MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: PaulieWalnuts on November 05, 2008, 21:31
-
I'm starting to see signs this best match change was based on the 80/20 rule. Meaning 20% of their contributors make up 80% of their revenue. Some of the top contributors were complaining of no revenue growth even though they were uploading hundreds or thousands of files yearly.
Jim Pickerell posted this at http://www.jimpickerell.com/articles2/admin-article-view.asp?id=2022 (http://www.jimpickerell.com/articles2/admin-article-view.asp?id=2022)
"Since the beginning of 2005 it is likely that iStock has had more than 52 million downloads. (Relatively accurate numbers are available for 2006 and 2007 when Getty Images was public and providing quarterly figures. The numbers for 2005 and 2008 are extrapolations.) These 267 [Diamond] photographers are responsible for Over 18.2 million of the 52 million downloads were of images belonging to these 267 photographers. "
If that's accurate than less than 2% of their contributors account for 37% of their downloads (and possibly revenue). That's pretty amazing. So maybe a very small percentage of contributors (less than 10%?) are responsible for 90% of their revenue.
Seems like most of the big guns have been happier with this new best match. So since you can't make everybody happy wouldn't it make sense to shift the best match toward making the top performers more happy?
-
Seems like most of the big guns have been happier with this new best match. So since you can't make everybody happy wouldn't it make sense to shift the best match toward making the top performers more happy?
It really depends where it takes the collection, and obviously sales, as a whole. The interim would suggest the diamonds are happy and the company sees no loss in sales but if other agencies begin to have larger collections of newer, fresher images -- which is what will happen -- iS will end up losing. And guess what, so will exclusive photogs.
-
Why does everyone seem to assume that only new contributors can provide "newer, fresher" images?
-
I think what he was trying to say is: that if new files (from old or new contributor) are not allowed to climb up the best match, the collection would eventually start looking a little stale.
Does anyone know how a file climbs best match these days? The few sales I have had on new files don't seem to be helping much.
-
I think what he was trying to say is: that if new files (from old or new contributor) are not allowed to climb up the best match, the collection would eventually start looking a little stale.
Ok, guess I wasn't reading it that way. Thanks...
-
if new files (from old or new contributor) are not allowed to climb up the best match, the collection would eventually start looking a little stale.
I was trying to say it will look a lot stale.
-
A quick check seems to indicate to me that the bias has been pushed (more?) towards exclusives than big sellers. My search showed mostly exclusives on the first page but most were bronze canisters. fred
-
The best match search changes regularly. They do sometimes make it more favorable for new images. We will have to see if they change it back to give newer images from non-exclusives a better chance.
-
Does anyone know how a file climbs best match these days? The few sales I have had on new files don't seem to be helping much.
Get a very high view to download ratio. I once offered one of my files as a free download at IS. Subsequently it was buried. But during the time it was for free it got something like 40000 views. It was not such a great file. Non the less it got almost 100 dls and has now a view to dl ratio of 430. This pushes it on second place in best match in my portfolio.
But it seems to only get really into effect if you already have a couple of dls on that file. The last download of that file was like a month ago despite the good best match positioning (2nd in my portfolio) and only got 2 !!!! downloads in this year.
Why does that old very very slow selling file deserve to be before other newer files which get downloaded several times a day and are in every aspect better? I don't know. This best match is really crazy.
I am doing ok altogether despite that most of my files (maybe because I am not exclusive) were pushed back, so I cannot complain that I am doing bad. But this best match is surely unreasonable.
Oh and I do have a very nice portfolio, feel free to take a look at it. The files look best, if you right click on the thumbnails ;)
-
A quick check seems to indicate to me that the bias has been pushed (more?) towards exclusives than big sellers. My search showed mostly exclusives on the first page but most were bronze canisters. fred
It may give a preference to exclusives but I think it gives a stronger preference to higher canister levels and especially Diamond level contributors. I just did a search for "telephone" and the first five images I checked were all exclusive diamonds. "Signs" turned up all exclusives with mostly diamonds and a gold.
So this supports what I'm saying about the best match giving preference to top active performers. And maybe that's the 1,000 Golds, Diamonds, and Black Diamonds that probably generate 80-90% of their revenue. To do that they probably measure a combination of canister level, exclusivity, total images, total sales, rate of new images uploaded, image download performance, etc. So even if you're gold but haven't uploaded anything in a year you may start losing best match preference.
Also, I'm a few downloads shy of Silver but I've already had a couple of my images penalized for getting too many downloads. They were at the front of my portfolio and were getting several downloads a day but then suddenly stopped getting downloads. I checked my port and they were litterally moved to the last page. Similar results in the search. Why would they do that? Maybe because they don't want my bronze image displacing golds or diamonds in the search?
And for all of you exclusive conspiracy theorists, forget it. I'm an exclusive and I'm down 50% the past couple of weeks. There's much more going on here.
-
And for all of you exclusive conspiracy theorists, forget it. I'm an exclusive and I'm down 50% the past couple of weeks. There's much more going on here.
But there are diamonds complaining that the floor dropped out for them as well. I don't know what the secret is. I have some suspicions. All I know is that I'm silver and I'm loving it.
-
I am doing ok altogether despite that most of my files (maybe because I am not exclusive) were pushed back, so I cannot complain that I am doing bad. But this best match is surely unreasonable.
And the first five images in a search for penguin are from an exclusive diamond.
I'm not against rewarding top contributors. I understand this from a business standpoint that they need to protect their revenue and also grow it. But couldn't they have done this best match shift less drastically and over a longer period of time so that they could make the top dogs happier while also not angering everybody else?
-
If they want to protect their revenue they should make the best match favour the best images not the exclusives, because they have to pay more to the exclusives and customers are likely to prefer the best images at the top wether or not exclusive images.
-
it's much like the record industry, isn't it? once they said that springstein , m jackson, gnr,etc were the main moneymakers of the label, the rest are simply there to fill the demograph to look "big".
btw, just curious, how far this bias , as you put it , goes?
does having a reviewer as your fiance(e) helps to get you up the ladder? ;D
if so, does anyone know a reviewer i can get matchmade to? ;)
-
And for all of you exclusive conspiracy theorists, forget it. I'm an exclusive and I'm down 50% the past couple of weeks. There's much more going on here.
But there are diamonds complaining that the floor dropped out for them as well. I don't know what the secret is. I have some suspicions. All I know is that I'm silver and I'm loving it.
This is about weighted performance. Each measurement (canister, total downloads, DL/PM, etc) has a weight. If you are doing well with all of those measurements then you're probably doing well in the best match and with revenue. The more areas you're doing poorly on the worse you'll do in the best match and with revenue.
I'd be willing to bet that those diamonds have some sort of performance issue. Like they haven't upoaded much in the past year. Or what they've uploaded isn't selling well even though it's at the top of the search.
It's rewarding the best of the best.
-
If they want to protect their revenue they should make the best match favour the best images not the exclusives, because they have to pay more to the exclusives and customers are likely to prefer the best images at the top wether or not exclusive images.
I would disagree. Even though they make a bigger percentage that image most likely is also at a dozen other sites. This increases the chances of it being purchased somewhere else instead of IS which for IS decreases its download volume, file revenue, and overall value.
Exclusive files increase value for IS as a whole. The more they have of something that someone can't get anywhere else the less influence the competition has on them. They then have more control on their operations and pricing.
If you have the exact same thing that everbody else is offering, what's your competitive advantage? Service or price. And since service really isn't a big factor in micros ("we're the micro with the best service" So what, who cares?) you're left competing on price. And competing prices only go lower.
-
Paulie!
with the latest best match, thats exactly what theyve done ( keeping a selectwed few exclusives happy) and as far as they are concerned the non-exclusives can just go knock themselves out, bugger off.
TIB, did the same misstake in early 90s and see what happend.
-
I wonder if some of the high performing images that were uploaded when the IS contributor was non-exclusive get some kind of flag and images uploaded while exclusive get preference. My all time best image currently at 7 views/DL which I believe is VERY good at IS had 3 DLs in October after consistently getting >15DL/month. Now it is buried on page 22 of my 26 pages amongst 0 DL files. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. It used to be on page 1 when searching for "robot" and now I can't even find it anymore. BTW - I am silver exclusive. Fortunately my portfolio is so diverse that I am still making BMEs every month. The trick is keeping very diverse uploads coming during times when business is active - slow down uploads over the summer and longer holiday periods - and always submit as the images are processed - spread over the whole week so that your images are seen by as many reviewers as possible. You do not want all your images be seen by one reviewer because if he does not like the first couple he probably will look bad on the rest of the batch.
-
From an economic point of view it would be better for best match to favour non exclusives as the commission payable would be 20% rather than the up to 40% for diamonds ....
-
Yes but youve got to remember, IS, ( no offence to anybody) is basically an amateur site, working on the laws of quantity. i.e. if one supplier quits there are dozens to replace him. They dont care if a contributor supply strong commercial imagery as long as they can produce. For the opposite youve got to go to a Trad-RM agency.
Me? I will NOT upload anymore specialized images involving MRs etc, waste of time.
On the other hand, anybody joining IS today, well they better go exclusive, that word is a truly beloved word inside IS and much, much more important then image-quality.
-
I agree with Paulie, but I'd like to add that the statment probably doesn't hold for vectors. I think only a few illustrators are benefiting from current best match. Most (including diamonds) got their downloads cut by quite a margain.
-
If they want to protect their revenue they should make the best match favour the best images not the exclusives, because they have to pay more to the exclusives and customers are likely to prefer the best images at the top wether or not exclusive images.
I would disagree. Even though they make a bigger percentage that image most likely is also at a dozen other sites. This increases the chances of it being purchased somewhere else instead of IS which for IS decreases its download volume, file revenue, and overall value.
Exclusive files increase value for IS as a whole. The more they have of something that someone can't get anywhere else the less influence the competition has on them. They then have more control on their operations and pricing.
If you have the exact same thing that everbody else is offering, what's your competitive advantage? Service or price. And since service really isn't a big factor in micros ("we're the micro with the best service" So what, who cares?) you're left competing on price. And competing prices only go lower.
This makes a lot of sense to me. There must really be a problem with people shopping on Istock and buying at say... Fotolia for peanuts unless contributor is Emerald. Why advertise a file that can be bought cheaper elsewhere. Takes business away and maybe they don't come back?? hmmm??
Obviously not true in all cases but maybe its happening enough to change things around somewhat to see if it makes a difference.
-
On the other hand, anybody joining IS today, well they better go exclusive, that word is a truly beloved word inside IS and much, much more important then image-quality.
Trouble is, it could a looong to get the first 250 dls. I'm looking at nearly all my new images being placed in iS pergatory, for who knows how long.
-
Everything is down on this site these days: views,Dls, uploads etc...
Other sites offer more than IS...
-
and always submit as the images are processed - spread over the whole week so that your images are seen by as many reviewers as possible. You do not want all your images be seen by one reviewer because if he does not like the first couple he probably will look bad on the rest of the batch.
I upload at least 2 photos a day to IS and the other agencies. I seem to have a better acceptance rate when I only upload a few images at a time.
-
On the other hand, anybody joining IS today, well they better go exclusive, that word is a truly beloved word inside IS and much, much more important then image-quality.
I agree Christian. Although some of the best image producers in the business are exclusive, a significant number of them aren't and between restrictive upload limits, increased rejections, and search engine obscurity, they are doing all they can to supress high quality non-exclusive images from the collection.
The current best match favors people who are both exclusive, and high cannister (with the exception of portfolios that have a lot of vectors and/or videos). I am diamond and not exclusive and I have seen sales cut in half from the first week of October to the first week of November.
I did just have a couple of new files downloaded today, though. It's too soon to tell if that signals a best match change or just dumb luck.
I sincerely hope they come up with a fairer best match. Way too many people have been hurt by this one. This is the first best match where I have heard people threatening to stop uploading, and lower cannister exclusives considering turning in their crowns.
-
(http://www.slichke.com/images/rgh1225994142x.jpg)
RED- current month
BLUE-all time
Graph shows the ratio of profits by agencies in percentage ....
So far IS was the second, BUT this month has a zero percent... HORROR!!!
We must appeal directly to IS!!!
-
I did just have a couple of new files downloaded today, though. It's too soon to tell if that signals a best match change or just dumb luck.
Also had a new file download today and it is by far the best day for sales since the middle of October. The only files being downloaded in the last half of October were stand-out photos in saturated areas and unique images with not much, or no, competition. Maybe today is a positive indicator that things are improving? Actually, all the agencies seem to be doing better than average today :) A post-election boost?
-
It could just be the month. November seems to be great for sales.
-
. This is the first best match where I have heard people threatening to stop uploading, and lower cannister exclusives considering turning in their crowns.
Threat or the real thing, either way it amounts to the same thing. Those images won't sell if they don't get uploaded. Or likely won't sell if they get uploaded. Nothing different. The only thing keeping uploads going for me is the restrictive limits.
-
Yes but youve got to remember, IS, ( no offence to anybody) is basically an amateur site, working on the laws of quantity. i.e. if one supplier quits there are dozens to replace him. They dont care if a contributor supply strong commercial imagery as long as they can produce. For the opposite youve got to go to a Trad-RM agency.
Me? I will NOT upload anymore specialized images involving MRs etc, waste of time.
On the other hand, anybody joining IS today, well they better go exclusive, that word is a truly beloved word inside IS and much, much more important then image-quality.
It depends on which supplier quits. Yuri is getting 500-1000 downloads a day. If he quit that alone could be 1% of IS's downloads/revenue. If other top contributors start losing faith and a dozen drop exclusivity and another dozen drop IS completely I would say that would have a huge impact on IS's revenue.
-
Yes but youve got to remember, IS, ( no offence to anybody) is basically an amateur site, working on the laws of quantity. i.e. if one supplier quits there are dozens to replace him. They dont care if a contributor supply strong commercial imagery as long as they can produce. For the opposite youve got to go to a Trad-RM agency.
Me? I will NOT upload anymore specialized images involving MRs etc, waste of time.
On the other hand, anybody joining IS today, well they better go exclusive, that word is a truly beloved word inside IS and much, much more important then image-quality.
It depends on which supplier quits. Yuri is getting 500-1000 downloads a day. If he quit that alone could be 1% of IS's downloads/revenue. If other top contributors start losing faith and a dozen drop exclusivity and another dozen drop IS completely I would say that would have a huge impact on IS's revenue.
He had 830 downloads yesterday. You think he'd give up several hundred dollars a day income on principle? Why?
-
No, but if over time he kept uploading 1,000 files a year and his daily downloads continued dropping he may reach a point where he no longer uploads or gets disgusted and leaves. If he, and a lot of other top contributors, start submitting all of their new stuff somewhere else instead of IS, IS starts to lose value for buyers.
I've stopped uploading. It's no longer worth my time at this point. October was my 14th consecutive BME. This month is shaping up to be down 50% from October which will make it one of the worst months I've had since I started there. I'm a handful of downloads short of silver so I'm giving it some time to see how the dust settles. I'm using that time to test the waters elsewhere.
EDIT: For crappy grammar and spelling.
-
(http://www.philly2hoboken.com/blog/archives/images/jan_brady.jpg)
Yuri, yuri, yuri !
-
Haaaa! Okay, okay Sean. How's this?
"It depends on which supplier quits. Sean is getting 500-1000 downloads a day. If he quit that alone could be 1% of IS's downloads/revenue. If other top contributors start losing faith and a dozen drop exclusivity and another dozen drop IS completely I would say that would have a huge impact on IS's revenue."
-
(http://www.thegregbradyproject.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/momalwayssaid500.JPG)
Mom always said, don't play ball in the house!
-
I am starting to wonder whether istock's exclusivity program has become something of an achiles heel ... when it was first introduced (is it almost 3 years ago now?) it was a brilliant strategic move to counter the growing competition from the new microstock sites - and I think it worked really really well and helped them maintain their consistent top dog status among the micros.
But today's market has really begun to change - we are seeing the entry of a number of truly professional photographers into the microstock market who were not in the market before but are starting to enter it (because the whole stock paradigm has changed - macro is failing and micro is emerging - they have done the math and see the writing on the wall) ... and I am not just talking about Yuri here - see eg. "monkey business images", "Avava", etc - and none of these pros are going to go exclusive because it makes no financial or professional sense for them to do so ...
This group is really upping the quality level in a big big way and their output is huge (sometimes hundreds of images uploaded every week), they are allowing other micros to compete in a way they could not before on the quality and quantity front and they may very well be impacting the downloads of exclusives on istock (they seem to be taking market share at any rate)... istock is then now torn ... how to be fair to their exclusives but how also to take advantage of these newer non-exclusive pros who have great great work that is hugely sellable? I mean they must be sitting there trying to figure out which group they can afford to piss off the least every time they do a best match change …
I think we are going to see more and more of these pros enter the micro market and I think as this happens the exclusivity program as it now exists at istock may start to drag it down ... in other words, can istocks exclusivity program as it now exists survive the entry into the market of “100 Yuris or monkey business images” (and of course Sean Locke now that he has given up exclusivity ;D)?
-
hoi ha!
You dont know how right you are!! without disclosing too much, I can tell you there are, hiding behind Pseudonyms some very, very big names with recognition all over the globe supplying.
Here comes the comic part: they dont even know about it! why? cause there is no creative incentive but purely a numbers rackett and thats why exclusivity is so "important"
Idiot thing is: these best match changes disasters are spreading like wildfire, everyone seems to know, buyers that found their images on say page 2 last week, cant find them this week or as one put it " image is gone! have you got a duplicate?
Some truly "great minds" behind this mechanism.
-
If istock based their upload limits on the success of their contributors, they wouldn't have a problem. People like Yuri should be able to upload all their portfolio. Exclusives already have much higher commissions and a big advantage with quicker reviews and higher best match placement. At the moment, they are letting people upload images that are highly unlikely to sell while others that would make lots of money are missing from the site. How long will it take for that to change?
Now they also have StockXpert with the missing high selling images but I am sure a lot of buyers are going to SS, DT, FT etc.
-
If istock based their upload limits on the success of their contributors, they wouldn't have a problem. People like Yuri should be able to upload all their portfolio. Exclusives already have much higher commissions and a big advantage with quicker reviews and higher best match placement. At the moment, they are letting people upload images that are highly unlikely to sell while others that would make lots of money are missing from the site. How long will it take for that to change?
Now they also have StockXpert with the missing high selling images but I am sure a lot of buyers are going to SS, DT, FT etc.
I dont think StockXpert came with this deal? all I know is that SS, FT, DT are up, up, up and its not too hard to figure why?
-
...(and of course Sean Locke now that he has given up exclusivity ;D)?
When did this happen?
I still see a crown on sjlocke's profile at IS!
-
...(and of course Sean Locke now that he has given up exclusivity ;D)?
When did this happen?
I still see a crown on sjlocke's profile at IS!
It's a joke ... kind of in response to the posts above mine ... so don't go starting any rumours now - I might get in big trouble with istock's biggest defender !!! ::)
-
I think we are going to see more and more of these pros enter the micro market and I think as this happens the exclusivity program as it now exists at istock may start to drag it down ... in other words, can istocks exclusivity program as it now exists survive the entry into the market of “100 Yuris or monkey business images”
I agree with all your points hoi ha, but just to play devil's advocate:
I think istock's restrictive upload limits on non-exclusive members have turned out to be one of the big attractions of exclusivity. Where independents have to compete against the full portfolios of these new, prolific pros across all sites, istock exclusives are only competing against a couple of hundred images from each. In the short term, this means istock's exclusives are insulated from a lot of the dog-eat-dog competition the rest of us face on the other sites.
OTOH they ARE competing with these pros full portfolios if you consider that buyers may just go elsewhere to buy their images. Will this leave istock exclusives vying for pieces of an ever-shrinking pie? Too soon to tell.
-
Istock should just put us all out of our misery, become an exclusive-only site, and send us all to StockXpert. But, can they?
Bear with me, I'm going to compare Istock to my school cachment. I live in a bedroom community 1.6km from school. If we were 1.7km (1/10th km farther!) my kids would get a free bus and be able to stay for lunch. The school bus stop is 3 doors over. Instead, I have to drive out past the bus stop every day and pay so that my kids can stay at school for lunch. Although I am not technically in "the town", the "town kids" pay for the entire lunch program. There would be no lunch supervisors if the "town kids" didn't supplement the out-of-town kids. If we all brought our kids home for lunch they would be f*cked; the school board would have to somehow pay for the supervisors and everyones' school taxes in this cachment would go up. It would set a precedent and they would have to do the same in all their other cachments in this district.
As delicious as it sounds, can Istock become an exclusive-only site? I doubt it. I think they likely need the 80% bonus they receive from every non-exclusive sale to maintain the exclusives, marketing, and business.
Not hoping to jinx it, but I've had daily sales again this week. They likely realized with their best match in October they weren't grossing enough % and had to give non-exclusives more sales to plump up the bottom line.
-
I have 2 PPD dl.s last 24h...
Maybe will be better...
-
I'm Back!
Hi All,
This is Chumley aka Jonathan aka AVAVA aka The Jackal. No I never used The Jackal but its a good name. I have been taking counciling classes have found a better therapist and am running every day so I might just be able to hang with you guy's without losing it. We'll see. I am prepared for a few pokes so take your best shot I am ready. :-[
I have been following the posts and want to say that this is by far the best forum out there ( suck up ) I admire you all for sharing your thoughts openly without fear of reaction my hat is off to you all. I was Chumley here before and will always have a bit of Chumley in my heart so if there is ever anything I can offer anyone about the stock industry I will always try my best to answer the question or seek it out then reply. happy to send PM's.
I had to finally return when Hoi Ha spoke up in this thread and mentioned my name. I am now part of the Micro community. Its true you really really like me ( bad Sally Fields impression ) All kidding aside I think Hoi Ha is making some sense. Many from the Macro side have asked the same question and I have heard from inside that the same buzz is going on further up the pole. How do you keep your exclusives happy but also include the best sellable work that your competitors offer. Tough question I would think over time that Istock will switch their exclusive program around a bit ( speculation ). Give the exclusives better percentage, personal editor, maybe even more uploads but let your customer decide what work is best for their needs by leveling the placement playing field. Competition only makes us all better, its what pushes you to improve and makes you have to think.
Another point you have to realize is that there are many Macro shooters who would love to become exclusive at Istock but because they will not let you become exclusive without removing all your images from every RF collection outside of Getty they are keeping all the older dogs out of the exclusive option. I can not remove my images from Macro sites for up to 7 years that is the contract you sign when you go Macro. So for those of us that were shooting RF Macro more than several years ago we cannot go exclusive at Istock even if we wanted. Not complaining just pointing out why Monkey Business might not be exclusive at Istock. I know it is the reason I am not trying exclusivity, I just am not allowed to within their contract limitations.
The Macro world has been exclusive for years. They consider exclusivity to be about the image not the shooter. You can only put your Macro RF work you submit to Getty in the collection they decide and you cannot send it on to say Corbis for their use. This is a reasonable contract. You can then turn around and shoot another job for Corbis ( if you have a contract ) the very next day and you have not broken the original contract with Getty as long as the work is different. To make photographers sign a contract that says you can only sell your Rf images through our portal kind of takes away the contractor relationship that this industry is based on and makes you more of an employee without the health benefits. We as photographers are really contractors with our own business. We should be able to send different work to different vendors that is the way most companies work with contractors.
When you contract for Microsoft you might sign an agreement that says as long as you work for us you will not produce any other work for our competitors but when that contract is up you are aloud to work for the next software company, in most cases. Not the same work you did for Microsoft but you can create new work for your next client. I don't see Istocks contract working in that fashion. All that aside remember it is your choice if you want to be exclusive so if you are not tied to another contract you have the freedom to choose.
The thing you have to ask yourself is WHY? Why are these changes occuring and how do they benefit the owners of the company. Many hypothesis out there so let me throw out another completely unsubstantiated view of what might be taking place. Remember these are very smart people that own Getty so why would they allow an exclusive model to continue the way they have. Could it be they want growth in the Micro market but not so much as it hurts their Macro market ( good reason for buying up Jupiter ). Getty has a great deal more invested in their Macro RF than they do in Istock. If they can control the Micro market they can keep it in its place and only allow enough growth as not to hurt their biggest income maker Macro RF.
Buy up and control the Micro market and you can make money at all levels. Let one grow to fast and it will hurt the other. I have seen Macro RF sales start to flatten after two years of drops is this where it will stay. Again ask yourself if you owned a company that only 20% of your income was made from one model ( Micro ) and any further growth would hurt the larger portions of your income how far would you let it go and what might be your options to control all levels of your industry.
What if tomorrow Getty took their Holly Owned Macro RF ( the stuff they own and don't split a commission with a photographer ) and dumped it into Istock and put it at the top of the search. This is not impossible. There are so many scenarios I could go on for days. It comes down to " we don't know " but I can garentee you that they are working round the clock to maximize their sales especially after being bought out.
I don't know what the answer is at this point that is why I have added 3500 images to Micro ( only 1500 up so far the rest are uploading over the next month ) spreading your eggs as much as possible is the answer to security in any volatile market place. If you ever played roulette you know what I am speaking of.
At this point all I can add is " Don't live in fear of tomorrow it will only slow down what you can achieve today " I made that up you can use it if you want. ;)
Peace,
AVAVA ( Chumley )
-
"This is Chumley aka Jonathan aka AVAVA aka The Jackal."
Hey there Jonathan.. Good to see you again.. We missed you.. :D
-
Very thoughtful and informed post Jonathan!
Interesting reading! :)
-
>>>>>>>What if tomorrow Getty took their Holly Owned Macro RF ( the stuff they own and don't split a commission with a photographer ) and dumped it into Istock and put it at the top of the search. This is not impossible. There are so many scenarios I could go on for days. It comes down to " we don't know " but I can garentee you that they are working round the clock to maximize their sales especially after being bought out.
this is probably the best argument AGAINST IS exclusivity anyone has put forward -- pratical considerations aside, i find it amazing that anyone would risk it all with one agency when the % benefits of IS exclusives are so low.
imagine the position of an IS exclsuive photographer whose portfolio was weighted towards cars and other images that IS suddenly banned?
there's an old tag about dancing among elephants -- most of us are never going to compete with the big guys. i experienced this in the computer games industry 20+ years ago and it applies today -- there i made conscious decisions to find niches that the large companies missed. some of my choices cdontinue to bring in royalties 15 yrs later. the advantage of smaller is to be able to move quickly and adapt in changing conditions. it's a lot of work, but it's never boring.
steve
-
Should that happen, I don't think it will, because getty would lose a lot of revenue, istock exclusives wouldn't be the only hurt. WIth all existing getty images at istock, competing microsites would see lots of customers fleeing to istock,and that would decimate sales everywhere.
-
I still don't understand why we can't get together and run our own site. We are the suppliers and without us the sites are worth nothing. Are we going to let them take bigger chunks of our earnings? At the moment we don't seem to have any power. It might be hard to set up but I don't see any barriers in this market. We could get in contact with the buyers, offer them lower prices and still make more money than we do now.
-
Hi Loop,
It is very hard for those of us without the numbers and info to be able to be sure what tomorrow will bring for sure I can only speculate from my own personal experience as we all do. But what you say is I would imagine what Getty would love to have happen. All the other Micros falling apart until they sell out to Getty or just die. To have total control of the stock industry has been their plan for years, they are closer than ever before.
Just offering that this industry can change over night I have seen it happen for years and years. I have carried one basket of eggs before, I tripped and broke a lot of them. It took my chickens a long time to get my revenue back.
Don't fear the future just keep talking about it ya'll
Peace,
AVAVA
-
I have carried one basket of eggs before, I tripped and broke a lot of them. It took my chickens a long time to get my revenue back.
Peace,
AVAVA
I'm a slower learner than you. I carried them in one basket a couple of times, thinking I would be more careful the second time. It's so easy to be merrily dancing along watching a great income flow one minute never imagining the world can change very quickly. Honestly, nothing against all you hard working exclusives, enjoy the times while they are good.
-
Hi Loop,
It is very hard for those of us without the numbers and info to be able to be sure what tomorrow will bring for sure I can only speculate from my own personal experience as we all do. But what you say is I would imagine what Getty would love to have happen. All the other Micros falling apart until they sell out to Getty or just die. To have total control of the stock industry has been their plan for years, they are closer than ever before.
Just offering that this industry can change over night I have seen it happen for years and years. I have carried one basket of eggs before, I tripped and broke a lot of them. It took my chickens a long time to get my revenue back.
Don't fear the future just keep talking about it ya'll
Peace,
AVAVA
Don't have fear... and I think that nobody will destroy his RM and Macro RF wealth just to take control of something that dosen't give so much and that, anyway, they already have hald controlled (IS, Photos com StockXpert) today.
And... talking of eggs and baskets... if living just from photography it almost doesn't mind if you are exclusive at istock or not. The clever way is to broad the spectrum to other photography fields and opportunities not related with any kind of stock photography.
-
Good Point Loop,
There are many ways to make money from photography, stock is just one. Photography Rocks!
Cheers,
AVAVA
-
Yeah, you can also sell your expensive equipment! ;)
-
If it's a camera you better be fast. I think they fall faster than gravity. ;D
AV
-
If Getty or anybody would have total control: we would get paid less and we would have no choice but to comply or bugger off.
Besides Getty is owned by a private Equity firm and IS by Getty.
Suck on that caramel for a second.
-
Hi All,
Just an example of what happens when Istock buries your work. I made over $4000 dollars over the past 3 weeks at three other Micro stock agencies with 1400 new uploads and the sales are growing daily. At the same time I made $105 dollars at Istock over the same period fulfilling my weekly quota of 15 images with my strongest work and my RPI is dropping there. I am making less at Istock this month than I was there with 30 images nine months ago. My new work is so deep in the search I have trouble finding it. Please read the comments I made on the Key wording blog this is the strangest part of the ongoing puzzle of how to make money at IS.
To be fair I was able to upload 1400 images to the other sites or at least two, the others are in progress. Giving me a much bigger presence at the competitors. If you do the RPI from just the past three weeks I am making twice as much per image at the other sites and I think the 1400 will return more in the long run than the 115 images I have at Istock.
I really think they are doing the math back at Getty and changes will take place. That is my take on it for what it's worth.
Hang in there,
AVAVA
-
Wow, what a drastic change.. I think it's unfortunate for Istock if they continue the same as it will only kill contributor confidence and people will stop uploading.. I have recently uploaded last week my quota and they were almost all accepted, but they have all been burried and only 1 download of any of them and all other ones that are somewhat new get almost no dl's.. My only saving grace with them are previously popular files that continue to get dl's, if it weren't for the old high dl files I'd be close to zero..
Hopefully they figure things out.. Thanks for sharing this info Jon..
Hi All,
Just an example of what happens when Istock buries your work. I made over $4000 dollars over the past 3 weeks at three other Micro stock agencies with 1400 new uploads and the sales are growing daily. At the same time I made $105 dollars at Istock over the same period fulfilling my weekly quota of 15 images with my strongest work and my RPI is dropping there. I am making less at Istock this month than I was there with 30 images nine months ago. My new work is so deep in the search I have trouble finding it. Please read the comments I made on the Key wording blog this is the strangest part of the ongoing puzzle of how to make money at IS.
To be fair I was able to upload 1400 images to the other sites or at least two, the others are in progress. Giving me a much bigger presence at the competitors. If you do the RPI from just the past three weeks I am making twice as much per image at the other sites and I think the 1400 will return more in the long run than the 115 images I have at Istock.
I really think they are doing the math back at Getty and changes will take place. That is my take on it for what it's worth.
Hang in there,
AVAVA
-
My pleasure Tubed,
Thanks for the support. Today I made a whopping .23 cents at IS. I don't know weather to spend it all on gum or buy two pieces and save the rest for my retirement. ;D
Best,
J
-
To be fair I was able to upload 1400 images to the other sites or at least two, the others are in progress. Giving me a much bigger presence at the competitors. If you do the RPI from just the past three weeks I am making twice as much per image at the other sites and I think the 1400 will return more in the long run than the 115 images I have at Istock.
I really think they are doing the math back at Getty and changes will take place. That is my take on it for what it's worth.
Illustrates exactly what I have been thinking and was trying to say however artlessly .... I cannot access your full portfolio at istock so I have to shop for your images elsewhere (and we do by the way :)) - that is a big bonus to the other micro sites because they have your 1400 images for sale while istock only has 115 - that means I am not buying at istock ... and that cannot be helping istock's bottom line .... exclusivity as a strategy for istock worked when the best photographers were exclusive but unravels when the best photgraphers are not.
Of course istock is aware of this and they have shown themselves to be smart strategically in the past - the big difference as "Johnny Jackal" has noted is they are now Getty of course and who knows what Getty's strategy is, for as you say, istock is a small part of their revenue - so strategic decisions are not just about istock anymore - it's about what's best for Getty and that might not be the same thing as what is best for istock ... One thing is for sure, I am expecting big changes on how exclusivity works and to be honest it might not even be done in public ... for example I can see istock changing the exclusivity rules for certain top photographers but not for others - I can see them quietly manipulating the search to help out those same "non-exclusive" photographers, changing the upload rules for them (i.e. why don't you send us your portfolio on CDs and we will handle the rest .. wink wink), reaching out to them privately and coming to private arrangements .....
I am not saying istock is actually doing this - I am simply saying I could see why they would .... I am congnizant of the fact that istoock is not Bruce and Co. anymore - it is Getty now .... and business is, afterall, business ....
-
Hi AVAVA - BTW - nice to meet you here on these boards ... I live in China - its Saturday afternoon here so while you posted I slept .... interesting stuff ... many thanks for your input!!
-
Hi Hoi Ha,
My pleasure you made some strong points and it was easy to support them. By the way if it's tomorrow there already can you tell me what my sales look like for saturday. ;D
Best,
J
-
Well AVAVA - I would say things are looking pretty rosy ;D But then I, like you, try really hard to stay postive - in everything there is opportunity ... it is simply a quesion of finding where that opportunity lies !!!! peace .... and many downloads to you ....
-
Right. its not Bruce&co anymore its Getty and their policies. If I were a DD or invested many years with a giant exclusive portfolio at IS? well I dont think I would sleep at nights or at best I would be popping Valium.
Imagine this being your sole income? 10 best match changes per year, none more effective then the other, then suddenly you get thrown a bone of a Change that oh! well, looks pretty good, great! few months later a new change thats killing.
Me? Im only Gold, non exclusive at IS and with 3 other micros, also with Trad-RM, RF agencies and doing very well, still,total Stock only represents about 20% of my annual turnover. the rest is all day-rate incomes.
No, I feel for the people whos invested their future etc in this mary-go-round. The way things are going its all too easy to predict its gonna hit all of them sooner or later. Getty will as always look after their RM exclusives since many years and the rest?
take a guess.
-
But it isn't Getty any more, as they were sold to Hellman & Friedman. It will be interesting to see if Hellman & Friedman let the Getty managers run things their way or if they have plans of their own. They have a reputation for buying a business at a low valuation and selling for a higher price later. Getty were struggling and their share price was falling. Will Hellman & Friedman be able to turn them around?
-
Yes sharpshot!
Its Hellman & Friedman and thats EXACTLY the worrying thing. Following past history of horror scenarios of: here today gone tomorrow.
Ive got about 9 collegues, friends within the RM and they are all petrified of this merger.
-
I still don't understand why we can't get together and run our own site.
The details ! The devil is in the details.
A camel is a horse designed by a committee
If we get the 50 best selling photographers toghether it will be pretty hard to find an agreement.
Or not ?
-
I still don't understand why we can't get together and run our own site.
The details ! The devil is in the details.
A camel is a horse designed by a committee
If we get the 50 best selling photographers toghether it will be pretty hard to find an agreement.
Or not ?
Judging by these forums were sometimes members find it hard to be civil to each to each other I think you may find it harder than you think to run a 50 photographer co-op!
-
No! its not that difficult, not if youve got the connections and know-how.
I know a guy, previously working with Thomas Knoll, you know, the guy who invented PS and Adobe.
This guy is a certified GENIUS. At the moment he is killing himself in ironi at all differant search-engines and how sites really are functioning.
All that is needed is 200 of the best photographers, no rubbish, none of that" run-of-the-mill " crap but genuine stock-photographers.
Were already working on it AND thanks to cretain skill combined with luck, the buyers/clients are already there.
The art is to offer something above the ludicrous "young business girl" or " business team against white".
Think Im joking? hold on for six, seven months.
-
Were already working on it AND thanks to cretain skill combined with luck, the buyers/clients are already there.
The art is to offer something above the ludicrous "young business girl" or " business team against white".
Think Im joking? hold on for six, seven months.
Comments like this will obviously cause some ears to perk. Mine for instance.
-
I don't really thing that any new "me too" site can work if not backed by a really heavy invstment. Think of LuckyOliver, gimmestock, and scores more of vanished or semi-vanished sites. Having "better content" it's not a new idea, and then, you would need a lot of "better content", at least one million images.
Last great ideas that I remember at the microstock market are the concept of microstock itself, by istock, and appliying the subscription model at this idea, by Shutterstock.
-
Nobody said Micro! or Macro. What about in between? tailormade images serving 4 or 5 niches. Images purposely directed towards the Advertising and corporate industry.
Takes a different kind of photographer...............concepts in mind.
Theres always a demand for this and have been since the early 70s, trouble has always been that clients are more or leass foeced to by RM, thats expensive. Rights-Ready was never a good answer, was it?
-
Hi All,
I can speak on some base of knowledge here as I am part owner in two Photographer owned Macro RF/RR/RM collections. Both companies have 20-25 legal owners and then a bunch of contributing photographers. We started the first one over 4 years ago and it is now a very strong company. You can find them on Getty " Blend Images " and " Cultura ". Both companies are completely separate from one another and have completely different owners and are available at about every image seller out there. They are both based on completely different niche collections so they do not compete with each other for sales.
It takes the right group of people to make a thing like this work. It has to be made up of true " GIVERS " and not " TAKERS " as well as people that will produce and not just have the others make their company stronger. This doesn't come easy some days but it is totally doable. I coach soccer and I relate the two a lot. A good team must be made up of players who's entire efforts are to put the ball in the net as a team, not as an individual. It doesn't matter who's foot the ball comes off to make the goal it is the entire team that makes it happen.
Micro is a bit different of a beast but if you look at the recent polls that show how few photographers are making almost all of Istocks income off a very limited number of images I think a group producing top quality content could make an impact in Micro. I don't think you need 4 million images to play I think about 200,000 really strong images could make a very strong niche Micro collection launch.
Do the numbers. You would have to find 50 shooters that could produce 4,000 images each for the launch. That is very doable especially from the bigger guns out there. Then you can add on contributors like any other site and your next years production can be offset by your new contributors.
You are still going to be very small in comparison to a Getty so it would be important that your quality was the best in Micro. Now someone like Getty or Corbis see your returns after a few years and they come in and make you an offer for buy out. The collection is sold for a profit to the owners and the work continues to make money under the new owners control just the old owners return would be diminished to what was set in the sales agreement ( much smaller portion than when you were an owner, maybe even a buy out of the copyrights of the owners images for a higher sale price with no further return for the previous owners ).
It sounds easy but I can tell you it takes a very special group of people who are not just looking out for themselves but the entire company. These people are out there you just have to do the research to find these 50 special producers.
These are just examples but to answer the question YES! It can be done and has, just not in Micro yet. Will someone step up in the Micro market and try to build a niche collection of the best work ? Who is going to step up and start this baby and then give their entire lives to the growth and beginning of such a venture for several years.
Keep thinking you guys this is good stuff, I love it!
Best,
AVAVA
-
I don't think this is the type of group that should be selling micro. True high end stuff should be kept for higher priced collections.
-
SJ,
What are higher priced collections these days. I can tell you that Micro RF and Macro RF are getting closer every day on their returns. This migration is what happened in Macro RF I don't know why it would hurt Micro. I see healthy competition as a good thing and the more options for photographers to sell their work. Just another level in the ever changing market of stock.
Best,
AVAVA
-
It may just be me, but there are just certain things that say to me "this should command a high price", and I'm talking about individual sales, and not volume.
-
i agree with sjlocke ...
AVAVA...
1. if you have made money from this concept you where VERY LUCKY to make 50 special producers flow you... or..... they....
2. This is not creation just fabric production you could be better go to china it's cheaper....
-
Hi Lobby,
I think I understand your point but I don't think I made myself very clear. I did not create these companies that I spoke of they were built by guys much smarter and more ambitious than me. I was just fortunate enough to become an owner in the co-ops. No one followed me it was a complete collaboration of equal owners, if anything I have been one of the followers in many ways.
We vote in a board of directors that are to everyones agreement and a CEO to run the day to day operations of the company. You can't have twenty+ owners involved in the daily operations it would be madness.
It is structured just like any business that has multiple owners or stock holders. In this case the stock holder is also the person producing the product. Talk about motivation when it comes to your efforts for quality when you own the company.
I can name a pretty healthy list of third party companies that have done really well in Macro. Rubberball, BananaStock, Brand X, Image Source, Tetra. Getty has bought up a ton of these companies as has Corbis. The list goes on and on in Macro RF why not Micro eventually?
I am a little confused about the creation vs. fabric construction statement would you please explain what you mean. I don't want to comment on something I don't understand. Thanks for your feedback.
Best,
J
-
RF certainly came up in price through the years as the quality improved, even though quantity was increasing. I imagine the same will happen with micro.
-
I think it is time to try something different. My idea would be for us all to have our own sites, using the same software and hosting company. We all pay our own fees and take 100% of the profit. Then we could pay a monthly fee for a site that hosts all the small preview images and a database to search all our files. Obviously there would be advertising costs but I believe a lot of buyers would find the site if they knew they could buy directly from us and we could charge fair prices, as there wouldn't be a third party taking a large commission from each sale.
-
Sean is actually right, in a way that is. There is however quite a big hole in the market, you can only spot it if your dealing with creative clients, art and picture-buyers, art-directors etc. its almost a forgotten breed normally associated with high-end material, i.e commisioned shoots or RM material.
There are always other avenues, thats the great thing about photography! ten years ago who would have dreamt about Micro?? then along comes Bruce with a genial idea which revolutionized the entire industry.
My only regret is that he sold out.
-
Hi Sean,
I couldn't agree with you more. It's called RM. Macro RF prices have deteriorated from 1500% return over 5 years now down to 200% return over 3 years. Micro allows me to produce three times more images than I can for Macro it makes 300% return over 1 year. I just do the math and send my work where it can make me the most money.
My other reason for getting involved in Micro is to make sure I am in play for the future at all levels of stock for changes that are coming. At this point it is hard to say where the money will be the strongest. Diversification is the best thing during unsure times.
If you compare my new Macro RF with my Micro you'll see a big difference in quality. I send my simple vanilla to Micro so as not to compete with my higher end Macro RF. I am happy to share the difference if anyone is interested.
Lagreek, I totally agree there are holes in the market we are aware of two very large holes in the market. There are several sources to know where the holes are beside art buyers as well. Art buyers are a very good source of knowledge and I think it is pretty smart of you to be asking buyers you know what they are missing. They are the ones spending the money after all.
Don't be sad that Bruce sold his company for 50 million I think most people would. That is how this business has been for years now. Some collections are being built just to be sold off to the big guys.
Good stuff guys, keep it up.
Best,
AVAVA
-
Hi Jonathan! ( AVAVA) btw. wonder if you remmember Kettners Wine-bar back in 92???
Listen to this. Got to bring it up. I spoke to an Art-buyer earlier today in fact. She is at one of the biggest Ad-agencies in the world, London based.
She was given a huge budget for picture buying, I mean huge! for the past two years shes bought Micro, almost all the way but surprise! NO more. Quality and search-methods have deteriorated to the poit of annoyance.
If I told you where she plans to spend, honestly, you wouldnt believe it.
-
Now you got me all interested and salivating. I live near Seattle how about a nice Dungeness cracked crab packed in ice on your door step tomorrow morning. ;D
Best,
J
-
Cmon lagereek, spill the beans. The only place I'd be surprised to find her is alamy, since quality and search are tough there.
-
Yep! bring on the crabs! Seattle crab that is.
Not mentioning any names but her budget goes to a very small but highly exclusive RM,RF agency also London based. This is the kind of agency that will follow a layout a brief and translate it into the idea in question. If I remember correctly, Getty, in the beginning of 2000 wanted to buy this agency but the guys refused to sell.
Where is my crab? maybe Sean can get me one. BTW, Sean I shudder to think about the lolly your lifestyle shots would bring in at Alamy.
-
Okay we are getting closer but I want a backdoor PM on this my friend. Cough up the name and the crab is in the mail. By the way I'm a Brit, they must want to work with another Pom ;)
Cheers,
AVAVA
-
Okay we are getting closer but I want a backdoor PM on this my friend. Cough up the name and the crab is in the mail. By the way I'm a Brit, they must want to work with another Pom ;)
Cheers,
AVAVA
Yup! Im half Brit/Swede! That makes two crabs. Blimey youve got exactly the same name as The Jonathan-Ross on British Television, he was the most popular TV personallity in Britain during the 80-90s. He had the Jonathan-Ross show, late evenings.
-
Hey lagereek,
Please don't remind me. I can't tell you how many bad jokes have been shared with my name being the same. Someone once sent me a YOUTUBE video of a bloke in England that had trained his cat to sound like it was saying wanker. The owner then asked the cat what he thought of Jonathan Ross. :)
Cheers,
J
-
Another proof of the OP is on the MJ blog at IS:
These are the daily download stats of iStock's top 25 contributors. They represent roughly 10% of iStock downloads. Each of the horizontal lines represents roughly 5% of sales.
(http://www.michaeljay.ch/img/iStockTop25.gif)
The top contributors are having better sales it seems.
-
Another proof of the OP is on the MJ blog at IS:
These are the daily download stats of iStock's top 25 contributors. They represent roughly 10% of iStock downloads. Each of the horizontal lines represents roughly 5% of sales.
([url]http://www.michaeljay.ch/img/iStockTop25.gif[/url])
The top contributors are having better sales it seems.
Yes, it looks like they are almost back up to where they were in March.
-
Another proof of the OP is on the MJ blog at IS:
These are the daily download stats of iStock's top 25 contributors. They represent roughly 10% of iStock downloads. Each of the horizontal lines represents roughly 5% of sales.
([url]http://www.michaeljay.ch/img/iStockTop25.gif[/url])
The top contributors are having better sales it seems.
Yes, it looks like they are almost back up to where they were in March.
Too bad that's true only for them and not most non-exclusives/lower canister exclusives/illustrators (PS I uploaded my first picture in March so atm sales are better then in March :D). Which exactly prooves who got the best of this best match. Would love to see the same graph for illustrators.
-
Here's hoping. Today was the first time downloads and dollars were back to where they were last month. Apart from a $0.19 extra small download a couple of days ago, these are the first downloads since October 29. We'll just have to wait and see over the next few days. IS was my number one producer and went from hero to zero in one day.
-
No! its not that difficult, not if youve got the connections and know-how.
I know a guy, previously working with Thomas Knoll, you know, the guy who invented PS and Adobe.
This guy is a certified GENIUS. At the moment he is killing himself in ironi at all differant search-engines and how sites really are functioning.
All that is needed is 200 of the best photographers, no rubbish, none of that" run-of-the-mill " crap but genuine stock-photographers.
Were already working on it AND thanks to cretain skill combined with luck, the buyers/clients are already there.
The art is to offer something above the ludicrous "young business girl" or " business team against white".
Think Im joking? hold on for six, seven months.
Just wondering how this is going, it's been two years, thought it was only fair to give the new enterprise a chance!
-
Another proof of the OP is on the MJ blog at IS:
These are the daily download stats of iStock's top 25 contributors. They represent roughly 10% of iStock downloads. Each of the horizontal lines represents roughly 5% of sales.
([url]http://www.michaeljay.ch/img/iStockTop25.gif[/url])
The top contributors are having better sales it seems.
Yes, it looks like they are almost back up to where they were in March.
Too bad that's true only for them and not most non-exclusives/lower canister exclusives/illustrators (PS I uploaded my first picture in March so atm sales are better then in March :D). Which exactly prooves who got the best of this best match. Would love to see the same graph for illustrators.
That doesn't look like they are getting 1/2 their downloads in the 4th quarter or whatever we were told about the credit targets when they were first rolled out.
-
I think it is time to try something different. My idea would be for us all to have our own sites, using the same software and hosting company. We all pay our own fees and take 100% of the profit. Then we could pay a monthly fee for a site that hosts all the small preview images and a database to search all our files. Obviously there would be advertising costs but I believe a lot of buyers would find the site if they knew they could buy directly from us and we could charge fair prices, as there wouldn't be a third party taking a large commission from each sale.
http://www.stockartistsalliance.org/pluspacks/index.htm (http://www.stockartistsalliance.org/pluspacks/index.htm)