|
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 - cthoman
3076
« on: September 27, 2010, 15:09 »
cthoman: That is not what I said and not what I ment. if I buy a port of photos of a certain model posing for example, and you then go hire that model again and produce similar (or even BETTER) photos then my purchase is worhless.
Nobody intends for you to retire or become a burger flipper. but a buyer with some sense in his mind would try and avoid "shooting himself in the leg" .
Apologies. I guess I misunderstood. Regardless, I would think most of what you're paying for is turnkey and consistent sales. Taking over a successful business is much easier than building a new one. If the buyer had to reupload all the images and hope for the best with acceptance, sales and search rankings, I'd think that would be a deal breaker.
3077
« on: September 27, 2010, 14:40 »
sjlocke: thats not risk, that would be plain stupidity.
Would you buy a bakery for example if the seller told you in advance he is planning on opening a bakery across the street as soon as the deal is closed ? not only this, you know this bakery will probebly make better products then the bakrey you just bought!
Didn't think so.
I disagree. The person would be buying all your images and the copyrights to them. They'd have every right to get you banned or take legal action if you were just copying your old images. Agreeing to stop making images in your own style though would be business suicide and I don't know how anyone could agree to that.
3078
« on: September 26, 2010, 12:03 »
A few weeks or months isn't going to make much difference to images that should sell for years to come.
I agree. I don't really understand the impatience to see your files reviewed immediately or see the site extremely profitable overnight.
3079
« on: September 25, 2010, 21:56 »
that's a good chart. the only problem is that it does not account for those, like me, who have multiple mediums at iStock. currently I am gold, but my port is both vector and photos so I will drop into different categories for that.
Yeah, I hear you. The chart would be a lot more interesting if it applied to me at all (vectors).  Although when I looked at my numbers, I could double my income there and still not make the next level which would still be a 10% cut. But, it's not about the money, right? Actually, I'm starting to agree with that statement. I wouldn't be considering deleting my portfolio if it was just about money.
3080
« on: September 25, 2010, 16:08 »
I suspect you'll struggle to agree a value with anyone. A portfolio seller tends to have an optimistic view on future returns (assumes that income will continue largely at current levels) whereas the buyer tends to take a much more pessimistic view (assumes that the income will fall due to competition, etc).
For instance I would only consider selling my port for 3x annual earnings minimum. However if I were buying I'd be unlikely to pay more than 2x for someone else's port.
Interesting topic. I'd never really thought about the value before. Gostwyck's estimate sounds about right though. I think it it would take me 2 to 4 years to build up my business again from scratch, so I think something in that range of 2x to 4x the annual earnings sounds correct.
3081
« on: September 24, 2010, 10:27 »
my sales have been very good this week. I've had two days that were stellar in fact. I think it is far too early to start suggesting sales are plummeting because of an issue being primarily covered in forums, which most buyers don't really visit.
From what I remember, September goes like that sometimes. It's normal, then rallies at the end of the month. Then, October is all awesome.
3082
« on: September 24, 2010, 10:01 »
Yeah, I wouldn't say dead and I wouldn't say thriving. I'd say "Low Earners" like the poll says is a good classification.
3083
« on: September 23, 2010, 15:40 »
The way I see it, I'm not betting on iStock's future at all - I'm betting on my own. I'm not in a position to judge how the marketplace might change - I don't think anybody here is. Definitely true. I suppose most of us are just guessing based on how we processed the change and assume most others will come to the same conclusions as we did (which they probably won't). In my case, I assume that contributors won't like being paid less than 20% and will start deleting their portfolios in January. But, it's just a guess based on what I will probably do. Since, I'm guessing... If I was to guess who will win the bet, I'd have to go with Sharply. I think people will leave IS in the new year and things will probably get worse there, but it won't be bad enough for long time contributor to leave. I'll put my magic eight ball away now.
3084
« on: September 23, 2010, 15:06 »
Why do you think I'm getting a massive cut in my commissions next year?
Sabotage? Seriously though, it sounds like an interesting bet. It basically sound like you two are betting on the future of IS in the next 18 months.
3085
« on: September 23, 2010, 11:36 »
I can't really say I know what was going on with the whole story, but it was an entertaining read this morning.
3086
« on: September 21, 2010, 23:57 »
Seems like the new model all but guarantees burnout. And unlike the old model, you can't really take a sabbatical or healthy inspiration-break and continue to reap top benefits from all the hard work you did (consistently or not) in years past. That's just bananas. Don't the kids at the top know/understand that quality creative work isn't really an on-demand, high volume, 24/7 kind of skill/talent? I would hazard that such a skill/talent is rare, indeed. And that when you push artists too far they break/down and/or their work suffers. Which isn't good for either the artists or the business of selling their work.
Actually, I'm thinking it will make less difference because the levels are so vast that it will be hard to make a change unless you're near one end of it. If you upload 0 files or 1000 files during the year, you will probably still be at the same level at the end of the year. Now, whether the level moves on you is another story.
3087
« on: September 21, 2010, 15:16 »
Yeah, I can't say my situation can be summed up in a poll either. My sales are fairly normal and up from the summer, but considering the growth in my portfolio this year, they are down. That probably doesn't make a very normal poll entry though.  It's down everywhere though, so I think it is time to start doing something new.
3088
« on: September 21, 2010, 11:53 »
Yeah, I don't think the fable works either. I felt treated fairly for many years by IS, so I don't really consider them a bad company. In the end, this more of a disagreement. I think my work is worth more than a certain percentage and they don't.
3089
« on: September 17, 2010, 19:11 »
I made a screendump of istockcharts.de the minute I read the first announcement on 7 September to get a measure of how it affects contributors behaviour. For future reference (roughly in 20 days, the first exclusives will effectively loose their crown and become independent)
I was wondering how accurate a method this is. Are people completely removing their account or just removing their files? If they just remove their files, then they are still listed as a contributor, right? In my tentative plan of quitting, I was thinking about leaving a few files just to have a presence at IS.
3090
« on: September 16, 2010, 09:46 »
85% profit is not an accurate number. sigh. too bad, leaving takes away your support from many artists in fact.
You're right it's not. I assume IS has some average that they are trying to achieve. My guess would be somewhere between 20-25%. I assume if enough independents leave to mess up their ratio, they'll have to come back and lower exclusives' portion again. Whatever that target number is somebody has to suffer to help them hit it. Right now, it's mostly independents, but exclusives may have to carry the weight in the future.
3091
« on: September 15, 2010, 20:26 »
I have to hand it to them for staying on point with their message. Every answer I've heard is almost exactly like every other answer I've heard from them. I guess they handed out cue cards or something. Especially that paragraph about the vector credit levels. Vectors cost more, so their value is less. I think somewhere a robot just exploded after reading that circular logic.
3092
« on: September 15, 2010, 12:35 »
^ I don't think he does know how this will impact his income. Listening to his conscience....come on. This is business. You guys can't have your cake and eat it too. you're all over contributors like me for respecting and trusting iStock, you berate your fellow colleagues regularly, make false and libelous accusations....and now you're heralding acts of conscience. I don't know how your consciences allow most of you to speak to one another the way you do in here.
the loud minority does not represent a massive swath of serious contributors who wouldn't even bother to wade in here.
Wow! Tell us how you really feel. Does that mean I'm not getting a Christmas card this year?
3093
« on: September 14, 2010, 20:53 »
hawk_eye, why do you criticize so much people who are not accepting losing so much of their IS earnings? You might say it's too early for a drastic decision, but giving up a partnership that is not working well makes total sense, even if you lose money.
I have to tend to agree. If you think a deal isn't fair, it makes sense to cut your losses and get out. Some of it may be emotional, but when have you ever not gotten emotional over being ripped off.
3094
« on: September 14, 2010, 17:44 »
I applaud your boldness. I'm sure it was a tough decision.
3095
« on: September 14, 2010, 13:10 »
3096
« on: September 13, 2010, 11:24 »
All we have to do is stop uploading. all of us. Just for a week perhaps, like a strike! continue downloading, fine. It will stop Gettys business in its tracks. yet not adversely affect us or take any effort.
We Just need to pick a date and inform everyone. How? Anyone?
That's what I've started with is to stop uploading. I figured I'd evaluate in December whether I wanted to take the big plunge of pulling my files. I'm still hoping for a reprieve, but I'm definitely not holding my breath for one.
3097
« on: September 12, 2010, 23:30 »
I figured that it was photos only, but I thought it was worth mentioning the rest of us stockers too. So should there be a reverse money chart too that shows how much iStock loses each time someone from each level closes their account?
3098
« on: September 12, 2010, 22:58 »
Although there are far more independents than exclusives, it's clear that exclusives stand to lose more from this than independents. Assuming the poll data is valid, it might be possible to make a broad statement: While 50% of independents will lose up to $1350 per year in this deal, 40% of independents will be minimally affected by it, losing less than $100. Nearly 50% of exclusives will lose up to $4000, almost 3 times the amount of independents in a similar income bracket. How's that for spin?
Interesting figures, although your numbers seem a little light on the top end. My losses are pushing the upper end of your $1350. Because I'm a vector artist, I could double my sales and lose about $2400 and still not make the next tier at 75K credits.
3099
« on: September 12, 2010, 19:35 »
I appreciate your motivation and your action but unfortunately there is an obvious flaw. By removing your images does not necessarily mean that Istock will lose the revenue __ the buyer will simply chose a different image to fulfill their needs. Istock still gets their money but the commission you would have earned goes to another contributor. It's the buyers themselves we need to move away from Istock.
I don't know. If I had a project laid out with thumbnails I was going to buy and got approval from the client to purchase everything, I'd be ticked if all or some of the images disappeared. I might check one of the other agencies or Tineye to see if I could find them somewhere else instead of picking something new for approval.
3100
« on: September 12, 2010, 10:56 »
I'd guess at most 10% of contributors will leave, the new thread already has a lot
I wonder about this because the majority of contributors are small contributors. They have a lot less to lose by pulling out, and most of them were insulted the most with a 25% cut in their earnings. A mass exodus of small contributors could really deal a major blow.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
