What's truly bizarre is that they are giving themselves a pay cut, too. That's a first!

It's funny, I made this point in the relevant thread over there (which was ignored obviously).  As I was there I looked at a few ports of a few diamonds who are bleating about the wonderfullness of the exclusive content and who, without exception, have less downloads per image than even I have (who could hardly get anything accepted there up to now - dunno about in their new accept any old cr@p approach)
As a small amateur I haven't bothered with anything below top 5 but, of these, there is only one that is actually focused on the commercials of this business via their pricing, acceptance policy, contributor cut etc etc and we all know who that is.
.

That's just peachy, these guys really have the winning friends and influencing people thing down pat, don't they?  I don't suppose it occurred to them to just move P+ into the new collection while they make up their minds instead of handing out another pay cut.  My 15% of a small number sold just as well, if not better, at the higher point as they did at the lower.  The irony is that folks all would have picked their P+ on a similar basis and, given IS take the lions share of sales revenue, who is going to lose the most?

It's another variable.  It might work for those with unique or stand out work but would probably kill anyone uploading saturated subject matter.  I see several threads about dropping sales / best match issues.  Give the buyer a nice additional filter like price and it's game over because there is no shortage of choice.  Different of course on your own web site.

The other problem is that value really depends on whether anyone wants any particular image not whether it's good, bad or indifferent in itself.  I am totally useless at predicting what will sell and then it's usually not what I would consider the better ones.

Hi MSG! Just wanted to open a discussion on file pricing. I've personally never been in an agency where I could set my own prices, so I really wouldn't know how it's like. I personally like the idea of self-regulated pricing, but I can't help but feel like it's a quick way for everyone to engage in a price war where no one wins.

Thanks for participating!

Yeah, setting them yourself sounds attractive but then you wonder are you pitching it right / pricing yourself out of the market so you look around and see what others are doing, perhaps lowering them.  Then others look at you and maybe lower theirs and, in the end, everyone is worse off than with agency prices.

Quote from: heywoody on June 11, 2013, 17:48

Why do people always complain about subs on DT and nowhere else ...

Because DT introduced a system of levels, that lets your images increase in value overtime; then cuts you off at the knees with subs.   It's totally aggravating to see your Level 5 images sold at maximum size for 35 cents.

The levels system at DT is the only one that rewards image performance rather than port size.  The threshold is low, something like 25 sales, and, statistically, half of those or more would probably be subs.  I�ve got > $5 for extra small and correspondingly more for bigger sizes and these do help the bottom line.  On SS, images that have sold hundreds 0f times still earn $0.33 for a sub and �2.48 at my particular level and on FT �0.27 for subs and between �0.23 and �1.61 for a credit sale and the subs only count 25% towards the next level and nobody seems to complain about subs on these sites.

Like for like, this is a relatively good deal, especially for the small guy.  The problem with DT is the famine / feast nature of the sales but they have to be better than the bargain basement sites.

Why do people always complain about subs on DT and nowhere else when the return compares well to SS, FT, 123 and the IS PP?   Is it because the credit sales are so much better there compared to certain sites where there is hardly any difference between a sub and credit sale?

Quote from: heywoody on June 10, 2013, 17:01

Is istock the only site you have tried?  The "entrance exams" on IS and SS are easier if you have an idea about what stock sites in general are looking for so DT and FT, with no exam, are an easier starting point.

I would concentrate on getting a few good images as a starting point.  Getting in with images that aren't going to sell wouldn't be that helpful, imo.

The problem for new people (speaking in general as I don't know if the OP is such) is that there is a difference between a good picture and a good stock picture - going through the submit / reject / wait cycle on IS / SS is a slower way of learning this than seeing what gets accepted / rejected on the others. 

My sales are trending at below 2011 levels for the year, so if the year continues as it has I will earn less than I did in 2011 with a port more than twice as big and I think (hoped) twice as relevant.  However, I do think that my trending is actually overly optimistic.  I tend to think that my earnings will plummet to 2009 levels if recent sales figures are anything to go by.

I am a longtime diamond with thousands of images and I am exclusive.  I think I might be respresentative of many mid-level, 40% - earning contributors who are seeing earnings decline rapidly.  I do not compete in the business and lifestyle segments so I thought I might be somewhat immune to major changes as I have in the past - not so this time, I've been hit hard.

I don't see many alternatives in the market as I don't like the subs model at all.  If things do not change by November I will probably exit exclusivity and explore different options.  For now I have relegated shooting for Istock to my lowest priority, and luckily there is enough assignment work to survive on.

The upside is that I hope this business change at ISP will allow new (and existing) competitors to enter the market.  Someone out there must value us mid level suppliers who offer a diverse, more authentic look and serve segments that the factories can't quite make sense of.

We will see.  I am beyond throwing stones, as business is business and corporations will always look at ways to maximize profits and drive efficiencies.  I obviously do not fit their new mass-produced model.

What about stocksy?  Tickstock is right in that the only MS market place that doesn�t involve subs is IS exclusive.

I only rarely uploaded to IS because they hate the type of stuff I do but, up to the end of last year, I was getting about 3X the downloads and 5X the income per image than from SS.  Now the only site that produces less revenue per image is 123.

There may be nothing at all wrong with the images, if the subject matter is well covered even images with high sales potential may not benefit the site as the buyer will have enough choice so not to go away empty handed.  The banknote may be just cos it's a banknote even in Euro notes are legally ok.  As for what's the point, if most of your stuff is accepted and sells it's worth more than something not submitted.

.....see what happened to the handshake shot after I posted that it sold a couple times, now everyone has a picture of one....

Have to award a heart for that 

Quote from: viorel_dudau on May 29, 2013, 16:28

I'm using my real name as my username, so I think it's a good idea to know who you're talking to. Being anonymous means you take no responsibility for your words. Who can benefit from that?

I'm concerned about users with 10 or less pictures in their portfolio and 2 months of stock advising people around about stock photography.

Bollocks

Why bollocks?  The bolded piece is a factual statement and the entire point of the discussion. 

All for it - as I said before, the only reasons for no doing so are fear or dishonesty.  Really, I cant see sites pursuing anyone for stating a legitimate point of view and it definitely stem some of the abusive post from folks hiding in the grass,

@Ponke - everyone knows who you are anyway, portfolio links and all so nothing gained.

The miserables are miserable about Stocksy. Everyone else is like wow

And the rest of us, other than 'the miserables' and 'everyone else' are totally neutral.
[/quote]

That's it in a nutshell!