Similar images is not a bad idea, many agencies have it. But it needs good implementation,for instance from my perspective as a buyer I would want the similar images to be the excact same price point that I selected in the search. I did a few searches and keep seeing extremely expensive images when I then click on the similar files. This would put me off pretty fast.

And like others have said the similar images from the contributor or the series should come first and the placement of the similar files is awkward.

I like the new way you can select best match/NEW/POPULAR. Much better solution.

What I understand least is that they didn�t think about how to categorize files for editors pick or the different price points before???

I mean they had a very efficient market oriented solution where 30 000 eyeballs were looking at their portfolio and moving files around with their experience for a niche. Now this intense attention for the individual file gets replaced by a non visual robot software. I don�t get it.

Real handpicked collections are extremly valuable. Many agencies do it. Why not make the label mean something and task people to choose great content - including the best handshake and tomatoes? Start with new files and bestsellers and gradually work your way around the exclusive files. Even if it takes two years, it would be really valuable to have these labels. They could also get their inspector team to prefilter files with nominations on given subjects and then the editors just look at those prefiltered light boxes.

You would think that being able to choose the best content on the site is a huge marketing advantage over other sites. Like this it just devalues the whole collection and makes Getty look bad if the label is slapped on an image turned sideways or under exposed etc...

Overall for me the changes don�t look that market oriented, even the super cheap files are not done with sensitivity. I just don�t get it. How will they compete against SS like this?

The extreme drop in prices on the main collection will lead to an extreme loss in revenue. How many new customers do they need to attract to balance the loss of income? Do they need to double the number of customers to make up for the loss? Triple them? And by slapping a "forever" label into their marketing, the extreme difference (in credits marketing speak) is here to stay. Leaving them little choices longterm.

Overall it looks as if Getty loves to micromanage everything and hates it when contributors make their own choices. They clearly do not see them as individual entrepreneurs with webshops who are running a business.

But what do I know? Maybe this strategy is brilliant, they will recover etc...

The best news for the contributors on istock is that all these changes will hopefully be accompanied by a large investment in marketing dollars (to attract all those new customers).

I mean, this would be logical wouldn�t it? They are not just going to rely on the cheaper credit price and keep pushing Thinkstock over istock, will they?

I am half Arabic and have spent considerable time in the Middle East. There is no question that women are severly disadvantaged, also legally. However, most of these countries aren�t democracies anyway so people cannot really enact "their own" laws. They live under either family or some "upper class" dictatorships. Men are also discriminated, or even persecuted, if they belong to the wrong "group" wether you are just poor or from the wrong village...most of these countries have corruption everywhere including the legal system. Want to get away with murder? Just be the son of the ruling elite and you are untouchable...

But over the last 40 years I have also seen drastic improvements in the way everyone is being treated, not just women. We may not see it in our media, but there is a growing Middle Class, more and more people can read and write, in some countries now the majority is literate.

They still have a long, long way to go, but the people I know are extremly hard working and many are fighting more politically as well. But if you are following the news in Egypt, you see how incredibly hard the nation building process is.

And when it comes to laws - how many western countries accept gay people as full legal citizens? Can they marry, adopt children and raise their families in peace? Obviously most people are comfortable with gay people having normal legal rights, but there is an amazing number of people who think they are some kind of human underclass and are very vocal about it.

In time the attitude will change and gay people will have equality. But the fight is far from over.

Arabic and many other countries (india?) in the world are still in the stage where women have to fight for their rights, the way women did here 100 years ago. But they will get them.

I think all we can do is encourage those who are fighting for freedom and also to point out,complain and shame publicly whenever we see injustice. But this should include our own backyards. 

Editor's pick could have been a great marketing tool to promote outstanding content. But if it is not hand picked and just slapped on their wholly owned content and the select few they favor it has no value at all for the customer.

Another case of just not thinking it through. It is like they are trying to create the "illusion" of well selected content without putting in the work necessary to really look at the files themselves.

This sounds interesting. Unlike the Google drive deal we will get a normal license fee, even if it is a tiny subscription royalty. Much better than getting 12 dollars and then having files transferred to 400 million people...

It is very easy to change those numbers and put them right.

That they don�t want to do it, either really means they just don�t care about the accuracy on their website or they are delaying it deliberately to see how many people will go exclusive when these are the visible terms. Getty only pays 20% to their own house contributors. I am sure they are not happy about payouts that might reach 45%. If the standard is lower, they can still offer individual contracts with higher rates for those they deem worthy.

Or...they want to change the system completely and adjust royalties up...but even then, it would be simple to update the page and show the correct rate until they have figured out what they want to do.

Anything to do with money should be as accurate as possible. Everyone understands that if the rates are wrong on the website, people will wonder if the accounting in general is correct.

If Istock had given me even a small indication that the company will get back on track, I would still be photo exclusive. Going indie isn't an easy decision and having to work your way back up is absolutely no fun.

But since they took away the option to decide the price point in the portfolio, I know I made the right choice. E+ was one of the best programs istock had. Killing it tells me everything I need to know about what is coming...

As an indie I have many options to choose the price point for my files, I just send them to the appropriate agencies.

To be in control of prices is just as important as to decide what goes into your portfolio. Computer programs and editors can never replace my commercial experience in my given niche.

tickstock, as you know, I used to work closely with many people in the istock community. And if you want to see monthly sales threads that give a very positive impression of success and overall well being of the company, why don't you go back two or three years and look at the threads there. The sales threads happening now are unbelievably depressing.And the reports from the network grid are even worse and the majority of community interaction is no longer taking place on the istock forums. You don't seem to be using them yourself...

istock is a shadow of what it used to be, wether it is growth, money, trust, business vision etc...

Which is a great shame, they made it really easy for SS and other competitors.

Maybe Yuri can help them, but it doesn't sound like he is going to work with them in any business development position.

But he is very intelligent, so maybe they can pick his brain for fresh ideas in their struggle to stop the loss of market share and good people giving up exclusivity.

There is a lot istock can do to move away from the icebergs. But so far the changes this year don't look very promising. Unfortunately. I really would prefer to see them turn things round. I believe that balance in the market is best for the contributors, irrespective wether you are exclusive or indie.

What would worry me is that the RC targets for photos are still listed as maximum 30%. I know they said it was a bug in the facebookgroup. But it is really simple thing to change if they wanted to. What if they are trying to lock in new exclusives to these rates?

I mean, those who go exclusive now, have signed on with these rates visible, don't they? And then next year make these the targets for everyone....

I know it doesn't affect me, but it is a concern I keep hearing.

The new prices are so low, they must be losing a lot of money. And with the floodgates opened for low quality content, why pay out more than 30% on the base contract? They can always offer a higher rate on individual contracts if they really want your work.

Well, I am reading that the average revenue per download is 2.33 Usd, obviously a mix of low subscription and higher single image downloads.

The average return people are reporting here is between 0,6 to just under a dollar, so the 30% sound plausible to me.

56 Million revenue a quarter, 21 million as cost of revenue. Somewhere in the cost of revenue for the quarter must be the royalties, because all the other expenses are listed individually (marketing, sales, It)

At least that is the way I would read this.

Would be nice if they published a weekly index on their front page: This week paid out to contributors 1.x Million Dollars etc...

From istock the last data we had was from Kelly Thompson in 2008. I wonder how much they pay out now.

Big drop in earnings from istock, nearly 40% less than in June although volume of sales was up by 15%.

All the new agencies together (including video) brought in 92 Dollars, most of the money came from SS and stocksy, then Fotolia, Deposit,Dreamstime.

The month started well, but then the summer slowdown hit me everywhere. My 7 day rank, which had gone up to 3200 on Fotolia has dropped down to 6240.

I still only have 200-500 images on the new agencies and will continue to upload slowly.

No video sales on Pond5 and only 1 video sale overall.

I have friends who are designers/work in marketing. When they buy one of my files, they let me know. So far all sales have always been recorded. I think today it is very easy to verify if sales are being recorded correctly. In the old days the payments was often months after the order was placed, so I can imagine there was a lot more opportunity for error on all sides. These days the computer does the instant accounting in real time.

Not saying it doesn�t happen, but if it does, it will affect thousands of people who can share this info with each other. Just look at the recent problems with PP sales on istock. The community could easily identify the days were royalties were missing and the istock IT people can then rerun their scripts.

That is sad to hear, I've heard other things from several people. And Fotolia has a lot of very typical German content that is hard to find at the other agencies.

I'll have to try it myself, but I agree that the policy of expecting files to sell at least 3 times in 6 months sounds like they are now focussing on the ultrageneric stuff that has a superfast turnover.

Anyway, I still just have 350 files with them, so le'l's see how things go in a few months.

But there is a market for niche images that can justify prices above subscription and are not available everywhere. Otherwise all agencies are the same and they really can only fight on price.

Otherwise, I've been reading on the forums, that people are not happy with the quality of the search results. Some say, the contributors are to blame, too many spammy keywords. But the contributors upload the same keywords everywhere, don't they?

I do keyword manually in German for Fotolia, but I am not usng other keywords than I would in English.