pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Photo+ - new iStockphoto collection for non exclusives  (Read 39339 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #25 on: May 05, 2011, 20:18 »
0
So I wonder how long it will take them to cut commissions again. And then suggest that you can use this to increase prices to make the same money as before.


« Reply #26 on: May 05, 2011, 20:43 »
0
I'm astonished that people are even considering this, especially with a 6-month lock! A new round of koolaid must have been passed out.

I wouldn't touch that offer with a 12-inch turd, especially with the way they have lied, misled and cheated their contributors out of hard earned and well deserved commissions. 

ROFL at both of you.

"a 12-inch turd" *snigger*

« Reply #27 on: May 05, 2011, 21:32 »
0
Forgive the cross post, but here are my concerns about this:

A year ago I would have jumped all over this.  Now I am not so sure.  I worry about adding to customer confusion, and falling sales for my best sellers if I were to do add anything to P+.  The reports I have read about sales of E+ images aren't at all promising.

I would need to know more about best match placement before considering putting anything in P+.  Also, the 6 month commitment worries me.  I have a 6 month commitment elsewhere, but no other site changes as dramatically or as often as Istock.  6 months is a long time if there is no stability.

Also, I don't see where the royalty % question has been answered.  Would we be receiving our same (unfortunate) royalty for the P+ images, or even lower royalty?

Another question - will the P+ images, with their 6 month lock-in, be forced onto partner sites?  If so, would there be any boost in the royalty rates paid through the PP, or the same pitiful .28?

I'm with you, Lisa.  I'm too gun shy to even give this a try.  this announcement didn't even get my heart started.  I just keep thinking "great, another reason to piss off buyers"

lagereek

« Reply #28 on: May 05, 2011, 23:50 »
0
The best match!!!  the best match, must change!  whats the matter with some of you?  have you gone soft in the head or something?  photo+ and all that, whats the point if the best match stays the same.
The whole, entire problem is the present best match!  which at the moment pushes non-exclusives as far back as possible.

After 5 minutes, buyers will start getting even more confused, their heads will spin in circles and they will start to complain even more about this labyrint of differant pricings.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2011, 23:53 by lagereek »

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #29 on: May 06, 2011, 01:00 »
0
If IS was a "normal" site, I would opt in my best sellers immediately, just like I set all files on Fotolia at higher possible price, with no negative effects.

But at IS I am scared of touching my best sellers for now: there MUST be a catch sometime, somewhere.

I'm tempted to add some of my non sellers to the Photo+ collection, just to see what will happen:
nothing to lose, my "worst" files sold at an higher price point, and - just in case they will boost search results a bit - at the top of their search, funny!
« Last Edit: May 06, 2011, 02:01 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #30 on: May 06, 2011, 02:46 »
0
Doesn't sound too bad. I do notice the word photo on it though. Are the redheaded step children of iStock being left out again?  :'(

yep, sounds like it.  On the photo+ page
Quote
Right now, Photo+ is for photos only. We may introduce other file types at a later date.

I think this is a good thing though and will be opting my images into the collection.  If a buyer doesn't want the expensive version there is probably plenty more in the series at the cheaper price.  The prices are still not crazy high and I am happy to receive a better price for my images.

« Reply #31 on: May 06, 2011, 02:51 »
0
Forgive the cross post, but here are my concerns about this:

A year ago I would have jumped all over this.  Now I am not so sure.  I worry about adding to customer confusion, and falling sales for my best sellers if I were to do add anything to P+.  The reports I have read about sales of E+ images aren't at all promising.

I would need to know more about best match placement before considering putting anything in P+.  Also, the 6 month commitment worries me.  I have a 6 month commitment elsewhere, but no other site changes as dramatically or as often as Istock.  6 months is a long time if there is no stability.

Also, I don't see where the royalty % question has been answered.  Would we be receiving our same (unfortunate) royalty for the P+ images, or even lower royalty?

Another question - will the P+ images, with their 6 month lock-in, be forced onto partner sites?  If so, would there be any boost in the royalty rates paid through the PP, or the same pitiful .28?


On the first post, spazerd says the royalties will stay the same
Quote
...
Royalties for will remain the same.
...

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=328522&page=1

I think this will have a different price consequence than Exclusive+ because the pricing will just be the same as most of their entire collection.  It isn't really another 'tier' it is just more images at the exclusive tier pricing.  Of course, the real determining factor is going to be the best match placement.

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #32 on: May 06, 2011, 03:42 »
0
I think this will have a different price consequence than Exclusive+ because the pricing will just be the same as most of their entire collection.  It isn't really another 'tier' it is just more images at the exclusive tier pricing.  Of course, the real determining factor is going to be the best match placement.

aren't exclusives complaining for competition from lower-priced non-exclusive files? it that is true, why should we indipendents join them voluntarily and lose the only advantage we have?

of course, a better placement may put things in a different perspective
« Last Edit: May 06, 2011, 03:45 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #33 on: May 06, 2011, 03:43 »
0
I will opt in. It cannot get much worse at iS anyway. And just think about it. If files cost too much at iS buyers are slowely migrating to the other microstock agencies. It is the perfect deal for non- exclusives :-)

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #34 on: May 06, 2011, 03:47 »
0
I will opt in. It cannot get much worse at iS anyway.

Yes, it can. Should our best sellers stop selling after putting in the Photo+ collection, 6 months are enough to ruin their placement forever.

I am not ruling out opting in anyway, just still evaluating.

And just think about it. If files cost too much at iS buyers are slowely migrating to the other microstock agencies. It is the perfect deal for non- exclusives :-)

This is the good part indeed. As an independent, the whole IS issue is already resulting in higher overall earnings for me across all sites.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2011, 03:54 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #35 on: May 06, 2011, 04:06 »
0
I'll give it try with a few files (some best sellers, and some non-sellers).
Will see if it's better or worse. My total sales from IS dropped so much that the risk isn't high, even if I ruin some of my best sellers.

« Reply #36 on: May 06, 2011, 04:12 »
0
...but files attached to 'the + collection' are locked in it for 6 months... fortunately, it doesn't make them exclusive.

« Reply #37 on: May 06, 2011, 04:38 »
0
Forgive the cross post, but here are my concerns about this:

A year ago I would have jumped all over this.  Now I am not so sure.  I worry about adding to customer confusion, and falling sales for my best sellers if I were to do add anything to P+.  The reports I have read about sales of E+ images aren't at all promising.

I would need to know more about best match placement before considering putting anything in P+.  Also, the 6 month commitment worries me.  I have a 6 month commitment elsewhere, but no other site changes as dramatically or as often as Istock.  6 months is a long time if there is no stability.

Also, I don't see where the royalty % question has been answered.  Would we be receiving our same (unfortunate) royalty for the P+ images, or even lower royalty?

Another question - will the P+ images, with their 6 month lock-in, be forced onto partner sites?  If so, would there be any boost in the royalty rates paid through the PP, or the same pitiful .28?

Like with E+, it's really up to the contributor.  As for reports of falling sales, many exclusives have also said that their E+ files have worked very well for them, and the ones I have opted in seem to work well for me.  I think it's important to be very selective though;  don't opt a good seller in unless it is either (a) Unique in some way and/or (b) has performed well against similar files.  But that's just my strategy.

As for the 6 month lock in, if you're not comfortable with it, don't opt in;  my assumption though is that the lock in is so that buyers don't find the same files changing price all the time from day to day, which seems reasonable.

I doubt there will be any benefit coming in best match placement.  It has been asked for with E+ but there is no real indication of it being implemented, though of course that could change.

As already said, you'll get the same royalty percentage, but on the higher price, so more $$s.

As for the PP, assuming it's just like E+, it's up to you whether or not you opt a file into the PP as well as making it Photo+.  But you won't get any extra royalty from the PP sales, that stays the same.

lagereek

« Reply #38 on: May 06, 2011, 04:54 »
0
So,

1:    no better placement in best match ?
2:    locked in for 6 months?
3:    no, or just minimal price change?

So the photo+ ,   is just a pretty word then?

Surely, if they want lots of good independants and resigned exclusives to re-think and come back?  surely they can come up with something at least a little bit better?

« Reply #39 on: May 06, 2011, 05:39 »
0
I will opt in. It cannot get much worse at iS anyway.

Yes, it can. Should our best sellers stop selling after putting in the Photo+ collection, 6 months are enough to ruin their placement forever.

I am not ruling out opting in anyway, just still evaluating.

And just think about it. If files cost too much at iS buyers are slowely migrating to the other microstock agencies. It is the perfect deal for non- exclusives :-)

This is the good part indeed. As an independent, the whole IS issue is already resulting in higher overall earnings for me across all sites.

My best sellers already kind of stopped selling. My income at iStockphoto has fallen so much dollarwise it cannot fall the same amount again. If it would , I would have to pay iStockphoto each month. Thats why I think what ever, give it a try, not much to loose anyway.

« Reply #40 on: May 06, 2011, 06:28 »
0
It seems to me that every single change that has happened in past few months has been to line IS's pockets, not to help out the contributor. If you don't think you have anything to lose, I guess it doesn't hurt to try. But if you're thinking that this is going to magically bring back all of your lost sales, I don't believe that will ever happen. They are doing this for a reason that will help THEM, not you.

« Reply #41 on: May 06, 2011, 06:50 »
0
It seems to me that every single change that has happened in past few months has been to line IS's pockets, not to help out the contributor. If you don't think you have anything to lose, I guess it doesn't hurt to try. But if you're thinking that this is going to magically bring back all of your lost sales, I don't believe that will ever happen. They are doing this for a reason that will help THEM, not you.

Yes they have been lining their pockets and that is also the point of this. But this time they are incidentally willing to line ours a bit, too. I reckon it amounts to about a 50% pay hike, minus any defections of buyers going to other iStock independents instead of buying our files. If 20% of buyers switch, that would still leave me 20% better off. (80% the number of sales at 150% of the price). The loss of sales would need to hit 33% before it would be quits.

If there is any rationality in iStock, they are doing this because they realise that our files are now underpriced and that we will not hit significant customer resistance by putting them at a price that equals that of the exclusive collection. Istock also has an incentive - whether it acts on it or not - to promote Photos+ files at the expense of ordinary independent ones, so non participation might lead to even worse search placement.

If photos+ files are too expensive to sell, then so is the entire exclusive collection but I've never heard anybody complain that exclusivity makes their files too expensive, they all see the price hike as a benefit of turning exclusive. I've heard people say that going exclusive doesn't increase your sales, I don't recall hearing them say that it causes them to fall.

« Reply #42 on: May 06, 2011, 06:59 »
0
If photos+ files are too expensive to sell, then so is the entire exclusive collection but I've never heard anybody complain that exclusivity makes their files too expensive, they all see the price hike as a benefit of turning exclusive. I've heard people say that going exclusive doesn't increase your sales, I don't recall hearing them say that it causes them to fall.

You can ask a premium for E+ by the mere fact that they are not available elsewhere, let alone a thousand elsewheres at much lower prices.

« Reply #43 on: May 06, 2011, 07:07 »
0
If photos+ files are too expensive to sell, then so is the entire exclusive collection but I've never heard anybody complain that exclusivity makes their files too expensive, they all see the price hike as a benefit of turning exclusive. I've heard people say that going exclusive doesn't increase your sales, I don't recall hearing them say that it causes them to fall.

You can ask a premium for E+ by the mere fact that they are not available elsewhere, let alone a thousand elsewheres at much lower prices.

I don't think that applies, Sean. My files are already available at other places cheaper than they are at iStock but people still choose to buy them at iStock because that is where they are shopping. The same applies to Yuri and it sure as hell hasn't stopped people spending extra to buy his at iS.

In any case, the price comparison is not with E+, it is with ordinary E. E+ is actually making the same "its worth more" claim twice over, once for being exclusive and again for being exclusive and super good.

The question is, does pricing files at ordinary E level put off customers at iS? I don't see that it does. A lot of exclusive files are generic, anyway, so uniqueness is irrelevant and if people were THAT price sensitive they would only buy their isolated apple shots from independents. But they don't.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2011, 07:09 by BaldricksTrousers »

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #44 on: May 06, 2011, 07:22 »
0
I agree that uniqueness (and exclusivity) is irrelevant: if the same picture has been sold hundreds of times on a single site, what difference does it make for a buyer? It's not exclusive anyway.

And I agree - from my experience at Fotolia and Dreamstime - that setting prices a little higher doesn't hurt  in general.
 
But what I fear is that in the current situation at IS - with a lot of distrust - anything that has a tag identifying it as a "super" file may be skipped by buyers.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2011, 07:25 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #45 on: May 06, 2011, 07:25 »
0

But what I fear is that in the current situation at IS - with a lot of distrust - everything that has a tag identifying it as a "super" file may be skipped by buyers.

Interesting thought. On the other hand, it could be a selling point ... if something costs a bit more people think it is worth more. It's all just guesswork now but I'll find out soon enough.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #46 on: May 06, 2011, 07:26 »
0
If photos+ files are too expensive to sell, then so is the entire exclusive collection but I've never heard anybody complain that exclusivity makes their files too expensive, they all see the price hike as a benefit of turning exclusive. I've heard people say that going exclusive doesn't increase your sales, I don't recall hearing them say that it causes them to fall.

You can ask a premium for E+ by the mere fact that they are not available elsewhere, let alone a thousand elsewheres at much lower prices.

Don't agree. What happens when there are a ton of similar images on IS? If there are 1,000 almost identical handshakes and you price yours as E+ why would a buyer just not buy the almost identical cheaper one next to it?

I think independents would have better success using Photos+ because, used in large enough volume, it would raise the overall average for pricing making it a bit more consistent. For exclusives, E+ seems to be best used sparingly for unique images or concepts without much competition.

« Reply #47 on: May 06, 2011, 07:28 »
0
Somewhat ironic. I opted a few files in last night and already had sales with the new + commission.

XS = 50 cents. I like it.

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #48 on: May 06, 2011, 07:30 »
0
Somewhat ironic. I opted a few files in last night and already had sales with the new + commission.

XS = 50 cents. I like it.

Good for you. If this trend continues and it's not just random statistical noise, then it's a clear sign that either those files have a better placement or people are not so price sensitive.

I opted in a few real non-sellers (0 sales) this morning as a test. Will see in the next few days.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2011, 07:33 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #49 on: May 06, 2011, 07:31 »
0
...What happens when there are a ton of similar images on IS? If there are 1,000 almost identical handshakes and you price yours as E+ why would a buyer just not buy the almost identical cheaper one next to it?...

If you would price your generic hand shake as a + file then you don't understand the benefits of the new collection.

Naturally you would put images into the + collection that have almost none to none competition...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2118 Views
Last post February 26, 2007, 19:30
by pixelbrat
39 Replies
9142 Views
Last post May 01, 2009, 01:40
by Freezingpictures
123 Replies
30006 Views
Last post August 11, 2009, 16:07
by leaf
9 Replies
6621 Views
Last post May 02, 2012, 15:55
by ShadySue
3 Replies
1830 Views
Last post December 21, 2017, 13:14
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results