Author Topic: Non-exclusive contributors to iSP worth more ($) to Getty? (Read 6737 times)

Cogent Marketing · « **on:** July 30, 2011, 12:23 »

Non exclusives at iStockphoto contribute significantly more to Getty revenues than exclusive contributors based on iStockphoto's own top 15 images downloads per last 3 months/ last month and even last week. You can check this yourselves if you go to the Contributor Lounge and click on Trends. I've done the analysis of the current data (shown below) which was a real pain as the Contributor lounge/trends pages are full off bugs and resets each time you page back - non of the images load either but I'm pretty sure their data is correct.

Last Three Months (Top 15 Image downloads during that period)
Non Exclusive Contributors 12 Images (80%)
Exclusive Contributors 3 Images (20%)

Last Month (Top 15 Image downloads during that period)
Non Exclusive Contributors 10 Images (66%)
Exclusive Contributors 5 Images (33%)

Last Week (Top 15 Image downloads during that period)
Non Exclusive Contributors 12 Images (80%)
Exclusive Contributors 3 Images (20%)

I am sure some 'bright spark' will start quoting Pareto but clearly iSP's own statistics are telling their masters at Getty that two-thirds of their revenue sales comes from non-exclusives and if you take into account they pay considerably less to non-exclusives than exclusives surely if their going to 'rationlise' contributors there should be a cull on the non-performing exclusives?

Bearing in mind that one non exclusive contributor in these figures appears again and again and is shortly going to 'go direct' I think Getty might have a revenue problem coming - although his leaving will certainly help a few of the exclusives that skulk around in his shadow.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #1 on:** July 30, 2011, 12:54 »

... And those files bring in fewer redeemed credits, so there is no way to blanket state independents are worth more.

lisafx · « **Reply #2 on:** July 30, 2011, 12:58 »

Sean's right - Getty still makes more on individual exclusive sales, although perhaps they may make more on the independent collection overall.

Since Istock began with the collections, I think it's a safe bet that whatever they are pushing to the front of the best match is what they make the highest profit on.

Thanks for compiling those stats, though. I didn't realize that the sales were so heavily skewed to Yuri (although of course I knew he was the best seller).

When he goes out on his own, has it been decided that he will definitely be pulling his port from the micros?

cthoman · « **Reply #3 on:** July 30, 2011, 13:07 »

I'm going to go with... so what?

I think IS could make a lot better decisions in running things, but I don't see anything changing there. If it does, let me know.

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #4 on:** August 02, 2011, 07:07 »

Quote from: lisafx on July 30, 2011, 12:58

Sean's right - Getty still makes more on individual exclusive sales, although perhaps they may make more on the independent collection overall.

Since Istock began with the collections, I think it's a safe bet that whatever they are pushing to the front of the best match is what they make the highest profit on.

Thanks for compiling those stats, though. I didn't realize that the sales were so heavily skewed to Yuri (although of course I knew he was the best seller).

When he goes out on his own, has it been decided that he will definitely be pulling his port from the micros?

Impossible to say what he'll do really. If it were me I definitely keep the revenue streams alive with existing outlets until traffic was sufficiently good. If it ever got so successful on my own site and then at that precise time I'd pull everything external down and bump my prices down by 10% and clean-up. Game over.

lagereek · « **Reply #5 on:** August 02, 2011, 07:30 »

Ofcourse they make more money on exclusives, thats not the issue and really, who cares anymore? my issue is not money orientated, my point is that the entire Getty outfit is so unstable and insecure and in such an ill-repute that it feels like a giant gamble just uploading pics.
I have found other avenues, far healthier then this.

Slovenian · « **Reply #6 on:** August 02, 2011, 08:12 »

^^It makes sense, they're ripping them off with low A/V/GI royalites.

Slovenian · « **Reply #7 on:** August 02, 2011, 08:16 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on August 02, 2011, 07:07

Quote from: lisafx on July 30, 2011, 12:58
When he goes out on his own, has it been decided that he will definitely be pulling his port from the micros?

Impossible to say what he'll do really. If it were me I definitely keep the revenue streams alive with existing outlets until traffic was sufficiently good. If it ever got so successful on my own site and then at that precise time I'd pull everything external down and bump my prices down by 10% and clean-up. Game over.

How is he ever going to get enough traffic if he leaves his files on gazillion sites? It makes no sense at all. He should pull everything down and start selling on his site. And promote his site heavily, but his work is cut out significantly as he's a superstar, has a lot of visitors at his site and every blogger will write a post about it, not to mention this forum will explode. It's just the same as ppl do when they become exclusive. You loose a lot in the short run in order to gain in the long run.

lagereek · « **Reply #8 on:** August 02, 2011, 09:03 »

Exactly!! when like Yuri, you graduate from a sole earner, into an institution, you have to re-think, find differant strategies, you cant leave yourself open to others blunders, risk-takings, external and internal politics problems. Too much to lose. Sooner or later you have to go on your own and what better timing then right now?

He makes his move now, he is bound to succeed.

cobalt · « **Reply #9 on:** August 02, 2011, 09:58 »

Customers don´t care about who the artist is. They choose an agency for convenience and will stick with it. Yuri only offers a special subtype of images.

It´s his call, but I can´t see the logic in pulling his files from the agencies. They are all doing free marketing for him.

If he really wanted to make money only from his own site, he would have to add all the content that is missing, i.e. become his own agency.

Maybe this is his longterm plan, who knows. But running an agency brings lots of additional admin, sales and marketing work.

Will be interesting to watch what he does.

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #10 on:** August 02, 2011, 10:08 »

Lagereek - "How is he ever going to get enough traffic if he leaves his files on gazillion sites? It makes no sense at all. He should pull everything down and start selling on his site."

It would be suicide to kill existing sales before his own site is at least vaguely known about - and that could take some time. I am only surmising in regard to Lisafx's question - who really knows what he'll do. I only wish him well - I think the majority of his images are really great. I do (well not really) fear that libraries like iSP and a few others will feel the hit when he turns them off though.

Slovenian · « **Reply #11 on:** August 02, 2011, 10:17 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on August 02, 2011, 10:08

Lagereek - "How is he ever going to get enough traffic if he leaves his files on gazillion sites? It makes no sense at all. He should pull everything down and start selling on his site."

It would be suicide to kill existing sales before his own site is at least vaguely known about - and that could take some time. I am only surmising in regard to Lisafx's question - who really knows what he'll do. I only wish him well - I think the majority of his images are really great. I do (well not really) fear that libraries like iSP and a few others will feel the hit when he turns them off though.

You should at least give credit to the right person for this glorious thought

Cogent Marketing · « **Reply #12 on:** August 02, 2011, 10:31 »

Quote from: Slovenian on August 02, 2011, 10:17

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on August 02, 2011, 10:08
Lagereek - "How is he ever going to get enough traffic if he leaves his files on gazillion sites? It makes no sense at all. He should pull everything down and start selling on his site."

It would be suicide to kill existing sales before his own site is at least vaguely known about - and that could take some time. I am only surmising in regard to Lisafx's question - who really knows what he'll do. I only wish him well - I think the majority of his images are really great. I do (well not really) fear that libraries like iSP and a few others will feel the hit when he turns them off though.

You should at least give credit to the right person for this glorious thought

OOPPs - Sorry Slovenian and apologies to Lagereek! Not intentional I promise.

lagereek · « **Reply #13 on:** August 02, 2011, 10:39 »

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on August 02, 2011, 10:08

Lagereek - "How is he ever going to get enough traffic if he leaves his files on gazillion sites? It makes no sense at all. He should pull everything down and start selling on his site."

It would be suicide to kill existing sales before his own site is at least vaguely known about - and that could take some time. I am only surmising in regard to Lisafx's question - who really knows what he'll do. I only wish him well - I think the majority of his images are really great. I do (well not really) fear that libraries like iSP and a few others will feel the hit when he turns them off though.

Sure! but in business you have to take the rough with the smooth, there are no freebies. Ofcourse he will lose out big in the beginning but thats a blow he will have to take and in order to gain, gradually with time, he will claw back.
Every business is a gamble! and what happens if you dont gamble? getting nowhere, stand-still.

Im pretty sure Yuri knows what he is doing, he knows his market very well and what to expect, should he make this move.

bunhill · « **Reply #14 on:** August 02, 2011, 11:07 »

@Cogent Marketing - you are not including in your calculation the money which Getty makes from exclusive iStockphoto content sold via the main Getty site. Often for hundred$ per sale.

lagereek · « **Reply #15 on:** August 02, 2011, 11:10 »

Yeah well somehow I dont think that amounts to any staggering sums.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #16 on:** August 02, 2011, 13:39 »

'How is he ever going to get enough traffic if he leaves his files on gazillion sites? It makes no sense at all. He should pull everything down and start selling on his site'

That doesn't make sense though, as buyers would just move on to similars from others, including the people he trained.

lagereek · « **Reply #17 on:** August 02, 2011, 14:00 »

I would imagine, in todays unstable micro market, whatever you do, its good enough. If he is big enough, then why should he let other agencies reap the benefits, etc? and getting 100%, from your own images will easily make up for quite a lot.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Non-exclusive contributors to iSP worth more ($) to Getty? (Read 6737 times)

Cogent Marketing

Sean Locke Photography

lisafx

cthoman

Cogent Marketing

lagereek

Slovenian

Slovenian

lagereek

cobalt

Cogent Marketing

Slovenian

Cogent Marketing

lagereek

bunhill

lagereek

Sean Locke Photography

lagereek

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors