Why would anyone want to submit material to Istock ?

Now is the time to move buyers to our better paying sites. A 25% cut and 15% base is not good enough, so heres what everybody should do:

1: Stop linking to Istock from your website, your blog, and from forum threads. This will help better paying agencies move up in Google rank, thus getting in more buyers.

2: Stop buying images at IS, try everyone else before going there. Why put money in to venture bankers pockets, when you can put money in to artists pockets.

3: Tell everyone in your network to please do the same as the above. And tell them to tell their network too.

4: Tell everyone around you, that buying at IS, is just putting money in to bankers pockets, and tell everone you know that they exploit artists by paying them as litte as 15%.

5: Do the storytelling on your website, on your blok, on twitter, in magacines etc. all over the world.

Following the above will quickly lead to a massive raise in sales in the better paying agencies, god for all independent artist - bad for greedy bankers.

Now GO and ACT![/color]

I predict IS will take a massive hit in google rank in the future....

Newer mind - some, especially exclusives will suck it up, and continue to slave in the sweatshop....

Some will make the smart move and leave to other and more green pastures.

In 2 years time IS no longer leads in micro.

Now - it shure was interesting to follow - back to keywording and oploding to my proper paying sites...

Istockers - Woooo Huuuu - what a deal you got!

Quote from: LostOne on September 11, 2010, 09:02
This almost reads like a fairy tale. Unfortunately for Kelly I'm too old for fairy tales.

PS: I'm wondering if he would be interested in all of our personal stories. How we have bills to pay, kids to feed,... I guess he doesn't have much of those problems as a CEO.

Mr. Kelly is only interested in one thing: His bonus for 2010 and 2011. In february he was given the task to grow IS profits with 50%. He could not do that, so he steals the money out of the contributers pockets.

The money goes towards either: A big deficit from other Getty branches, or
fattening up the balance for bringing Getty up for sale, so the venture capitalist bankers kan net a billion or tw o in profits.

EWither way - You pay...

""We know money are not going to make You happy"   (only us)

I don't know what kind of drug they poured in to Mr. Kelly. Amazing stupidity. They need money, but don't think contributer do in the mist of the worst crisis in 50 years.....

I mean - MAN! It's so stupid I can hardly belive it...

They don't realised that it is the contributers paying them, and not them paying the contributers....

I'm fortunate to have vitnesed this live - it will pass over in history as one of the greatest mistakes in businnes. And the biggest i the stock industry.

Whats really bevildering, is that those guys don't understand, that it is not them paying the contributers, but it is the coutributers that are paying them.

It so so so so stupid, that I in my 35 years in sales and marketing advisory life have never ever seen anything like it.

It like at piece of comedy at the theater - or should I say tragedy?

""""But money isn't going to be what makes you all happy. You want to know that this is still the best place to be, to hang out, and sell your work. You may not be convinced today like you were last week, but it's our job to make sure you feel that way again soon."""

Ha ha ha ha ha ah...... Goood to get f*ed

They don't think the contributers need money to run their businesses!

Epic fail = end of Istock. Period!

I'll give them max 2 years before folding, and they are no longer no 1 in one year

This statement wil go over in history, as how to destruct your own crowdsource company - amasing to be at whitness to such folishness....
Guess the banking boy who own the place put on the thumbscrews.

Especially enjoy this piece of holy crap:

""But money isn't going to be what makes you all happy. You want to know that this is still the best place to be, to hang out, and sell your work. You may not be convinced today like you were last week, but it's our job to make sure you feel that way again soon.""

Apparently IS need money to run the businnes, but the contributers don't! In their oppinion....

Holy smoke - they just blew off both their feet with a double barrled shutgun...
Never ever seen anything like it.

Exodus - BEGIN!

Istock just blew themselves up, with all this blabber from the COO - its a real laugh:
-----------
kkthompson
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo, Flash and Illustration downloads in the past 0 months Member is an admin This user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.
Posted 19 mins ago
   
This week was my 6th anniversary here at iStock. Probably not the easiest week in iStock history to have it on.

It does feel very 'full-circle' though. I remember standing around with Bruce in 2004, agonizing over this new idea — exclusivity for our contributors. It was excruciating. It looked great on paper, but would it fly? Would they really leave competitors to come sell only at tiny little iStock? We had only ever paid out 20% royalties. Would a jump to 40% put us in the poor house? Would competitors follow suit? None of us slept for a week. Besides selling the company, it's probably one of the toughest decisions of my business life.

Part of the difficulty in that decision was who was on the other end and affected the most. You aren't just contributors, many of you had, even by then, become close friends. There aren't many businesses that can say that about their suppliers.

Of course that's what makes these last few days so hard. It's our friends calling us out in the forums, hurt and scared we've sold you out.

We know this news has taken you all by surprise, and we're sorry for the anguish it's caused. We know this is a big shift, and we expected that you would have strong feelings about what it means to each of you individually, and iStock as a whole.

Looking back at the decision about Exclusivity all those years ago, the team did a pretty miraculous job with the exclusive program. I'd hazard a guess that it's a big part of what made iStock really different from the rest. But like every decision, we didn't get everything right. We set the canister levels to what we thought would be challenging but still attainable over the long term through hard work. What we had no idea at the time was how much and how quickly the site would grow. We expected - and wanted - to pay more and more money out to contributors. But what we quickly realized was that it's one thing for the payout amount to increase over time, it's another thing for that percentage of our total cost to always increase over time. We saw it coming, but we also took the easier road. "Ehh, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it."

Tuesday was iStock's "bridge" day, and we crossed it full on.

Over the last few months we've seen this coming. These decisions have been wrestled with, thought over, adjusted, re-thought and tweaked many times over, with a very close eye on all the hard data we have accumulated over the years, and in the full light of the reaction it would bring. But this is the system we need to go forward with, and there isn't any flexibility for now.

As I've said, we will re-examine targets once the year-end numbers are in, especially if our projections prove wrong. In the meantime, we are going to have to wait and see, and we ask you to do the same, if not with understanding, then at least with patience.

We've known this was coming for a long time, but it's also a pretty good time for it to come. We're in a position where we can soften the blow a great deal, and we've tried to accomplish this as much as possible. Like this past year, we're pushing for significant growth next year. For those that do happen to fall a level, we'll push to make that up to you with more sales. For the contributors with files in Vetta or Agency, they should see a significant bump from those collections being sold on Getty Images.

In the last 6 years, easily the thing I'm most proud of is how many lives we've changed. We've opened a closed industry to tens of thousands of people who love their craft. iStock contributors are earning $1.7 million each week. That number still stupefies me (I wish I could let the 2004 me know!). We expect to bring that number up over $2 million next year.

But money isn't going to be what makes you all happy. You want to know that this is still the best place to be, to hang out, and sell your work. You may not be convinced today like you were last week, but it's our job to make sure you feel that way again soon.

Although some of you may still be struggling with the decisions communicated this week, I want you to know that I would tender my resignation at iStock before I had to do something I couldn't stand behind. The same can be said about all Executives here at iStock.

So hang in there. We are focused on getting the work done we need to do before the end of the year.
I've heard some comments that iStock has changed. And it has — we're a much larger, more successful company. But what hasn't changed is what we value as a company: the people that make iStock kick-ass everyday. The changes we announced this week will keep iStock successful for many years.

I'm also at Fotolia, and quite content about it. Not there as exclusive though. Good sales there every day

Wery well put.....

But You've got to add Alamy. Because Alamy offers you freedom to shoot and upload what you find important.

What makes Alamy unique, is that every special stuff you ever could think of is there. If you cant find it else where, it will be on Alamy. A lot of crap too, but hey - the crap also sells - again and again...

It continue to amaze me what sells at Alamy - never the ones you would thin would sell (well somtimes those too) but often the - ok I'll upload that one just in case photo - sells and sells again.

Alamy allows you to diversify - RF - RM - special interest arears - general stock etc.

On top of that - the give you one of the best deals in royalty.

To make regular monthly  payouts there, one does need a portfolio of about 2 - 3500 pics, depending of your subjects and shooting style.

That is IS management "fighting" back, with the weapons they know - press releases via well paid contacts in the press officies and newspapers.

We rule the internet invironment - they the old media.

. 
[/quote]

You and me both!!

The recent events have been an excellent illustration of why NOBODY should voluntarily go exclusive at any agency. You are simply giving the agency too much power, in the case of Istock ... WAY TOO MUCH POWER.

I hope that Istock's extraordinary greed will eventually be rewarded by a massive reduction in the power they have held over the microstock industry. That would be so much better for all of us contributors.
[/quote]

I BELIVE THIS IS THE TURNINGPOINT FOR iSTOCK.... They have finally exposed themselves as greedy thives, and the "community" are in uproar - and rightly so.
Many smaller independents and exclusive will leave, and take many buyers with them. Some buyers - the more ethetical one will leave too.
Hi ranking exclusives, and those very dependend on their IS income, og those too afraid to seen new ways will stay.
In a year or two their income will have been brought down to 20% Content will be more boring, more expensive, and buyers will migrate.
After this the exclusive deal at istock is dead - with 15% royalty newcomers will thing twice before joining, thus promote further decline.

I eagerly await IS next move in this - do they continue to shoot themselves in their feet - og do they come up with a small bone for contributers?

I think the latter - I'm allready awaiting the "whauuu Istock - tank you for listning - you rock" crowd, who dosen't realise, that they are just gonne be screwed again in say 6 months time.

Quote from: dgilder on September 10, 2010, 19:23
I had 2000+ images spread wide.  I made 30% more when I switched to being an exclusive at iStock in February.

But that was a short warmth from pissing in your own trousers

Those 30% was nice, but now they are proabably gone, and so at future rises - better you invested more time and efford i the divesification of your work

Quote from: click_click on September 10, 2010, 18:27
What has happened:

- We have ALL been lied to into our faces by iStock management.
- We have been given wrong numbers about who would maintain commission levels and who doesn't
- They plan to bring on 3rd party collections - poison to all exclusives (and another slap in the face)
- They "offer" a forth and back discussion without discussing anything.
- Hundreds of families, (even partially) relying on iStock income will suffer financial problems
- Photographers, illustrators, audio artist and videographers are treated differently (why is a photographer's credit worth more than an  illlustrator's credit?)

Feel free to add to the list.

I'm not sure if iStock management is simply so cold blooded or if they have been held a gun to their head from the investment company to "try" to make their financial goals work regardless of any possible consequences about iStock's future.

I wonder who put his/her signature under all this because any sane person would have seen this reaction coming miles away.

Just unbelievable.

I don't wonder - they are investment bankers - the owners - they are worse than lawyers - stone harded cold arsses, who only think at one thing: MONEY!

Quote from: dgilder on September 10, 2010, 17:09
 I feel very sorry for those who need iStock to put food on their tables.

As do we all, but people has to be carefull, as to whome they "go to bed with" - sometimes, you get home with somthing more than you expected in the first place...

Quote from: dgilder on September 10, 2010, 14:12
Here is something that makes me angry.  The iStockcharts folks emailed this to me this morning.

Quote

We've got 5531 exclusive contributors in our contributor charts:

base contributors          105 ( 1.9%)
bronze contributors       2417 (43.7%)
silver contributors       1647 (29.8%)
gold contributors          760 (13.7%)
diamond contributors       574 (10.4%)
blackdiamond contributors   28 ( 0.5%)

Kelly says 76% of exclusives will not take a hit.   43.7% of them won't because they are bronze.   Another 29.8% are silver, and stand a fairly good chance of hitting that low 2000 credit target.  Add in the 1.9% base contributors that are guaranteed to go up.  That is 75.4% of exclusives.

iStock is gunning for your royalties golds and exclusives, I guess we now know why the silver target was set so comparatively low.  It makes it easier for them to say that 76% of people will not see a change.

I think we can also conclude, that with the new 15- 19% for independents, they also wanted to make i clear, that those are not very welcome.

So - they aim for exclusive content, high volume shooters (new content all the time) and volume sellers.
This will further make the IS collection very streamlined micro-like boring content.
They will loose at lot af the less mainstream pictures, that made the collection interesting for some buyers who lokked for something out of the ordinary. Perhaps they replace this with the Getty content?

Quote from: Microbius on September 10, 2010, 13:09

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on September 10, 2010, 11:00

QuoteI will send my buyers to primarely Alamy

What, your Mom and Pop?

If you're such a big deal I guess it's time you started negotiating with some of the other agencies to see if they'll let you in at a canister level 

I'm allready well established with some hight prices trads on some of my work, some go to micros, most go to Alamy.
Alamy + trads renevue is 4x micro, but on far fewer DL's.

Diversify on your shooting and your outlet's - this protect your income.

I belive that IS main advantage was better marketing towards the market, and also to some extent better content.

But at some point, business or not, when factoring everything in, the time to produce, kryword, upload etc. IS was simply not profitable for me anymore with a 15% royalty in view.

Business is also about values, and my values didn't any longer fit with the "new" IS values - so I quitted - simple as that.

And many more will follow, but many will also stay behind in the sweatshop - well - that's their desition - quitting was mine.

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on September 10, 2010, 11:31

Quoteit is more a matter of principle.

The principle being lets shaft our fellow exclusive artists on Istock? Yeah, thanks a bunch mate.

Vlad - the impaler - go hunt some gosts somewhere else.

It's not our responsebility that IS exclusives made a bad business desition - it has been clear for years, that IS was going to screw you exclusives sooner or later. But most of you were brainwashed to a degree that defies description

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on September 10, 2010, 10:49

I'm seeing nothing anywhere that is not easily explained by old "ebb and flow". In fact on many sites I am doing worse than I would expect. I wouldn't expect to see anything happening at this stage though, it took months for the signs of possible buyer resistance to turn up in the sales pattern after the last price hike.

Well - that what I see, but ofcourse, it too early to judge a long term effect, but I hear a lof of others reporting the same - but we will have to wait and see the long term effect of all this.

Well - I will send my buyers to primarely Alamy, where I over the years build a big portfolio with some nice images.
Also for those wanting the typical microstock image, I'll refer to Dreamstime.

DT has for MS the best pricingstructure I belive. And also has treatet suppliers Ok during the years. I joined DT form the very start.

IS succes so far, has been founded on their abaility to get buyers to pray more at IS, so that submitters in the end got a good pay, despite tha fact that IS royalti was the lowest.

Whith the new changes, this will no longer be the case, especially when they introduce the getty collection in to IS, and screw the search engine to show those first.

In the coming months / years - you sales at IS will plummet rapidly, for that reason, and beacuse the will keep on upping prices, keep on taking more fraom the contributor, and from simple oversaturation with files. Each contributer will suffer form fewer DL's.

Sales all over my sites (FOT, DT, SS, Alamy) are going up, and up and up these past two days.

And to Lisa FX - we had a mail discution some years back about going exclusive or not, and I recommended you to take a look at the alternatives, such as Alamy, DT, SS etc. My nick on IS was Asist.

I was really glad to see when you started to diversify - it will keep you and our family on your feet, even though IS income will drop or disapear. In time IS will selfdsestruct, and we gain the loss on our other sites.

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on September 09, 2010, 22:44

Quote.  Both self-interested AND moronic

That's right, they exist hapily together, you've just shown that.

QuoteTo point out to iStock management that their actions have consequence

Look mate, you're hardly a big seller on IS. For a lot of people it's their entire source of income, start chasing buyers away and people are not happy. Duh!

In futura I not - I left the place. As in independent I'm noto responsible for YOUR business desitions. I make my own. If I chose to redirect my clients and my network to other sites, that MY desition. If you choose to stay with IS - thats YOUR desition!

Quote from: disorderly on September 09, 2010, 22:30

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on September 09, 2010, 22:20

QuoteIt's another to support the artists and vote with your feet.  Thank you!

That has got to be the most self-interested moronic comment I've read in this whole debate. Why would anyone contributing to IS want people to go elsewhere and thus damage the artists income?

To point out to iStock management that their actions have consequences?  To put every other agency on notice that we're not just sheep to be fleeced?  And that's ignoring the very human "screw with me and I'll screw with you" response to being bullied.

Well - the independnts are going to leave IS i masses. So we will naturally redirect our clients to our other sites, as we pull down our stuff from IS.
We'll also stop buying images from IS.
The independents are about 75% of IS contributers in numbers, though not in images, but we buy a lot casuse many of us also run design shops aside the photography.
All that businnes is now leaving IS as we leave IS.

For the exclusives I feel sorry- but you just made a bad business desition.

I remember advicing Lisa some years ago, not to put all her eggs in the IS bag - I bet she glad about that today?