People I know what I am doing. That is why I don't want to work with slow low paying agencies like Crestock.
Also, when you have clans inside one agency, there is no point being in loosers clan... I am again saying that difference in iStock about exclusives and non-exclusives threatmant is too way of fair so I am quite insulted as human being by that policy - Again I say that I told that to them that policing will not come up with good at the end. Clan which is marked as loosing clan will have to reorganize and strike hard... And that is what is happening now.
iStock can pay you 30 cents sub download from JUI/Photos.com but they are greedy and they want to keep your earnings lowest possible... That is the point!

I made my point today with quoting just one site earnings... Now it is more - I won't quote that... No point - still I think it is enough for comparation that I earned more today on StockXpert than more than year on iStock due to their policing!

AND with less downloads!!!

Wow Milinz, that's amazing. If it's not a secret, what kind of sale you had today on StockXpert?

Not much today... But, it's Monday... Maybe it will pick-up later ;-)

May 25, 2009
(Photos.com subscription)  2  $0.60
May 25, 2009
(Jupiterimages Unlimited subscription)  1  $0.30

So far this month I got in StockXpert about 70% of what I got in IS, but then IS is performing slow this month for me. StockXpert used to be an excellent site for me, now it's not that much.

On the other hand, I earned in FP more than in 123RF or BigStock, not to mention CS and CanStockPhoto.

Talking about Featurepics: Quite boosted sales if you ask me. But, still not all changes online... I expect very high growth in sales through Featurepics in next few months.

This would make sense except for the fact that StockXpert is owned by Getty.  And on top of that their management seems to be in a shambles. 

I doubt StockXpert are in any position to decide what they are or are not involved in. 

Has anyone considered that StockXpert may be the one pulling out of JIU/Photos.com? Leaving Getty with an immediate need to get new content for the site before the final deadline?

Think about it. How many threads have there been about JIU payment posting issues? Or the numerous threads about how Jupiter just "forgets" to pay contributors? How many about TOS violations not being resolved? If StockXpert wasn't pulling out of JIU/Photos.com then wouldn't they be pissed off about the new marketing phrase "powered by istockphoto"?

That would seem like a slap in the face to anyone with images on those sites that isn't posting through IS.

It becomes the perfect way for Getty to solve 2 issues. StockXpert stops complaining about reporting and payment issues, and IS has a way to cut payments down once buyers figure out that they can get all their IS images for a cheaper price.

Quote from: lisafx on May 27, 2009, 10:05

This would make sense except for the fact that StockXpert is owned by Getty.  And on top of that their management seems to be in a shambles. 

I doubt StockXpert are in any position to decide what they are or are not involved in. 

We might be saying the same thing about Istock in a few more months. Hmm.

Why that?

Quote from: lisafx on May 27, 2009, 10:05

This would make sense except for the fact that StockXpert is owned by Getty.  And on top of that their management seems to be in a shambles. 

I doubt StockXpert are in any position to decide what they are or are not involved in. 

We might be saying the same thing about Istock in a few more months. Hmm.

A Theory: Presume that Getty's intention is to make as much money as possible as fast as possible. (That's not too far-fetched is it?)

If so, then Getty's strategy might be to put as many of 'their' microstock images on as many of their microstock sites as they can. Therefore, they put IS images and StockXpert image on JIU and Photos.com. Might we soon see JIU and Photos.com and StockXpert images put up for sale as non-exclusive images on iStockphoto? If not why not? Maybe the shambles have only just begun.

Quote from: lisafx on May 27, 2009, 10:05

This would make sense except for the fact that StockXpert is owned by Getty.  And on top of that their management seems to be in a shambles. 

I doubt StockXpert are in any position to decide what they are or are not involved in. 

OK here's the plan. Since so many people like StockXpert and would like to have it be free of Getty, and allegations of unreported subs, plus many people want to be represented and get a fair cut of "all those profits". How about we buy StockXpert from Getty and solve all the problems? A microstock site run by the people who supply the photos.

Up the revolution! Stop complaining and take possession of your own work instead of having other people pay peanuts. I have a feeling this idea will be followed by silence and reasons why it won't happen.

[silence] Reasons why it won't happen to follow...

Darn I thought a group would jump up and say, Yea, lets buy StockXpert and share all those profits. Could it be that there really aren't huge profits that some people think are being make at our expense?

When someone tosses out numbers like $2 million clear made by BS or how many millions are made by StockXpert, I'd question why they don't want to be taking part in that part of the business, instead of making small change in the Peanut Gallery. (like me)

If the business is so profitable, why are sites going out of business. How did Digital RR with millions in investors backing, many photographers who loved the site, figure out that they had to close their doors to stop losing more money. Where's Lucky Oliver? Albumo? Snap Village? Photoshelter?

The list of closed and sold sites is in the hundreds if not thousands. The successful micro sites appear to be just two. The rest of the good sites are struggling to stay in business. As someone else appropriately labeled it, a "Race to the bottom" by cutting prices, cutting our earnings, as the only way to attract business. Price cutting can only lead to the slowing of the inevitable. The strong ones can wait until the herd is thinned out.

Sure I'd like to get paid more and what we deserve. If the agencies could stand at $10 and image and pay use a few bucks minimum, that would be fantastic. But we are the bottom line in a price war.

Quote from: madelaide on May 25, 2009, 10:44

So far this month I got in StockXpert about 70% of what I got in IS, but then IS is performing slow this month for me. StockXpert used to be an excellent site for me, now it's not that much.

On the other hand, I earned in FP more than in 123RF or BigStock, not to mention CS and CanStockPhoto.

Talking about Featurepics: Quite boosted sales if you ask me. But, still not all changes online... I expect very high growth in sales through Featurepics in next few months.

You have no idea what you are talking about.  Am I supposed to take you seriously?