Very solid, better than April. If that goes on, maybe it will be better than May 2010.

I just have made a calculation of my last 300 dl's.

Regular files  x files sold for every 100 files available as regular exclusive.

E+: 1.82x for every 100 E+ files available.

That said, E+ files usually are better files (in my collection) than regular ones.

Vetta and Agency files have considerable higher results, but maybe that's distorted by the fact that I don't have so many files in this collections compared with my portfolio size.

Although I'm not a fan of subscription sales --the demise of microstock--, including Thinkstock, the fact is that I'm seeing a lot of Thinkstock stuff at magazines that used to have other ms sites, especially Shutterstock.

I fully understand your feelings. I'll miss your posts. Good luck.

I'm guessing that loop is an exclusive over at istock. He sounds like one of the group that are on a mission to come here and try to disspell the notion that buyers are leaving istock; to convince us all that all is well in istockland; and that all exclusives over at istock are making a TON of money, because istock is taking care of them. istockholm syndrome.  

Yes, I'm exclusive... I understand that if I'm not talking against Istock, I'm here on a mission. Should I pass my time bashing istock several days a week, I would be a free soul making use of my freedom on speech. I fear this is how things seem to go here now.

Quote from: loop on April 23, 2011, 10:39

If Istock had stuck to mostly just screwing contributors this thread wouldn't be up to 1107 posts

.. almost all of them written not by buyers, but for independent contributors who upload to other sites and that feell angry because istock structure of comissions to non-exclusives.

Well, that's a little true, but the thread was started to report when buyers were fed up with istock and posted their complaints on the istock forum. The posts were then copied and pasted here, because, well, it's easier to read them here, all in one place. And this thread contains a ton of those. And the thing is, since a lot of folks post anonymously, it's sometimes difficult to tell if a poster is a contributor, a buyer, or both. The difference here on this forum is that their opinion, no matter who they are or in what capacity they are interested in microstock, they are welcome.

I'm just saying that there can be 5 or 10 or even 20 buyers posts quoted.... but that's a long shot from a thousand posts. A handful os buyers posts is anecdotal, a thousand would be serious.
And I may be wrong, but I don't think we have many buyers posting here, anonismously or not. Note that some contributors have posted scores of times in this discussion.

I look at the prices at the grocery store. It's no wok at all, just a glance.

That said, istockphoto has enough different prices to make the customer aware of them. It is not that they have a "normal" price and a "Vetta" price. They have non-exclusive, regular exclusive, exclusive plus, Vetta and Agency. I think that being 5 different prices the customer should be almost instantly aware that there are differences.

Obvious and typical scam.

Quote from: sjlocke on April 09, 2011, 06:59

Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 01:07

Agree, if I was a design company on the receiving end of this call, not knowing the alternatives out there and the way IStock was treating contributors, I would be thankful for the info.

If I was running a design house, busy doing my work, and some random person called me to "inform me" of his opinions about how I should run my business, I'd hang up.  Who asked you for your opinion?

And if I want to think you're a jerk for trying to damage my primary source of income, I think I'm allowed to feel that way.

I wouldn't even have replied, but I'm glad you did. I've already said what I think about contributors like this attempting to destroy business at iStock. it's not worth repeating in this ridiculous thread which includes serial posts from two people who have nothing to do with iStock except that they've made a career out of being haters.

And note that at least one of them  was already a hater about four or five years ago, way before  thinkstock, changes in royalties and new macrostock agency contributors. That really makes me wonder.

(And the other, for not contributing nor buying at istock spents looooooots of time there, always the first to notice and report here anything, big or tiny, that happens --More food for thought)

Well, it seems we have a boycott on track, with all that's needed; its leaders, its followers, its "official board", its telephonic evangelists  etc.

It's not that I'm fearing that this kind of boycott can work. Always never happens. But I'm surprised by one one the most recurrent arugments: "let's show to our customers where they can get files cheaper". That's to say: "files are to expensive in stock", "send the customers to the places where they will be fastly get used (and spoiled) to get files for 0.30 c". Where our work is less valued. Let's make of all them subscription buyers. That will make impossible a raise in prices, and more probable cuts in comissions. In two or three years, number of files will double and I really doubt it will be possible to stand in this business selling files at 0.30.
If IS has done something good, it has been reedeming the "nothing" microprices from 2000 to more resonable microprices, affordable to both big firms and new MS customers. They can get a big size, even at IS, for one tenth of what they had to pay ten years back. Even a Vetta is three times cheaper.  
And comissions for independants ... they are not so different, if you consider subs (it seems that is where more customers go, according to posts of many independants in thios very forums). Ther's always the question: what matters more? Your cut or what you really get for your sale?
At the end, you are asking for a business where the designer gets money, the printer gets momeny, the creative gets money... and the 0.30 paid for the photographer it isn't worth to be written in the budget.

As obvious, I was talking of my own experiencie. If you bother to read the post, you will see that I wasn't talking of "other agencies". Don't put words in my mouth.
Thanks.

I'm in a similar situation. I'm a one-man shop and I started out using photos from SXC. After I received a digital camera (Fujifilm Finepix 2800Zoom) for a birthday gift, I thought that it would be nice if I gave a little bit back, so I started uploading to SXC.

I was so excited to find that people found my images useful! What a great feeling! And then someone said in the forums that they were getting PAID for their photos on a website called Dreamstime.

That was my first experience with microstock. Soon after Dreamstime, I found iStock. I purchases images from both sites in the beginning, but now I only buy from Dreamstime or Bigstock.

Their prices are reasonable and I can find what I'm looking for quickly. Those are the 2 most important things to me as a designer.

Most of my clients are happy with cell-phone snapshots, so image quality isn't a problem for them. They just want me to stay on budget.

Not very wise customers, if they are unable of understanding the importance on an image in an ad. The ones with I work exige always the best image possible, within a range of microstock reasonable prices.  And the image, even if Vetta, is always the cheapest item of the budget.

Not BME, just for the year, but no far. Had my BDE during March, beating even 100 x 100 royalties-days  from the past. Changes with best match poduce peaks and lows. Exc Diamond.