With most contributors focusing on the changes to royalties, I believe a much bigger bomb is about to drop on istock. From KTs original post:

Vetta Collection Changes
Effective September 27, 2010
Vetta has been more successful than we ever thought possible. It's been a wakeup call to the industry--it's that good. Vetta has far surpassed the definition of microstock and is underpriced when looking at any of its competitors. As such, we will be increasing the prices for Vetta content as well as adjusting Vetta royalties, which will now range from 22, 24, 26, 28, & 30% when sold on iStock. Even with the decrease in royalties, this will be a net gain for contributors, and customers are still getting one of the best collections in the world at a fraction of traditional stock pricing.

The Vetta Collection will now be mirrored at Getty Images under their traditional license model. We've been doing similar content mirroring with iStock Vectors and Videos for several months now, with exceptional results.

The Agency Collection
Effective September 2010
Later this month we will introduce a new collection here at iStock--it will be the first time we've allowed outside agencies on the site. The Agency Collection will feature some of the world's best photographers and agencies, selected by Content teams at Getty Images and iStock. Later in the month, we'll be inviting select iStock photographers to submit to the collection as well.

The Agency Collection will be priced at a premium to Vetta and will be available on iStock, Getty Images, Jupiter and PunchStock.

Exclusive iStock contributors will be invited on an individual basis to add their content to this collection. We will pay a modified royalty for the Agency Collection that fits between traditional stock and current iStock royalties. The royalty range for this collection will be: 22, 24, 26, 28, & 30% when sold on iStock. For content sold off of iStock, all royalties will be 20%.

istock is going midstock, with current Getty pros dominating. The micro collections will become the new Dollar Bin. Most current contributors will become irrelevant. Vetta has proved that the market can bear it.

Istock going to Midstock is not a bad thing. It's not a big problem for me to have "redeemed credits". However, the numbers are way too high. For most people, it is hard to ever reach Gold.

certainly got me thinking. I defiently see another price rise coming next year and thinkstiock pushed to take the budget market. But I wonder how much of getty images are going to be thrown in to the mix, I have a feeling now its going to be lot with their wholly owned content. I think of thinkstock and the wholly owned content that slams the search engine, wonder if they will do the same - here's 10 pages that is 80% getty images.

FD has got it pretty right.  Sorry stepping on some contributors toes but for IS to go Macro would be a disaster, the exclusive/independant stuff doesnt cut it in the Macro world,  Vetta is to 70%  non commercial stuff and really not that great actually, even though many would like to think so.

Gettys own Macro stuff and I mean their main-core, original RM stuff is far superior as is Corbis main-core stuff.

for IS to go Macro would be a disaster ... Vetta is to 70%  non commercial stuff and really not that great actually ... Gettys own Macro stuff and I mean their main-core, original RM stuff is far superior as is Corbis main-core stuff.

No.

Getty RM has higher operating cost vs IS RF. The Getty portal employs sales personnel. IS RF is PAYG self service and automated. No accounts managers co-ordinating with customers.

Vetta has shown that IS can be portal at premium prices. Getty will now experiment at moving more of its core content through IS. At IS they can sell for same price at lower cost. Expect them to start with the Flickr stuff maybe.

RM and editorial is higher cost to operate. Evolving premium RF makes sense for them. Selling it self service makes even more sense.

Getty will ultimately try to move everyone to 20%. Then ...

++ the other side of the transition is to move non collection stuff to subscription

When I become irrelevant I'll be able to pull my port with little loss, so I guess it has a bright side 

Yes... that's pretty much the conclusion I've come to also.

I think (as others have said) that iStock will gradually move to more of a midstock model and those
who want to participate in that model will change with it; whilst others will move out as they become
'irrelevant' to iStock, and will consolidate and improve their work within the microstock model at other
agencies.

It's hard to say how iStock will fare with so much wholly-owned Getty imagery coming in... I've always
understood that buyers want new, fresh, contemporary and diverse imagery... so who exactly their
upcoming market will be, I've no idea.

They're about to separate from the microstock pack, I think - and become something rather different
that has no place for me as I am now.

@ Nordlys - I've read your message about ten times this morning.  You really don't need to post it in every thread.

Istock going to Midstock is not a bad thing....

If that's the goal, that's fine. But not everyone is in agreement that midstock is the way to go, so istock shouldn't be surprised if some people (like me) choose to support new microstock ventures rather than investing any more time in what appears to be becoming a midstock agency.

I just don't think buyers are really ready to get on board with a midstock offering. I also don't think people are happy with varying prices for images in different collections. Sites like SS do well because they are simple. Buyers know that they're always going to pay the same amount of money every month. Even at PPD sites, I think StockXpert was so successful for many people (myself included) because it was simple. A certain size image always cost the same.

There are too many good microstock options out there, and I just don't see istock being able to continue offering anything substantially better than current microstock quality for any sustained amount of time, or at any higher a price point. Buyers won't notice much difference, and it's not as if the exclusive content is qualitatively any better than non-exclusive. It's just easier to find exclusive content in the best match. So as buyers figure out that they can get equally good content at a fraction of the price, they'll continue to take their business to the cheaper agencies.

It would probably be a mistake if istock went totally midstock. Vetta's doing quite well but it has the best best match placemen and still many images don't sell. Without the rest of the collection there wouldn't be many buyers around to even see it. they would do o.k in the short run but afterward who knows. Most buyers come to istock for the large range of the collection that includes all the mundane stuff.

Having said all that I expect another round of large price increases in January after they have increased the Vetta prices on the 27Th of September.

Personally I think what is going on is they are getting ready to set up iStock as a mid stock company. iStock is a brand name and a lot of buyers now it. With them implementing the increase in cost for the Vetta and bringing in the Agency stuff for higher prices and inviting exclusives to particpate it looks to me like this is where they are going. I then believe they will basically say....if you're not exclusive then you are being moved to ThinkStock which is our subscription site. There is a reason they started up Thinkstock and this may very well be why. I think the slow price increase in their "special collections" is kinda like going to the grocery store and paying a little extra, then the next week a little more. It's not as noticeable to your pocket book as a buyer. Why else would they introduce the Agency collection if not for this reason? Many agencies have tried mixing mid stock and microstock and haven't been to successful at it and that's why I believe they created Thinkstock.

Quote from: FD-regular on September 10, 2010, 23:01

As a buyer on DT, I have seen much better usable level 4 and 5's there than on Vetta. Vetta is just too expensive, and a lot is not very commercial. You can have loads of level 4-5 on DT for peanuts with a subs pack.

Sounds poor for the contributer.

EXACTLY!!! I'm having loads of maximum size sub sales. These are the majority of the sales and that's why my RPD is gone down with them really bad.

One hears from time to time about designers whose agencies will not let them use microstock. The Agency collection, which will also be available on Getty, looks to be a way to enable these people to start shopping at istock. Foot in the door. Who knows how big this market is.

I'm very possibly dead wrong, but I couldn't imagine that there are many large image buyers out there who at dont at least use a mix of micro and macro images. For a macro agency someone who buys 1 image a week is still a decent customer, for micro they are hardly anything.