MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: Saska on September 28, 2010, 20:32
-
kkthompson
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1)
First, it needs to be noted that while iStock is a part of Getty, we are still run independently. The announced changes were decisions — difficult decisions — made by iStock for the benefit of iStock and its community.
JJRD
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=257202&page=3 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=257202&page=3)
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, kkthompson & I have put our own asses on the line many, many times over for this community of artists... and we'll do it again and again every single time that we feel it necessary.
-
Very nice, I like Dramas
-
Both?
-
kkthompson
If you take a look at some previous announcements they were perfectly open about IStock being run by a Getty/ IStock team.
It's just damage control to try and distance them now the sh*t's hit the fan and Getty is seen as corporate satan by contributors.
-
My favorite line in the whole slippery solution was this, None of this is comfort to the 24% of Exclusives who will see a rate decrease – or to any of the non-Exclusives who are, quite frankly, bearing the brunt of these changes.
I just don't like the idea that taking from the poor to pay the rich, to adjust the "unsustainable" payouts based on increased canister levels, which they promised people to entice them into becoming exclusives.
Leave the non-exclusives alone, because they didn't cause the problem and they aren't part of the problem at an already low 20%
-
My favorite line in the whole slippery solution was this, None of this is comfort to the 24% of Exclusives who will see a rate decrease – or to any of the non-Exclusives who are, quite frankly, bearing the brunt of these changes.
I just don't like the idea that taking from the poor to pay the rich, to adjust the "unsustainable" payouts based on increased canister levels, which they promised people to entice them into becoming exclusives.
Leave the non-exclusives alone, because they didn't cause the problem and they aren't part of the problem at an already low 20%
If enough non-exclusives leave or take down some of their portfolio, the exclusives are going to be in for another commission cut. This is such a big gamble but unfortunately lots of people will put up with this. I just hope enough wise up and realise that if we tolerate this, we will soon be lucky to get 5% commission.
-
My favorite line in the whole slippery solution was this, None of this is comfort to the 24% of Exclusives who will see a rate decrease – or to any of the non-Exclusives who are, quite frankly, bearing the brunt of these changes.
I just don't like the idea that taking from the poor to pay the rich, to adjust the "unsustainable" payouts based on increased canister levels, which they promised people to entice them into becoming exclusives.
Leave the non-exclusives alone, because they didn't cause the problem and they aren't part of the problem at an already low 20%
Hey, but we wouldn't want someone of such importance to have to rough it out while under such unsustainable financial strain and have to suffer the indigity of economy class, would we?
http://twitter.com/kkthompson (http://twitter.com/kkthompson)"Thank you travel gods for last minute upgrades to business class on oversees flights. Go #aircanada
9:05 PM Sep 25th via Twitter for iPhone "
Sheer arrogance, IMO, unless it was a free upgrade (which certainly would've been wise to make mention of, if it be the case, coming from someone who seems rather budget conscious about paying the bread and butter suppliers).
-
Hey, but we wouldn't want someone of such importance to have to rough it out while under such unsustainable financial strain and have to suffer the indigity of economy class, would we?
[url]http://twitter.com/kkthompson[/url] ([url]http://twitter.com/kkthompson[/url])"Thank you travel gods for last minute upgrades to business class on oversees flights. Go #aircanada
9:05 PM Sep 25th via Twitter for iPhone "
Sheer arrogance, IMO.
Next he'll be tweeting about saving a few million on his new $10million condo. LOL
-
Hey, but we wouldn't want someone of such importance to have to rough it out while under such unsustainable financial strain and have to suffer the indigity of economy class, would we?
[url]http://twitter.com/kkthompson[/url] ([url]http://twitter.com/kkthompson[/url])"Thank you travel gods for last minute upgrades to business class on oversees flights. Go #aircanada
9:05 PM Sep 25th via Twitter for iPhone "
Sheer arrogance, IMO.
Next he'll be tweeting about saving a few million on his new $10million condo. LOL
I just changed my post in case the word FREE had inadvertantly been omitted from the tweet. But, I agree - the pay cuts, sited as being due to unsustainablity might be a bit easier to take if it appeared there were cut backs affecting everyone. Doesn't seem like it to me - with the Japan Lypse as just one example.
Punctum day was already taken away and now it seems Peter is being robbed in a bid to pay Paul (like the sudden Vetta increase, rumoured to be an attempt to boost RC's before year end).
Too much lack of accountability on a very large scale, IMO. I think contributors need to have their own representation, if these problems are ever to be overcome.
-
I really don't mind the exclusives getting some rewards for being loyal or making more because they contribute special images that aren't elsewhere. WhY i resent is that in order to hold up the payment plan for some people, the bottom paid group is getting a cut?
It's almost as if IS wants all exclusives unless someone is stupid enough to work for nothing. I mean micro is already small enough payment and commission, now they are reducing that to 15%? If their goal is to drive out the independents, this should do it, except for a small, very small percentage, of stock factories.
Hopefully the rest of the independents will recognize that selling for nothing and working for nearly nothing is stealing sales from their other agencies. They might as well get one sale for a fair pay, instead of three sales, for the same pay. It's not how many times you make a sale, it's the bottom line and what you can put in the bank.
First it was subs for 25 cents, now it's 15% commission. As some have mocked, soon they will charge us to sell our photos. Oh wait, doesn't Getty have that plan already? :(
-
The whole thing is a crock anyway. You simply can't call things unsustainable and cut people's commissions all while raising the commissions of the exclusive power-sellers from 40 to 45%. There's a serious disconnect right there.
-
Yes, I can't understand why they're so inflexible about the 20% 'across the board' thing. If Getty artists have been happy with that to date, it has to be because the sale price was large enough to make a 20% commission a sustainable means of making a living.
Why can't they see that 20% (let alone 15%) of the pittance that is a micropayment is UNsustainable for the artist who is selling so cheaply? Sustainability is a two-way street.
Their position is too fixed on this, and I feel they should flex their fixed model to suit the micropayment portion of their industry. Sometimes a company has to step back and question whether 'doing it because it's always been done this way' is actually a realistic and sensible thing.
-
Hey, but we wouldn't want someone of such importance to have to rough it out while under such unsustainable financial strain and have to suffer the indigity of economy class, would we?
[url]http://twitter.com/kkthompson[/url] ([url]http://twitter.com/kkthompson[/url])"Thank you travel gods for last minute upgrades to business class on oversees flights. Go #aircanada
9:05 PM Sep 25th via Twitter for iPhone "
Sheer arrogance, IMO.
Next he'll be tweeting about saving a few million on his new $10million condo. LOL
Just to be clear, the well-publicised $10M flat belongs to Jonathan Klein, Getty CEO not Kelly Thomson.
http://www.observer.com/people/jonathan-d.-klein (http://www.observer.com/people/jonathan-d.-klein)
-
Yes, I can't understand why they're so inflexible about the 20% 'across the board' thing. If Getty artists have been happy with that to date, it has to be because the sale price was large enough to make a 20% commission a sustainable means of making a living.
Why can't they see that 20% (let alone 15%) of the pittance that is a micropayment is UNsustainable for the artist who is selling so cheaply? Sustainability is a two-way street.
Their position is too fixed on this, and I feel they should flex their fixed model to suit the micropayment portion of their industry. Sometimes a company has to step back and question whether 'doing it because it's always been done this way' is actually a realistic and sensible thing.
I agree but they know that most people will buckle and will put up with below 20%. That's why I no longer see a future for me in microstock, when all the other sites follow istock and cut commissions, it just wont be worth doing anymore. Thinkstock has already ruined subs, ending the chances of higher commissions. Perhaps the only slim chance for us is if enough buyers take pity and go to the sites that pay a more reasonable commissions? I hope that happens but don't expect it to. Look at all the people now happily buying from thinkstock when it's hitting contributors earnings.
-
Hey, but we wouldn't want someone of such importance to have to rough it out while under such unsustainable financial strain and have to suffer the indigity of economy class, would we?
[url]http://twitter.com/kkthompson[/url] ([url]http://twitter.com/kkthompson[/url])"Thank you travel gods for last minute upgrades to business class on oversees flights. Go #aircanada
9:05 PM Sep 25th via Twitter for iPhone "
Sheer arrogance, IMO.
Next he'll be tweeting about saving a few million on his new $10million condo. LOL
Just to be clear, the well-publicised $10M flat belongs to Jonathan Klein, Getty CEO not Kelly Thomson.
[url]http://www.observer.com/people/jonathan-d.-klein[/url] ([url]http://www.observer.com/people/jonathan-d.-klein[/url])
I know that. That is why I said "new". ;) Just a joke implying his bonus was going to be so big that he'd be able to afford such a thing.
-
I agree but they know that most people will buckle and will put up with below 20%. That's why I no longer see a future for me in microstock, when all the other sites follow istock and cut commissions, it just wont be worth doing anymore.
I completely agree Sharpshot. The Greater Fool Theory is alive and well in microstock. The agencies have nothing to fear because they know there always be someone foolish enough to sell their work for a 15% commission on a $2 sale. I will be independent in less than 3 weeks, but I see that more as an opportunity to decrease my exposure to microstock rather than continue to support it.
-
This is what I don't understand. A 15-20% commission on a $2 sale is unsustainable for the contributor.
There is no money in it unless a particular file sells in the thousands.
Lets face it, those types of winners are very few and far between.
Why has no one instituted a sliding commission system.
Say something like this:
$2 sale 40% commission
$10 sale 35% commission
$20 sale 30% commission
etc, etc.
-
This is what I don't understand. A 15-20% commission on a $2 sale is unsustainable for the contributor.
There is no money in it unless a particular file sells in the thousands.
Lets face it, those types of winners are very few and far between.
Why has no one instituted a sliding commission system.
Say something like this:
$2 sale 40% commission
$10 sale 35% commission
$20 sale 30% commission
etc, etc.
I don't get this. If you guys see that so clearly now, why didn't you see it years ago, and simply skip microstock??????? It would have been understandable if there were almost no other chioces but there were plenty! (Alamy for example... 75% comissions!) Total nonsense..... actually i have to say you can blame yourselves as much as the greedy companies, you made horrible, uneducated chioces with little to no foresight whatsoever.
-
I don't get this. If you guys see that so clearly now, why didn't you see it years ago, and simply skip microstock???????
Welcome back, Macrosaur. ;D
-
I don't get this. If you guys see that so clearly now, why didn't you see it years ago, and simply skip microstock???????
Welcome back, Macrosaur. ;D
Hi microsour. Nice to see you. 8 )
-
I don't get this. If you guys see that so clearly now, why didn't you see it years ago, and simply skip microstock???????
Welcome back, Macrosaur. ;D
Well spotted!
-
Welcome back, Macrosaur. ;D
Hi microsour. Nice to see you. 8 )
That was just a little bit too fast Hippie, for credible deniability. ;) Bingo, I assume.
-
Welcome back, Macrosaur. ;D
Hi microsour. Nice to see you. 8 )
That was just a little bit too fast Hippie, for credible deniability. ;) Bingo, I assume.
Actually I don't know what . are you talking yout, but have fun with it anyways : ) ok, i do get it that I'm supposed to be some old time foe here who's a fan macrostock. Well I'm not. I'm not a fan of any stock, I'm a fan of photography.
-
I'm not a fan of any stock, I'm a fan of photography.
Gosh, too bad there aren't any "photography" forums on the internet for you to hang out in and you are forced to spend your time digging up old threads on a microstock forum, when you so clearly hate the medium... :'(
-
:D :D :D
Just what I was thinking - but you put it so much better, Lisa.
-
I'm not a fan of any stock, I'm a fan of photography.
Gosh, too bad there aren't any "photography" forums on the internet for you to hang out in and you are forced to spend your time digging up old threads on a microstock forum, when you so clearly hate the medium... :'(
well you just have to live with the fact that people can have their say and opinion about things, because, hey, maybe that's what forums are actually invented for... but maybe in another life, where you are elected president of the universe, you'll get a remote controll that can mute people. untill that, get a dog or smthng : )
-
Well I'm not. I'm not a fan of any stock, I'm a fan of photography.
Did you try Flickr? You'll get overloaded with banners, ribbons, aahs and oohs. ;) We, well, we just cry and lament on our way to the bank.
-
well you just have to live with the fact that people can have their say and opinion about things, because, hey, maybe that's what forums are actually invented for..
Wrong. Forums are organized around an area of interest to share experiences and tips. It happens that this forum is organized around microstock. Since you're not interested in stock, your opinions are pretty worthless. Have a nice day and ploink.
-
maybe in another life, where you are elected president of the universe, you'll get a remote controll that can mute people.
Oh wow, that sounds awesome! Hey, wait - they have one of those here! It's called the "ignore button"!
Ahhhh, birds chirping again, happy leprechauns skipping across rainbows.... just like magic.... ;D
-
kkthompson
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1[/url])
First, it needs to be noted that while iStock is a part of Getty, we are still run independently. The announced changes were decisions — difficult decisions — made by iStock for the benefit of iStock and its community.
JJRD
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=257202&page=3[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=257202&page=3[/url])
Over the course of the past 2 weeks, kkthompson & I have put our own asses on the line many, many times over for this community of artists... and we'll do it again and again every single time that we feel it necessary.
Who's lying? Maybe neither. Maybe Kelly's statement is another of those factually-kind-of-correct-but-totally-misleading sentences that iStock seem to now specialize in. Jonathan Klein is the CEO of iStockphoto. So a decision made by him in that capacity could be spun as an iStockphoto decision.
But I wish that back in 2006, more consideration had been given to the possibility of a management and artist buy out of iStockphoto. It would have been financially difficult, but possible I think.
Certainly iStock has gained a lot from being part of Getty. But the level of profit taking is now getting really excessive, and iStock is ripe to get slapped hard by a well-run company who don't have the huge disadvantage of having to massively prop up a dinosaur and its owners.
-
well you just have to live with the fact that people can have their say and opinion about things, because, hey, maybe that's what forums are actually invented for..
Wrong. Forums are organized around an area of interest to share experiences and tips. It happens that this forum is organized around microstock. Since you're not interested in stock, your opinions are pretty worthless. Have a nice day and ploink.
You just repeated what I said about forums with different words. The fact is that I am interested in microstock, and you are infantile. All you do is rant like spoiled kids instead of any sensible argument, just because someone has opposing opinion about something. Grow up! Now! : D
-
Pretty soon you'll start using the word "haters"...
-
Who's lying? Maybe neither. Maybe Kelly's statement is another of those factually-kind-of-correct-but-totally-misleading sentences that iStock seem to now specialize in. Jonathan Klein is the CEO of iStockphoto. So a decision made by him in that capacity could be spun as an iStockphoto decision.
But I wish that back in 2006, more consideration had been given to the possibility of a management and artist buy out of iStockphoto. It would have been financially difficult, but possible I think.
Certainly iStock has gained a lot from being part of Getty. But the level of profit taking is now getting really excessive, and iStock is ripe to get slapped hard by a well-run company who don't have the huge disadvantage of having to massively prop up a dinosaur and its owners.
Good points ... and we're back on topic too.
-
I don't get this. If you guys see that so clearly now, why didn't you see it years ago, and simply skip microstock???????
Welcome back, Macrosaur. ;D
Well spotted!
Yes, thanks for the heads up, FD.
-
Certainly iStock has gained a lot from being part of Getty. But the level of profit taking is now getting really excessive, and iStock is ripe to get slapped hard by a well-run company who don't have the huge disadvantage of having to massively prop up a dinosaur and its owners.
[/quote]
That's true. As for a well run company, i wish i could think of one. They all have their good points and bad points, but i think any one of them could just as easily done what getty/istock did, given a leading share of the market. There is no one in the microstock market that has everything running well, IMHO.
-
Hey jbarber, did you get banned from the iStock forums yet?
-
Hey jbarber, did you get banned from the iStock forums yet?
I'm working on it! It's fun- every 100 pages or so I come in and throw a few bombs. I've only gotten warnings so far, but i notice that Lobo ( short for what?) says he reads all the outside forums, so maybe.
Actually It doesn't matter to me- I haven't submitted anything to istock in ages, and submit everywhere else under different names, so this is my "evil twin" identity.
-
I have to say, I'm really enjoying your posts :D. I'm surprised at the latitude you are being given. People have been banned for much less.
-
... Lobo ( short for what?) ...
I always thought it must be short for Lobotomize - what he'll do to anyone who doesn't respect his authoritah... ;D
-
... Lobo ( short for what?) ...
I always thought it must be short for Lobotomize - what he'll do to anyone who doesn't respect his authoritah... ;D
See, that's the thing. I've always had a problem with authority. ( and my kids have the t-shirt with cartman on it- uh oh )
-
I have to say, I'm really enjoying your posts :D. I'm surprised at the latitude you are being given. People have been banned for much less.
Speaking of my personal opinion - I particularily relish the ones with the self-important 'bozo' who is dilusional enough to think everyone should believe them when they make assurances (gee, have we had those before...) that there is no inner/upper gaming, when, by their own glaring example, it would be necessary to believe that their work is actually worthy of in excess of 125 (over 30% of their folio) inclusions in the VETTA collection. How many contributors with as good as, or better, offerings are hard pressed to get even 1 image deemed worthy of VETTA?
It is my strong opinion, that they have, and apparently always will, do what they please because they are self-important and self-governing, and there is no accountablity.
-
I have to say, I'm really enjoying your posts :D. I'm surprised at the latitude you are being given. People have been banned for much less.
Speaking of my personal opinion - I particularily relish the ones with the self-important 'bozo' who is dilusional enough to think everyone should believe them when they make assurances (gee, have we had those before...) that there is no inner/upper gaming, when, by their own glaring example, it would be necessary to believe that their work is actually worthy of in excess of 125 (over 30% of their folio) inclusions in the VETTA collection. How many contributors with as good as, or better, offerings are hard pressed to get even 1 image deemed worthy of VETTA?
It is my strong opinion, that they have, and apparently always will, do what they please because they are self-important and self-governing, and there is no accountablity.
I like "Bozo"! Maybe i should use that in my next post...
BTW-I don't get the whole Vetta thing with them. It seems to be a poorly curated collection, with some good shots mixed in with a lot of really self indulgent crap. Is it just marketing,( in which case it obviously didn't work), or do they really think it represents " peak creative prowess"? At least they don't show that woman with the black stuff all over her face any more.
ps- in case the person who shot the photo of the woman with the black stuff all over her face is reading this- nothing personal- it's just not my taste. I've already got all of canada mad at me, don't want to offend anyone else.
-
... Lobo ( short for what?) ...
I always thought it must be short for Lobotomize - what he'll do to anyone who doesn't respect his authoritah... ;D
Lobo is Spanish for wolf. Maybe because I live in Florida I thought everybody knew that :)
-
i still kind of like lobotomize :)
-
... Lobo ( short for what?) ...
I always thought it must be short for Lobotomize - what he'll do to anyone who doesn't respect his authoritah... ;D
Lobo is Spanish for wolf. Maybe because I live in Florida I thought everybody knew that :)
Lobo is also a lil' hick town in South Western Ontario, Canada. The Lobo is also a local apple variety - used in pies.
"LOBO
Early to Mid Season. A seedling of Macintosh selected in 1930 in Canada. A very large, bright red, crisp fruit that is particularly good for cooking, making a nice white froth when stewed (applesauce) and making excellent pies. Good all purpose apple, although a little tangy at first. They sweeten in storage."
http://grandmasapplepierecipe.com/lobo.cfm (http://grandmasapplepierecipe.com/lobo.cfm)
-
Cool! Never knew that about the lobo apple.
I'm going to guess from his biting comments in the forums that Lobo on IS is more likely to be the wolf variety than the delicious apple though ;)
Although, wait.... he does also go by pieman. Maybe his name is a reference to apple pie after all!
-
Cool! Never knew that about the lobo apple.
I'm going to guess from his biting comments in the forums that Lobo on IS is more likely to be the wolf variety than the delicious apple though ;)
Although, wait.... he does also go by pieman. Maybe his name is a reference to apple pie after all!
he he
http://www.wicksworksdesign.com/images/pieman.jpg (http://www.wicksworksdesign.com/images/pieman.jpg)
-
Cool! Never knew that about the lobo apple.
I'm going to guess from his biting comments in the forums that Lobo on IS is more likely to be the wolf variety than the delicious apple though ;)
Although, wait.... he does also go by pieman. Maybe his name is a reference to apple pie after all!
I think you are right...I have seen several posts on the IS forum (never really related to what's actually being discussed though, usually thrown in by a cheerleader...sounding like inside jokes) about how they are going to bring him a pie, how he likes pie, etc. etc. So maybe his name is all about the Canadian apple.
-
.