|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - jamirae
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 33
176
« on: September 30, 2011, 12:08 »
wow. thank you!
177
« on: September 27, 2011, 18:47 »
I just got a confirmation email to my opt-out.. here it is: Dear Contributor,
We'd like to confirm receipt of your email indicating your wish to opt out of the Veer subscription program that will be offered later this year.
Since announcing the subscription plan and related royalties last week, we've received a lot of thoughtful feedback and suggestions for ways to make the plan more attractive to contributors. We want to let you know we've been listening, and as a result of that feedback, we plan to release an adjusted plan within the next few days.
We will be offering an opportunity to opt back in to the revised plan, and invite you to respond to this email with any further suggestions you have that will help us provide you with a more desirable subscription plan.
Sincerely,
The Veer Contributor Team
178
« on: September 26, 2011, 22:55 »
Thanks for coming on here to try to explain things.
Although the average of 9 dl/day might be right for a subs plan. I am guessing there are many 0 download days (weekends spring to mind). In those cases Veer gets 100% - that is fine, except that means that the days that there are a download, there will likely be more - so the actual payment for DL will be lower for the contributors. I wonder how many places either download most of their quota or 0 pictures. From my brief analysis of my sales under the IS subs plan that might actually be the case.
Now if the price for the sub is significantly below 250/month that does make the % paid to contributors higher, but it also undercuts sites that pay more for subs to the contributors which isn't exactly a good thing for the industry or contributors.
3.75 to .13 cents for extended licenses is just crazy talk.
If you didn't have the EL subs and offered .30 or more per DL I bet most would opt in. As it is, I bet most who hear about this will opt out. Sorry.
Thank you for the option to opt out. That is definitely appreciated by me. In general I have been pleased w/ Veer and I'd hate to have to pull my port over this.
(I just spent quite some time deleting half my port from IS because of their new ASA and I'll be back for most of the rest tomorrow, don't even get me started about what Ft has been up to lately, but you won't find my images for sale there).
the part I bolded above is exactly what I was thinking. buyers probably don't use their full quota each day of their subscirption because they probably dont log in every day just to download images. I am guessing that on the days that a buyer logs in to download files that they get their quota or close to it, but on those days that they do not, "the house" gets all the money. just like a casino, the advantage goes to the house. if you look at averages, you're probably spreading full download days with zero download days - in the end it gives crap to the contributor and bigger returns to the company.
179
« on: September 24, 2011, 18:19 »
with so many contributors how can they really police this? I mean how can they track down every contributor's portfolio on other sites? what am I missing here?
180
« on: September 17, 2011, 20:20 »
great news! thank you so much, Peter!
181
« on: September 11, 2011, 17:44 »
The real competition is net profit and not total d/l's, in that case I wouln't be suprised if Sean is higher up.
Yeah, some of the top hitters are not individual photographers but teams, with all the ensuing expense and time-consuming paperwork that involves.
Sean is a Lone Wolf; so, I believe, is Lise.
interesting to know, now I have to ask the question clearly and specificly
- in terms of revenue, Yuri is No.1, don't know who's next.
- in terms of profit, Lise is No.1, Yuri will not even be considered No.2, correct?
only if you are talking strictly at iStock. Yuri makes plenty of money on all the other sites he/his team contribute to.
182
« on: September 07, 2011, 17:25 »
It reminds me of Dreamstime's Assignment. Each month they ask for images with a certain theme.
Oh, iStock did that for a while on the Logo forum until even the diehards lost the will to live.
wait.. what's this about Logos? seriously, though... they can launch a feast but still can't get their act together for the logo program?
183
« on: September 07, 2011, 17:24 »
Does anyone actually understand this Feast thing? I have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. I'm obviously not "down with the kids" enough.
Thanks for saying it. I thought I was the only one. I have no idea what this is about either. I skimmed over the announcement, but the point of it and the details completely elude me.
sounds to me like another case of " The Emperor has no clothes" -- you (we) all need to be hip to understand it. 
184
« on: September 07, 2011, 16:33 »
edit: I wonder if this Feast gem was some suggestion from the survey.
The contact sheet with the Feast announcement was August 10th. The email I got about the survey was August 18th. So they came up with this idea all on their own 
really? I just got the contact sheet today. it was announced last month? I guess that shows how little I pay attention to iStock these days.
185
« on: September 07, 2011, 16:04 »
Well I have now been banned - told via the email revoking my forum posting privileges to "Have a little break" by Lobo
It's probably for the best as I should just stop wasting mental energy on iStock's soap opera of broken site, anti-contributor changes, etc.
I guess it's been brewing for you.. because I didn't think that post was so bad. Lobo was probably just waiting for you to post something sarcastic so he could ban you. what an ass.
186
« on: September 01, 2011, 17:50 »
I was just checking out stinkstock...er, I mean thinkstockphotos.com and I notice that the photographer/artist name is not attached to any of the images - they are just listed by collection. is that really how it is or am I missing something in how you can tell who the artist is for a particular image?
187
« on: August 31, 2011, 20:49 »
I don't even know what they pay for Thinkstock downloads. Was it .25 or is it even lower than that now?
It went up to .28 a few months back. The tactic of starving them for content forced them to up royalties. Now that all independents are pushed into the PP that may change though.
that was my very first thought, they can now push it back down and almost nobody will withdraw their files as it'll mean taking them off IS too
I wouldn't be too sure about that last part. I'm already on the fence about leaving iStock completely and that sort of push would be likely be enough to do it. As would another cut in independent's royalty rates - all these income reducers just take away one more reason to stay.
I'm with Jo Ann on that part - further cuts would put me over the edge. Right now I'm going to try and work a like a madwoman to get as much of my port on DT and SS as possible. those two have been my best earners since going Independent, despite only having a few hundred files up so far. And also building up at WarmPicture and Stockfresh - though they are not big earners, they have good potential in my mind. so if I had to drop IS, I could do it easily with income I'll be making up elsewhere.
188
« on: August 31, 2011, 16:28 »
I don't read the design mags, but haven't I heard they are not advertising Istock? Anyone know which company they are pushing?
It's up to iStock to advertise in mags, otherwise the mags are going to mention whoever's advertising wih them.
For a while iStock advertised everywhere, then they seemed to stop advertising in the consumer and prosumer mags. When they were advertising, so were all the others, including several that have since folded. Over the gap, I was only seeing ads for Shutterstock (in mags on newsagents' shelves in the UK).
Recently iStock took to advertising in a magazine aimed at professional photographers. That must say something, though it seemed as though they were selling coals to Newcastle. Still haven't found any in, for example, the mags aimed at professional web designers (which I often have time to flick through at WHS at the station). Since Borders went bust, I don't see things like dgusa or Photoshop User.
the one magazine i read and subscribe to regularly, Photoshop User (comes with the NAPP membership), still seems to always a have a 2-page istock ad right inside the front cover. To that extent I do not see the istock ads lessening. NAPP also has a very close relationship with iStock and many of the tutorials you find in the magazine use istock images (properly credited with the photog's name).
189
« on: August 30, 2011, 11:28 »
This is a pretty critical move. Commissions in the "less than 10%" are probably due soon through sister agencies/partner reselling.
My team and I are researching the extend of this, but a royalty set by Istock on partner distribution is not something we favor at all.
I totally agree. are you considering pulling out from istock altogether? for someone like you and Lisa with such huge ports it may be a difficult thing to do for sure.
190
« on: August 29, 2011, 22:20 »
were we supposed to get an email about this? because I only heard about it by coming here.
pisses me off, really. I will have to think about this before I decide what to do, right now I'm just too upset to make a rational decision. I guess I sort of knew something crappy like this would happen.
191
« on: August 25, 2011, 14:37 »
I didn't get the survey. I got the newsletter where KKT talked about Rebecca stepping in from Aug. 4th, so I get emails from them, just not ALL emails from them, I guess.
Same for me.
Maybe they decided to not send it out to contributors without active files in their portfolio....
But I actually still have 5 active files, so that can't be the excuse.
did you check spam folders? it isn't actually coming from them since it's a survey monkey thing or some other service (i dont exactly remember). i didnt think I got it either but there it was hiding in the spam folder.
192
« on: August 25, 2011, 14:21 »
Excellent posts Stan and Liz. You were both more detailed in your responses than I was, but the bottom line was the same. My main concerns are the RC system (and the grossly high sales numbers required to meet the levels), the confusing collections and pricing schemes, and the incompetent site maintenance.
yes, I agree, I wasn't as verbose, but pretty much responded the same way.
193
« on: August 22, 2011, 12:30 »
if you didn't get the survey, check your spam folders. for some reason the way they sent it, the survey was caught in one of my first ring of spam filters (on the server, actually) - and a place that I rarely check for good messages, but I had seen it was going out so looked and found it there. i do get all the other istock emails (as far as I know, anyway) without problem, so this was sent with something in it that causes spam filters to grab it pretty quickly.
194
« on: August 22, 2011, 11:10 »
To be frank...
I just want the 40% I earned while I wasted my fingers, wrist, eyesight, back family time and free time... that I invested in getting there at almost triple diamond.
We had a contract and a set of rules which were changed mid-race in order to simply wipe the slate clean and post higher revenues. It is simply the ugliest thing any company or boss has done to me personally and why I simply have lost what made me love iStock in the first place, trust.
They can still backtrack and make it all back from today forward but I can't fathom that fairness is something they put in the equation now or in the future.
If iStock does 40% to us diamonds as we were privy before, we still have the lowering of revenues due to large competition. It does however only punish from a predictable side and not from the part of the equation that should be your agent and look after your revenue/work.
I know that many at iStock had no clue or wanted to do this so I am not generalizing on the good people there. They were handed a rotten egg basket and they had to color them nicely as much as they could to make the poison pill easier to swallow. They can still turn back the clock and re-earn their place of trust.
Very well put. Exactly the same here. I want the 40% I was promised to be "grandfathered" in to. Separating "canister" from "royalty level" was never part of the deal as far as I was concerned.
not harsh at all. exactly the way I feel, too. Although once that trust is lost, as it is now, it will be much, much harder for them to earn it back. Even "turning back the clock" won't automatically re-earn that trust - they've done too much to wipe the trust out. Trust is not given, it has to be earned.
195
« on: August 17, 2011, 18:45 »
well I'm still having some decent sales. yesterday was a great day for downloads for me although a lot of small and xsmall purchases so the dollar amount wasn't as high as it could have been. I hope the rest of the week keeps at it.
196
« on: August 16, 2011, 17:59 »
My sales are at about 50% of where they usually are for this time on a Tuesday.
Trust me it is slow everywhere this week. Yesterday at FT my sales numbers were at weekend levels and today they are not much better. If FT's main market is Europe then they may be hit the most by European holidays.
I'll second that. Sales across the board were very slow yesterday. They appear to have picked up somewhat today, but still grim summer numbers.
I guess we, low ranking losers, get slightly bigger crumbs than usually. This week is above average, I'd say very good at IS (and the whole month for that matter), sales at the other agencies are average.
must be one of those "low ranking losers" because I've noticed a slight uptick in sales since last week. today has been pretty good, yesterday was average. I'm also still noticing some of my older files with low downloads getting some "download love" these days as well.
197
« on: August 16, 2011, 15:45 »
Seems to me there are three reactions people are having to this change (or any change any agency makes for that matter)... the first two are perfectly respectable, adult reactions... and the third, not so much...
1. You don't like the change, you estimate that it is bad for you either today or in the long run, and you are taking action in protest. You're deleting your port, you're gradually removing images, you're putting your money where your mouth is. Respectable response.
2. You accept the change after looking at your own personal situation, determining that you respect the agency's right to make the change and it's in your interest to continue the relationship. You keep your images there and keep uploading more. Respectable response.
3. You don't like the change and whine about how mean the agency is being to you, wishing the government or a union would step in to protect you, all the while preparing your newest uploads. You are the person that they are mocking with the below image... if you can't respect yourself enough to take a stand, you can't expect them to respect you... drink in your mockery...
personally I find this ad in completely poor taste and unprofessional. I have only been on FT since last November and I have been debating whether to stick with them or not since I am doing well on DT, SS and IS. this new drop in commissions pretty much has me ready to stop uploading. no, make that it definitely has me ready. I will probably even delete my port all together there so I don't have to hassle with it. Then I can concentrate more on other ventures with my photography.
198
« on: August 16, 2011, 09:15 »
same here.. they are reliable, affordable and solid quality. They also have the best customer service of any company I have ever dealt with. ever.
199
« on: August 13, 2011, 19:37 »
I've had a lot of older pics downloaded last week. so I'm happy about that! and downloads picked up a bit, too. at least for me.
200
« on: August 13, 2011, 19:35 »
LOVE Downy Wrinkle Releaser! It's hard to find around here so if I get the chance, I'll buy it out!
= mild hoarding tendencies... 
tip for you.. I dilute mine up to 50/50 (water/downy) and it still works great!
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 33
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
