Author Topic: to recap and review... (Read 9115 times)

stockastic · « **on:** February 13, 2013, 13:54 »

The story is - Getty/IS sold several thousand images to Google, to be re-distributed in an apparently uncontrolled way, and the photographers received only a token one-time payment. And that's the end of it. Despite all the fog released on their forum, no detailed explanation of terms was ever provided, no real indication that the terms might be changed, or that the deal was in fact even complete (i.e. that even more images might be involved in the future) or that similar deals would not be struck elsewhere.

Statements made by IS employees on their forum, promising a relevant statement or announcement, had apparently no basis.

It's take it or leave it.

Is that a correct summing up of the situation?

crashoran · « **Reply #1 on:** February 13, 2013, 13:57 »

I don't think the $12 was given until after contributors started protesting, and even after the measly $12 it made people even more angry.

tickstock · « **Reply #2 on:** February 13, 2013, 13:59 »

cmannphoto · « **Reply #3 on:** February 13, 2013, 14:01 »

Quote from: crashoran on February 13, 2013, 13:57

I don't think the $12 was given until the uproar began, and even after the measly $12 it made people even more angry.

Wrong, Sean made light of this in January
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350439&page=1

Quote

Royalties for these images were paid through Getty Images and were processed in October and November of 2012.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350491&page=1

stockastic · « **Reply #4 on:** February 13, 2013, 14:24 »

Quote from: tickstock on February 13, 2013, 13:59

Wouldn't this post fit nicely in one of the twenty other threads on this?

Did you read my post? I'm asking if my summary is correct. No one is going to go back and read those 20 threads now.

I'm actually surprised that IS has had absolutely nothing to say on this - officially at least - in all this time and I'm wondering if that's really true, and if so, are other people surprised as well?

I'd expect some typical corporate weasel-words by now.

ShadySue · « **Reply #5 on:** February 13, 2013, 18:40 »

Yes, this is a correct summary of the situation.

Perhaps Sean's shoddy treatment is an indication that they are not going to give us any further information on this or future 'deals' and we'd best just shut up and take it.

Mantis · « **Reply #6 on:** February 13, 2013, 18:43 »

Quote from: stockastic on February 13, 2013, 13:54

The story is - Getty/IS sold several thousand images to Google, to be re-distributed in an apparently uncontrolled way, and the photographers received only a token one-time payment. And that's the end of it. Despite all the fog released on their forum, no detailed explanation of terms was ever provided, no real indication that the terms might be changed, or that the deal was in fact even complete (i.e. that even more images might be involved in the future) or that similar deals would not be struck elsewhere.

Statements made by IS employees on their forum, promising a relevant statement or announcement, had apparently no basis.

It's take it or leave it.

Is that a correct summing up of the situation?

And they canned Sean to divert attention away from the Google deal.

klsbear · « **Reply #7 on:** February 13, 2013, 19:05 »

Lobo made a vague reference to it on Monday (below) and a post later today sounded like he was on his way there today.
I don't expect we'll get anything close to what we'd like to hear.

Quote

Posted By Lobo:

Quote
Posted By lostinbids:
^ I think Slobo was wondering if there was going to be an announcement on what is happening with Google Drive.

That was a freebie then.

I'm heading into HQ this week. I'll get some updates.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=351105&messageid=6841727

stockastic · « **Reply #8 on:** February 13, 2013, 19:42 »

So that's it then. Just wanted to be sure I hadn't missed something, because the complete silence from IS/Getty is sort of amazing in itself.

Mars · « **Reply #9 on:** February 13, 2013, 20:44 »

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #10 on:** February 14, 2013, 06:50 »

Quote

Other exclusives will follow Sean's lead and their buyers will go too.

I think this is an unlikely scenario. Most exclusives I know have been keen to keep their heads down and not cause trouble, most are realistic in feeling that buyers are loyal or otherwise to iStock, not to individual sellers. Most exclusives are not going to give up their steady, albeit reduced, incomes unless something cataclysmic happens at IS.

JFP · « **Reply #11 on:** February 14, 2013, 06:58 »

I will certainly not stay exclusive at IS and working on preparing my files for becoming indie. I grew my portfolio by 30% in 2012, had my BME in November and have a huge fall of revenues in Dec and Jan. My weekly revenue in Feb is 3 TIMES LOWER than in Nov.

The cataclysm already happened and IS is unlikely to recover. No steady income anymore.

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 06:50

Quote
Other exclusives will follow Sean's lead and their buyers will go too.

I think this is an unlikely scenario. Most exclusives I know have been keen to keep their heads down and not cause trouble, most are realistic in feeling that buyers are loyal or otherwise to iStock, not to individual sellers. Most exclusives are not going to give up their steady, albeit reduced, incomes unless something cataclysmic happens at IS.

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #12 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:07 »

Quote

My weekly revenue in Feb is 3 TIMES LOWER than in Nov.

That is certainly not my experience, nor that of others I know. My income is gradually rising, as others I know also report, although still well down from, say, 2 years ago.
I had my best week since last summer last week, others I know report improving sales ( again, although still well down on previous years) I have no way of knowing how many sales 3 times lower is, but I suspect those with smaller portfolios and who have been at IS for a shorter period may have a bumpier ride, especially as the best match is currently favoring older files and thus disadvantaging newcomers. To say IS is 'unlikely to recover' and 'the cataclysm has already happened' is overstating the situation to an absurd degree.

cathyslife · « **Reply #13 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:13 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 07:07

Quote
My weekly revenue in Feb is 3 TIMES LOWER than in Nov.

That is certainly not my experience, nor that of others I know. My income is gradually rising, as others I know also report, although still well down from, say, 2 years ago.
I had my best week since last summer last week, others I know report improving sales ( again, although still well down on previous years) I have no way of knowing how many sales 3 times lower is, but I suspect those with smaller portfolios and who have been at IS for a shorter period may have a bumpier ride, especially as the best match is currently favoring older files and thus disadvantaging newcomers. To say IS is 'unlikely to recover' and 'the cataclysm has already happened' is overstating the situation to an absurd degree.

I thought you closed your account.

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #14 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:16 »

Quote

I thought you closed your account.

I had a number of requests not to, so I didn't. It was good to know I had more support that I thought.

Microbius · « **Reply #15 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:17 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 07:07

....To say IS is 'unlikely to recover' and 'the cataclysm has already happened' is overstating the situation to an absurd degree.

Just saving the quote for the next round of the fun and ongoing game "Reposting Vlad's words a year later so he can eat them" yum yum

cathyslife · « **Reply #16 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:18 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 07:16

Quote
I thought you closed your account.

I had a number of requests not to, so I didn't. It was good to know I had more support that I thought.

enstoker · « **Reply #17 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:33 »

Quote from: cclapper on February 14, 2013, 07:18

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 07:16
Quote
I thought you closed your account.

I had a number of requests not to, so I didn't. It was good to know I had more support that I thought.

Really?

And who asked You not to close ?

Mars · « **Reply #18 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:36 »

JFP · « **Reply #19 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:41 »

You are lucky then...

I m exclusive since 2009 with a descent size portfolio

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 07:07

Quote
My weekly revenue in Feb is 3 TIMES LOWER than in Nov.

That is certainly not my experience, nor that of others I know. My income is gradually rising, as others I know also report, although still well down from, say, 2 years ago.
I had my best week since last summer last week, others I know report improving sales ( again, although still well down on previous years) I have no way of knowing how many sales 3 times lower is, but I suspect those with smaller portfolios and who have been at IS for a shorter period may have a bumpier ride, especially as the best match is currently favoring older files and thus disadvantaging newcomers. To say IS is 'unlikely to recover' and 'the cataclysm has already happened' is overstating the situation to an absurd degree.

ShadySue · « **Reply #20 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:43 »

Quote from: Mars on February 14, 2013, 07:36

But let's not make this about you again and about your experience when we have more than half of the current exclusives saying they want to drop their crown.
http://blog.microstockgroup.com/2012-microstock-industry-survey-sneak-peek/

To keep it real, over half of the {170 exclusives who took part in the survey} said they were going to drop exclusivity. Out of how many exclusives?

As Michael said:
"I wouldn't read too much into it. Those who are dedicated to staying exclusive (at least for the time being) have not much reason to look outside the iStock forums for information, and no need to take part in industry surveys. So the people who decide to take part in something like this is a self-selected group of people who are already at a stage to look outside the iStock world. Overall it's just about 170 iStock exclusives who took part in the survey."
"http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/2012-microstock-industry-survey-first-results/msg298519/#msg298519

ShadySue · « **Reply #21 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:55 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 07:16

Quote
I thought you closed your account.

I had a number of requests not to, so I didn't. It was good to know I had more support that I thought.

Grief, I wouldn't let other people influence my decisions to that extent.

Unless they were buyers, and if I had that much of a buyer fan base I'd be selling direct, not giving any agency a percentage.

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #22 on:** February 14, 2013, 08:24 »

Quote

Unless they were buyers, and if I had that much of a buyer fan base I'd be selling direct, not giving any agency a percentage.

I was talking about here, not IS! That made me laugh for some reason.

Quote

when we have more than half of the current exclusives from the survey saying they want to drop their crown.

I think the big mistake people here make is they assume that what happens here is as important in the real world as people here think it is.
Thus, the fact that half the exclusives filling in that report say they want to drop their crown, that is ( a) assumed to be accurate and (b) assumed to reflect everyone else on IS. Neither of those propositions is necessarily true, (b) particularly so. People who come here tend to be the more annoyed and disaffected, so the trends reported in surveys don't necessarily reflect the wider view, just those of people here. How many exclusives are there? I have no idea, but many many thousands. The fact that 80 odd people fill in a form and say they want to give up exclusivity ( I probably said that, because, in an ideal world, with all incomes equal, I would like to), it doesn't mean they're going to.

Quote

I've decided you're either someone with a small portfolio big noting yourself or you're on the IS payroll trolling here to try to keep things balanced.

I'm not sure what 'big noting' means, but I don't think that's me, nor am I on IS payroll! ( wish I was actually) I am a medium to big seller, that all I am prepared to say. I come here to counter some of the more absurd statements that are made here, of the 'we're going to bring IS down', 'I am going to take all my clients away from IS' etc etc ad absurdum
If you read what I say, I am unhappy with IS and many recent developments, I'm just not in a position to drop exclusivity for reasons I've already stated. I have said if I was starting out now I would definitely not be exclusive, but I am in a trap at IS, as many others are, where we cannot afford to leave as our income drop would be too great. I do not need sympathy for my position, as it is in the nature of golden handcuffs, but I make plans for the future, like anyone else at IS right now.

ShadySue · « **Reply #23 on:** February 14, 2013, 08:38 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 08:24

Quote
Unless they were buyers, and if I had that much of a buyer fan base I'd be selling direct, not giving any agency a percentage.

I was talking about here, not IS!

People here asked you not to give up the crown, so you didn't?
What if they'd asked you to jump out of a window? (sorry, couldn't resist - as a former teacher, the classic response to 'they were doing it so I joined in' just flew back to the top of what passes as a brain.)

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #24 on:** February 14, 2013, 08:42 »

Quote

People here asked you not to give up the crown, so you didn't?

>Facepalm
Let me clarify what I said, for those at the back not listening.
I said a few days ago I was dropping my membership here, not at IS.
A few people contacted me and asked me to reconsider, as I was one of the few sane people here ( they didn't say that bit , but that was the general gist). I reconsidered and didn't leave HERE ( not IS, where I am an exclusive and am not about to give that up, although not 100% happy there)

ShadySue · « **Reply #25 on:** February 14, 2013, 09:01 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 08:42

Quote
People here asked you not to give up the crown, so you didn't?

>Facepalm
Let me clarify what I said, for those at the back not listening.
I said a few days ago I was dropping my membership here, not at IS.
A few people contacted me and asked me to reconsider, as I was one of the few sane people here ( they didn't say that bit , but that was the general gist). I reconsidered and didn't leave HERE ( not IS, where I am an exclusive and am not about to give that up, although not 100% happy there)

Oh

Sorry.
Clearly I wasn't paying attention at all!
Don't leave here. We need some sort of balance, and although IMO you might be a bit overstating the case on the 'stay exclusive' side, IMO others are overstating the indy case as though it applied equally to all (I have no doubt that nowadays it is the better option for many people).

All this not shooting is leaving me with too much time to come up with conspiracy theories. I just had the bizarre one that what if all those here who advocate giving up exclusivity are really iStock stool pigeons infiltrating to persuade people to give up the crown so that iS can pay us a lower %age.

(Don't worry, peeps, I don't actually think that, it just floated into the mush and can float back out again.) Back to Alamy keywording.

FWIW, my iS sales are up and down like yoyos; last Feb was a weird month which had my highest dls of the year but the lowest RPD. This year dls are of course well down and $$ down. With the daily yoyoing it will no doubt come right down to the line on the last day, and eventually depend on GI sales (or not).

Mars · « **Reply #26 on:** February 14, 2013, 09:05 »

heywoody · « **Reply #27 on:** February 14, 2013, 09:07 »

De Nile is a river in Egypt, other cliches involving ostriches also springing to mind reading some of the posts

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #28 on:** February 14, 2013, 09:26 »

I don't keep track of numbers, but I have seen, in the last month or so, in all the comments on my blog and other places, a great number of contributors dropping exclusivity. Actually doing it. I've never asked them to do so, to "get back at Getty" or anything. It's just seeming like something people are feeling the need to do.

And I've heard from some people who are holding onto it, for the time being, as well, for their own reasons.

Ploink · « **Reply #29 on:** February 14, 2013, 09:35 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 06:50

Quote
Other exclusives will follow Sean's lead and their buyers will go too.

I think this is an unlikely scenario. Most exclusives I know have been keen to keep their heads down and not cause trouble,...

And that's the reason why they put Sean's virtual head on a pike. The message is loud and clear: "Look, we did it to our prodigy, we won't hesitate for a second to do it to you...".

And if I were exclusive on IS and if my income depended on them, I would tread very carefully with what I say or do in open forums. What most exclusives hopefully will do is to look for plans B, C, and D - and, when they are in place, tell IS politely to go fly a kite...

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #30 on:** February 14, 2013, 09:44 »

Quote

you might be a bit overstating the case on the 'stay exclusive' side

I have always said that, were I starting out now, I would be non exclusive, no doubt. Lets get this clear, I envy non exclusives their freedom, I have stated before though, I am financially trapped in exclusivity. I don't want pity, I make a good living, better than many here. In the recent survey here, only, I think, 7% were full timers, income wise. I'm one of those 7%. If you're one of the 93%, you will undoubtedly have a different point of view on things than I do. Neither of us is right or wrong, we're just coming from different directions.

Quote

So all those people that you've responded to that have a different experience to you here don't matter, is that right?

Of course it isn't, when have I ever said that? You are putting absurd words into my mouth.
You are making the classic mistake of reading what you want into my posts, not reading what I'm saying.

Quote

all we can go by is the collective experiences of everyone, here. They all matter.... not just yours.

When have I ever said otherwise? Go on, tell me. I respect everyone's experiences, I feel very little respect here for mine. You are implying I'm lying about my experiences and those of others I know. You're wrong on both counts.

Quote

In case you haven't noticed, contributors have been leaving iStock. Exclusives have been dropping their crowns and buyers stopped being loyal to iStock and have left.

I have seen all those things, where have I said otherwise? I freely admit, why would I do otherwise, my income is down probably 50% from its peak. Everyone else I know is in a similar position. IS is no longer the IS it was, management is poor, I am no apologist for IS believe me. I still make a living there, and with a gradually increasing income though. Not increasing hugely, but increasing. Why would I lie, what point would there be in that? I certainly have seen nothing like the 3 times drop in income since November someone reported, nor has anyone else I know. I find that almost unbelievable, the only explanation I can think of is they have tiny sales and ebb and flow can do strange things if you're only selling a few files a month.

vlad_the_imp · « **Reply #31 on:** February 14, 2013, 09:48 »

Quote

And that's the reason why they put Sean's virtual head on a pike. The message is loud and clear: "Look, we did it to our prodigy, we won't hesitate for a second to do it to you...".

And if I were exclusive on IS and if my income depended on them, I would tread very carefully with what I say or do in open forums. What most exclusives hopefully will do is to look for plans B, C, and D - and, when they are in place, tell IS politely to go fly a kite...

Absolutely. The reaction to all I know at IS to Sean's sacking was shock and horror, it was undoubtedly a shot across the bows to all who were thinking of joining the revolution, if such a thing was brewing. Everyone immediately scuttled back to their desks and got on with work. Everyone is looking for the best next step whilst keeping their heads down

Quote

It's just seeming like something people are feeling the need to do.

It's something most people I know would like to do, they can't afford it at the moment, that is the problem. Getting booted out at least solves that problem, it's probably a feeling of relief.

tickstock · « **Reply #32 on:** February 14, 2013, 10:05 »

Mars · « **Reply #33 on:** February 14, 2013, 10:30 »

Mars · « **Reply #34 on:** February 14, 2013, 10:36 »

Travelling-light · « **Reply #35 on:** February 14, 2013, 12:53 »

Vlad, I'm glad you didn't leave MSG. I read this forum to get different points of view, and a lot of what you say is useful. Please continue, I don't usually bother to reply when all I want to say is +1, but I'm sure others feel the same.
I just wish people wouldn't attack others for having a different point of view.
Those people doing the attacking also have useful things to say, and I want them to continue posting also, the useful stuff that is, not the attacks.
No need for anyone to go off in a huff.

w7lwi · « **Reply #36 on:** February 14, 2013, 13:28 »

I agree we need both side of any story in order for each of us to make up our own minds. The problem I see is not so much that two sides are expressed, but rather how they are expressed. Straight forward facts, or clearly noted personal opinions, are fine. Emotional responses and name calling are not. In several instances, insults are not expressly stated, but thinly implied. Keep in mind that each of us can only relate our own personal experience. If I say sales are up, that's just my sales, not necessarily everyone's experience. If someone state's that their sales are down, I can/should not tell them that they are full of it as they are stating their own experience. After a while, if more people say things are doing well, we can imply that may be the general drift for that topic.

So, please continue to state your personal thoughts and experience; but, lets do it in a respectful manner. Anything else only alienates others from giving your input any credence.

stockastic · « **Reply #37 on:** February 14, 2013, 15:01 »

[Sound of gong being struck]

Getting back to the topic of 'recap and review', I see that in their forum, IS employees are again assuring us that some sort of discussion is still going on behind the scenes, and 'teasing' a newsletter later this week.

ShadySue · « **Reply #38 on:** February 14, 2013, 17:38 »

Quote from: stockastic on February 14, 2013, 15:01

[Sound of gong being struck]

Getting back to the topic of 'recap and review', I see that in their forum, IS employees are again assuring us that some sort of discussion is still going on behind the scenes, and 'teasing' a newsletter later this week.

<pedant> "middle of next week" for the newsletter,
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=351105&messageid=6843583
plus Kelvin says there won't be anything on GoogleDrive at that point
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=351105&messageid=6843569

stockastic · « **Reply #39 on:** February 14, 2013, 18:45 »

Well I'm the smallest fish in this pond, and I have no inside information. My guess about what's going on now at IS/Getty is that they're having their lawyers take another look at the Google deal AND at other, similar deals already in progress, to make absolutely sure they're not vulnerable to any legal action by contributors, no matter how creative. Then they'll release a statement basically saying they had the right to do exactly what they did, and they hope contributors understand, and if not, well there's the door. And that will be the extent of their enhanced communication with contributors. Then they'll go ahead with other deals like this one, and probably reveal that more images are going to Google as part of that deal as well. There won't be any changes in payments, and there won't be an 'opt out', and there won't even be any new fine print for users of Google Drive to skip over and not read.

ShadySue · « **Reply #40 on:** February 14, 2013, 18:55 »

Your scenario could well be right, and our contract is so vague on their side that they can do almost whatever they like.
However, the lack of control over how models' images can be used under the Google deal is surely negligent, possibly criminally so.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #41 on:** February 14, 2013, 19:02 »

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 06:50

Most exclusives are not going to give up their steady, albeit reduced, incomes unless something cataclysmic happens at IS.

Recent events have not been "cataclysmic"?

PixelBytes · « **Reply #42 on:** February 14, 2013, 19:15 »

Quote from: stockastic on February 14, 2013, 18:45

Well I'm the smallest fish in this pond, and I have no inside information. My guess about what's going on now at IS/Getty is that they're having their lawyers take another look at the Google deal AND at other, similar deals already in progress, to make absolutely sure they're not vulnerable to any legal action by contributors, no matter how creative. Then they'll release a statement basically saying they had the right to do exactly what they did, and they hope contributors understand, and if not, well there's the door. And that will be the extent of their enhanced communication with contributors. Then they'll go ahead with other deals like this one, and probably reveal that more images are going to Google as part of that deal as well. There won't be any changes in payments, and there won't be an 'opt out', and there won't even be any new fine print for users of Google Drive to skip over and not read.

I guess you are probably right about how they are going to react. I don't see how what they've done could possibly be legal though, even if their lawyers say it is. I imagine there's some torte lawyer(s) out there who would disagree, and maybe some judges too. Time will tell.

tickstock · « **Reply #43 on:** February 14, 2013, 19:20 »

PixelBytes · « **Reply #44 on:** February 14, 2013, 19:29 »

Quote from: tickstock on February 14, 2013, 19:20

Quote from: PixelBytes on February 14, 2013, 19:15
I guess you are probably right about how they are going to react. I don't see how what they've done could possibly be legal though, even if their lawyers say it is. I imagine there's some torte lawyer(s) out there who would disagree, and maybe some judges too. Time will tell.
Maybe it would be better to get a TORT lawyer? Unless they did something to my dessert!?

Nice catch. I wasn't sure about the spelling - or else I just have dessert on my mind

ShadySue · « **Reply #45 on:** February 14, 2013, 20:34 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on February 14, 2013, 19:02

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 14, 2013, 06:50
Most exclusives are not going to give up their steady, albeit reduced, incomes unless something cataclysmic happens at IS.

Recent events have not been "cataclysmic"?

Of course not. They've fixed a bug (write it down big!) and we can now subscribe or unsubscribe to threads in the forum. At least, the unbanned can.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=351105&messageid=6842325
Everything in the Garden is Rosy.

w7lwi · « **Reply #46 on:** February 14, 2013, 21:56 »

Another crown begging to be banned (bottom of thread).

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=351105&page=8

gclk · « **Reply #47 on:** February 15, 2013, 21:37 »

Quote from: w7lwi on February 14, 2013, 21:56

Another crown begging to be banned (bottom of thread).

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=351105&page=8

Not at all!

The point I was trying to make (seems I got got a bit tongue tied typing into my phone in the process) was that zero 'magic' is needed for iStock/Getty to simply allow people to find out if their work is involved in this deal.

If people need to get 'booted' for asking for that, then things must be pretty bad indeed.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #48 on:** August 01, 2013, 08:46 »

Tried to find a thread for How Many Exclusives and also interested in percentage of sales. I see some guesses and here's the best one from January 2013. Which hopefully will be updated some day, so we can see if the numbers changed with recent developments. (like one major contributor leaving and one joining the exclusive club)

~6200 exclusives making 54% of the sales while ~78000 non exclusives make 46%.

Interesting is that about 50-50 for total sales and at the same time, 8% of the population is making half the sales. (Exclusives 7.9%)

I've seen the numbers tossed out (and I see no evidence, just parrots quoting what someone else first wrote on a forum?) 80% of the sales come from 1000 members. I'd actually suspect the numbers are more skewed like 90% of the sales come from 300 or less contributors.

Keep in mind that there are people on top, from the photo factories who make quite good products, 10,000 commercial images, professional models, targeting stock use, and on the other end, people who have 50 shots of the flowers in their back yard, pet cat or sliced vegetables.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: to recap and review... (Read 9115 times)

Mars

vlad_the_imp

vlad_the_imp

vlad_the_imp

Microbius

Mars

vlad_the_imp

vlad_the_imp

Mars

vlad_the_imp

vlad_the_imp

Mars

Mars

Uncle Pete

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors