Author Topic: Redeemed Credits from a business angle..... (Read 19133 times)

Shank_ali · « **on:** July 15, 2011, 09:56 »

To many contributors only viewed the Redeemable Credits from there own perspective/sales/portfolios.
When they try to see the bigger picture they wrongly assumed it was greed by Istockphoto that fueled the change.
The money the company now saves, with this new payment method,will be used to bring longevity to the company which in turn serves all our purposes.

cthoman · « **Reply #1 on:** July 15, 2011, 10:09 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 09:56

To many contributors only viewed the Redeemable Credits from there own perspective/sales/portfolios.
When they try to see the bigger picture they wrongly assumed it was greed by Istockphoto that fueled the change.
The money the company now saves, with this new payment method,will be used to bring longevity to the company which in turn serves all our purposes.

I can't say I really care all that much about the longevity of a company that only wants to pay me 17% of the pie. There doesn't seem to be much of a future there, so I've focused my attention elsewhere.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #2 on:** July 15, 2011, 10:11 »

Thanks for today's random "IMO" post.

cthoman · « **Reply #3 on:** July 15, 2011, 10:24 »

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W56GtCNYKUI[/youtube]

Graffoto · « **Reply #4 on:** July 15, 2011, 10:31 »

^^^^^
Pretty much says it all doesn't it.

click_click · « **Reply #5 on:** July 15, 2011, 10:41 »

Thanks for that - funny!

Shank_ali · « **Reply #6 on:** July 15, 2011, 10:45 »

Quote from: cthoman on July 15, 2011, 10:09

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 09:56
To many contributors only viewed the Redeemable Credits from there own perspective/sales/portfolios.
When they try to see the bigger picture they wrongly assumed it was greed by Istockphoto that fueled the change.
The money the company now saves, with this new payment method,will be used to bring longevity to the company which in turn serves all our purposes.

I can't say I really care all that much about the longevity of a company that only wants to pay me 17% of the pie. There doesn't seem to be much of a future there, so I've focused my attention elsewhere.

Let's be honest, non exclusives don't give a dam about Istockphoto for the most part, so they use an outside forum to belittle the company at every opportunity.

Perry · « **Reply #7 on:** July 15, 2011, 10:55 »

cthoman's video said it all...

click_click · « **Reply #8 on:** July 15, 2011, 11:02 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 10:45

Let's be honest, non exclusives don't give a dam about Istockphoto for the most part, so they use an outside forum to belittle the company at every opportunity.

Ahhh, there it is: the non-exclusives are the culprits. We should have known.

How dare we criticize a company that surprises its contributors with pay cuts?

Of course, we should be thankful and stick our heads up much deeper into IS' @$$. I bet, some already came out on the other end...

P.S. I highly doubt that you actually care that much about IS. Financing a hobby is one thing, making a living is another.

nruboc · « **Reply #9 on:** July 15, 2011, 11:08 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 10:45

Quote from: cthoman on July 15, 2011, 10:09
Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 09:56
To many contributors only viewed the Redeemable Credits from there own perspective/sales/portfolios.
When they try to see the bigger picture they wrongly assumed it was greed by Istockphoto that fueled the change.
The money the company now saves, with this new payment method,will be used to bring longevity to the company which in turn serves all our purposes.

I can't say I really care all that much about the longevity of a company that only wants to pay me 17% of the pie. There doesn't seem to be much of a future there, so I've focused my attention elsewhere.
Let's be honest, non exclusives don't give a dam about Istockphoto for the most part, so they use an outside forum to belittle the company at every opportunity.

boo hoo

helix7 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 15, 2011, 11:21 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 09:56

To many contributors only viewed the Redeemable Credits from there own perspective/sales/portfolios.
When they try to see the bigger picture they wrongly assumed it was greed by Istockphoto that fueled the change.
The money the company now saves, with this new payment method,will be used to bring longevity to the company which in turn serves all our purposes.

You're assuming that the longevity of the company was ever at risk. If you buy into the whole notion that 80% profit was unsustainable, then yeah, I guess I can see how you might think that the royalty cut was some sort of bet on future growth and would shore up the necessary funds to keep the company going.

I'm not sure why you'd believe that, though.

cthoman · « **Reply #11 on:** July 15, 2011, 11:25 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 10:45

Let's be honest, non exclusives don't give a dam about Istockphoto for the most part, so they use an outside forum to belittle the company at every opportunity.

It may be the opposite. I always thought the reason iStock seemed to bear a large brunt of the criticism is because it was a well liked agency. So, people felt like they were stabbed in the back by their buddy. Fotolia did the same thing 3 times in a row, but there is less complaining about that. I think it is because contributors expect that from FT.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 15, 2011, 13:07 »

shank are you from this world?? how can you talk like that saying we dont care about IS? thats a joy to hear, lot of folks here have commited a lot of work into pulling portfolios up there WHICH is a MESS overall with the slots, the keywords, the rejections that don´t match pictures (not a lot but some for sure).. and then the WORST paying a low 15%..

I guess you should think first before protecting IS when they were the only ONES screwing our earnings and buyers too.. I don´t make much there or anywhere else but the 15% is a thing to be ashamed and I am sure IS on the first days was too but money TALKS!

cathyslife · « **Reply #13 on:** July 15, 2011, 13:18 »

@cthoman and Lando's deal...

LOL! That is exactly the IS deal!

Shank_ali · « **Reply #14 on:** July 15, 2011, 13:21 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:07

shank are you from this world?? how can you talk like that saying we dont care about IS? thats a joy to hear, lot of folks here have commited a lot of work into pulling portfolios up there WHICH is a MESS overall with the slots, the keywords, the rejections that don´t match pictures (not a lot but some for sure).. and then the WORST paying a low 15%..

I guess you should think first before protecting IS when they were the only ONES screwing our earnings and buyers too.. I don´t make much there or anywhere else but the 15% is a thing to be ashamed and I am sure IS on the first days was too but money TALKS!

Well scotty has not beamed me up just yet....
I'm just in the minority in my thinking as i believe that microstock companys provide a resource for selling my photographs and without it i would be screwed.Some are of the opposite opinion..if it wasent for our work there would be no microstock companies.
What came first,the chicken or the egg.
Istock are still the premier microstock agent and no non exclusive will persuade me otherwise.
RC's were a bitter pill to swallow for most but in the long run people will see the benefit.

Shank_ali · « **Reply #15 on:** July 15, 2011, 13:27 »

Quote from: sjlocke on July 15, 2011, 10:11

Thanks for today's random "IMO" post.

Excuse me but it was hardly random.It was item 4 on the list and as we have entered the 3rd week of July....

luissantos84 · « **Reply #16 on:** July 15, 2011, 13:31 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:21

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:07
shank are you from this world?? how can you talk like that saying we dont care about IS? thats a joy to hear, lot of folks here have commited a lot of work into pulling portfolios up there WHICH is a MESS overall with the slots, the keywords, the rejections that don´t match pictures (not a lot but some for sure).. and then the WORST paying a low 15%..

I guess you should think first before protecting IS when they were the only ONES screwing our earnings and buyers too.. I don´t make much there or anywhere else but the 15% is a thing to be ashamed and I am sure IS on the first days was too but money TALKS!
Well scotty has not beamed me up just yet....
I'm just in the minority in my thinking as i believe that microstock companys provide a resource for selling my photographs and without it i would be screwed.Some are of the opposite opinion..if it wasent for our work there would be no microstock companies.
What came first,the chicken or the egg.
Istock are still the premier microstock agent and no non exclusive will persuade me otherwise.
RC's were a bitter pill to swallow for most but in the long run people will see the benefit.

but who is here trying to get you to non-exclusive? I believe every contributor must try all agencies and feel what works best, then you can go exclusive or quit or other

Shank_ali · « **Reply #17 on:** July 15, 2011, 13:37 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:31

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:21
Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:07
shank are you from this world?? how can you talk like that saying we dont care about IS? thats a joy to hear, lot of folks here have commited a lot of work into pulling portfolios up there WHICH is a MESS overall with the slots, the keywords, the rejections that don´t match pictures (not a lot but some for sure).. and then the WORST paying a low 15%..

I guess you should think first before protecting IS when they were the only ONES screwing our earnings and buyers too.. I don´t make much there or anywhere else but the 15% is a thing to be ashamed and I am sure IS on the first days was too but money TALKS!
Well scotty has not beamed me up just yet....
I'm just in the minority in my thinking as i believe that microstock companys provide a resource for selling my photographs and without it i would be screwed.Some are of the opposite opinion..if it wasent for our work there would be no microstock companies.
What came first,the chicken or the egg.
Istock are still the premier microstock agent and no non exclusive will persuade me otherwise.
RC's were a bitter pill to swallow for most but in the long run people will see the benefit.

I believe every contributor must try all agencies and feel what works best, then you can go exclusive or quit or other

I used that theory before picking the wife

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2011, 13:51 »

Quote from: click_click on July 15, 2011, 11:02

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 10:45
Let's be honest, non exclusives don't give a dam about Istockphoto for the most part, so they use an outside forum to belittle the company at every opportunity.

Ahhh, there it is: the non-exclusives are the culprits. We should have known.

How dare we criticize a company that surprises its contributors with pay cuts?

But you don't understand. Pay cuts are good. Pay cuts are wonderful. Pay cuts mean we will always have a job. They make our employer sustainable. And if he should become unsustainable, please, cut our pay again. That will show those evil non-exclusives how we will always thrive and they, losers that they are, will see their income sources wither and die!

Why is SS about to collapse? Because it hasn't cut the pay of its subscribers! Only through constantly rising percentages can sustainability be achieved. I won't be happy until all my commission has achieved 0%, only thus can I be assured of the sustainability of my job. And when that happy day arrives, perhaps it will be followed by a 100-fold increase in my commission rate!

Thank you iStock, for showing me the path to true fulfilment. And thank you, Shank Ali, for laying before us all the true facts that will ensure Sustainability. Truly, you are wise!

fotografer · « **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2011, 14:00 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:37

I used that theory before picking the wife

Shank, you drive me so mad sometimes that my blood boils but then you come out with a random statement like the above one and I can't help but laugh!!!!!!!!

click_click · « **Reply #20 on:** July 15, 2011, 14:02 »

You know, BaldricksTrousers, sometimes one can't see the forest because of all the trees.

From time to time it does take the view of an enlightened one to make us all understand.

Let me add that I can't wait until the prices for gas, food, clothing and health insurance are due for another increase. It just gives me this awesome cozy feeling of knowing that iStock has done the right thing of making sure that their investors will always be well off.

Sorry, I just had to go with the flow...

luissantos84 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 15, 2011, 14:31 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:37

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:31
Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:21
Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:07
shank are you from this world?? how can you talk like that saying we dont care about IS? thats a joy to hear, lot of folks here have commited a lot of work into pulling portfolios up there WHICH is a MESS overall with the slots, the keywords, the rejections that don´t match pictures (not a lot but some for sure).. and then the WORST paying a low 15%..

I guess you should think first before protecting IS when they were the only ONES screwing our earnings and buyers too.. I don´t make much there or anywhere else but the 15% is a thing to be ashamed and I am sure IS on the first days was too but money TALKS!
Well scotty has not beamed me up just yet....
I'm just in the minority in my thinking as i believe that microstock companys provide a resource for selling my photographs and without it i would be screwed.Some are of the opposite opinion..if it wasent for our work there would be no microstock companies.
What came first,the chicken or the egg.
Istock are still the premier microstock agent and no non exclusive will persuade me otherwise.
RC's were a bitter pill to swallow for most but in the long run people will see the benefit.

I believe every contributor must try all agencies and feel what works best, then you can go exclusive or quit or other
I used that theory before picking the wife

exactly.. please help me out there too.. brunettes or blondes?? I have found that brunettes seem more insatiable

something on their nose right?

Shank_ali · « **Reply #22 on:** July 15, 2011, 14:35 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 14:31

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:37
Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:31
Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:21
Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:07
shank are you from this world?? how can you talk like that saying we dont care about IS? thats a joy to hear, lot of folks here have commited a lot of work into pulling portfolios up there WHICH is a MESS overall with the slots, the keywords, the rejections that don´t match pictures (not a lot but some for sure).. and then the WORST paying a low 15%..

I guess you should think first before protecting IS when they were the only ONES screwing our earnings and buyers too.. I don´t make much there or anywhere else but the 15% is a thing to be ashamed and I am sure IS on the first days was too but money TALKS!
Well scotty has not beamed me up just yet....
I'm just in the minority in my thinking as i believe that microstock companys provide a resource for selling my photographs and without it i would be screwed.Some are of the opposite opinion..if it wasent for our work there would be no microstock companies.
What came first,the chicken or the egg.
Istock are still the premier microstock agent and no non exclusive will persuade me otherwise.
RC's were a bitter pill to swallow for most but in the long run people will see the benefit.

I believe every contributor must try all agencies and feel what works best, then you can go exclusive or quit or other
I used that theory before picking the wife

exactly.. please help me out there too.. brunettes or blondes?? I have found that brunettes seem more insatiable

something on their nose right?

The bald ones are more loyal

luissantos84 · « **Reply #23 on:** July 15, 2011, 14:38 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 14:35

Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 14:31
Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:37
Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:31
Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 13:21
Quote from: luissantos84 on July 15, 2011, 13:07
shank are you from this world?? how can you talk like that saying we dont care about IS? thats a joy to hear, lot of folks here have commited a lot of work into pulling portfolios up there WHICH is a MESS overall with the slots, the keywords, the rejections that don´t match pictures (not a lot but some for sure).. and then the WORST paying a low 15%..

I guess you should think first before protecting IS when they were the only ONES screwing our earnings and buyers too.. I don´t make much there or anywhere else but the 15% is a thing to be ashamed and I am sure IS on the first days was too but money TALKS!
Well scotty has not beamed me up just yet....
I'm just in the minority in my thinking as i believe that microstock companys provide a resource for selling my photographs and without it i would be screwed.Some are of the opposite opinion..if it wasent for our work there would be no microstock companies.
What came first,the chicken or the egg.
Istock are still the premier microstock agent and no non exclusive will persuade me otherwise.
RC's were a bitter pill to swallow for most but in the long run people will see the benefit.

I believe every contributor must try all agencies and feel what works best, then you can go exclusive or quit or other
I used that theory before picking the wife

exactly.. please help me out there too.. brunettes or blondes?? I have found that brunettes seem more insatiable

something on their nose right?
The bald ones are more loyal

dude NO.. you have killed the spirit

bald woman??? where?? what place?? ahaahha

ShadySue · « **Reply #24 on:** July 15, 2011, 16:11 »

Quote from: shank_ali on July 15, 2011, 10:45

Let's be honest, non exclusives don't give a dam about Istockphoto for the most part, so they use an outside forum to belittle the company at every opportunity.

And iStock love their exclusives so much that they kick us off the forums at the random whim of a moderator.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Redeemed Credits from a business angle..... (Read 19133 times)

Shank_ali

cthoman

Sean Locke Photography

cthoman

Graffoto

click_click

Shank_ali

Perry

click_click

nruboc

helix7

cthoman

luissantos84

cathyslife

Shank_ali

Shank_ali

luissantos84

Shank_ali

BaldricksTrousers

fotografer

click_click

luissantos84

Shank_ali

luissantos84

ShadySue

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors