be clearly in charge of the "big picture". You canīt have different parts of a company work independently from each other or even fight each other. You need clear leadership to keep everyone focussed, every employee, contributor, even the cleaning staff need to know their place and what their role is. Ideally they should absoluetly love what they do and be so passionate about it that you have to force them to take a break or a holiday.
A company is not a democracy, it needs benovelent dictatorship and good communication. Think of Apple Computer. Or a well oiled machine.
At the moment many contributors are confused and frustrated and probably quite a few buyers as well. So this machine isnīt working at optimal performance. And it needs more than just an oil change.
By the way, one major disadvantage of focussing on a small buyer group, is that it becomes a lot easier for your competition to take the market away from you....
-
Photographers/Creative artists are a dime a dozen. We create digital products that can be sold worldwide at lightspeed.
They can source artists from all over the world and with istockīs excellent feedback system/forums/Lypses they will always have enough creative talent to find the few gems they need who will become contributors for the high end collections and getty. istock is an excellent talent scout. I know, Iīve received fantastic feedback and I will always be grateful.
I think what I am trying to say, that hopefully things are not as bleak for exclusives or "coffee artists" like me. But my income will become spread over several sites, not just istock.
I sincerly hope what is happening is part of a careful strategy.
My worst nightmare is that there is some internal power struggle with different people pulling directions to different buyer groups. Or best match changes that come from panic and bad predictions. Somebody has to be clearly in charge of the "big picture". You canīt have different parts of a company work independently from each other or even fight each other. You need clear leadership to keep everyone focussed, every employee, contributor, even the cleaning staff need to know their place and what their role is. Ideally they should absoluetly love what they do and be so passionate about it that you have to force them to take a break or a holiday.
A company is not a democracy, it needs benovelent dictatorship and good communication. Think of Apple Computer. Or a well oiled machine.
At the moment many contributors are confused and frustrated and probably quite a few buyers as well. So this machine isnīt working at optimal performance. And it needs more than just an oil change.
By the way, one major disadvantage of focussing on a small buyer group, is that it becomes a lot easier for your competition to take the market away from you....
what a great post...very good summary of the way I feel too. particularly agree with your 'benevolent democracy' comment...my only surprise with your post is that you contribute to the PP....would you mind extrapolating on why you think the PP is a safe venture? has always seemed that the PP will become mandatory to me, since so many contributors have opted out, and they want our content in their sub sites one way or the other....what do you see happening in the industry when they inevitably take the option away?
-
I tell you whats happening in the industry. Why do you think us RM photographers within the Getty -RM, was more or less forced to sign away our material to RF and micro? or get out.
IS has always been a thorn in the side of Getty, was a strong site until Getty came along. Within a year from now, IS, will be incorporated in TS, thats whats happening.
-
I tell you whats happening in the industry. Why do you think us RM photographers within the Getty -RM, was more or less forced to sign away our material to RF and micro? or get out.
IS has always been a thorn in the side of Getty, was a strong site until Getty came along. Within a year from now, IS, will be incorporated in TS, thats whats happening.
Getty's buyers migrated over to istock over the years for cheaper prices. Gettys like "where do you think your going?" comes in through the backdoor and raises prices. Essentially trying to squeeze every last dollar and creates thinkstock for the betrayed buyers but the buyers end up going over to SS and others that dont stink of Getty doodoo...
-
"what a great post...very good summary of the way I feel too. particularly agree with your 'benevolent democracy' comment...my only surprise with your post is that you contribute to the PP....would you mind extrapolating on why you think the PP is a safe venture? "
Thanks for the flowers :-)
I am contributing to the pp Programm because the istock subscription program wasnīt competitive with Shutterstock. And as all the independents reported good results from subscription, istock needed an offer for the customers that can only use subscriptions, apparently there are many companies that prefer this licensing model.
Because the subcription offer is on a different site, I am not worried that it will kill my pay as you go sales on istock.
Obviously, the pp programm will be rising in volume, because the sites and the programm are new and getty is promoting them heavily.
A company can grow in many ways:
- they can add more customers by expanding into new countries or culture groups
- they can make their existing customers buy more, for instance by adding new file types (like adding editorial and png)
- they can take away market share from the competition.
The marketing team must of course address all of these areas, so I strongly welcome the pp Program for the subscription market(still do).
So unless they are doing less to promote istock, then I donīt believe that it is the pp programm that is creating the loss in traffic. If the PP Programm is successful you should see Shutterstock losing traffic while the PP Program is gaining traffic. But obviously, this isnīt happening. However, the pp Program is not growing to the same extent as istock is losing traffic. So I donīt think that the normal pay as you go customers are going to PP.
I believe it is a best match that strongly favors files that are 20-50 more expensive than what the customers is used to and that the artistic vetta files by their style simply can never be bought in high volume. If you sort istock by downloads and then again by best match you see a huge, huge difference. A sort by downloads shows you what the regular istock customers are looking for in a given search.
Sort by downloads and you get light, airy, generic, files, often isolated on white, lots of copy space. Of course they are also bland, often boring, but that is what they are supposed to be.
A best match that is dominated by Vetta is darker, fuller, less copy space, edgy, inspiring, artistic...but simply not as widely usable. This means lower downloads. The files are excellent, but the creative edge limits their use. istock has always had these edgy files. Why should they sell more if the price is raised?? Having a specialized collection will help the customers that are looking for cover art and save them time. But it will not become a high volume product.
best match has the biggest effect on customers. They donīt want to "learn their way around an agency". They just want to walk in, find the file and leave. Ideally the best match should read their minds to magically serve up what they want.
Maybe the Price filter really is the solution, but I still think a best match that offers more of a style that is similar to highest downloads will be best. That is why I liked the best match yesterday. It seemed to have a great mix of all files.
-
Since Im online I will answer you. I am 100% convinced, especially now after the last best match change. This has got nothing do with the best match or whatever. Look, faithful clients dont really care, do they?
The traffic, isnt there, simple as that, Vettas, agency files, E+, P+, it doesnt really matter, the amount of buyers just isnt there anymore. A bad best match, can be repaired but lack of buyers, etc, is damned difficult to get back.
We know Getty is a joke, their scheme is to milk the cash-cow and then dump it and with minimal costs, everybody know this but some silly buyers. Its like the old casino bosses in LA, skimming off the top, bleeding it dry and then dump it.
Its been like that since 96.
On another note: I really hope SS and DT, takes over this sinking Micro ship and before buyers get so fed up with all the rubbish that they go RM instead.
If the IS crew would have had more spunk in them from the beginning, not being yes-crawling, Im sure it would be slightly better.
-
I am contributing to the pp Programm because the istock subscription program wasnīt competitive with Shutterstock. And as all the independents reported good results from subscription, istock needed an offer for the customers that can only use subscriptions, apparently there are many companies that prefer this licensing model.
Because the subcription offer is on a different site, I am not worried that it will kill my pay as you go sales on istock.
You have to first decide if that's even a sales model you want to participate in, and a customer base that you want to sell to. Not that IS isn't offering one. IMO at least.
-
The buyers are there. The market is there (and many emerging economies are untapped). World business hasnīt stopped advertising.
They just arenīt on istock. Shutterstock and Dreamstime seem to have them.
What is the biggest difference between these sites and istock? Prices and best match.
Unless of course, there is no marketing for istock (ads, trade shows, direct marketing)
"You have to first decide if that's even a sales model you want to participate in, and a customer base that you want to sell to. Not that IS isn't offering one. IMO at least."
I know that is where we differ in opinion. If I saw a huge rise in PP traffic and a dramatic drop in both Shutterstock AND istock, then I would probably be very critical. The way it is, I still think the business model is different enough. istock and Shutterstock coexisted for a long, long time and istock was the dominant player.
I may be wrong. Maybe istock is losing all their traffic to Thinkstock. But the stats donīt seem to support that IMO.
-
I am contributing to the pp Programm because the istock subscription program wasnīt competitive with Shutterstock. And as all the independents reported good results from subscription, istock needed an offer for the customers that can only use subscriptions, apparently there are many companies that prefer this licensing model.
Because the subcription offer is on a different site, I am not worried that it will kill my pay as you go sales on istock.
You have to first decide if that's even a sales model you want to participate in, and a customer base that you want to sell to. Not that IS isn't offering one. IMO at least.
Bolded by me.
I worry about buyers leaving istock for subscription based sites will only hurt this industry further. Buyer migration to the subscription based site will lead to more content providers grudgingly switching over which just devalues the work even further. The slope will get steeper.
-
I am contributing to the pp Programm because the istock subscription program wasnīt competitive with Shutterstock. And as all the independents reported good results from subscription, istock needed an offer for the customers that can only use subscriptions, apparently there are many companies that prefer this licensing model.
Because the subcription offer is on a different site, I am not worried that it will kill my pay as you go sales on istock.
You have to first decide if that's even a sales model you want to participate in, and a customer base that you want to sell to. Not that IS isn't offering one. IMO at least.
Bolded by me.
I worry about buyers leaving istock for subscription based sites will only hurt this industry further. Buyer migration to the subscription based site will lead to more content providers grudgingly switching over which just devalues the work even further. The slope will get steeper.
I think that as suppliers all we can do is try to ride the waves, not control them. The industry is driven by forces that are far beyond ability of anybody with just a few thousand images to control. I know some people say that is defeatist, I think it is realistic.
In individual sites, the decisions of managers certainly can affect the direction of the industry. When I was running businesses, my constant imperative was to do what I felt would serve my customers best - believing that profit would naturally follow. That's terribly old fashioned, I know, but it worked for me and I still think it is the only sure strategy for long-term success. It will be interesting to see if the sites which believe in milking customers instead of serving them have a long-term future.
-
In the past 24-36 hours, best match has changed a few times again.
-
I think that as suppliers all we can do is try to ride the waves, not control them. The industry is driven by forces that are far beyond ability of anybody with just a few thousand images to control. I know some people say that is defeatist, I think it is realistic.
I'm not necessarily trying to control anything. Cheap subscription sites are not a model I wish to license at, currently, for various reasons.
-
I think that as suppliers all we can do is try to ride the waves, not control them. The industry is driven by forces that are far beyond ability of anybody with just a few thousand images to control. I know some people say that is defeatist, I think it is realistic.
No, your thoughts are just defeatist. The fact that Getty actually increased commissions at TS, in a desperate attempt to attract more contributors and their content, is proof that we suppliers most definitely can influence issues if we make a stand. I wish you'd stop being such a wet blanket about the PP (and every other issue) and grow some cojones.
Anyway, the PP is such an utter shambles I really cannot imagine why anyone who values their own work would bother with it.
-
I think that as suppliers all we can do is try to ride the waves, not control them. The industry is driven by forces that are far beyond ability of anybody with just a few thousand images to control. I know some people say that is defeatist, I think it is realistic.
No, your thoughts are just defeatist. The fact that Getty actually increased commissions at TS, in a desperate attempt to attract more contributors and their content, is proof that we suppliers most definitely can influence issues if we make a stand. I wish you'd stop being such a wet blanket about the PP (and every other issue) and grow some cojones.
Anyway, the PP is such an utter shambles I really cannot imagine why anyone who values their own work would bother with it.
Youre right there! PP, is a melting pot of just concentrated rubbish. Makes one feel ashamed its part of Getty.
-
I applaud the Best Match sort on Istockphoto.It keeps the search fresh for designers and keeps fooling 1000's of contributors who have not got a clue on how it works !!!!
-
This is getting hard to track. So they changed it, quickly changed it back to the Vetta/Agency heavy model, and now it looks like its back again to the most recent version.
-
whatever it is, if it's the reason I'm suddenly having a few good days of sales at IS, I'm all for it!
-
whatever it is, if it's the reason I'm suddenly having a few good days of sales at IS, I'm all for it!
Enjoy it while you can, because I suspect that this week there will be some winners, and next week, well, the winners will be losers, etc. As in the past. :(
-
whatever it is, if it's the reason I'm suddenly having a few good days of sales at IS, I'm all for it!
agreed, it is nice to get some downloads for a change.
-
Obviously the ideal would be if the best match is not just dynamic but also intelligent, i.e. it learns the buying habits of the customers, adds regional info and then every customer will see a different best match depending on his or her buying behaviour, location.
If a customer always buys the cheapest files, why offer him search results with 50% Vetta? And a customer that is not budget concious will appreciate a result dominated by the more exclusive V/A with low downloads, so the risk is low that their client will find the same image in use by a competitor. It isnīt RM, but can be better than using files with thousands of downloads.
-
Normally I would blow off the, Best Match issues and sales are falling, complaints and whining. It's never ending, so like rain, no one notices another few more drops here and there.
Well it's official now. I haven't had a download on IS in 30 days!
Small collection or not, I've never had a dry spell for that long. Considering I've had the same pictures and at least some monthly downloads for years, I can only guess, that I don't exist and I just haven't realized it yet, or sales have fallen off a cliff! (calling all Lemmings) Not one CrapStock shot sold in a month? Impossible!
Wait, when Mostphotos passes IS, we'll all know it's the end of the world! ;D (is it 2012 yet?)
LOL! This is so typical. Dismiss the complaints of others as whining until the same thing happens to you. Then it is a real problem. ::)
^^ stole my thoughts to a tee.
-
whatever it is, if it's the reason I'm suddenly having a few good days of sales at IS, I'm all for it!
150% Same here.
Maybe its just because its July and my mix of stuff seems to do better in the summer, but up until this best match shake-up, I was doing dismally.
-
'Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?'
Actually, I think the relevancy factor does a pretty good job of showing what other buyers were happy with. Within that, the mix of collections is what it is.
The best match was clearly designed for revenue push given all the different collections, not what makes buyers happy. I mean, why on earth would they put an image of equal quality with equal keyword quality at a fraction of the price (say, from an independent) on the back pages if this image were to make the buyer happy because it's cheaper? It's crystal clear that the best match is #1. revenue push; #2. what the customer wants.
-
You're basing your assumption on the idea that price is all that makes buyers happy, when it isn't necessarily so. You can't fit everything above the fold.
-
I don't know if this has anything to do, but today I got two sales, one of an image that had never sold, the other an image that had no sale since 2008.
-
whatever it is, if it's the reason I'm suddenly having a few good days of sales at IS, I'm all for it!
agreed, it is nice to get some downloads for a change.
+1.... last two days have been very good to me especially today. In fact this week has been awesome for me since i got 6 ELS for $400. five from apparently one buyer =D
-
You're basing your assumption on the idea that price is all that makes buyers happy, when it isn't necessarily so. You can't fit everything above the fold.
Well, not really. I did mention quality....maybe I should have added composition....all I am saying is that there are some pretty competitive images with the upper echelon price points that don't get poop for placement when they should. Agree, though, that given all the collections you have to have a happy medium.
-
Now that I've looked at this latest version it's not the same. Looks like this favors high performing images and Vetta/Agency but not "+" images or editorial like the last version.
-
thank you for the long and thoughtful response to my question Jasmin. maybe this would be better suited in its own thread, but to digress one more time about the PP...your comments--as a former admin--are interesting. I certainly acknowledge your insight and experience----but there are two problems that I see. One is that which Sean pointed out, that some contributors don't wish to contribute to the subs market. that's not me per se. I don't mind the idea of submitting some content to one market and DIFFERENT content to other markets.
saying that, what happens if content is mirrored across buyer groups so successfully that it irreversibly changes buying behaviour? I'm certainly not an economist, but it stands to reason that very successful/content rich PP sites would certainly cause buyer migration over time...how long would the PAYG model avoid being fatally eroded?
-
Same here! I have had two good days, not only that but Im glad to see, lots of differant files are selling, old and newer ones. Oh well, Santa came early this year.
-
Hi Stacey,
I may be a former inspector and moderator but I never had any insight into marketing plans, best match secrets etc...on that front I had to make my own educated guesses, just like all other members...however, because I see how hard people are working on the different admins teams, I maybe have more trust in their actions than the average contributor.
What happens when all content is duplicated on the PP, which is a different site than istock? Well what about the independents spreading their files over all the different stock sites?? If subscription and cheap files was all the buyers wanted, all pay as you go sites would have folded a long time ago. IMO.
I think the key lies in the istock marketing. If they promote pp sites more than istock and add an attractive pay as you go package, then pp becomes a threat. But why should they do that?? It is expensive to move traffic, if the buyers are on istock, why should they encourage them to leave?
The day I feel that pp is threatening my income, I will pull my files, thatīs for sure. For now I donīt see it, also because different files are bestsellers there. Many files that never had a sale on istock or were slow on istock are selling on pp. Just like some files "awoke" in the dollar bin and now have flames.
I think having several sites and moving content around is a good way to deal with the oversupply of files. For instance I can think of some kind of time based program to move content. Something like: what doesnīt sell on getty as RM even once - goes to getty RF. What doesnīt sell on getty RF even once goes to istock (or jupiterimages or punchstock) . What doesnīt sell on istock in 3-5 years even once goes to pp...or the dollar bin.
Of course I would prefer if the contributor always had the choice in that. But when files donīt sell over a really long time, they might do better on a different site. How much time? That will depend on many things.
I already deleted many files from istock when I put them into PP and even when I upload new files I might decide to put some weaker images or outtakes straight into PP.
So for me it is a useful system. At least in principle.
I do see a risk that because the contributors get a lower percentage on pp than on istock, that there is a possibility that the agency may benefit more than the contributor if a customer signs up there instead of istock.
But the pp sites donīt have the V/A content. And I think these files are extremely valuable in boosting revenue.
So I think marketing will always try to bring customers to istock or Getty first (where the prices are even higher).
I am not against having "luxury collections" or different price points on istock. I just have a problem with the way they were dominating best match if they have no sales.
I thought it was very bad for business and if I look at what happened to the traffic, it looks like my nightmares came true. Especially because the low sales were predictable IMO (because of the style, not the price). Putting them all in front will of course boost their sales in general, but wine is not coffee, those coming in for coffee and finding 60% wine on the first three pages will obviously go elsewhere. Plus you frustrate the "coffee producing contributors" who have time and money invested in developing very generic files for high volume sales.
Again, all of the above is my own conjecture. No crystal ball involved.
-
^ like your coffee/wine analogy....very true. I had thought you to be an admin...my apologies. not that you were ONLY an inspector, lol. the partner program worries me a good deal. likely what makes me so uneasy is the way it's been implemented, rather than the fact that it exists at all. I really dislike the model and question its long-term viability and impact on buying. your sub sites to PAYG sites co-existing for years argument makes sense...but mirroring my own content in this manner just doesn't sit well with me. anyways, thanks for indulging my questions, much appreciated.
sorry to have stayed on this tangent for a few posts.
-
Donīt feel sorry. There is a lot of confusion around the pp program and although they keep saying that best match is a secret, we at least need to know who the main target group of buyers is, so that we can adjust our image production.
Especially because we are now integrated into the Getty umbrella with many,many different sites and collections that members need more direction and clear communication in what to produce or what is the best way to spread content over the different sites.
Feels good to derail a thread without having to feel bad for taking it off topic :-) At least for a few posts...it is fun to be a normal contributor ;-)
-
I think that as suppliers all we can do is try to ride the waves, not control them. The industry is driven by forces that are far beyond ability of anybody with just a few thousand images to control. I know some people say that is defeatist, I think it is realistic.
No, your thoughts are just defeatist. The fact that Getty actually increased commissions at TS, in a desperate attempt to attract more contributors and their content, is proof that we suppliers most definitely can influence issues if we make a stand.
Well, that's your interpretation. If you can provide anything other than wishful thinking to support your assertion, I'd be interested to see it.
Tell me this: If they were desperate to increase the IS content on TS, then why start by increasing the payout rather than fixing the thing that transfers content there? Why not just scrap or reduce the 18-month delay for exclusives? If the rate was boosted to try to pull in more suppliers, why not make a big fuss about it, so they actually know what is happening - was the announcement ever more than just a post in the forums? And if you are right, why did they make the increase retroactive?
Now, if you had chosen the Vetta vector strike as an example, then you would have had a point. But the thing they were protesting against was so obviously ridiculous that everybody would support that boycott and iStock could see immediately that they had screwed up. That's a special case.
-
Hi Stacey,
just wanted to add one more thing about the PP Programm. Of course, It only makes sense if the pp Program focusses on subscriptions.
I just remembered that some people heard that the PP programm was a good place for the buyers who want cheap files to go and that by focussing istock on the high quality content V/A they knew they would have to sacrifice "cheap" buyers. If this means they are promoting PP sites for Pay as you go and hoping customers who donīt like the high prices on istock will go to PP - that makes no sense whatever. Why on earth would you want to lose traffic from istock??
When customers are not happy with istock - where will they go? The competition of course. Shutterstock, Dreamstime, Fotolia. These sites are well established and have a good market presence. PP sites are new, making them known internationally will take years and cost a lot of money. If this is the intent, then I am not suprised that the agency needs more money. Promoting and marketing many different sites and brands running parallel must be very expensive. At the same time the competition is not diluting their efforts and focus on mainly one (or two) sites.
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/istockphoto.com+shutterstock.com+dreamstime.com/ (http://siteanalytics.compete.com/istockphoto.com+shutterstock.com+dreamstime.com/)
Looking at the stats customers left istock and proportionally and in the same time frame signed up with other well known sites.
Now that Shutterstock has overtaken istock, what is going to stop them from offering a V/A programm of their own?
Usually on the internet companies strive to become the total 800 pound gorilla (amazon, itunes, ebay). Amazon offers a lot more products than we have files on istock. There must be other things you can do with the user interface to manage the rising number of files. Moving low sellers to a subscription site makes sense, but encouraging pay as go customers to leave istock and split the traffic - this I donīt understand. Customers want a one stop shop. Two payment models, two sites. They could probably ad a "getty" area on istock showcasing selected high quality collections, like they have for video and vectors and it would work well. It would all be on the same site. Focussing on a small buyer group makes you very vulnerable.
if they want to get rid of the low sellers and unclog the search they could also just remove them from the general search but offer to keep them in the artists portfolio if the artist wants them there. The main collection could be more a showcase for the most successful work, the artists webshop however could have more files including outtakes from the series.
This would be an easy way to keep the main collection fresh, while giving the artist the control over his own portfolio and helping him to develop his own group of buyers who like his or her style.
I hope the price slider and best match changes bring our customers back. If Dreamstime and Fotolia overtake us...that would be sad.
But istock is a very dynamic company, they experiment and try things and learn. Over the years theyīve tried so many different strategies and they always corrected their mistakes. As an exclusive I hope they take their dominant position in the market back.
-
...
Over the years theyīve tried so many different strategies and they always corrected their mistakes. ...
From my point of view that is not true, unless you are still giving them time to correct mistakes from years ago. Although the changes announced last fall really are the biggies.
-
[url]http://siteanalytics.compete.com/istockphoto.com+shutterstock.com+dreamstime.com/[/url] ([url]http://siteanalytics.compete.com/istockphoto.com+shutterstock.com+dreamstime.com/[/url])
Looking at the stats customers left istock and proportionally and in the same time frame signed up with other well known sites.
Wow! That looks even more dire than the Alexa version. If I was exclusive at IS, that chart would scare the He11 out of me! :o
-
It is scaring many people but at the same time I know a lot of people who are reporting excellent sales. There doesnīt seem to be a general drop, at least not among my friends. My own sales are very stable.
But the general loss in traffic is scary. Of course all sites are slowing down for the summer, so the graph goes down at the end.
-
It is scaring many people but at the same time I know a lot of people who are reporting excellent sales. There doesnīt seem to be a general drop, at least not among my friends. My own sales are very stable.
Thanks for sharing that info Jasmin. It makes sense to me. I assume you mean that revenues are holding steady, rather than actual download numbers? At least that's the impression I get reading the stats threads - downloads way down, but higher prices compensating for it.
If that is the case, it explains why exclusives would be seeing much more stable revenues than non-exclusives. For one thing, exclusive and collection images are favored in the best match, and for another, the high prices are propping up incomes. Non-exclusives are feeling the actual effects of the reduced traffic because we haven't had price rises on our images in a couple of years.
I guess the reason I would find this scary as an exclusive is that Istock isn't likely to be able to continue raising prices at the rates it has over the past couple of years. Once the price rises stop, exclusives will feel the hit from the departing buyers, and also from the RC targets that keep being raised to insulate Istock from their drop in traffic.
-
Jasmin - again, fantastic insights. thanks so much. I think you nailed it when you suggested that much of the fear (mine anyways) comes from the impression that any sales are welcome, even if it means sending buyers away from iStock to the partner program for 'cheaper' content. I hate the idea of it, and the implementation of it.
and what convinces me more of the direction is that Getty--and I do not mean to insinuate they're the bad guys, I don't feel that's correct--Getty is borrowing iStock's brand and buyers in order to push its underperforming assets. Its assets that garner greater royalty shares are being trucked into the iStock collections (particularly into higher placement/income colelctions too i.e. Agency). There is little sharing of the Getty brand in the other direction (for example, facilitating Gettyesque promotion for serious iStock editorial shooters)...
I think the breakdown I feel has/is happening can be attributed to prioritizing short-term bottom lines over protecting our brand in the long run. and that means protecting the viability of contribution to their site(s) for suppliers. As far as I'm concerned, despite the sincere and best efforts of a handful of truly caring, diligent people at both iStock and Getty...everyone is being squeezed by the penultimate bottom line. it's shortsighted IMHO. and the value of our work needs to be firmly maintained by contributors. that means not contributing to the partner program for me. but I doubt it will remain optional, and I'm curious how contributors will react to that. I know that I feel I should be unequivocally able to choose where my work is sold.
-
In the past 24-36 hours, best match has changed a few times again.
Thank You. That's what I've been trying to point out for a few years.
The BEst Match and search is always changing. Maybe by IP address, maybe by time of day, maybe based on the number of letters in the search, maybe a random number, but if someone is trying to figure it out or watching how they show and then move, it will make them crazy. There's no simple answer! But people keep thinking they have it solved. Then it changes again.
-
"I assume you mean that revenues are holding steady, rather than actual download numbers?"
Yes, download numbers are down, but money is steady or even up, especially with V/A specialists.
"I think the breakdown I feel has/is happening can be attributed to prioritizing short-term bottom lines over protecting our brand in the long run."
maybe, i think they are genuinly trying to make all the different agencies under the Getty umbrella work together in a sensible way. But I do believe they have underestimated the power of the competition. You canīt just intentionally be ready to lose buyers - you have no control over where they sign up. many contributors have the impression that there is quite a bit of arrogance there - about "cheap buyers"and how much better it is to strive for the "honorable high paying clients".
However the only thing that counts is the commercial value of an image. istock is a business, not an art club. I remember reading an interview with someone from corbis a few years ago, where they admitted that the most successful image they had in that year was a close up shot of fresh green grass.
I love artistic images, I really do. And it is great that they present two specialized collections on the front page so those looking for cover art can find them easily. But the "sort by downloads" search tells you what style the buyers want. The more you deviate from that, the more established clients you lose.
Or in my model: looking at the stats tells us that if there is too much expensive wine in the search, the coffee buyers are flocking to the coffee shops - pretty fast.
Personally I am very sceptical if it is worth dividing up the buyer streams to so many different sites (with the exception of subscription). If istock is the biggest brand with the most traffic, why not find a way to integrate all the content there? You will still need the Getty site because it is an established brand for editorial and high end Rm/RF, but shouldnīt all other RF content be handled from istock??
I know they move content around a lot and sublicense to many different agencies. This seems like an old business model to me, from the catalogue days and when buyers couldnīt easily compare what is on offer worldwide with a mouse click.
Wouldnīt it make a lot more sense to very aggressively push one site? With the help of different collections, their sales teams can internally target specialized or regional markets. And for the regional markets, give more autonomy to the regional "stores" when they reach critical mass. Or language based stores.
But because it is all done under one brand you minimize internal rivalries and it becomes a lot easier to streamline it all from the top down. Especially the flow of communication has to be efficient. Communication problems are a very serious issue that costs tons of money because low morale lowers work effiency. Just look at how frustrated the contributors and obviously many buyers have become. It will also work the other way: if the contributors become positive and inspired, I am sure they are also good at handling the customer psychology well. You canīt separate the one from the other. Either you understand how people tick and can inspire them towards your goal, or you canīt.
Then of course there is the effect of social media, blogs, comments...the reputation of a company has a net effect on sales. That is why companies spend so much time and money carefully designing the reputation they want to have as a company and what they can do to achieve it.
So if they are pushing many different sites, the reputation of all these different brands have to be carefully controlled and balanced against each other. It sounds like a very expensive endeavour to me. Which makes it understandable why they would like more money from the artist (in addition to feeding their owners).
If it works - all hails to them. By the stats and the money we will judge...business is more transparent these days than ever before.
For me as a contributor the most important thing is that they keep bringing in many, many new buyers. Dilution is always a problem, but there are so many buyers out there that still donīt use stock, I am not worried about dilution for the next ten years.
But if they "sacrifice" buyers as a contributor I get squeezed from two end - more images on the site and less buyers to buy them.
Current best match looks good. I hope everyones salary at HQ is strongly tied into traffic, growth and buyer numbers, not just revenue. If Dreamstime and Fotolia overtake istock in the stats I will be really depressed.
-
However the only thing that counts is the commercial value of an image. istock is a business, not an art club. I remember reading an interview with someone from corbis a few years ago, where they admitted that the most successful image they had in that year was a close up shot of fresh green grass.
I love artistic images, I really do. And it is great that they present two specialized collections on the front page so those looking for cover art can find them easily. But the "sort by downloads" search tells you what style the buyers want. The more you deviate from that, the more established clients you lose.
"not an art club".....I agree. and in many ways I feel it is being run like an art club over the past couple of years. a contributor I know fairly well makes literally ten times what I do and the best selling image for that contributor is-----grass on white background.