I know on the video side they have an elevated review time for some contributors who have a proven track record of self editing and high acceptance rate...I believe I am in that department for video, but not so much for photos.

Isn't P5's strength with video?

maybe and as usual we talk before really knowing what is going on, human nature yep

anyway why would Yuri join exclusivity when he is doing 12k $ per day at PI?

Let's be fair here: http://www.microstockgroup.com/selling-direct/today-is-a-good-day-peopleimages-com-is-up-up-up!/


No where does it state he is pulling that a day...that happens to be a good day...a very good day, but let's at least not skew the few facts we do have

when iS runs a promotion and discounts their credits, WE pay for the discount. you just have to trust them to report correctly.

Yeah, aint that a bitch?

Do prices matter? In a few week IS can just bump his work up to the signature+ collection regardless of exclusivity

Quote from: tickstock on May 17, 2013, 14:11

Quote from: dirkr on May 17, 2013, 14:08

Quote from: dingles on May 17, 2013, 10:55

Quote from: dirkr on May 17, 2013, 10:46

Quote from: dingles on May 17, 2013, 09:59

Just seems like the industry is dooming itself by lowering prices and undercutting the competition

I might be wrong, but I am not aware of examples of (established) microstock companies lowering prices. Quite the opposite, looking at what has happened at e.g. Istock, Fotolia, Dreamstime over the last five or six years. When I remember correctly, the prices have been quite a bit lower when I started with microstock in 2007.

Multiple agencies have lowered their royalties during that time, but that's a different issue.

You are not considering subscriptions.

So did subscription prices decrease over the last years? Where was the price of a standard Shutterstock subs plan five years ago? I have no idea...

I think he's saying sites like Dreamstime, Fotolia, and Bigstock have added subs which have lower royalties than credit or single image sales.

That's right, and I don't disagree with the lowering of royalties.
But did they introduce subs that are significantly lower priced than those of the competition?
What I am asking is whether the statement I quoted is correct - about lowering prices and undercutting the competition.

Because I believe that is not the current problem of this industry.

I'm not sure if it is either, but I am sure that you can often find the image at a lower rate elsewhere. The mentality lately seem to be spread your portfolio everywhere...but I feel you hurt the industry and undercut your self by doing so.

Quote from: dingles on May 17, 2013, 09:59

Just seems like the industry is dooming itself by lowering prices and undercutting the competition

I might be wrong, but I am not aware of examples of (established) microstock companies lowering prices. Quite the opposite, looking at what has happened at e.g. Istock, Fotolia, Dreamstime over the last five or six years. When I remember correctly, the prices have been quite a bit lower when I started with microstock in 2007.

Multiple agencies have lowered their royalties during that time, but that's a different issue.

You are not considering subscriptions.

Good points, maybe the industry needs to pull together and develop standardized pricing before images have 0 value...I guess you can argue we are already at the point. Just seems like the industry is dooming itself by lowering prices and undercutting the competition...it's the WalMart mentality...in the end they will cut prices so low they can't offer anything else of value. I'm not saying exclusivity is the only way to battle this, but to me if you offer unique content of quality and keep yourself out of the bargain bin. Outside of providing unique content, you have to up the buyer experience...make it easy to search and quick to buy. Kill all the confusing jargon and language...simplifying is good...not sure iStock has nailed the approach.

I agree...do buyers give a crap about collections?

The only thing as buyer that gets me is how one site can sell the same content as another site at different price points. Knowing that I always look for the best price for that image...I could care less who the agency is as long as the licensing fits my needs. I'm not sure iStock may be going about this the right way as I think exclusivity is the only way to justify a higher price....or else you can get the same content cheaper elsewhere. I think their efforts would be better spent promoting and encouraging exclusivity instead of hacking away at every benefit. Now they will have a collection full of the same content every site has. And in today's market with Google image search and a generation of folks who grew up with Google at their fingertips entering the career world mixed with the financial stress on most businesses today I would say it is naive to think people aren't searching for the best price, especially when an image is available everywhere(we do it when we are shopping for anything else online, why wouldn't we do it for stock also?)...seems like iStock is positioning themselves on a fast track to bottom with most everyone else in the industry. I like the idea of performance driving price, but it sure seems to be a moot point if that same image is available next door for a fraction of the price.  I think exclusivity can bring value back to our work and to agencies by stopping the ability for you to undercut your own work...which is happening everywhere now.

It is short sighted when contributors spread their portfolio everywhere for the same reasons...your only helping to kill the market and further devalue your own work for only pennies in return.

I'd say its one of many reasons trust is nonexistent with them.

Agencies taking too much is a problem that surpasses iStock. I feel most agencies take too large a cut and don't deliver on their end.

I don't mind it. I personally don't want to waste time moving my files around and waiting. For the most part, I'd probably keep them in the main �ollection anyway. I guess it sucks that we are losing some more control, but not overly important to me.

I like the idea of exclusives having to keep quality up. Outside of video, I'm not sure how exclusivity holds any weight any more.