Author Topic: New Royalty Rate Cut for Exclusives at Istock (Read 25035 times)

cobalt · « **Reply #25 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:16 »

Only if the files are in the higher priced collections. But for files that get moved to main, you would be stuck with a 7% difference with no option to make up for it by sending the files elsewhere.

For S and above the difference will be more than the % makes it appear, I agree.

But those rates still wouldn´t look attractive to me.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #26 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:29 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 27, 2013, 07:16

Only if the files are in the higher priced collections. But for files that get moved to main, you would be stuck with a 7% difference with no option to make up for it by sending the files elsewhere.

For S and above the difference will be more than the % makes it appear, I agree.

But those rates still wouldn´t look attractive to me.

Are exclusive files going into "main"? I tried to find some and I couldn't, everything on the search I looked at seemed to be inde at the lowest price point.

Also, note that the difference between 15% and 22% is roughly 50%.

cmannphoto · « **Reply #27 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:31 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 07:29

Quote from: cobalt on June 27, 2013, 07:16
Only if the files are in the higher priced collections. But for files that get moved to main, you would be stuck with a 7% difference with no option to make up for it by sending the files elsewhere.

For S and above the difference will be more than the % makes it appear, I agree.

But those rates still wouldn´t look attractive to me.

Are exclusive files going into "main"? I tried to find some and I couldn't, everything on the search I looked at seemed to be inde at the lowest price point.

I had 409 moved to the Main Collection and have sold a couple from there in the past week.

cobalt · « **Reply #28 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:32 »

According to Lobo exclusive files are available at all price levels and will dominate the price band

So wether they are there now or not, obviously they are planning to have them there as well. Maybe not on upload, but they can be moved there.

Again, I really believe those numbers are a mistake.

ETA: cmann was faster.

ShadySue · « **Reply #29 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:36 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 07:08

It's not a 7% difference, though, is it? All the non-exclusive material has been dropped into the "Main" collection, with prices of 1, 4, 7 and 10 credits, whereas the bottom end exclusive files seem to be priced at 5, 7, 12 and 17 for those sizes, so you have to multiply together the higher commission and the higher prices.

The exclusive files that were moved to Main are the same credit value as indies.

ShadySue · « **Reply #30 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:44 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 07:29

Are exclusive files going into "main"? I tried to find some and I couldn't, everything on the search I looked at seemed to be inde at the lowest price point.

Giving the lie to Lobo's "Always. Period."
Why does he even embarrass himself by posting that way?
Why doesn't he just say, "Word from TPTB is that ...", thus distancing himself from the message.
You'd think he's have learned by now.

cobalt · « **Reply #31 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:48 »

In the istock facebook group Shaun just said the numbers are a mistake and that nothing is changing.

ShadySue · « **Reply #32 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:51 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 27, 2013, 07:48

In the istock facebook group Shaun just said the numbers are a mistake and that nothing is changing.

Why did he announce it there first, rather than on the appropriate iStock thread?

Lizard · « **Reply #33 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:51 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 27, 2013, 03:55

I hope it is not true. This will just force people to leave istock. There is absolutely no way they can "spin" this into positive news. Together with the loss of E+ and control over prices, this will be a disaster for all those who do stock full time and feed their families from this income.

On the other hand I don't see it as a disaster at all, quite opposite I would say. Sometimes a kick in the ass is a step forward

gbalex · « **Reply #34 on:** June 27, 2013, 10:35 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 27, 2013, 06:36

I really hope it is a mistake. And like Paul has said it is incredible that they can´t wake somebody up to confirm this. 30 000 people are affected by these rates, it is not the kind of thing you let the intern post on the website. Can´t believe those stats can be changed and published without top level approval and oversight.

It MUST be a mistake. Who would stay exclusive for a 7% difference?

Almost like they are pushing them to go independent. Now the question is, if it is a mistake where did those numbers come from. At the very least they are thinking of making this move or they want us to think they are.

gemmy12 · « **Reply #35 on:** June 27, 2013, 10:45 »

Yes i also feel like.. sooner or later they will apply this or something similar.. who knows if they would offer just image exclusivity leaving artist exclusivity

Noedelhap · « **Reply #36 on:** June 27, 2013, 10:53 »

Quote from: ShadySue on June 27, 2013, 07:51

Quote from: cobalt on June 27, 2013, 07:48
In the istock facebook group Shaun just said the numbers are a mistake and that nothing is changing.
Why did he announce it there first, rather than on the appropriate iStock thread?

Because communication and Istock don't go together.

Also, the fact that the bug was discovered on TUESDAY, but Istock decided not to inform the contributors, shows they truly don't give a *. Yeah, I know, Calgary was flooded and all, but come ON.

crashoran · « **Reply #37 on:** July 08, 2013, 15:32 »

Glad I deactivated all of my files on IS earlier this year. What a joke.

tickstock · « **Reply #38 on:** July 08, 2013, 15:35 »

audiogate · « **Reply #39 on:** July 11, 2013, 01:47 »

It just goes to show how pointless the forums have become at iStock I learned this info here right now. Thanks OP.

ShadySue · « **Reply #40 on:** July 11, 2013, 04:24 »

Quote from: AudioGate on July 11, 2013, 01:47

It just goes to show how pointless the forums have become at iStock I learned this info here right now. Thanks OP.

Huh? The OP quoted a post on the iStock forum.
Note that it was later said to be a 'cut and paste error'.

borg · « **Reply #41 on:** July 11, 2013, 08:08 »

They are testing...

lisafx · « **Reply #42 on:** July 11, 2013, 16:08 »

Quote from: borg on July 11, 2013, 08:08

They are testing...

I completely agree. The "accidental" rate chart is way too specific and detailed to have just been a "bug". Let's assume it's a preview of coming attractions...

Ron · « **Reply #43 on:** July 11, 2013, 16:37 »

Quote from: lisafx on July 11, 2013, 16:08

Quote from: borg on July 11, 2013, 08:08
They are testing...

I completely agree. The "accidental" rate chart is way too specific and detailed to have just been a "bug". Let's assume it's a preview of coming attractions...

Thats exactly what I said in another thread when that table came up. They said it was a copy and paste error. How something like that goes live to site, is only because they are implementing changes and accidentally the test site went live. Or something in that order.

ShadySue · « **Reply #44 on:** July 14, 2013, 06:09 »

Quote from: Ron on July 11, 2013, 16:37

Quote from: lisafx on July 11, 2013, 16:08
Quote from: borg on July 11, 2013, 08:08
They are testing...

I completely agree. The "accidental" rate chart is way too specific and detailed to have just been a "bug". Let's assume it's a preview of coming attractions...
Thats exactly what I said in another thread when that table came up. They said it was a copy and paste error. How something like that goes live to site, is only because they are implementing changes and accidentally the test site went live. Or something in that order.

H*ll - I didn't realise that page was still live until I read it in the Bugs thread.
That has to be about the easiest 'bug' to fix IF it was only a 'copy and paste' error. It's only 'type in the right amounts'.
So why haven't they detailled a junior IT wallah to fix it?
I know there are far more pressing issues, but this one is just so simple.

BTW: when did a 'copy and paste error' become a 'bug' rather than a 'typo'?

borg · « **Reply #45 on:** July 14, 2013, 08:11 »

Quote from: lisafx on July 11, 2013, 16:08

Quote from: borg on July 11, 2013, 08:08
They are testing...

I completely agree. The "accidental" rate chart is way too specific and detailed to have just been a "bug". Let's assume it's a preview of coming attractions...

Thanks Lisa!

Yes, as several new models of Apple's iPhones, "accidentally" lost, few months before the launch on the market, in some disco club...

goober · « **Reply #46 on:** July 16, 2013, 06:19 »

Mysterious royalty rate appearances. Emails saying "we got your royalties wrong for the past few weeks and we're on to it " with no explanation of how or why. Halfprice on everything with no announcement to the artists. Unannounced leadership changes. The end is nigh for western artists. The future of stock is for those who can live on $10 a day.

DonLand · « **Reply #47 on:** July 22, 2013, 09:05 »

I was leaving open the possibility of going exclusive with iStock if (big IF) they changed their relationship with contributors. If this new rate is real I already have my answer. Since seeing it I have stopped contributing to them and am just waiting to see if it is real or a mistake. If a mistake why can't they just correct it. 2 minutes tops. Go figure. My honest belief is they are testing the waters and looking to see how many new exclusives they get with these wonderful new rates.

ShadySue · « **Reply #48 on:** July 22, 2013, 09:51 »

Quote from: DonLand on July 22, 2013, 09:05

My honest belief is they are testing the waters and looking to see how many new exclusives they get with these wonderful new rates.

More likely, they're checking how many are leaving, though it's not an exact science given they claim it was just a 'copying over error', now known as a 'bug', but refuse to 'correct' it.

lisafx · « **Reply #49 on:** July 22, 2013, 11:26 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 22, 2013, 09:51

More likely, they're checking how many are leaving, though it's not an exact science given they claim it was just a 'copying over error', now known as a 'bug', but refuse to 'correct' it.

STILL not corrected!!?? Yikes. Queue ominous music...

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New Royalty Rate Cut for Exclusives at Istock (Read 25035 times)

cobalt

BaldricksTrousers

cmannphoto

cobalt

ShadySue

ShadySue

cobalt

ShadySue

Lizard

gbalex

gemmy12

Noedelhap

crashoran

tickstock

audiogate

ShadySue

borg

lisafx

Ron

ShadySue

borg

goober

DonLand

ShadySue

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors