MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: When do subs start  (Read 22888 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Batman

« on: March 26, 2014, 08:36 »
+1
Got an email yesterday telling me move files into the main collection or be missed by subs? I want to be missed by subs.


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2014, 08:40 »
0
Subs start in early April, and it wouldn't surprise me if they manage to run this out in their stated timescale.
Unfortunately, none of us can avoid being included in subs, unless all our images are Vetta - all other files are included.
However, there is to be a two-tier sub system, whereby a buyer can have access to Main files only or Main, S and S+ (not Vetta).
So if you have old non-sellers, you might like to suggest them for Main, or not.
Whatever. They can move them to Main at their whim anyway.
They've already been moving files from S+ to S, and in my experience and that of others, it's not only files that didn't sell at S+ which have been switched.
(See the collection changes thread on the exclusive forum)
« Last Edit: March 26, 2014, 08:42 by ShadySue »

« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2014, 09:11 »
+1
However, there is to be a two-tier sub system, whereby a buyer can have access to Main files only or Main, S and S+ (not Vetta).
So if you have old non-sellers, you might like to suggest them for Main, or not.
Whatever. They can move them to Main at their whim anyway.
They've already been moving files from S+ to S, and in my experience and that of others, it's not only files that didn't sell at S+ which have been switched.
(See the collection changes thread on the exclusive forum)

Good idea IMO them inviting us to submit a lightbox of content we would like moved to Main. My lightbox includes nearly all of my S content including old flames and a few S+ too. I cannot see a strong case for the S collection from a buyer perspective (which is what counts).

(Tip: you can add images to a lightbox in bulk one search page at a time and then weed out the exceptions. It took me a while to figure out how to get around having to add them one at a time. Maybe this helps someone else too.)

Personally I think that two price points would be simpler for customers. And a single subscription program including all content. But, not being party to the decision making process, I am perhaps not taking into account some important detail.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2014, 09:13 by bunhill »

Uncle Pete

« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2014, 21:45 »
+2
And this is simplification? Two sites with subs, single, EL, S, S+ Vetta, Main, Subs and who knows what else? I can understand buyers being confused and frustrated. (oh and XS is gone right?) Not that I cared about selling an XS, but how many different sizes and prices does someone need for a RF image?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2014, 18:01 »
+1
Good idea IMO them inviting us to submit a lightbox of content we would like moved to Main. My lightbox includes nearly all of my S content including old flames and a few S+ too. I cannot see a strong case for the S collection from a buyer perspective (which is what counts).
I totally agree that iS made a huge error of judgement in pricing S images so much higher than M.

« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2014, 18:15 »
+3
The deadline for sending the lightbox is the end of April. Considering that, and istock's history of delays, I guess that subs won't begin until early May. For me, the latter, the better.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2014, 18:19 by loop »

« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2014, 18:18 »
0
repeated

stock-will-eat-itself

« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2014, 18:42 »
+13
I can't help thinking it's going to be a blood bath for exclusives in the short term, RPD is going to crash. They'll be no backing down once its implemented either, customers will acclimatise to paying much lower rates pretty quickly.

« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2014, 03:29 »
0
I totally agree that iS made a huge error of judgement in pricing S images so much higher than M.

You're agreeing with something I have not written or implied since I don't see things in these superlative terms.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2014, 16:26 »
+2
I can't help thinking it's going to be a blood bath for exclusives in the short term, RPD is going to crash. They'll be no backing down once its implemented either, customers will acclimatise to paying much lower rates pretty quickly.
Besides which, are they really going to promote newly demoted exclusive Main files on which they have to pay more, over indie/Main files?

« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2014, 16:51 »
+2
Let me ask a question here,
based in Fotolia's change to subscription experience, how, (exclusive member percentage of $$$), will these new IS move affect exclusives? Lets say you make $1000.00 a month from IS and $200 a month from GI?  (based in your own experiences with Fotolia) give me a approximate calculation. Thanks. in other words, how much blood will be lost with this new IS move.

KB

« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2014, 17:19 »
0
Let me ask a question here,
based in Fotolia's change to subscription experience, how, (exclusive member percentage of $$$), will these new IS move affect exclusives? Lets say you make $1000.00 a month from IS and $200 a month from GI?  (based in your own experiences with Fotolia) give me a approximate calculation. Thanks. in other words, how much blood will be lost with this new IS move.
We can speculate, but no one can yet know the correct answer to that.

Getty claims that it's a different class of buyers who buy subscriptions, so we won't be losing sales, we'll be getting extra sales that would've gone to SS or other sub sites.

I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS, nor for new buyers to come to IS in place of SS. So most sub buyers will be converted IS credit buyers -- and most likely those will be the buyers who were the biggest buyers of credits.

I don't see an impact on GI sales (not from subs -- the free editorial and personal use images are an entirely different matter). But my own guess is that the theoretical $1000 per month person is likely to see a 50% haircut in sales by the time subs are fully rolled out, if not more. It will be brutal.

« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2014, 17:33 »
+2
Let me ask a question here,
based in Fotolia's change to subscription experience, how, (exclusive member percentage of $$$), will these new IS move affect exclusives? Lets say you make $1000.00 a month from IS and $200 a month from GI?  (based in your own experiences with Fotolia) give me a approximate calculation. Thanks. in other words, how much blood will be lost with this new IS move.
We can speculate, but no one can yet know the correct answer to that.

Getty claims that it's a different class of buyers who buy subscriptions, so we won't be losing sales, we'll be getting extra sales that would've gone to SS or other sub sites.

I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS, nor for new buyers to come to IS in place of SS. So most sub buyers will be converted IS credit buyers -- and most likely those will be the buyers who were the biggest buyers of credits.

I don't see an impact on GI sales (not from subs -- the free editorial and personal use images are an entirely different matter). But my own guess is that the theoretical $1000 per month person is likely to see a 50% haircut in sales by the time subs are fully rolled out, if not more. It will be brutal.
thank you for your answer, I know it is an speculation.
What you calculated is more or less what i think it will be. IS will be receiving the same money from the client (if he was spending $1000 in credits, they will spend $1000 in subscription) but the exclusive contributors will be hit deep in their pockets. Maybe a couple of big clients will be brought back, but not lot of them. This is an IS one more move to get more money from contributors.
I think is about time to start thinking and to be ready to leave exclusivity.

« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2014, 18:05 »
0
I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS

Straight question: If they come in with a competitive package and word gets around then why wouldn't buyers switch ?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2014, 18:16 »
+3
I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS

Straight question: If they come in with a competitive package and word gets around then why wouldn't buyers switch ?
SS have maintained their acceptance standards.

KB

« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2014, 19:37 »
+1
I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS

Straight question: If they come in with a competitive package and word gets around then why wouldn't buyers switch ?
What is your definition of 'competitive'?

It would have to be nicely discounted from SS's prices, not simply matching. Otherwise what does IS have to attract buyers? It isn't the lack of technical standards or poor keyword relevance of new files (which are overwhelming the number of older, better keyworded files). Not to mention the added complexity of a two-tiered subscription plan.

My guess is that their lower tiered offering will indeed be 'competitive' with SS's, but the higher tiered offering will not. So a further hit to exclusives, as even if sub sales take off, most exclusive files won't be the ones being downloaded. (Probably true within the lower tier, too, as someone else pointed out: Won't Getty be likely to skew the results to independent files, since their costs will be significantly lower?)

« Reply #16 on: March 31, 2014, 19:55 »
+1
I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS

Straight question: If they come in with a competitive package and word gets around then why wouldn't buyers switch ?
What is your definition of 'competitive'?

It would have to be nicely discounted from SS's prices, not simply matching. Otherwise what does IS have to attract buyers? It isn't the lack of technical standards or poor keyword relevance of new files (which are overwhelming the number of older, better keyworded files). Not to mention the added complexity of a two-tiered subscription plan.

My guess is that their lower tiered offering will indeed be 'competitive' with SS's, but the higher tiered offering will not. So a further hit to exclusives, as even if sub sales take off, most exclusive files won't be the ones being downloaded. (Probably true within the lower tier, too, as someone else pointed out: Won't Getty be likely to skew the results to independent files, since their costs will be significantly lower?)

Probably they will redirect credit base buyers to GI (maybe they are already doing it) since sales decreased dramatically during the last couple of months (even though we are in march, the month supposed to be the best of the year together with october, regarding sales)

« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2014, 03:12 »
+3
I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS

Straight question: If they come in with a competitive package and word gets around then why wouldn't buyers switch ?

I suspect there is a lot of inertia in this market and that customers are likely to stay loyal to a brand unless it actively annoys them with stuff like constant price changes, the price of individual images moving up and down by huge amounts at random, site outages, poor customer service etc.   For large companies - which is what interests iStock - to change agencies may require a series of meetings and decisions being made and ratified, and is it going to be worth it? How reliable is the long-term pricing at iStock?

Suppose you opened an account last year because all the images you buy are XS and you wanted to take advantage of "everything at half price forever" guarantee.  Three months later you go to get your XS image and discover that all the prices have doubled .... forever, no doubt ... via the subterfuge of scrapping the XS file size so 2 credits becomes the minimum price. So now you have to have another set of meetings to go back to SS. No sooner have you done that than iS comes up with a very attractive offer that will save you maybe 10% on the SS price, do you organise a third set of management meetings in four months to decide to change your buying strategy again?




Batman

« Reply #18 on: April 03, 2014, 11:32 »
0
I claim that there'll be little or no incentive for SS buyers to switch to IS

Straight question: If they come in with a competitive package and word gets around then why wouldn't buyers switch ?

I suspect there is a lot of inertia in this market and that customers are likely to stay loyal to a brand unless it actively annoys them with stuff like constant price changes, the price of individual images moving up and down by huge amounts at random, site outages, poor customer service etc.   For large companies - which is what interests iStock - to change agencies may require a series of meetings and decisions being made and ratified, and is it going to be worth it? How reliable is the long-term pricing at iStock?

Suppose you opened an account last year because all the images you buy are XS and you wanted to take advantage of "everything at half price forever" guarantee.  Three months later you go to get your XS image and discover that all the prices have doubled .... forever, no doubt ... via the subterfuge of scrapping the XS file size so 2 credits becomes the minimum price. So now you have to have another set of meetings to go back to SS. No sooner have you done that than iS comes up with a very attractive offer that will save you maybe 10% on the SS price, do you organise a third set of management meetings in four months to decide to change your buying strategy again?

The over and over change at IS have got to make the customers unhappy and confused.

« Reply #19 on: April 03, 2014, 15:58 »
0
Now.

« Reply #20 on: April 03, 2014, 16:13 »
+2
Did you notice that it's a monthly download limit, not daily? Makes it much harder for the agency to make it work financially that way.

I guess we'll have to see how much buyers value the higher priced stuff - $499 a month is a pretty big premium on top of Shutterstock's $249...

I did a search for balloons and then looked at the signature vs. the peasantry. They need to clean up all the isolated plain vanilla stuff from the premium price section if they stand a chance of making this make sense to a buyer
« Last Edit: April 03, 2014, 16:16 by Jo Ann Snover »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #21 on: April 03, 2014, 16:24 »
0
 :'(

« Reply #22 on: April 03, 2014, 16:28 »
+2
Maybe you shold review the market you are in, Sue.  Specialist stuff and subs probably ain't the way to go.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #23 on: April 03, 2014, 16:39 »
+4
Maybe you shold review the market you are in, Sue.  Specialist stuff and subs probably ain't the way to go.
I'm probably 'out'. I stuck with iS because the payment per dl was worth it (until they made the huge price differential between Main and S, undercutting exclusives) and I had no interest in subs. Now it's all just madness.
Anyway, it's Spring, bird survey season.  8) (weather permitting, which it isn't at present)

When they originally announced the subs and said it was going to be monthly, it was obvious that was the end. There is almost no reason why anyone would want to buy credits now, despite that admin saying that people would still be buying credits and the subs would be new buyers. I can see that credits are far more flexible than daily subs, but hardly at all compared to monthly subs.

RIP. Now iS is just another cheap subs company.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2014, 18:41 by ShadySue »

« Reply #24 on: April 03, 2014, 16:50 »
0
Good luck

« Reply #25 on: April 03, 2014, 16:58 »
+2
... RIP. Now iS is just another cheap subs company.

Except that they're not cheap. You get a whole lot less than Shutterstock for $199 and there are cheap plans at BigStock and CanStock if you're really stuck for cash that are effectively a price match. For the higher price to include everything I'd have to really like a lot of the higher priced stuff to pay so much more than SS - and I don't even get Vetta for that.

So if I go with Thinkstock I get iStock main + some Getty and StockXpert (Hemera) stuff. If I go with iStock subs I drop the Getty stuff and pick up two of the three exclusive collections.

Why wouldn't I go to Thinkstock and pay $299 vs. $499 - won't a lot of the stuff that migrated from iStock to Getty find it's way to Thinkstock that way?

It all seems way too complicated, IMO. Complicated makes getting the high volumes of sales you need as a contributor to make this work much harder.

« Reply #26 on: April 03, 2014, 17:07 »
0
232$ for 250 downloads (IS essentials)
247$ for 750 downloads (SS)

2194$ for 750 downloads (IS essentials 1 year)
2537$ for 750 downloads (SS 1 year)

575$ for 250 downloads (IS signature)
4388$ for 750 downloads (IS signature 1 year)

pounds (SS) and euros (IS) converted to $


H2O

    This user is banned.
« Reply #27 on: April 03, 2014, 19:42 »
+2
Just Joined iStock - Should I stay or Should I go know?

« Reply #28 on: April 04, 2014, 01:45 »
+3
Looks like the subs package is especially attractive for customers who used to buy the large credit packs. And their sales team will certainly offer an attractive combo and throw in 1000 credits in case the customer still needs to buy a few Vetta files.

Is it enough to attract customers from SS?

I really don't know. SS has a very, very simple layout, the site is ultrafast, the quality hasn't changed and there are few surprises over the years for the customer. For all "normal" needs I am not sure it would be worth switching. And if you look at S and S+ content I am not sure it looks more interesting than SS. There are many simple objects on white etc...these collections are very obviously not edited or "handpicked". The customers are not stupid.

In principle having a site with different levels of quality and prices is a good idea. But it really has to be a visible difference.

And if subs is mostly bought by established istock customers, there will be even more exclusives leaving and their good quality content with files in top positions (if sorted by sales) will drop into main. So the quality of main will be increasing, making it even harder for the remaining exclusives to stand out.

And then of course you have more and more smaller independent production teams sending in content.

I think for a system like this to really work, real editors that comb through the collections and bring together the best files from different styles would make a huge difference. To just create the illusion of being handpicked when it obviously isn't, won't give the customer an advantage.


« Last Edit: April 04, 2014, 01:49 by cobalt »

« Reply #29 on: April 04, 2014, 05:55 »
+9
I had a month to prepare for this but I didn't really bother, I usually don't care that much anymore these days. But now seeing it, I just find it ridiculous once again how much sloppiness and incompetence is around.

They just don't understand that the value of Shutterstock is not the simple "price vs. number of downloads" comparison. It's that Shutterstock offers a frictionless experience. Once you sign up, download what you need, don't even think about it. You get more than you'll ever really need and you can get everything you want.

iStock again offers: Two choices; one of them containing about 60%, one of them containing 90% of the content. First decision to make. How do you decide for a full year ahead which one is the right one for you? And then you get a search experience mixing in results that are not even contained in your package, no matter which of the two you choose.

And you still get to deal with a search result page that is... arguably what the average customer actually is looking for. Obviously at least the customer won't see that they are not capable to do live reporting of downloads/royalties but will take three or four weeks for that.

But I guess that is just what you get trying to make exclusive members happy - or at least not any more unhappy than they already are. Another offer that can't compete with the market.

« Reply #30 on: April 04, 2014, 05:59 »
+2
Jesus... will anyone buy the Signature sub with that price difference?? This will probably be the death of all exclusives. We're not gonna get any sub downloads and less and less credit downloads.  :(

iStock is really overestimating the quality of the exclusive collections. There are lots of files in the Main collection and at the competitor agencys with the same quality.

« Reply #31 on: April 04, 2014, 07:48 »
+4
istock makes things so complicated that in near future even they will not understand what have they made - and then - they will resolve to make things simple -

....endless story...
« Last Edit: April 04, 2014, 07:50 by ferdinand »

« Reply #32 on: April 04, 2014, 10:45 »
+7
Jesus... will anyone buy the Signature sub with that price difference?? This will probably be the death of all exclusives. We're not gonna get any sub downloads and less and less credit downloads.  :(

iStock is really overestimating the quality of the exclusive collections. There are lots of files in the Main collection and at the competitor agencys with the same quality.


If you do some searches and then turn on first signature collection, then essentials, it's hard to see a visual difference. When you go to stock.xchng (didn't realize it's now http://www.freeimages.com/) or dreamstime's free site, there's a really clear idea of why the paid photos cost something - look at the comparisons in this search, for example (and ignore the odd difference in the numbers of images in the top paid section vs. the bottom - weird)

http://www.stockfreeimages.com/p1/balloons.html

I'd expect to see some sort of obvious difference given how much more Signature is - but I don't. On top of which Vetta's excluded (I'm guessing that won't last long) so you can't even get everything on the site.

And then there's the Thinkstock vs. iStock subs and some of the same content in both but some differs, pricing and download rules differ, both by Getty Images, but why can't I just have one subscription place?

I just don't know what they could have been thinking...

As a friend of mine said to an executive at a software company "I like money isn't a product strategy" :)

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #33 on: April 04, 2014, 11:11 »
+2
I suspect all Main will be going to TS sooner rather than later.

But all the bizarre switches in policy in the past few years suggest no long- or medium-term planning.

« Reply #34 on: April 04, 2014, 11:12 »
0
No sales at all - Zero - today the slaughter appears to be greater than anticipated, getting ready to go

« Reply #35 on: April 04, 2014, 13:33 »
+2
No sales at all - Zero - today the slaughter appears to be greater than anticipated, getting ready to go

Haha, here we go. You can't seriously draw any conclusions right now. It just can't be that all customers decide to switch to subscriptions within one day.

1) Any reasonable customer will first use up their existing credit package before changing to subscriptions
2) Many customers will stick with credit packages because even $199 is not something many customers will pay just because they need two images
3) iStock has not made a public announcement, not even started any marketing. Most customers will not even have noticed the new subscription model

Given all these I would not expect that even something in the range of 1% of downloads made on iStock today would have been through the new subscriptions. Sorry to say but you just have some bad luck on a Friday which always is a bit slow.

« Reply #36 on: April 04, 2014, 13:42 »
+2
Just Joined iStock - Should I stay or Should I go know?

Stay as non-exclusive

« Reply #37 on: April 04, 2014, 13:46 »
+6
If you do some searches and then turn on first signature collection, then essentials, it's hard to see a visual difference. When you go to stock.xchng (didn't realize it's now http://www.freeimages.com/) or dreamstime's free site, there's a really clear idea of why the paid photos cost something - look at the comparisons in this search, for example (and ignore the odd difference in the numbers of images in the top paid section vs. the bottom - weird)


Yes. I think it has been the biggest mistake in iStock's history to price certain content higher just because the photographer is exclusive with them. An isolated apple is not worth more than a dollar, no matter who shot it.

And a second big mistake is the lack of clear indication in searches which content is priced higher or lower. Take the (visually) best exclusive images, place them in a separate top row above the other search content and most customers wouldn't have had the problems with all the raises iStock has done in the past. Just the way you mention about upselling from free to paid content is being presented.

Right now the choice for customers is "cheap package with all the regular content" and "expensive package with basically twice the same images, just from different people".

« Reply #38 on: April 04, 2014, 15:47 »
0
Of course t has a logic. The client likes this file, no matter if good or bad, and he buys it because he just knows he can't get it cheaper anywhere else.

« Reply #39 on: April 04, 2014, 17:04 »
+1
Of course t has a logic. The client likes this file, no matter if good or bad, and he buys it because he just knows he can't get it cheaper anywhere else.

For buying a single file, that's absolutely the case. But when you have to cough up $499, you're going to have to want more than one file

« Reply #40 on: April 04, 2014, 17:15 »
+2
Maybe. We will see what happens. At least the usual istock's customers don't seem to be in the bargain hunters category (I say that considering that most of my sales in the last months have been S+). For the new clients they try to atract, it may be different. Don't get my wrong: I'not for subs, I've never been and I never will, unless I begin to sell eight hundred subs a day. Actually, this move, if backfires, could move me to to the independent status. To sell subs, I can sell them at many sites.

lisafx

« Reply #41 on: April 04, 2014, 18:30 »
+6

Getty claims that it's a different class of buyers who buy subscriptions, so we won't be losing sales, we'll be getting extra sales that would've gone to SS or other sub sites.


Not to take a shot at you, KB, but at Getty.  It is just so quaint to hear yet another agency claim that subscription sales won't erode higher paying credit sales because it's a different market.  I just have to laugh.  We indies have heard that at every credit site that added subs for years, and in every single case without exception downloads have shifted from mostly credit sales to mostly subs. 

This is a BIG part of the reason that my download numbers at most sites have gone up year on year, but earnings keep dropping. 

lisafx

« Reply #42 on: April 04, 2014, 18:35 »
+6
Just Joined iStock - Should I stay or Should I go know?

If you go there will be trouble.  If you stay it will be double.  ;)

KB

« Reply #43 on: April 04, 2014, 19:05 »
+7

Getty claims that it's a different class of buyers who buy subscriptions, so we won't be losing sales, we'll be getting extra sales that would've gone to SS or other sub sites.

Not to take a shot at you, KB, but at Getty.  It is just so quaint to hear yet another agency claim that subscription sales won't erode higher paying credit sales because it's a different market.  I just have to laugh.  We indies have heard that at every credit site that added subs for years, and in every single case without exception downloads have shifted from mostly credit sales to mostly subs. 
This was the exact same argument they made when they introduced TS. And not long after, we heard reports of Getty calling current IS customers and encouraging them to move to TS. So it was a lie then, and it's a lie now.

I think if there's one thing we've learned about Getty that we can trust is true, it's that there's nothing that we can trust Getty says is true.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #44 on: April 04, 2014, 20:16 »
0
Of course t has a logic. The client likes this file, no matter if good or bad, and he buys it because he just knows he can't get it cheaper anywhere else.
It might take a cost-conscious client some time to figure out/'know' which whose files are really exclusive and whose are merely faux-exclusive.

lisafx

« Reply #45 on: April 04, 2014, 22:06 »
+3

I think if there's one thing we've learned about Getty that we can trust is true, it's that there's nothing that we can trust Getty says is true.

So true!  That should be embossed on their company letterhead!

Uncle Pete

« Reply #46 on: April 05, 2014, 08:15 »
0
Since it's April and this supposedly has started, has anyone gotten one? Or will it be reported like TS, next month? I wonder what I should be looking for, if and when I get the first Sub DL?

Anyone have one? Anyone know?

wds

« Reply #47 on: April 05, 2014, 08:18 »
+1
Since it's April and this supposedly has started, has anyone gotten one? Or will it be reported like TS, next month? I wonder what I should be looking for, if and when I get the first Sub DL?

Anyone have one? Anyone know?

Unfortunately, they will be reported after the fact at the end of the month. The only way to possibly see impact is via a noticeable bump in views.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #48 on: April 05, 2014, 08:23 »
0
Since it's April and this supposedly has started, has anyone gotten one? Or will it be reported like TS, next month? I wonder what I should be looking for, if and when I get the first Sub DL?

Anyone have one? Anyone know?


wds is correct.
From the original email we were sent on 4th March and in the OP of the subs thread on iS (3rd March)
Royalties will be reported monthly, not in real time. Initially we will be reporting these royalties under the Partner Program.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359606&messageid=6990296
and in case you also missed it:
Image Subscription downloads arent purchased with credits so we will not be calculating RCs with these downloads.
So we are doubly screwed.

« Reply #49 on: April 05, 2014, 08:57 »
0
No good feeling with the SUB based on iStock(getty)'s track records... Please prove us wrong for just once!!!

wds

« Reply #50 on: April 05, 2014, 09:18 »
+1
Since it's April and this supposedly has started, has anyone gotten one? Or will it be reported like TS, next month? I wonder what I should be looking for, if and when I get the first Sub DL?

Anyone have one? Anyone know?


wds is correct.
From the original email we were sent on 4th March and in the OP of the subs thread on iS (3rd March)
Royalties will be reported monthly, not in real time. Initially we will be reporting these royalties under the Partner Program.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359606&messageid=6990296
and in case you also missed it:
Image Subscription downloads arent purchased with credits so we will not be calculating RCs with these downloads.
So we are doubly screwed.


Cash purchases aren't made with credits either, but they give RCs for those.
I really have to wonder if the RC system is going to disappear or be radically changed in 2015. They haven't dropped levels based on RCs for the past two years, so in effect, they really aren't following "the RC system".

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #51 on: April 05, 2014, 09:29 »
+1
'According to Lobo': "We will be revisiting the idea of allowing RCs to apply to Image Subscriptions after we see how things go."
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359606&messageid=6990400

Ron

« Reply #52 on: April 05, 2014, 09:57 »
+2
There is still a lot of confusion over these packages, and what images are sold how and where, and it also seems that no one is able to track sub sales in real time and that they may be reported in the same color as PP.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359606&page=23

I would say I would get used to Istock's imbecile way of doing business and reporting, but it keeps surprising me how imbecile they are. I have worked for several large global companies, using reporting tools, and also been dependent on real time data, but it was always available to me. We also provide external reports to our customers, on daily bases, with sales from that day. All other agencies seem to be able to report in real time as well. Why IS wont do it has to be a decision made on purpose, because I am convinced it cant be a technical issue.

« Reply #53 on: April 05, 2014, 09:58 »
+6
'According to Lobo': "We will be revisiting the idea of allowing RCs to apply to Image Subscriptions after we see how things go."
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359606&messageid=6990400


I guess they're scared it might lead to people moving UP a level, which is probably not considered a desirable outcome.

lisafx

« Reply #54 on: April 05, 2014, 14:37 »
+12
I'm a bit concerned that these will not be reported in real time.  After the recent reporting disaster with the PP numbers, it is worrisome that we will have the same lack of transparency with Istock subs sales. 

« Reply #55 on: April 05, 2014, 19:27 »
-4
I think the SUB's are a good idea to try and the pricing to compete with SS is good. I think different levels is good as even SS has this with OffSet. I am just feeling positive and happy, yes my medication has kicked in.

« Reply #56 on: April 05, 2014, 20:09 »
+9
I think the SUB's are a good idea to try and the pricing to compete with SS is good. I think different levels is good as even SS has this with OffSet. I am just feeling positive and happy, yes my medication has kicked in.
I'd be happy to take your medication too.  This new subscription program is making me feel depressed with panic attacks.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #57 on: April 05, 2014, 20:18 »
+6
I think the SUB's are a good idea to try and the pricing to compete with SS is good. I think different levels is good as even SS has this with OffSet. I am just feeling positive and happy, yes my medication has kicked in.
I'd be happy to take your medication too.  This new subscription program is making me feel depressed with panic attacks.
Me too. I don't believe many SS buyers will swap and have to wade through all the badly keyworded files that are coming through. I've seen a recent acceptance where the main subject is out of focus - so badly I could see it in the thum as well as having lots of unnecessary burn out. I have no idea what they're thinking of. It's not just quantity which counts with buyers. Time matters too.

I think it will certainly cannibalise credit sales - having a whole month to spend your credits is far better for the buyer than daily sub. ceilings - so flexible that buying credits is hardly a viable option, and they could always top up with a few credit sales in an emergency. Lucky bonus for someone getting a higher credit-price sale late in the month - with RCs - while the poor sods early in the month had to suffer sub sales.

I foresee nothing good in this. It would be a relief to be wrong, but I don't think I will be.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #58 on: April 05, 2014, 23:11 »
+1
Thanks both, it's partly my fault because I generally just toss emails from IS into the trash, without reading them. Reading the forum there is like banging my head against the wall. It feels best when I stop doing it.  :)

Since it's April and this supposedly has started, has anyone gotten one? Or will it be reported like TS, next month? I wonder what I should be looking for, if and when I get the first Sub DL?

Anyone have one? Anyone know?


wds is correct.
From the original email we were sent on 4th March and in the OP of the subs thread on iS (3rd March)
Royalties will be reported monthly, not in real time. Initially we will be reporting these royalties under the Partner Program.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359606&messageid=6990296
and in case you also missed it:
Image Subscription downloads arent purchased with credits so we will not be calculating RCs with these downloads.
So we are doubly screwed.


Oh now I'm even more thrilled to see I'll be locked in at Non-exclusive: All Collections: $0.28/download Even though I contend that Exclusives should get some favoritism for being loyal, I would say that IS should be the bottom of the industry for Subs and artists returns. Well not the absolute bottom, they are tied with themselves on TS offering the same measly 28c for a DL.

And 24 pages later of blabber, there's still nothing worth getting excited about in this offer, for a non-exclusive.

So I'll wait a month and see what happened.

I don't understand how counting views has a value for guessing at DLs. Maybe someone can explain that? I have a file on IS, with the most views of all my files, and Zero DLs. It must have some killer keywords, but when people get there, they find something other than what they were looking for. Interesting but fruitless.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2014, 23:30 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #59 on: April 06, 2014, 01:03 »
+2
Of course t has a logic. The client likes this file, no matter if good or bad, and he buys it because he just knows he can't get it cheaper anywhere else.

You reply to me without actually reading what I've written: I said the higher price is not justified just because the photographer is exclusive. There are quite a few exclusive images that justify higher prices because they are unique and special. Actually I also believe there are quite a few non-exclusive files that are wasted on cheap sites. But there is also a lot of exclusive content that is just the same as what you can find everywhere else at 10% of the cost.

And yes, those customers who are still with iStock, are mostly bigger companies having large contracts with the whole Getty family, so they are not bothered to pay $20 or $50 for an image. But they also have controllers asking why they wouldn't be able to buy somewhere else at a fraction of the cost.

Most importantly: We are talking about the buyers that are still left with iStock. Remember the time (a few years ago) when iStock made about three times the revenue as all microstock competitors combined? If you didn't notice, this time is over. iStock got stuck somewhere, they are making about the same or a bit less revenue than three years ago with fewer customers paying the higher prices. But a big chunk of the market went elsewhere and until now there has been no indication that this move has stopped.

« Reply #60 on: April 06, 2014, 04:03 »
-2
The only  microstock revenue that matters to me is my microstock revenue. I can't care less if company A doubles company B or whatever, no matter how entertaining these kind of informations can be for you.

« Reply #61 on: April 06, 2014, 06:06 »
0
And 24 pages later of blabber, there's still nothing worth getting excited about in this offer, for a non-exclusive.

I disagree with you for two reasons as follows:

1. The 'iStock Essentials' check box is available in general search. Although listed under a 'subscriptions' heading, it is not something which only subscribers are going to see. It is the new alternative to the price slider - a one click short cut to the lowest priced content. It effectively makes the price slider obsolete. Searching for content to buy it would likely be my default. Whether I was on subscription or not. And the best of the lowest price content is non exclusive. Because exclusives currently have their work mostly in higher priced collections.

2. The content available in the less costly of the two subscription programs is dominated by very high quality non-exclusive content. As an example, do a search for 'business' - which is probably one of the most important keywords. Then select the 'iStock Essentials' option. This limits the search results to only show images available at the lower price point. Make sure to select either 'best match' or 'most popular'. I think you will agree that there is some great work on offer. Now, finally, select 'Only from iStock'. You can see that the best content at the lower price subscription point is non-exclusive.

I am interested, not complaining.

« Reply #62 on: April 06, 2014, 06:10 »
+1
I think their strategy people have just caught up to the late 2Oth Century business model - where you would sit in a meeting and hear people say:

"Let's run it up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes it" or my personal favorite: "Let's put this out on the back porch and see if the cat licks it up."

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #63 on: April 06, 2014, 06:11 »
+3
<snip>
And 24 pages later of blabber, there's still nothing worth getting excited about in this offer, for a non-exclusive.
Nonononono.
They said "Were excited to introduce image subscriptions, ..."
They didn't even try to suggest that there was anything for us to be excited about.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #64 on: April 06, 2014, 06:12 »
+4
I think their strategy people have just caught up to the late 2Oth Century business model - where you would sit in a meeting and hear people say:

"Let's run it up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes it" or my personal favorite: "Let's put this out on the back porch and see if the cat licks it up."

I've seen nothing else there for 3-ish years now. Only differences now is that the changes come thick and fast with no time to prove themselves, and they are more obviously bouncing all over the place, with one 'idea' cancelling a recently previous one.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #65 on: April 06, 2014, 06:33 »
+2
I'm a bit concerned that these will not be reported in real time.  After the recent reporting disaster with the PP numbers, it is worrisome that we will have the same lack of transparency with Istock subs sales.

Not to mention the long-standing 'delayed royalty' issue with their existing subs program (I think it goes back to November).
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359606&messageid=7000364

Isn't it funny that they have actually got a reporting column for 'delayed royalties', like it's 'built-into' the system?
Still, it's better than just sweeping them under the carpet and hoping we never find out.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #66 on: April 06, 2014, 07:55 »
+2
OK I'll be excited in May when I see my PP sales, mixed with my PP sales, and have no clue if they came from the new exciting IS subs program or the old exciting TS subs program? How the heck do they come up with this stuff. One month late reporting (or 15 days maybe), reporting mixed with a different agency results?

And the argument that somehow TS is different from IS subs, has eluded me. Why not just one place for everything? Is dividing them into two collections doing something beneficial? Seems like all these letters and collections and price points and ways to buy are more confusing for buyers, than making things nice and easy.

"It's a no brainer" (that's for the collection Red Dove)


<snip>
And 24 pages later of blabber, there's still nothing worth getting excited about in this offer, for a non-exclusive.
Nonononono.
They said "Were excited to introduce image subscriptions, ..."
They didn't even try to suggest that there was anything for us to be excited about.

« Reply #67 on: April 06, 2014, 08:22 »
+4
One month late reporting (or 15 days maybe),

Or 50+ days? Make a sale on April 3rd and get it reported on May 27th. Then request a payout and get paid on June 9th...  ::)

« Reply #68 on: April 06, 2014, 08:34 »
+4
I think the SUB's are a good idea to try and the pricing to compete with SS is good. I think different levels is good as even SS has this with OffSet. I am just feeling positive and happy, yes my medication has kicked in.

I believe that the only way it could be good is if it doesn't erode existing credit sales, which it will, unfortunately. 

Uncle Pete

« Reply #69 on: April 06, 2014, 13:23 »
+1
I didn't realize it was that bad. I thought that my previous month DLs from TS were showing in the middle of the next month. (most of the time) Sometimes it takes longer.

But I see what you mean, in a good month, it's going to be 45 days from the 1st, until, maybe getting reported to us. Makes me ask, like many before have asked, why do all the rest of the agencies have same day reporting, maybe within hours?

Is the system that convoluted and messed up at TS and IS that they can't keep track of things. This is from the biggest stock agency in the world and what was once the biggest Microstock agency? Highly unprofessional. Or is that unsustainable?

I mean "professionals deal with professionals". Right?


One month late reporting (or 15 days maybe),

Or 50+ days? Make a sale on April 3rd and get it reported on May 27th. Then request a payout and get paid on June 9th...  ::)

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #70 on: April 06, 2014, 18:20 »
+1
Is the system that convoluted and messed up at TS and IS that they can't keep track of things.
...  Or is that unsustainable?
Both of the above, probably.

MxR

« Reply #71 on: April 07, 2014, 03:56 »
+1
I think the monkeys trained to make monthly economic accounts of PP with fingers will revolt when they know they must also calculate sales by subscription... and we will return money back

« Reply #72 on: April 07, 2014, 04:31 »
+5
In the UK we have a word now added to the Oxford English Dictionary, which seems entirely appropriate for IS and a few others.......

OMNISHAMBLES


Meaning: A situation that has been comprehensively mismanaged, characterized by a string of blunders and miscalculations.

Most famously used to describe the wet mongrel of a budget put out by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in 2012

« Reply #73 on: April 07, 2014, 06:41 »
+3
Since it's April and this supposedly has started, has anyone gotten one? Or will it be reported like TS, next month? I wonder what I should be looking for, if and when I get the first Sub DL?

Anyone have one? Anyone know?


wds is correct.
From the original email we were sent on 4th March and in the OP of the subs thread on iS (3rd March)
Royalties will be reported monthly, not in real time. Initially we will be reporting these royalties under the Partner Program.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359606&messageid=6990296
and in case you also missed it:
Image Subscription downloads arent purchased with credits so we will not be calculating RCs with these downloads.
So we are doubly screwed.


Views are not revenue. I wonder how long it will take before the istock exclusives realize they are about to get all the views they have been asking for and not increase and probably a decrease in revenue. To me all Getty is trying to do here is pay virtually nothing for what they consider to be just padding out their collections.

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #74 on: April 07, 2014, 07:26 »
+5
In the UK we have a word now added to the Oxford English Dictionary, which seems entirely appropriate for IS and a few others.......

OMNISHAMBLES


Meaning: A situation that has been comprehensively mismanaged, characterized by a string of blunders and miscalculations.

Most famously used to describe the wet mongrel of a budget put out by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in 2012

I too was thinking this has govt employee mentality stamped all over it. There's a whole lot of overlap and double handling, and general "make it up as we go along", and the drones are still getting their paycheck, meanwhile us small business owners at the coalface keep getting screwed.

« Reply #75 on: April 07, 2014, 11:13 »
+4
April sales are so far non-existent...maybe the subs? It's a shame they aren't being reported in real-time...so frustrating.

« Reply #76 on: April 07, 2014, 12:05 »
+2
April sales are so far non-existent...maybe the subs? It's a shame they aren't being reported in real-time...so frustrating.


For me too, since friday no sales at all. used to sell 8-12 pics per day. 6=8 pics during weekends. No more sales for me. :(

« Reply #77 on: April 07, 2014, 13:36 »
0
One month late reporting (or 15 days maybe),


Or 50+ days? Make a sale on April 3rd and get it reported on May 27th. Then request a payout and get paid on June 9th...  ::)


Michael your timeline is probably right.

But if iStock are interested in following the terms in the ASA contract (not that they've shown much interest in doing that recently), subscriptions should be paid by the middle of the month following downloads...

www.istockphoto.com/asa_non_exclusive.php

Under 5b. (compensation)
"In response to a written request, iStockphoto will endeavor to make payment of royalties in respect of purchased downloads of Accepted Content on a monthly basis on or about the 15th day of the month following the purchase of Accepted Content..."
« Last Edit: April 07, 2014, 13:49 by gclk »

« Reply #78 on: April 07, 2014, 15:37 »
+16
Even the most insignificant subs sites are able to report sales and add the money to the balance instantly. Seeing sales as they happen is part of the fun and a big plus for contributors. Now we have a big minus.  Istock  was once the site that offered best features for contributors, now these days are gone.

OLJensa

  • Visit me at: www.jensmolin.se

« Reply #79 on: April 07, 2014, 15:39 »
+3
After a 6 month absence from microstock I come back and see that all is the same. IS is still making their best to upset the contributor community...  :P

« Reply #80 on: April 07, 2014, 15:54 »
+4
After a 6 month absence from microstock I come back and see that all is the same. IS is still making their best to upset the contributor community...  :P

It's not just Istock. But they are in the top three with deposit photos and fotolia's wonderful dollar photo club.

OLJensa

  • Visit me at: www.jensmolin.se

« Reply #81 on: April 07, 2014, 16:07 »
0
After a 6 month absence from microstock I come back and see that all is the same. IS is still making their best to upset the contributor community...  :P

It's not just Istock. But they are in the top three with deposit photos and fotolia's wonderful dollar photo club.

Just read up on the Fotolia DPC. Lol! Lucky me I have my day job...

What happened to DP? Link?

Uncle Pete

« Reply #82 on: April 08, 2014, 00:29 »
0
Probably this one, where DP has partners that sell our work for inflated prices and we get a payment of the same as a SUB. Besides, subs can't be re-licensed, but apparently these partners are doing that as well.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/depositphotos/the-german-shotshop-reseller-of-depositphotos/msg365026/#msg365026

Big Stink. DP avoided answering for some time, now says people can opt. out, but after some did, they found their work, back on the same site or another one, again. That's a very superficial summary.

I think it looks pretty underhanded and lacks ethics. I couldn't trust DP any less at this point.




After a 6 month absence from microstock I come back and see that all is the same. IS is still making their best to upset the contributor community...  :P


It's not just Istock. But they are in the top three with deposit photos and fotolia's wonderful dollar photo club.


Just read up on the Fotolia DPC. Lol! Lucky me I have my day job...

What happened to DP? Link?

OLJensa

  • Visit me at: www.jensmolin.se

« Reply #83 on: April 08, 2014, 10:01 »
+2
Probably this one, where DP has partners that sell our work for inflated prices and we get a payment of the same as a SUB. Besides, subs can't be re-licensed, but apparently these partners are doing that as well.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/depositphotos/the-german-shotshop-reseller-of-depositphotos/msg365026/#msg365026

Big Stink. DP avoided answering for some time, now says people can opt. out, but after some did, they found their work, back on the same site or another one, again. That's a very superficial summary.

I think it looks pretty underhanded and lacks ethics. I couldn't trust DP any less at this point.




After a 6 month absence from microstock I come back and see that all is the same. IS is still making their best to upset the contributor community...  :P


It's not just Istock. But they are in the top three with deposit photos and fotolia's wonderful dollar photo club.


Just read up on the Fotolia DPC. Lol! Lucky me I have my day job...

What happened to DP? Link?



Thanks Uncle!

Wow, this really is a mess. Was thinking about leaving DP anyways, will do that after the next payout I think. Bye bye DP! :)

« Reply #84 on: April 09, 2014, 13:40 »
+2
I have noticed that no new images have moved from IS to TS. The last ones have been around the end of Mar-2014. Is it just a delay or is it due to the IS subs program ? I may have missed the finer details of IS subs in that TS may also cease to exist or take on a new avatar (like photos.com).

« Reply #85 on: April 09, 2014, 17:47 »
+1
I noticed that too. Pretty odd. But it is iStock lol

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk


« Reply #86 on: April 09, 2014, 21:15 »
+10
If they decided to move all the thinkstock customers back into istock it would be a huge boost for the exclusives. Many of them were never opted in to the pp program and their expensive work wasn't mirrored anyway.

So if they slowly shift customers back to istock and fully focus all marketing for subs and credit sales on it, this should bring a significant increase in revenue, especially for the exclusives.

I have never understood why they divided their marketing time, money and attention on so many different agencies that all compete with each other. The internet favors companies with one strong brand...the way the major competitor has been doing it...

« Reply #87 on: April 10, 2014, 00:51 »
+1
If they decided to move all the thinkstock customers back into istock it would be a huge boost for the exclusives. Many of them were never opted in to the pp program and their expensive work wasn't mirrored anyway.

So if they slowly shift customers back to istock and fully focus all marketing for subs and credit sales on it, this should bring a significant increase in revenue, especially for the exclusives.

I have never understood why they divided their marketing time, money and attention on so many different agencies that all compete with each other. The internet favors companies with one strong brand...the way the major competitor has been doing it...
+1

« Reply #88 on: April 10, 2014, 03:31 »
+1
The internet favors companies with one strong brand...the way the major competitor has been doing it...

Not necessarily. Running competing brands a company can potentially occupy more of the competitive space - e.g. search results. And test different strategies.

Specifically, for example, Shutterstock operates 3 different brands.

« Reply #89 on: April 10, 2014, 07:59 »
+2
I know it's still early but ......

my sales are down none for yesterday and only one the day before ... Unusual for me (middle of the week and April is historically a strong mo)


My Very Best :)
KimsCreativeHub.com

« Reply #90 on: April 10, 2014, 08:16 »
0
almost none sales in april - who knows what are they doing with site - introducing these sub sales  -

- no  rationality -  that is because they do everything in a hurry and panic -

-   but they will not find the magic formula - I'm  absolutely sure -

- they are paying now for bad behavior in past - there is something like gods punishment -

 - no escape ... etc.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2014, 09:22 by ferdinand »

Uncle Pete

« Reply #91 on: April 10, 2014, 08:49 »
+3
If it's the same as adding TS, watch a RPD decline again. Let me explain.

My RPD (indy)

2009 = $1.35
TS Opened
2010 = .55
2011 = .61
Went Audio Exclusive
2012 = .47
2013 = .46

Basic conclusion, with the same files at the same agency and I added audio, and more files to the collection during the same time, I'm now getting less than before Thinkstock. Buyers have moved to subs.

Instead of a better commission, I get a flat 28c, the bottom of the industry. Going exclusive on audio the returns also dropped as I was added to Getty and get 25c a download there for some strange reason. Exclusive pays less?

I'll be happy to wait and see what these numbers look like in March 2015 after the subs commissions have been paid. Really? 40-50 days to calculate a flat rate DL? Something is wrong with their accounting side of the site.



April sales are so far non-existent...maybe the subs? It's a shame they aren't being reported in real-time...so frustrating.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2014, 08:52 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #92 on: April 10, 2014, 11:08 »
+3

almost none sales in april - who knows what are they doing with site - introducing these sub sales  -

- no  rationality -  that is because they do everything in a hurry and panic -

-   but they will not find the magic formula - I'm  absolutely sure -

- they are paying now for bad behavior in past - there is something like gods punishment -

 - no escape ... etc.

They had the magic formula!! In there hot little hands Sometime before RCs  and some price hikes..... Co. Today are not happy with great "steady" profits with small growth ........

If you try and trip a bug you'll kill it so if you want it to live leave it ;)


My Very Best :)
KimsCreativeHub.com

« Reply #93 on: April 10, 2014, 12:32 »
0
 :)

« Reply #94 on: April 11, 2014, 01:55 »
+1
I have never understood why they divided their marketing time, money and attention on so many different agencies that all compete with each other. The internet favors companies with one strong brand...the way the major competitor has been doing it...

Has the major competitor? I don't think so: They did not integrate BigStockPhoto into their main site yet. And they launched a new platform for a higher priced offer. Yahoo also keeps Flickr and Tumblr as their own brands. Amazon experimented with a separate brand for clothing and shoes.

It can make sense to keep different brands to market different values to different clients. So as long as iStock was being marketed as the "premium site among microstock", it made sense to keep a separate place for the subscription buyers.

Now that the strategy for iStock was changed with the price drop last year and subscription offer this year, it might become a different story.

« Reply #95 on: April 11, 2014, 03:31 »
0
A company can own different brands to experiment with but how many customers remember them? ebay,amazon, facebook maybe have other websites, but I only remember the plattform. This is the way i see an agency like SS: an internet plattform.

at the moment microstock is split up into several stronger agencies, but I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years there will be one megasite that dominates most of the market. istock was on the road to become that major plattform until getty decided to cut it into smaller pieces diverting traffic to several sites.

But whoever wins, my files will be everywhere, so i don't have to worry.

« Reply #96 on: April 13, 2014, 12:20 »
0
I have noticed that no new images have moved from IS to TS. The last ones have been around the end of Mar-2014. Is it just a delay or is it due to the IS subs program ? I may have missed the finer details of IS subs in that TS may also cease to exist or take on a new avatar (like photos.com).

As per this (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=359960&page=1) thread in IS forum, the delay in movement of files from IS to TS is due to a backlog. Fingers crossed :)

« Reply #97 on: April 13, 2014, 18:25 »
0
Snap, discussion is over with the last word in a dismissive post from JJ, lol.

"^^ with a portfolio of 49 files and 1 download, I can't see how you were motivated by 1 download. Your motivation should be to build a portolio that you are proud of.  I upload a minimum of 10 pictures a day (usually much more)."

« Reply #98 on: April 14, 2014, 17:32 »
+2
Whenever i read something related to istock here; I start to browse job listing pages to check full-time jobs, then i think that actually i could do my own work, after struggling with how to fund it, i end up with more depression before...

Yeah It's one of these days.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
9502 Views
Last post July 17, 2015, 12:25
by DerekTac
17 Replies
7076 Views
Last post June 18, 2008, 13:45
by ichiro17
29 Replies
13677 Views
Last post March 09, 2009, 20:49
by michaeldb
4 Replies
3755 Views
Last post May 18, 2010, 11:57
by borg
72 Replies
13022 Views
Last post May 29, 2014, 19:52
by goober

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors