MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Sites that no longer exist => StockXpert.com => Topic started by: gostwyck on October 12, 2009, 16:07
-
Just tried a couple of searches on Photos.com Plus, to see how the search-order was working, and when I clicked on one of my own images ... this message popped up in bright red type;
Alert: This image will not be available to download or license after November 2.
Looks like the party might be over fairly soon after all. Oh well.
-
I just posted in the IS forums asking for an update. If customers are being told something, seems only right contributors should be kept updated too...
-
Exploring a bit further on PCP it's actually quite difficult to find images that don't have that message (apart from the really dated wholly-owned stuff with everyone in brown suits, etc). Their customers must be delighted seeing that everwhere, especially if they've only recently renewed their subscription!
-
*,
Most sales from StockXpert are coming from photos.com or Jupiterimages.
So buy buy StockXpert
-
,
Most sales from StockXpert are coming from photos.com or Jupiterimages.
So buy buy StockXpert
Most sales maybe but not most of the money. JIU/PC together are only about one third of my StockXpert revenue. Shame to lose it though.
-
,
Most sales from StockXpert are coming from photos.com or Jupiterimages.
So buy buy StockXpert
It was buy buy StockXpert now it's by-by StockXpert.
-
,
Most sales from StockXpert are coming from photos.com or Jupiterimages.
So buy buy StockXpert
It was buy buy StockXpert now it's by-by StockXpert.
It was more like buy this company just what SS did with BS...
before it is bye bye StockXpert
(sorry for my bad English)
-
Thanks for the update Gostwyck. I don't do sample searches there, so I probably would not have known until the sales just dried up.
I still don't see how this could possibly be a sound business decision on their part to remove, what 80-90% of the content from their sub sites?
From reading the Jonathan Klein statements posted by Sean on Istock it sounds like Getty has big plans for their subscription sites, but where will they get the content?
With the poor deal being offered to independents through istock and with the dislike of many exclusives to low sub prices and to having their brand diluted, how is Getty going to stock their sub sites???
-
Just tried a couple of searches on Photos.com Plus, to see how the search-order was working, and when I clicked on one of my own images ... this message popped up in bright red type;
Alert: This image will not be available to download or license after November 2.
Looks like the party might be over fairly soon after all. Oh well.
Photos.com says this:
Next month, the ultimate subscription will get even better: We’re adding a new content source and will be adding fresh content daily. Expect over 1 million new images by the end of November.
While the current page says over 350,000 images. Maybe it's not all bad news? Where do you guess they will be getting 1 million new images to replace the over 350,000 images they now offer? IS isn't going to move best sellers from the profitable area into cheap downloads. Possibly from another partnership with a different site?
Considering that most of the Micro sites offer basically all the same images, it's like moving your money from one pocket to another. Nothing changes except where it comes from when you spend it. ;D
Maybe for StockXpert it will mean attracting more customers there for better sales, not the 30c subs.
Why is everyone so negative all the time?
If they close StockXpert and mail me a final payment, that's fine. Same as LO and SV. How many people here are still feeling negative economic effects from SV or LO closing down? Do you really, really miss those two? :D
-
I'm not following this very well. Really never have??? What does the red-letter message have to do with StockXpert?
Maybe I'm seeing it from a different point of view. I opted out of JIU/Photos.com. Do the red letters mean that anyone wanting the "red-letter" images will have to buy them from StockXpert????
-
While the current page says over 350,000 images. Maybe it's not all bad news? Where do you guess they will be getting 1 million new images to replace the over 350,000 images they now offer? IS isn't going to move best sellers from the profitable area into cheap downloads. Possibly from another partnership with a different site?
I awesomely hope that you are right. I don't want to start selling extended licence for 0.30 on Istock. I'm opted out of that rip off, it was a mistake. Nothing more to add about photos.com "deal"
-
I would like to see something positive in this and I really hope you are right, RacePhoto.
StockXpert has always had steady sales for me and I would like that some replacement is found for that volume.
-
Just tried a couple of searches on Photos.com Plus, to see how the search-order was working, and when I clicked on one of my own images ... this message popped up in bright red type;
Alert: This image will not be available to download or license after November 2.
Looks like the party might be over fairly soon after all. Oh well.
Why is everyone so negative all the time?
Past experiences?
The concern is that the agencies are looking for some short term boosts in income but that for contributors this may come at the expense of long term income growth.
-
I would like to see something positive in this and I really hope you are right, RacePhoto.
StockXpert has always had steady sales for me and I would like that some replacement is found for that volume.
Not right or wrong and I don't have a guess at what will happen. I'm just seeing people going "woe is me" StockXpert is dying. The party's over. The sky is falling... ;D
I wanted to point out that maybe there will be something positive at StockXpert and it's not the end. Photos.com will have to get that 1 million photos from somewhere else. I don't know what Jupiter will do?
But if StockXpert shuts down and pays me, I won't complain. The sales are inconsequential and almost 100% of mine are 30c subs. People who opted out of that program shouldn't be missing much either. For me this all may be good news.
-
Just tried a couple of searches on Photos.com Plus, to see how the search-order was working, and when I clicked on one of my own images ... this message popped up in bright red type;
Alert: This image will not be available to download or license after November 2.
Looks like the party might be over fairly soon after all. Oh well.
Photos.com says this:
Next month, the ultimate subscription will get even better: We’re adding a new content source and will be adding fresh content daily. Expect over 1 million new images by the end of November.
While the current page says over 350,000 images. Maybe it's not all bad news? Where do you guess they will be getting 1 million new images to replace the over 350,000 images they now offer? IS isn't going to move best sellers from the profitable area into cheap downloads. Possibly from another partnership with a different site?
Considering that most of the Micro sites offer basically all the same images, it's like moving your money from one pocket to another. Nothing changes except where it comes from when you spend it. ;D
Maybe for StockXpert it will mean attracting more customers there for better sales, not the 30c subs.
Why is everyone so negative all the time?
If they close StockXpert and mail me a final payment, that's fine. Same as LO and SV. How many people here are still feeling negative economic effects from SV or LO closing down? Do you really, really miss those two? :D
Actually on Photos.com it says "Search over 2 million images". Maybe for new customers they limited the access to only 350,000.
I actually do not believe that the one million will come through other sources than from iS. There was a newsletter a long time ago which stated that istock already has a few hundered thousand images opted in for that plan. It was a pretty high number not so far away from that 1 million.
Oh and StockXpert is a far better earner than LO and SV combined.
-
If they close StockXpert and mail me a final payment, that's fine. Same as LO and SV. How many people here are still feeling negative economic effects from SV or LO closing down? Do you really, really miss those two? :D
I made a very high five-digits amount with StockXpert in only a few years with nearly zero work because I had the pictures with IPTC already and uploading was supereasy (I never felt the need to categorize), I also liked the fair percentage etc. I will miss them very much.
I also missing LO liked the style of the site and made a decent amount of money (four-digits) in the short time they existed.
-
It is my prediction that the only change to StockXpert as a contributor is that the majority of their sales will be on demand sales. If StockXpert's database becomes more different then what's available on Istock's then this may be a possitive change for us contributors.
-
It is my prediction that the only change to StockXpert as a contributor is that the majority of their sales will be on demand sales. If StockXpert's database becomes more different then what's available on Istock's then this may be a possitive change for us contributors.
I hope you are right.
-
It is my prediction that the only change to StockXpert as a contributor is that the majority of their sales will be on demand sales. If StockXpert's database becomes more different then what's available on Istock's then this may be a possitive change for us contributors.
OD sales are 0 right now. Do you mean "positive" zero???
-
StockXpert is redundant in the Getty scheme of things. If they decide to dump the non-exclusives to IS then thats different, but they have their subs in photos.com powered by old IS files, and they have their premium stock at IS, so I'm not sure where StockXpert fits.
Probably good to say the goodbyes now
-
StockXpert is redundant in the Getty scheme of things. If they decide to dump the non-exclusives to IS then thats different, but they have their subs in photos.com powered by old IS files, and they have their premium stock at IS, so I'm not sure where StockXpert fits.
Probably good to say the goodbyes now
I hope you are wrong. There are a few of us who do not upload to IS. Our only link is a portfolio at StockXpert. I hope our images are good enough to sell. Drop StockXpert and those images are no longer available to Getty.
I'm curious as how the relationship between JIU and StockXpert works???
-
I think they will fill photoscom with rejected photos from exclusives. In their contract is that they can do with rejected photos what they want so they peace of pie will bee 100% and for authors 0%. Maybe thats the reason why exclusives cant sell their rejected images on other sites. From iStock POW the 20% commission is extremely ultra turbo noble fair in that case.
;D
If it will not bee like that I dont see how they will do that. They are unable to fix their simple upload application half year, how they handlee more complex thing then???
I feel like I was there ;D
Apple-Get A Mac-Pie Chart (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsvJefWOUYE#normal)
-
StockXpert is redundant in the Getty scheme of things. If they decide to dump the non-exclusives to IS then thats different, but they have their subs in photos.com powered by old IS files, and they have their premium stock at IS, so I'm not sure where StockXpert fits.
Probably good to say the goodbyes now
I wonder if photos.com customers will be satisfied with old istock files? I don't think they are going to like the change, lots of great portfolios will be replaced by old images, how can that be good? Hopefully they will discover shutterstock or perhaps they will just use StockXpert subs?
-
I wonder if photos.com customers will be satisfied with old istock files? I don't think they are going to like the change, lots of great portfolios will be replaced by old images, how can that be good? Hopefully they will discover shutterstock or perhaps they will just use StockXpert subs?
True enough. To be honest I don't really understand why anyone would subscribe to Photos.com unless they were completely unaware of the mainstream micro's. Once those 3M StockXpert files disappear they'll be even less incentive.
-
It's a Walmart of stock photography. All these people care is low price. Photos rejected from IS might just good enough for them.
-
StockXpert is redundant in the Getty scheme of things. If they decide to dump the non-exclusives to IS then thats different, but they have their subs in photos.com powered by old IS files, and they have their premium stock at IS, so I'm not sure where StockXpert fits.
Probably good to say the goodbyes now
Sorry for being a Negative Nelly, but I think Ichiro is right here.
Vast majority of sales in recent months on StockXpert are from the JIU/Photos.com sites. Grapevine has it that Getty has pulled resources (staff, advertising, etc.) from StockXpert already. No real reason to keep them going if they aren't going to be feeding those sites.
And FWIW the reason this concerns me is because StockXpert (and it's partnerships) bring in 6% of my income, which for me is a significant loss.
-
Sorry for being a Negative Nelly, but I think Ichiro is right here.
Vast majority of sales in recent months on StockXpert are from the JIU/Photos.com sites. Grapevine has it that Getty has pulled resources (staff, advertising, etc.) from StockXpert already. No real reason to keep them going if they aren't going to be feeding those sites.
And FWIW the reason this concerns me is because StockXpert (and it's partnerships) bring in 6% of my income, which for me is a significant loss.
Yeah, I did away with the JIU/Photos .com subscriptions months ago. The end result was my sales plummeting by about seventy percent or so. So unless something changes, many of you will probably experience a drop in earnings. Hopefully, if iStockphoto does shut them down, they will redistribute our money into our iStockphoto accounts. Or just send us payments of whatever is in our Stockxpert accounts at the time of closing.
-
I think the photos.com part is important because it will include exclusive material older than 18 months. No one has really noticed, but the IS subs don't work very well. And I think that photos.com will be important because I do think that compared to everywhere else, IS does have a better search so I think they may be using the same type of engine over at photos.com.
Regardless, StockXpert was just part of the package, so they needed to take it and since they did, they killed off a competitor. This is a great long term thing for the industry. Consolidation is great and the buyers will have to go somewhere, so its not like they will disappear. In the end, it will mean higher prices charged, and hopefully, bigger commissions. When you have too many players, they compete on price. IS is allowed to get away with their prices because they have selected content not available anywhere else. The only thing that sucks is that people who submitted essentially are losing the time they spent in submitting. Nonetheless, the buyers will still be there.
-
But, like the Gap has Old Navy, if Istock is the Gap wouldn't it make sense for them to groom an Old Navy site that has a library that can compete with Dreamstime, Shutterstock and Fotolia?
Istock is certainly in a league of their own and their prices are beginning to migrate up. Yes, they have exclusive content and impeccable standards, but they don't have the same content as their competitors: the artists who snubbed 20% commission, or those who didn't pass the entrance exam, and of course all those rejected files that are good enough to sell well for the other sites.
-
But, like the Gap has Old Navy, if Istock is the Gap wouldn't it make sense for them to groom an Old Navy site that has a library that can compete with Dreamstime, Shutterstock and Fotolia?
Istock is certainly in a league of their own and their prices are beginning to migrate up. Yes, they have exclusive content and impeccable standards, but they don't have the same content as their competitors: the artists who snubbed 20% commission, or those who didn't pass the entrance exam, and of course all those rejected files that are good enough to sell well for the other sites.
Photos.com is Old Navy. Just like Toyota is to Lexus. Cars may be a bad example, just because you can't buy a subscription on a car. iStock has the same content as most other sites minus the odd ones here and there that refuse to submit or don't for various reasons, but the attractive draw is that you can get the best of the exclusive world and the regular world. Add that you have subs too, and you are covering your bases. StockXpert would then be a duplicate - a bad idea for business - just like GM - too much duplication. Smart, streamlined model that makes sense business-wise for them. Costs are cut, buyers go to one place, and the charts show an increase in traffic.
My opinion, I'm not Jon Klein but I'm just trying to put together the clues.
-
In the end, it will mean higher prices charged, and hopefully, bigger commissions. When you have too many players, they compete on price. IS is allowed to get away with their prices because they have selected content not available anywhere else. The only thing that sucks is that people who submitted essentially are losing the time they spent in submitting. Nonetheless, the buyers will still be there.
The buyers may still be there, but I won't be.
StockXpert's sub commission of $0.30 was already too low; IS wants to replace that with a commission that's nearly 20% below. I'm not signing up.
It hurts, though, since StockXpert ranged from 8%-13% of my monthly income. That's going to be a big cut, since about 75% or so of sales were via JIU and photos.com. :(
-
Actually on Photos.com it says "Search over 2 million images". Maybe for new customers they limited the access to only 350,000.
I actually do not believe that the one million will come through other sources than from iS. There was a newsletter a long time ago which stated that istock already has a few hundered thousand images opted in for that plan. It was a pretty high number not so far away from that 1 million.
Oh and StockXpert is a far better earner than LO and SV combined.
True, they say 350,000 available for subscription and over 2 million, it's kind of odd, isn't it?
StockXpert says millions and claims 50,000 new uploads a month. That would be 2,6000,000 new photos a year. New photos this month shows 37,000 unless they only show the last three weeks?
While some people complain about subs, all subs, especially JUI/PDot at 30c each, now that we are losing the affiliate, many are saying they will be hurt by losing those same subs?
What's to say that the customers won't move to StockXpert and other agencies, or that the lose of JUI/Pdot won't be beneficial to income from StockXpert?
If Getty shuts down one of the top six outlets, where are they going to make up those sales and that income? I don't think this is as simple as, losing some cheap subs and then just pulling the plug on StockXpert. If StockXpert is 6-8% of the stock sellers income, it stands to reason that it's going to be at least that much of IS style/Getty income. Would they throw away that much income without having some plan to compensate for the situation.
Find out if the sky is falling, in three weeks. ;D
-
What was the relationship between photos.com and StockXpert in terms of content and how they fit together with jui? A quick recap of the story so far and going forward would be great.
-
It is my prediction that the only change to StockXpert as a contributor is that the majority of their sales will be on demand sales. If StockXpert's database becomes more different then what's available on Istock's then this may be a possitive change for us contributors.
OD sales are 0 right now. Do you mean "positive" zero???
I still get some! Lately they've equaled aprox. 50% of my income at StockXpert. It only takes a handfull of the OD sales to accomplish this!
-
Of my total imcome there Jupiter and photos.com make between them less than 20% of my earnings the rest all comes from StockXpert and mostly from credit sales.
I would lose about 4% of my total income from all sites if they closed the whole lot down which while it would hurt me it wouldn't be too disastrous especially if some of the buyers moved to some of the other sites that I upload to which I guess would happen. I'm positive that they won't all automatically move over to Istock.
-
^^^ More or less the same here. JIU/PC sales represent about 2% of my total stock revenue so hopefully I won't starve to death when they go. If their customers were prepared to pay Istock's prices then they'd already be doing so. If they miss the 3M-odd images that they are about to lose (including over 20K of Yuri's for example) then they can always stump up for a subscription at SS, DT or FT.
JIU/PC subscriptions appear to be priced to attract the bottom of the market, not the sort of accounts we should be chasing IMHO. The site facilities are very poor in comparison to most micros too. For example, because they don't name the artist, it makes it impossible to search for more images in a particular series. There's only one search-order option too, you can't search by age, popularity, downloads, etc. The search-order also promotes their own wholly-owned content above all else too, most of which are horribly dated and rubbish by today's standards, presumably so that they don't have to pay any commissions. If you try a search on 'business team' for example then you've got to jump to page 25 before you get to see the modern quality stuff. It'll be interesting to see if they do anything about the fact that all IS files' keywords are CV'd but, at least at the moment, JIU/PC do not have such a system in place.
I still can't understand why any IS exclusive or independent contributor would support this plan. At best they're likely to increase their income by about 1% (because it is only their non-selling rubbish going there) whilst allowing JIU/PC to promote themselves with the IS name __ basically turkeys voting for Christmas.
-
...Just like Toyota is to Lexus...
...StockXpert would then be a duplicate - a bad idea for business - just like GM - too much duplication...
If StockXpert is just a dupe, then by that example wouldn't Toyota go away since Lexus offers the better product?
The thing that has me doubting the demise of StockXpert any time soon is the sheer volume of sales there that I see. And not JIU or Photos.com. My StockXpert PPDs and subs combined earn me more per month than SS. Even when the JIU and Photos.com sales go away, StockXpert will probably still be my 2nd highest earner. Maybe I'm the weirdo and my numbers aren't typical, but from where I'm standing, Getty has a nice thing going with StockXpert and I don't know why they would shut it down. There's no guarantee that StockXpert buyers will just go over to istock if StockXpert ceases to do business. Getty has those buyers right now. Closing StockXpert means they run the risk of losing some of those buyers who go to non-Getty owned sites. Why take the chance?
-
^^^ More or less the same here. JIU/PC sales represent about 2% of my total stock revenue so hopefully I won't starve to death when they go. If their customers were prepared to pay Istock's prices then they'd already be doing so. If they miss the 3M-odd images that they are about to lose (including over 20K of Yuri's for example) then they can always stump up for a subscription at SS, DT or FT.
JIU/PC subscriptions appear to be priced to attract the bottom of the market, not the sort of accounts we should be chasing IMHO. The site facilities are very poor in comparison to most micros too. For example, because they don't name the artist, it makes it impossible to search for more images in a particular series. There's only one search-order option too, you can't search by age, popularity, downloads, etc. The search-order also promotes their own wholly-owned content above all else too, most of which are horribly dated and rubbish by today's standards, presumably so that they don't have to pay any commissions. If you try a search on 'business team' for example then you've got to jump to page 25 before you get to see the modern quality stuff. It'll be interesting to see if they do anything about the fact that all IS files' keywords are CV'd but, at least at the moment, JIU/PC do not have such a system in place.
I still can't understand why any IS exclusive or independent contributor would support this plan. At best they're likely to increase their income by about 1% (because it is only their non-selling rubbish going there) whilst allowing JIU/PC to promote themselves with the IS name __ basically turkeys voting for Christmas.
Thank you for the added perspective.
I don't care about Jupiter because they are bottom feeders? I could have started at that point and avoided reasons why losing them shouldn't matter that much? ;D
Here's the list of their image sources. Seems that the one they list as "New" is StockXpert, which will soon be gone.
Brand X Pictures
Comstock Images
BananaStock
Creatas Images
Thinkstock Images
Polka Dot Images
Goodshoot
Pixland
Essential Collections
Photos.com
AbleStock.com
liquidlibrary
PhotoObjects.net
Stockxpert
I really think some people are jumping way ahead with what they think will be happening vs what will actually happen. (doom and gloom, earnings loss and the demise of StockXpert) Back to the usual, please wait and see.
-
It obviously is a dilemma for Getty, iStock, JIU, etc. Was the original shutdown date in August??? They are still going strong for those who did not opt out of subs.
Maybe I should reconsider? :-\
-
I still can't understand why any IS exclusive or independent contributor would support this plan. At best they're likely to increase their income by about 1% (because it is only their non-selling rubbish going there) whilst allowing JIU/PC to promote themselves with the IS name __ basically turkeys voting for Christmas.
Neither can I, but then I opted out.
I think there's some notion that it's incremental revenue that won't have any impact on the IS revenue - IOW only upside potential. I think that's false - (a) that there's much income to be had from this (b) that it will have no effect on IS revenue. The other argument I heard was that (paraphrasing massively) we're all headed down the toilet with these bargain basement subscriptions, but grabbing as much cash as fast as you can is the best way to deal with this gloomy situation.
I think you were too kind in describing the Jupiter wholly owned content as rubbish by today's standards - I guess the fact that StockXpert contributors have been making anything from Jupiter subs at all (given their terrible search results position) is a testament to how much buyers don't want the old dated dreck.
I wish IS would fix the dollar bin (two prices; 1 credit for Large and smaller, 2 credits for XL and up) and promote their own subscriptions (which have lower, but still reasonable commissions) instead of pursuing moving content to the other sites.
-
StockXpert on its own is bigger than BigStock and shutterstock just spent money buying them. It makes no sense closing StockXpert down, as they must have at least a million images that aren't on the istock site and they must be making a decent profit. Would istock alone be bigger than a combined SS/BigStock? Can they risk losing their No. 1 status?
Perhaps StockXpert will be closed anyway but I am sure a lot of the buyers would move to sites other than istock because they want access to the full portfolio of the best non-exclusives.
-
I think most, if not all, of the 'sources' are actually stock agencies that they bought out years ago __ that why so many of the images look dated.
StockXpert are still proudly claiming '46,504 images added this week' and that takes a lot of money to achieve __ probably half a dozen full-time employees going balls-out reviewing images.
Reviewing images is a significant cost and is an investment that will hopefully be recovered sometime in the future. If Getty had already decided that they were going to close StockXpert down there would be no point in continuing to make that investment. I suspect StockXpert is being run very lean, to make it as profitable as possible, and little or nothing will be spent on marketing.Our first warning of any impending change might be if they stop accepting new submissions.
-
Of my total imcome there Jupiter and photos.com make between them less than 20% of my earnings the rest all comes from StockXpert and mostly from credit sales.
I would lose about 4% of my total income from all sites if they closed the whole lot down which while it would hurt me it wouldn't be too disastrous especially if some of the buyers moved to some of the other sites that I upload to which I guess would happen. I'm positive that they won't all automatically move over to Istock.
Getty may come in with a strong subscription product which goes head to head against SS.
I believe that subs and credit sales are two basically different, only slightly overlapping, markets.
-
Getty may come in with a strong subscription product which goes head to head against SS.
Yes __ Klein has already stated so. Have a read of our honourable friend Sean's thread at IS;
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=127691&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=127691&page=1)
Unfortunately for us all Getty's chosen vehicle for subscriptions is JIU/PC.
-
Perhaps StockXpert will be closed anyway but I am sure a lot of the buyers would move to sites other than istock because they want access to the full portfolio of the best non-exclusives.
Have you talked to many buyers ? The few customer I have met do not say things like that. It would not occur to them.
-
...traditional creative stills continues to decline, and even if we see a bump in revenue here after the recession, we must expect that the trends will continue for it to be a smaller part of our overall business. Klein
-
StockXpert on its own is bigger than BigStock and shutterstock just spent money buying them. It makes no sense closing StockXpert down, as they must have at least a million images that aren't on the istock site and they must be making a decent profit. Would istock alone be bigger than a combined SS/BigStock? Can they risk losing their No. 1 status?
Perhaps StockXpert will be closed anyway but I am sure a lot of the buyers would move to sites other than istock because they want access to the full portfolio of the best non-exclusives.
Unofficial estimates put IS at over 50% of the market by itself - which I would be interested to see verified
-
Unofficial estimates put IS at over 50% of the market by itself - which I would be interested to see verified
IS has about 50% of the market in terms of revenue however they are probably only about 30% in volume of licenses sold.
BigStock is probably less than 10% the turnover of SS and even together they'd be less than half the size of IS.
I reckon FT is coming up on the rails really fast though and are seriously pushing SS for 2nd place.
-
It hurts, though, since StockXpert ranged from 8%-13% of my monthly income. That's going to be a big cut, since about 75% or so of sales were via JIU and photos.com. :(
StockXpert typically accounts for around 13% of my monthly earnings, so it would mean a big cut for me as well :'(
-
So today's the big day. Supposedly they are already in the process of removing the StockXpert content from Photos.com.
Personally, I have had sales on both Photos and JIU today, and from what I can see doing searches for my images, they appear to be there still as of 8:37pm EST.
Tomorrow (Tuesday 11/3) I am assuming all those images will be gone. I plan to do searches when I wake up.
Will be interesting to see if they finally follow through on their plan, and to watch the fallout. Still having a hard time believing they will actually implement this.
On a more positive note, I had an exceptionally high number of credit sales on StockXpert today :)
-
Thanks for the reminder, Lisa. Maybe it explains my situation.
Today I had no sales at StockXpert whatsoever, plus they rejected all my pending files for "thanks but we are not interested". Normally I would have sales everyday including weekends. So is bad thing happening?
So today's the big day. Supposedly they are already in the process of removing the StockXpert content from Photos.com.
Personally, I have had sales on both Photos and JIU today, and from what I can see doing searches for my images, they appear to be there still as of 8:37pm EST.
Tomorrow (Tuesday 11/3) I am assuming all those images will be gone. I plan to do searches when I wake up.
Will be interesting to see if they finally follow through on their plan, and to watch the fallout. Still having a hard time believing they will actually implement this.
On a more positive note, I had an exceptionally high number of credit sales on StockXpert today :)
-
10pm Central, can't get StockXpert to load and have no photos on Photos.com (still on JI though).
-
10pm Central, can't get StockXpert to load and have no photos on Photos.com (still on JI though).
Darn, and I just uploaded ten new photos this morning, which were approved less than 12 hours later. Sure sign that the end is near? :D
-
my photos were still on photos.com just then
-
Mine are still there too. Of course it is possible that images might still apppear on searches but, if you had a subscription, the download itself might be blocked.
-
I have downloads from Photos.com today.
-
I've just had 4 in a row from Jupiter and a couple from Photos.com
-
I've just had 4 in a row from Jupiter and a couple from Photos.com
Don't forget there's a lag in reporting sales from JIU/PC. They are reported through the next day all at the same time just after 4am. We have to wait until tomorrow to see if we get any sales today.
-
I had sales from both photos.com and JIU yesterday, but when I clicked on one of my files on photos.com there is a line in red saying:
"Alert: This image will not be available to download or license after November 2. "
That seems clear enough to me...
-
Mine are still selling on photos.com, perhaps it is November 2 2010 :)
-
I've just had 4 in a row from Jupiter and a couple from Photos.com
Don't forget there's a lag in reporting sales from JIU/PC. They are reported through the next day all at the same time just after 4am. We have to wait until tomorrow to see if we get any sales today.
I have had quite a few sales on both sites today. I guess you are right and we will have to wait until tomorrow to know for sure what's happening.
FWIW my images are still showing on Photos.com and appear to be available for download in spite of the note saying they won't be as of yesterday... :-\
-
I've had StockXpert sales yesterday and today but no photos.com or jupiter sales since mid Oct. I also notice that my files are not getting inspected as quickly as they were. I still have a batch from last week that I uploaded that are still sitting there. In the past, they were reviewed in a day or two. Hmmm...
-
I stopped uploading to StockXpert 5 months ago and I have opted out from photos.com last month. Since then I had my best month this year only from StockXpert credit sales.
I thought that StockXpert was a dead agency until I opted out of subs. It seem there is still buyers that have load of credits in their wallet, but just like better taking all images available at sub prices.
-
I upload two images a day to StockXpert, and typically they were always reviewed within a day or two. For the past few weeks, those two dialy uploads accumulated until I had 24 awaiting review. They were finally all reviewed (approved!) yesterday morning, so they're definitely still reviewing and approving, if much slower than usual.
As for Photos.com and JUI, I've continued to see sales there everyday, with no sign of a slowdown. Many showed up in my account breakdown today, but like others are saying, the true test will be what shows up tomorrow.
-
apparently they postponed the removal for 10 days. now it reads:
Alert: This image will not be available to download or license after November 12.
-
^^^ Wow __ that's happened in just the last few hours!
-
I upload two images a day to StockXpert, and typically they were always reviewed within a day or two. For the past few weeks, those two dialy uploads accumulated until I had 24 awaiting review. They were finally all reviewed (approved!) yesterday morning, so they're definitely still reviewing and approving, if much slower than usual.
As for Photos.com and JUI, I've continued to see sales there everyday, with no sign of a slowdown. Many showed up in my account breakdown today, but like others are saying, the true test will be what shows up tomorrow.
Must have been lucky that I hit "review day" :)
My attitude about the whole thing is, I'm tired of watching how the "sky is falling" in messages, since June, when they announced, maybe 90 days. For those counting it's been over 150 days of gloom and doom, and "my downloads stopped yesterday". ::) With all the predictions, someone is bound to be right about the future. We've had five months to make wild guesses or intelligent assumptions.
What I'm really waiting for is something to actually change at StockXpert. If it's good, then fine, if negative, well that's life. Tired of, something is going to happen soon and how it's going to be bad. At this point I just want it over with. :D
-
apparently they postponed the removal for 10 days. now it reads:
Alert: This image will not be available to download or license after November 12.
I think Racephoto is on to something. This is starting to sound like the Boy Who Cried Wolf. They keep threatening but no action.
I would love to be a fly on the wall at Getty/Photos.com when they are discussing this. Or more likely fielding calls from irate subscription holders who will be leaving the site once the good content is gone ;)
-
A link to the leaked internal memo from Jonathan Klein has been posted earlier in this thread. I find the following part especially interesting:
"Jupiterimages Unlimited brings a very good base from which to start, but we will create an entirely new subscription business that builds upon it. This new subscription product will be a major initiative, with significant marketing support. It also represents a major collaboration between Getty Images and iStockphoto. "
Looks like we don't need to puzzle anymore about how Getty will feed the subscription beast. The only remaining question is: Will Getty come up with a fair deal or at least keep the opt-out option for contributors? Or will all contributors be forced into a rip-off deal?
-
A link to the leaked internal memo from Jonathan Klein has been posted earlier in this thread. I find the following part especially interesting:
"Jupiterimages Unlimited brings a very good base from which to start, but we will create an entirely new subscription business that builds upon it. This new subscription product will be a major initiative, with significant marketing support. It also represents a major collaboration between Getty Images and iStockphoto. "
Looks like we don't need to puzzle anymore about how Getty will feed the subscription beast. The only remaining question is: Will Getty come up with a fair deal or at least keep the opt-out option for contributors? Or will all contributors be forced into a rip-off deal?
I think the current outlines are very good. Automatically inserted into the sub program if you have a file 18 months or older and no downloads, and anything less than 18 months will not be allowed in and you can choose the 18 month and older items with downloads to go or stay
The way it seems to be unfolding (minus the slow rollout) looks very strategic and very well intended
-
Looks like we don't need to puzzle anymore about how Getty will feed the subscription beast. The only remaining question is: Will Getty come up with a fair deal or at least keep the opt-out option for contributors? Or will all contributors be forced into a rip-off deal?
If you have followed the threads on istock about this, you will know that this is ground that has already been well covered. Many istock exclusives were not at all enthusiastic about selling cheap subs and staged a revolt when istock tried to force them into Photos.com. The resulting compromise was, as Ichiro correctly points out, only exclusive content 18 mos. and older is eligible.
Independents can opt in all their content through istock, but since they are lowballing us by only offering .25 instead of the .30 we got through StockXpert, I don't know a single independent who is opting in.
Bottom line is they are losing millions of top quality images through StockXpert and haven't managed to come up with a way to replace those via istock.
Which explains why the date keeps getting pushed back...
-
If you have followed the threads on istock about this, you will know that this is ground that has already been well covered.
So what is your interpretation of the Klein quote? Just one more executive with his head in the clouds?
Don't forget: Subscriptions are much more profitable for agencies than single sales. Getty will try every dirty trick to bring as much contributors as possible into this model.
-
Which explains why the date keeps getting pushed back...
Has it been officially been pushed back again? I was expecting zeroes for my JIU-Photos.com sales on StockXpert post-Nov.3 but instead I have had two of my best days ever. I can't find anything recent about this on the StockXpert or IS forums.
-
Which explains why the date keeps getting pushed back...
Has it been officially been pushed back again?
If you check your images on photos.com they now say they will be deactivated on the 12th.
-
What they are trying to do by deactivating all StockXpert images from photos.com, I don't get it ? Now they add the worst of Istock images to photos.com. This make no sense I think...
-
If you have followed the threads on istock about this, you will know that this is ground that has already been well covered. Many istock exclusives were not at all enthusiastic about selling cheap subs and staged a revolt when istock tried to force them into Photos.com. The resulting compromise was, as Ichiro correctly points out, only exclusive content 18 mos. and older is eligible.
Independents can opt in all their content through istock, but since they are lowballing us by only offering .25 instead of the .30 we got through StockXpert, I don't know a single independent who is opting in.
Bottom line is they are losing millions of top quality images through StockXpert and haven't managed to come up with a way to replace those via istock.
Which explains why the date keeps getting pushed back...
Actually, exclusives CAN opt in content less than 18 months old, but it can only go to either the partner program (photos.com) or to iStock, not both.
I doubt any would do that though. Certainly I haven't.
-
Actually, exclusives CAN opt in content less than 18 months old, but it can only go to either the partner program (photos.com) or to iStock, not both.
I doubt any would do that though. Certainly I haven't.
Ah. This is news. Thanks for the clarification Gannet :)
FWIW I think you are in good company. Can't imagine why any exclusive would opt an image in to cheap subs INSTEAD of adding to the istock collection. Unless the inspection standards are way lower - then maybe you could send the stuff you are sure istock would reject...?
-
I opted out of this partner program and intend to stay that way unless something changes materially.
One thing that would make me think differently is if they allowed different standards for content for the partner site - not to put too fine a point on it, my chessier raster illustrations and composites that used to sell very nicely thank you on SS when I was an independent. IS won't accept those (and that's fine) but that sort of "cheap and cheerful" stuff works well for the all-you-can-eat (as long as it's not more than 25 a day) subs deals.
If they'd then fix the dollar bin so it was two prices 1 credit for Large and below, 2 credits for XL up for the main collection content that hasn't sold, I think they'd have a reasonable spread of prices.
The problem is that they want the good stuff (main collection) for too low a commission (worse for indepdents, but it was still pretty icky for exclusives even after the improvements).
I think the best course is to hold off letting them have the content cheap (i.e stay opted out). There is perhaps a slim chance that they'll get desperate and remove the opt out, but they'd have to be really desperate as there'd be peasants with large pitchforks if they did (IMO).
The weak spot is long time exclusives who have bought the total crock that this will be incremental revenue and can't wait to opt in lots of stuff. Not sure what to do about that though as just about everything got said in those massive threads that appeared back when this whole nasty business started.
-
If you have followed the threads on istock about this, you will know that this is ground that has already been well covered.
So what is your interpretation of the Klein quote? Just one more executive with his head in the clouds?
Don't forget: Subscriptions are much more profitable for agencies than single sales. Getty will try every dirty trick to bring as much contributors as possible into this model.
Getty made mistake with buying istock if subs was main goal... They should talked to Jon from Shutterstock about that ;-) Now it will be very interesting race to watch: How Istock can compete with SS-BigStock business model where weekly over 100.000 new images are added. If Getty close Stockxpert they will have very great disadvantage. Some of Istock policies will have to be abandoned to have this race running for Getty.
Since quantity is preferable to have when selling subs, begining next year Shutterstock will have over 10.000.000 images... What about Istock?
Added:
Regarding to logic here I don't see any logic about closing Stockxpert as well I see a big mistake in pulling-out StockXpert images from Photos.com and JIU.
-
One word "Flickr"!
-
Actually, exclusives CAN opt in content less than 18 months old, but it can only go to either the partner program (photos.com) or to iStock, not both.
I doubt any would do that though. Certainly I haven't.
Although I don't like the idea much I have a personal compromise.
I have opted in new files, but only the 'seconds' of a series, e.g. those which are still up to iStock's inspection but which are weaker compositionally than the ones I sent to iStock. And all sized down to a max of large, mostly sized down to medium. So they're not getting my firsts or larger files for the price, but I'll maybe pick up some sales (as they say, better than sitting on my hard disc). Embarrasingly, when I put about a dozen of such up in late August, expecting them to go straight into Photos.com/JU, they went into my iStock port when the partner program was held up. (I'd have thought they'd have gone into a limbo until then.) Two of them have sold over what I considered the better shots!
I asked at least three times what the difference between photos.com and JupiterUL was going to be, but got no answer.
-
At last count Getty had over 88 million images. That's a LOT of images, and it doesn't take much thought to work out how Getty is going to seed the subscription sites. With perhaps a million images from iStock and several million more from Getty, Photos.com and JUI can quickly become a major force to be reckoned with.
Imagine when the marketing gets going - 'ten million images from Getty and iStock all available at reasonable subscription rates'. That's a very powerful message and will cause the entire design community to take notice.
It might cause some customer loss at Getty and iStock, but on the other hand the opportunity to gain thousands of new subscription customers is clearly compelling. The sheer volume potential should easily compensate iStock exclusives for the business risk.
-
I remember reading some photogs were suing Getty for selling their images as subs. Does anyone know the outcome of the lawsuit?
My sales were very good last month at StockXpert. But this month, StockXpert is doing poorly. Even 123rf performing better for the first week of November.
http://www.m-restaurantgroup.com/mbund/home.html (http://www.m-restaurantgroup.com/mbund/home.html)
At last count Getty had over 88 million images. That's a LOT of images, and it doesn't take much thought to work out how Getty is going to seed the subscription sites. With perhaps a million images from iStock and several million more from Getty, Photos.com and JUI can quickly become a major force to be reckoned with.
Imagine when the marketing gets going - 'ten million images from Getty and iStock all available at reasonable subscription rates'. That's a very powerful message and will cause the entire design community to take notice.
It might cause some customer loss at Getty and iStock, but on the other hand the opportunity to gain thousands of new subscription customers is clearly compelling. The sheer volume potential should easily compensate iStock exclusives for the business risk.
-
If you have followed the threads on istock about this, you will know that this is ground that has already been well covered.
So what is your interpretation of the Klein quote? Just one more executive with his head in the clouds?
Don't forget: Subscriptions are much more profitable for agencies than single sales. Getty will try every dirty trick to bring as much contributors as possible into this model.
Getty made mistake with buying istock if subs was main goal... They should talked to Jon from Shutterstock about that ;-) Now it will be very interesting race to watch: How Istock can compete with SS-BigStock business model where weekly over 100.000 new images are added. If Getty close Stockxpert they will have very great disadvantage. Some of Istock policies will have to be abandoned to have this race running for Getty.
Since quantity is preferable to have when selling subs, begining next year Shutterstock will have over 10.000.000 images... What about Istock?
Added:
Regarding to logic here I don't see any logic about closing Stockxpert as well I see a big mistake in pulling-out StockXpert images from Photos.com and JIU.
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Its not all about subs - its about offering a variety of premium products and competitive products to grab the biggest customer base. Getty will be the biggest house, and acquiring BigStock for SS was just something to do. BigStock doesn't have anything that SS doesn't have, or very little. And the quality at SS on average is no where near the same at IS, but this is an old argument that will never end.
To 2010!
-
If you have followed the threads on istock about this, you will know that this is ground that has already been well covered.
So what is your interpretation of the Klein quote? Just one more executive with his head in the clouds?
Don't forget: Subscriptions are much more profitable for agencies than single sales. Getty will try every dirty trick to bring as much contributors as possible into this model.
Getty made mistake with buying istock if subs was main goal... They should talked to Jon from Shutterstock about that ;-) Now it will be very interesting race to watch: How Istock can compete with SS-BigStock business model where weekly over 100.000 new images are added. If Getty close Stockxpert they will have very great disadvantage. Some of Istock policies will have to be abandoned to have this race running for Getty.
Since quantity is preferable to have when selling subs, begining next year Shutterstock will have over 10.000.000 images... What about Istock?
Added:
Regarding to logic here I don't see any logic about closing Stockxpert as well I see a big mistake in pulling-out StockXpert images from Photos.com and JIU.
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Its not all about subs - its about offering a variety of premium products and competitive products to grab the biggest customer base. Getty will be the biggest house, and acquiring BigStock for SS was just something to do. BigStock doesn't have anything that SS doesn't have, or very little. And the quality at SS on average is no where near the same at IS, but this is an old argument that will never end.
To 2010!
I'm going exclusive at IS soon so maybe I'm biased but they do have great material and a great site but they pay a very low %. I'm surprised that most of the other sites don't offer exclusive deals that are better than IS, I know FT does but they keep screwing contributors same goes for DT but where is a company that is willing to invest in giving the best deal to the contributor. I think if SS offered a good exclusivity deal they would get a lot of people on board and push up the overall quality. Most of the other sites including StockXpert seem to be the ones that get all the images not exclusive to IS and therefore have relatively little to offer that's different than the rest, there needs to be more of a shake up in order to change this.
-
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Its not all about subs - its about offering a variety of premium products and competitive products to grab the biggest customer base. ...
There is nothing even remotely premium about JIU/Photos.com+. The content from StockXpert tarted up a very close to moribund site. And why would any sane independent contributor offer premium images in XXXL size for a 25 cent commission? Flogging bargain subscriptions with wholly owned content is one thing. Trying to do that and pay photographers is something different.
Didn't someone post earlier about this being akin to asking turkeys to vote for Thanksgiving? Why would we do that? Any gain is going to be very short term, IMO, if we were to start the long slide down to ever cheaper commissions for the previously "premium" work.
-
Same, I am going exclusive with Istock next month. I have a vaumit taste when I see my XXL images sold for 30 cents. About the big customer base buying subscriptions... I am not interested to sell to them.
-
Added:
Regarding to logic here I don't see any logic about closing Stockxpert as well I see a big mistake in pulling-out StockXpert images from Photos.com and JIU.
They are closing StockXpert I didn't see that announcement, where did you read it.
-
If you have followed the threads on istock about this, you will know that this is ground that has already been well covered.
So what is your interpretation of the Klein quote? Just one more executive with his head in the clouds?
Don't forget: Subscriptions are much more profitable for agencies than single sales. Getty will try every dirty trick to bring as much contributors as possible into this model.
Getty made mistake with buying istock if subs was main goal... They should talked to Jon from Shutterstock about that ;-) Now it will be very interesting race to watch: How Istock can compete with SS-BigStock business model where weekly over 100.000 new images are added. If Getty close Stockxpert they will have very great disadvantage. Some of Istock policies will have to be abandoned to have this race running for Getty.
Since quantity is preferable to have when selling subs, begining next year Shutterstock will have over 10.000.000 images... What about Istock?
Added:
Regarding to logic here I don't see any logic about closing Stockxpert as well I see a big mistake in pulling-out StockXpert images from Photos.com and JIU.
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Its not all about subs - its about offering a variety of premium products and competitive products to grab the biggest customer base. Getty will be the biggest house, and acquiring BigStock for SS was just something to do. BigStock doesn't have anything that SS doesn't have, or very little. And the quality at SS on average is no where near the same at IS, but this is an old argument that will never end.
To 2010!
I'm going exclusive at IS soon so maybe I'm biased but they do have great material and a great site but they pay a very low %. I'm surprised that most of the other sites don't offer exclusive deals that are better than IS, I know FT does but they keep screwing contributors same goes for DT but where is a company that is willing to invest in giving the best deal to the contributor. I think if SS offered a good exclusivity deal they would get a lot of people on board and push up the overall quality. Most of the other sites including StockXpert seem to be the ones that get all the images not exclusive to IS and therefore have relatively little to offer that's different than the rest, there needs to be more of a shake up in order to change this.
I've looked at SS library vs Istock library... Material is completely different in mass. But, if you look more closer what sells it comes to similar images... So, that is why I said that Istock will need to change some policies... If they continue to rise their noses they will hit something because they don't look at where they are going...
For example: SS sells simple images mostly as well as istock. But, regarding official statements of istock they are 'full' of simple stuff... I don't believe it is true!
I saw here that some people got rejected their Rasterized illustrations and scout overturning inspectors decision. It is good to see that, but there sure are so many stuff which is very good and rejected imho...
At last, there are designers and 'designers'. Real designer really don't need any stock image at all - they can do it all by themselves. But, since there are many 'designers' who are positioned as designers and they don't know how to draw they buy images. Regarding their knowledge and what is sold here and there I am sure that huge percentage of designers don't know to draw or they don't have time to do so. It comes so far that they buy the most simple images what almost anyone can shoot or draw.
It is interesting to see this on microstock... I didn't used to see so many snapshots and basic illustrations sold... Well... It might be because I am stock 'dinosaur'...
-
Added:
Regarding to logic here I don't see any logic about closing Stockxpert as well I see a big mistake in pulling-out StockXpert images from Photos.com and JIU.
They are closing StockXpert I didn't see that announcement, where did you read it.
I've read it here and there... Mostly as speculations - not as anything official...
-
FWIW I think you are in good company. Can't imagine why any exclusive would opt an image in to cheap subs INSTEAD of adding to the istock collection. Unless the inspection standards are way lower - then maybe you could send the stuff you are sure istock would reject...?
The inspection standards are to be the same as for iStock. I and others asked in the hugely long forums earlier in the year.
-
The inspection standards are to be the same as for iStock. I and others asked in the hugely long forums earlier in the year.
Thanks for the clarification Sue. That must have slipped by me. :)
In that case I don't see any reason at all for an exclusive to opt in new content. But who knows - there are some folks who will do whatever TPTB tell them without question...
-
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? Its not all about subs - its about offering a variety of premium products and competitive products to grab the biggest customer base. ...
There is nothing even remotely premium about JIU/Photos.com+. The content from StockXpert tarted up a very close to moribund site. And why would any sane independent contributor offer premium images in XXXL size for a 25 cent commission? Flogging bargain subscriptions with wholly owned content is one thing. Trying to do that and pay photographers is something different.
Didn't someone post earlier about this being akin to asking turkeys to vote for Thanksgiving? Why would we do that? Any gain is going to be very short term, IMO, if we were to start the long slide down to ever cheaper commissions for the previously "premium" work.
You need to read more carefully. I said premium and competitive. The competitive comes from subs/photo.com. Make no mistake, there is a clear product distinction and Getty is working very well at making sure they don't eat themselves out of business through overlapping product offerings. There is also a clear distinction of whats available at photos.com - its been discussed already.
That way Getty is a one-stop shop. They cover all the bases, and if one offering isn't good, you can always purchase from another - aka if you don't find what you need in subs or you need something special and rare, you can go to RM, or if you want something much newer, you can go to IS - or if you want something exclusive and not available anywhere else.
For anyone to imply that IS needs to be more like SS doesn't get it. SS is now the one that wants to be like IS. And if anyone has a concept of how to run an image company, I think I will put my faith in Jonathan Klein over anyone else. Period.
-
I don't see any reason at all for an exclusive to opt in new content. But who knows - there are some folks who will do whatever TPTB tell them without question...
Some pictures will probably make more money on subscription. I can think of my many weaker images which would seldom sell ŕ la carte but would inevitably pick up volume on an all you can eat menu. Ultimately I can imagine subscription as the natural home for much of the bread and butter stuff. Stuff which is useful but not great.
As I noted on another thread the amount paid will match Shutterstock for anyone who lives in a jurisdiction which does not have a double taxation agreement with the US - and close for many people even in jurisdictions which do.
I predict that the Getty sub site will quickly be huge. So the subscription site potentially offers IS photographers a good opportunity. It will be a big launch so I can see them wanting to get it right.
-
Some pictures will probably make more money on subscription. I can think of my many weaker images which would seldom sell ŕ la carte but would inevitably pick up volume on an all you can eat menu. Ultimately I can imagine subscription as the natural home for much of the bread and butter stuff. Stuff which is useful but not great.
As I noted on another thread the amount paid will match Shutterstock for anyone who lives in a jurisdiction which does not have a double taxation agreement with the US - and close for many people even in jurisdictions which do.
I predict that the Getty sub site will quickly be huge. So the subscription site potentially offers IS photographers a good opportunity. It will be a big launch so I can see them wanting to get it right.
You make some excellent points, but reading your comment and Ichiro's one would conclude that these Getty sub sites are a new thing. Fact is they have been up and operating for years, and for the past year and a half have already had millions of top quality micro images from nearly every independent in the business.
There are not likely to be any great changes or big surprises in this big "launch". The only change is that they are getting rid of the best 2 million plus images currently on the site and are scrambling to replace them. So far I haven't read anything that makes it clear how they are going to successfully replace all that content.
Selling subs may be a completely new thing for many istock exclusives, but it is certainly not a new thing within the Getty product line, and it is old hat in the stock industry. The wheel is not being reinvented here.
-
Not sure if this was mentioned, but isn't the simple solution to leave StockXpert content on the partner sites and just open up the partner sites to istock exclusives.
-
Some pictures will probably make more money on subscription. I can think of my many weaker images which would seldom sell ŕ la carte but would inevitably pick up volume on an all you can eat menu. Ultimately I can imagine subscription as the natural home for much of the bread and butter stuff. Stuff which is useful but not great.
As I noted on another thread the amount paid will match Shutterstock for anyone who lives in a jurisdiction which does not have a double taxation agreement with the US - and close for many people even in jurisdictions which do.
I predict that the Getty sub site will quickly be huge. So the subscription site potentially offers IS photographers a good opportunity. It will be a big launch so I can see them wanting to get it right.
You make some excellent points, but reading your comment and Ichiro's one would conclude that these Getty sub sites are a new thing. Fact is they have been up and operating for years, and for the past year and a half have already had millions of top quality micro images from nearly every independent in the business.
There are not likely to be any great changes or big surprises in this big "launch". The only change is that they are getting rid of the best 2 million plus images currently on the site and are scrambling to replace them. So far I haven't read anything that makes it clear how they are going to successfully replace all that content.
Selling subs may be a completely new thing for many istock exclusives, but it is certainly not a new thing within the Getty product line, and it is old hat in the stock industry. The wheel is not being reinvented here.
The wheel isn't being reinvented, but changing how its attached to the rest of the car is changing a bit.
-
I just posted in the IS forums asking for an update. If customers are being told something, seems only right contributors should be kept updated too...
You might like to think so! :o
-
Will effectively be a new product and likely to be well marketed. See how Getty already uses life.com to cross promote its other brands including IS. Microstockers who want to sell subscription pictures will want to be part of it.
-
I just posted in the IS forums asking for an update. If customers are being told something, seems only right contributors should be kept updated too...
You might like to think so! :o
Aha, so the news is now 'out'.
Nov 12th is launch day.
-
I just posted in the IS forums asking for an update. If customers are being told something, seems only right contributors should be kept updated too...
You might like to think so! :o
Aha, so the news is now 'out'.
Nov 12th is launch day.
Brief time line, announced May 22nd, going live Nov. 12th. Just one more instance where people need to be more patient and wait for the system to work out the kinks before they open it up live to the public. This goes for all sites.
On November 12 the first images from the Partner Program will become available at Photos.com. The team has been hard at work in the time since the initial opt-in, transferring files over between the two systems. There is still a ways to go but we are nearly completed and have decided to make available what is currently transferred. Most files that were opted in before August 20 will show up on Photos.com on the 12th, ready to be downloaded. We hope to have the rest of the files available soon afterwards, so if you don't see some of your opted-in files, please be patient.
If they announce something is changing, then we get rumors and gloom for months. People come up with all kinds of background plots. If they don't tell us, then we see complaints that the agency is making changes behind our back. No win situation. ;D
I still wonder what will happen to StockXpert, which was the original subject of the thread, I believe?
-
StockXpert is sticking to its plan, so we will see . . . .
Nov 9, 2009 2:59 PM | posted by seb_p
On June 15 we announced that we would be phasing out Stockxpert.com content from Photos.com and JIUnlimited. We know there has been a long wait for further details and we appreciate your patience.
On November 12, Stockxpert content will be removed from Photos.com. We are still working on the timelines for JIU and will announce that information at a later date. For the complete details please refer to the original announcement here.
It is still possible to have your images available at both Photos.com and JIU through iStockphoto. If you are already an iStockphoto contributor and have opted-in to their Partner Program, your images will become available at Photos.com on November 12. If you are not yet a contributor to iStockphoto, we would encourage you to apply. It is a great opportunity for you to increase your earnings and visibility, while engaging in one of the world’s largest and most dynamic creative communities. iStockphoto provides a wealth of information and ideas for you to grow from.
To learn more about contributing to iStockphoto, go to: http://www.istockphoto.com/sell-stock-ph (http://www.istockphoto.com/sell-stock-ph) ..
Once again, we want to thank you for your continued support, and we will continue to provide you with updates as they become available.
-
StockXpert is sticking to its plan, so we will see . . . .
Nov 9, 2009 2:59 PM | posted by seb_p
It is still possible to have your images available at both Photos.com and JIU through iStockphoto. If you are already an iStockphoto contributor and have opted-in to their Partner Program, your images will become available at Photos.com on November 12.
You will incur a more than 15% cut in an already industry-leading low commission rate, but perhaps you will make it up in volume.
That's strange, the blue sentence seems to have been inadvertently forgotten. ;D
-
StockXpert is sticking to its plan, so we will see . . . .
Nov 9, 2009 2:59 PM | posted by seb_p
It is still possible to have your images available at both Photos.com and JIU through iStockphoto. If you are already an iStockphoto contributor and have opted-in to their Partner Program, your images will become available at Photos.com on November 12.
You will incur a more than 15% cut in an already industry-leading low commission rate, but perhaps you will make it up in volume.
That's strange, the blue sentence seems to have been inadvertently forgotten. ;D
They also omitted,
Note that even if you already are a non-exclusive iStock contributor, your best selling StockXpert images will still not be available on Photos.com and JIU due to the fact that iStock rejected those images because they are not stock.
:'(
-
[/color]You will incur a more than 15% cut in an already industry-leading low commission rate, but perhaps you will make it up in volume.
That's strange, the blue sentence seems to have been inadvertently forgotten. ;D
LOL!!
I thought there were some things you just can't polish. Maybe the old cliche is wrong? ;D
-
On November 12, Stockxpert content will be removed from Photos.com. We are still working on the timelines for JIU and will announce that information at a later date.
This is indeed very bad news. This month (Nov 2009) the majority of my DLs on StockXpert was from photos.com and JUI. I won't compensate thru iStock since I opted out of the subs deal. There are limits in the price of subs: I'd rather sell nothing than give anything for a lowered commission.
For the complete details please refer to the original announcement here. iStockphoto provides a wealth of information and ideas for you to grow from.
Growth? I doubled my port on iStock this year and nothing of my new stuff sells at all. Only my old crap of 2-3 years ago gets downloaded. I have no clue why. I think the search engine hates me. Up till this date, my November earnings on iStock are half of those on StockXpert.
So be it. There are not enough funds in my Paypal to buy Getty.
-
Has Friday 13th struck? I had a look at the photos.com site and there is a message that the site will be permanently disabled on December 31, 2009.
There is a link to the new site that seems to go back to the same page. Hopefully the buyers will have better luck finding shutterstock.
-
Where do you see that? The only thing I see is an offer to get 10% off for a one year subscription, and that offer expires Dec 31, 2009.
Btw, the seem to have really removed the StockXpert content, can't find my images any more...
-
Well, I'm seeing images I opted in from iStock on photos.com now... so it's happening...
-
Where do you see that? The only thing I see is an offer to get 10% off for a one year subscription, and that offer expires Dec 31, 2009.
Btw, the seem to have really removed the StockXpert content, can't find my images any more...
When I go to photos.com, I get redirected to this page
http://ww2.photos.com/en/legacy/ (http://ww2.photos.com/en/legacy/)
-
Interesting, did not happen to me. I can simply go to www.photos.com (http://www.photos.com) without being redirected.
On the page you mention it says:
"Please visit the new photos.com and take advantage of its easier-to-use design, improved search functionality and thousands of new images. Thank you for your business. "
If you click on photos.com in that message, you go to www.photos.com (http://www.photos.com) as well...
Are you using a bookmark?
-
I am not using a bookmark. I tried firefox, opera and IE typing in www.photos.com (http://www.photos.com) in the address bar and they all re-direct me to http://ww2.photos.com/en/legacy/ (http://ww2.photos.com/en/legacy/) and I get re-directed there from the new photos.com link on that page.
-
I am not using a bookmark. I tried firefox, opera and IE typing in [url=http://www.photos.com]www.photos.com[/url] ([url]http://www.photos.com[/url]) in the address bar and they all re-direct me to [url]http://ww2.photos.com/en/legacy/[/url] ([url]http://ww2.photos.com/en/legacy/[/url]) and I get re-directed there from the new photos.com link on that page.
The redirect is saved in your cookies. The first time it works.
-
I don't have cookies enabled with opera and I still get re-directed.
-
Try http://uk.photos.com/en/ (http://uk.photos.com/en/) - does that work for you?
-
I've had 7 sales so far today between photos.com and jupiter so the images haven't dissapeared yet.
-
They used to report sales one day later, so likely those are sales from yesterday.
Can you still find your files up on photos.com?
I can't find mine...
I think for jupiter there was no end date announced yet, at least I did not see it, so those may be going on for a while...
-
Here's what it says when I go to photos.com/en (the /en comes up automatically):
This site is only available to access previously downloaded subscription images and purchases and will be permanently disabled on December 31, 2009.
Please sign-in with your original Photos.com username and password to access your download and purchase history.
Please visit the new photos.com and take advantage of its easier-to-use design, improved search functionality and thousands of new images. Thank you for your business.
When you click the "new photos.com" words above, you come back to the same page. So it looks like a holding site until the new site is available on Dec. 31? Confusing to say the least.
-
Try [url]http://uk.photos.com/en/[/url] ([url]http://uk.photos.com/en/[/url]) - does that work for you?
Thanks, that one works. All my photos are gone, I hope some of the buyers will switch sites now, they might struggle to find what they want there now.
-
Here's what it says when I go to photos.com/en (the /en comes up automatically):
This site is only available to access previously downloaded subscription images and purchases and will be permanently disabled on December 31, 2009.
Please sign-in with your original Photos.com username and password to access your download and purchase history.
Please visit the new photos.com and take advantage of its easier-to-use design, improved search functionality and thousands of new images. Thank you for your business.
When you click the "new photos.com" words above, you come back to the same page. So it looks like a holding site until the new site is available on Dec. 31? Confusing to say the least.
That's what I get, and I've never been to the site before.
-
They used to report sales one day later, so likely those are sales from yesterday.
Can you still find your files up on photos.com?
I can't find mine...
Mine are gone but sales still reporting. Lots of sales. I think you are right and the reporting is a day behind.
-
You're absolutely right, my images have gone :(
They used to report sales one day later, so likely those are sales from yesterday.
Can you still find your files up on photos.com?
I can't find mine...
I think for jupiter there was no end date announced yet, at least I did not see it, so those may be going on for a while...
-
I just checked both photos.com and jupiter and my images are gone. I had a few sales from them today, though. Probably the next-day reporting thingy.
-
I just checked both photos.com and jupiter and my images are gone. I had a few sales from them today, though. Probably the next-day reporting thingy.
That's disappointing. Since they hadn't set a date yet for JIU, I was hoping we might be there for a bit longer. :(
-
the ww2 site comes up with this.
(http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/8407/photocom.jpg)
The www.photos.com (http://www.photos.com) site looks normal to me.
No opinion, just so people can see it.
It does say "previously downloaded subscription images and purchases..."
-
Some JIU sales are showing up today but none from Photos.com. Overall it has been a better than average month on StockXpert
-
November 12, 2009
(Photos.com subscription) 1 $0.30
November 13, 2009
(Photos.com subscription) 2 $0.60
November 13, 2009
(Jupiterimages Unlimited subscription) 2 $0.60
November 14, 2009
(Jupiterimages Unlimited subscription) 1 $0.30
-
Some JUI sales are showing up today but none from Photos.com. Overall it has been a better than average month on StockXpert
Same story here. Still getting JIU sales.
-
I did a search on nov 11 («cargo container») and it showed 108 pages (60 photos per page) and many of mines were there.
Same search today brings only 46 pages, without any of mine. So I'm out!
But the strangest thing is that it also bring many doubles. Maybe they showed also on nov 11, but I didn't notice. So I guess that they merge two or more photo banks...
Claude
-
It seems that geeks are finally succeed in something, to dispel buyers and fckup submitters in one trait. Now for Jui may take additional six month for us maybe more, maybe by chance they erase all 3 sites at all in they selfish greed action. Who knows ;D
-
It seems that geeks are finally succeed in something, to dispel buyers and fckup submitters in one trait. Now for Jui may take additional six month for us maybe more, maybe by chance they erase all 3 sites at all in they selfish greed action. Who knows ;D
that makes no sense, maybe they can continuing expanding their business at staggering rates like they have for the longest time?
-
It seems that geeks are finally succeed in something, to dispel buyers and fckup submitters in one trait. Now for Jui may take additional six month for us maybe more, maybe by chance they erase all 3 sites at all in they selfish greed action. Who knows ;D
that makes no sense, maybe they can continuing expanding their business at staggering rates like they have for the longest time?
These two quotes have confused the heck out of me? Who are "geeks?" and Who are "They?" Who is closing what and Who is expanding their business?
-
It seems that geeks are finally succeed in something, to dispel buyers and fckup submitters in one trait. Now for Jui may take additional six month for us maybe more, maybe by chance they erase all 3 sites at all in they selfish greed action. Who knows ;D
that makes no sense, maybe they can continuing expanding their business at staggering rates like they have for the longest time?
These two quotes have confused the heck out of me? Who are "geeks?" and Who are "They?" Who is closing what and Who is expanding their business?
i'm not really sure, it was late when i posted. I think I meant Getty, but the quote I responded to makes no sense so I can't be sure what I posted given my state of mind
-
It seems that geeks are finally succeed in something, to dispel buyers and fckup submitters in one trait. Now for Jui may take additional six month for us maybe more, maybe by chance they erase all 3 sites at all in they selfish greed action. Who knows ;D
that makes no sense, maybe they can continuing expanding their business at staggering rates like they have for the longest time?
These two quotes have confused the heck out of me? Who are "geeks?" and Who are "They?" Who is closing what and Who is expanding their business?
i'm not really sure, it was late when i posted. I think I meant Getty, but the quote I responded to makes no sense so I can't be sure what I posted given my state of mind
What?
;-)
-
It seems that geeks are finally succeed in something, to dispel buyers and fckup submitters in one trait. Now for Jui may take additional six month for us maybe more, maybe by chance they erase all 3 sites at all in they selfish greed action. Who knows ;D
that makes no sense, maybe they can continuing expanding their business at staggering rates like they have for the longest time?
These two quotes have confused the heck out of me? Who are "geeks?" and Who are "They?" Who is closing what and Who is expanding their business?
i'm not really sure, it was late when i posted. I think I meant Getty, but the quote I responded to makes no sense so I can't be sure what I posted given my state of mind
What?
;-)
no comment
-
Had another JIU sale this morning.
-
Looking bad for me. Just read another admin post urging Non-iStock participants to get signed up "as soon as possible."
I don't want to sign up. I guess I am shooting myself in the foot ... again. ::)
-
StockXpert admin also said
"StockXpert images are still being sold on JIU until further notice."
-
StockXpert admin also said
"StockXpert images are still being sold on JIU until further notice."
That was the first foot I shot ... I opted out of subs. :'(
-
StockXpert admin also said
"StockXpert images are still being sold on JIU until further notice."
Thanks Epantha. If the images keep selling on JIU then perhaps losses won't be as bad as I had thought.
-
Thanks Epantha. If the images keep selling on JIU then perhaps losses won't be as bad as I had thought.
We will hope for the best. :) In the meantime, I have added some new agencies to take StockXpert's place in case they are eventually axed. Telling people to start uploading to IS "as soon as possible" doesn't sound very positive. :-\
-
Telling people to start uploading to IS "as soon as possible" doesn't sound very positive. :-\
Is the answer to that, "I would if I had anymore uploads there this week."? ;D
-
The limits at iStock will make it very difficult to get any significant amount of images up to iStock in a hurry ...
Does any one think there is a chance that iStock might left the upload limit if they want to bring in the StockXpert contributors's images that aren't currently already on iStock ?
-Mark
-
It seems that geeks are finally succeed in something, to dispel buyers and fckup submitters in one trait. Now for Jui may take additional six month for us maybe more, maybe by chance they erase all 3 sites at all in they selfish greed action. Who knows ;D
that makes no sense, maybe they can continuing expanding their business at staggering rates like they have for the longest time?
These two quotes have confused the heck out of me? Who are "geeks?" and Who are "They?" Who is closing what and Who is expanding their business?
i'm not really sure, it was late when i posted. I think I meant Getty, but the quote I responded to makes no sense so I can't be sure what I posted given my state of mind
What?
;-)
no comment
Ah... I understand now ;-)
-
The limits at iStock will make it very difficult to get any significant amount of images up to iStock in a hurry ...
Very true!
Does any one think there is a chance that iStock might left the upload limit if they want to bring in the StockXpert contributors's images that aren't currently already on iStock ?
I seriously doubt it. Lifting upload limits would require taking on a lot of additional inspectors. I don't think istock has shown any intention of making uploads any easier for independents.
-
I'm fairly new, only started doing micro 3 months ago.
Let me see if I got this right.
Getty wants a share of SS's subscription market.
To achieve their goal they firstly remove 3 million perfectly good stock images from StockXpert.
Then they urge contributors to re-upload them all, only this time via IStock.
My port is small, no big deal, but what about photographers with large portfolios and thousands of photos? They are the people who really make this business work. Will they agree to do it?
In return for their efforts Getty promises to pay 0.25 cent per download. 5 cents less than StockXpert and no chance for an increase.
Never mind IStock's upload limits. This whole affair doesn't feel right to me.
For the time being I'm going to follow Epantha's advice. Try something else and stay opted out.
-
I'm fairly new, only started doing micro 3 months ago.
Let me see if I got this right.
Getty wants a share of SS's subscription market.
To achieve their goal they firstly remove 3 million perfectly good stock images from StockXpert.
Then they urge contributors to re-upload them all, only this time via IStock.
My port is small, no big deal, but what about photographers with large portfolios and thousands of photos? They are the people who really make this business work. Will they agree to do it?
In return for their efforts Getty promises to pay 0.25 cent per download. 5 cents less than StockXpert and no chance for an increase.
Never mind IStock's upload limits. This whole affair doesn't feel right to me.
For the time being I'm going to follow Epantha's advice. Try something else and stay opted out.
You may be new Eireann, but you managed to sum up the situation perfectly!
I am opted out too.
-
I'm fairly new, only started doing micro 3 months ago.
Let me see if I got this right.
Getty wants a share of SS's subscription market.
To achieve their goal they firstly remove 3 million perfectly good stock images from StockXpert.
Then they urge contributors to re-upload them all, only this time via IStock.
My port is small, no big deal, but what about photographers with large portfolios and thousands of photos? They are the people who really make this business work. Will they agree to do it?
In return for their efforts Getty promises to pay 0.25 cent per download. 5 cents less than StockXpert and no chance for an increase.
Never mind IStock's upload limits. This whole affair doesn't feel right to me.
For the time being I'm going to follow Epantha's advice. Try something else and stay opted out.
I also am following the advice to "try something else." Maybe StockXpert buyers will find their way to YayMicro. :-\
-
Ooops what
November 16, 2009 tuesday?!? - WITHOUT ANY SALES?!?!
This is not happend last 6 months including weekends.
What are this geeks are doing >:(
-
Earlier I reported that my images were not on JUI any more. I was wrong. They are there...I was looking in the royalty-free section. Tonight I realized there is a subscription section and sure enough, that's where they are. Maybe I can make a few more pennies then.
-
Dead completely since photo.com has been disconnected.
-
Dead completely since photo.com has been disconnected.
StockXpert has always been dead for me... with and without photos.com and JUI...
I'm one of those photogs that have zero views on all new images for weeks.
Patrick H.
-
I get zero views on most of my new images for a few weeks but then some start selling. StockXpert PPD are about average and I am getting StockXpert and JUI subs sales.
It is going to be interesting to see what happens with photos.com now. I had the feeling that some SS buyers had gone there but perhaps now they can't get what they want and they will go back to SS or one of the other subs sites.
-
Interesting - my JIU sales today are the higher than ever. I wonder if some of the Photos.com subscribers have migrated there.
All in all today is turning out to be one of my best in a long time. Will be interesting to see if this is a trend or just a blip on the radar.
-
Odd because my photos are still on Jupiter. I just looked minutes ago. Under subscriptions. Last month I thought they were gone, but I looked in the wrong collection. Right under the images it says "Stockxpert". No iStock opted in images show. (some of my images are only on IS and some are only on StockXpert, so I can tell) Jupiter has not been disconnected. Maybe tomorrow?
http://www.jiunlimited.com/en/ (http://www.jiunlimited.com/en/)
That's OK people have been reporting doom and gloom, drops in sales since the announcement, when nothing changed. Then every month since then, reports of drops in sales and images gone, when nothing changed. Now we can see... it's happening again. ;D
When this picture vanishes from the message, I'll know they are honestly gone. The hat is on Chicken Little because the sky is falling.
(http://images.jiunlimited.com/thw/thw17/PH/63/StockXpert-contrib-634801/10900127.thj.jpg?11744961_44116246_1)
Photos.com appears to be disconnected.
Photos.com has been the premier stock subscription since its launch in 2003. Our collection contains more than 400,000 professional, model-released photos and illustrations in a variety of categories. With a Photos.com subscription, you pay once and download photos as you need them.
Plus Collection Photos.com Plus adds more than 1 million professional quality, downloadable files to your graphic arsenal.
Pretty vague what someone gets for the extra money. 1 million more files of what? If you like photos.com, then you enjoy seeing the same model on a page seven times, and the same series of shots, or same location, page after page. Something strange there? Look at page one of food and drink and see the same girl and all her friends (models posing) filling the whole page. Same couple dining, same guy eating breakfast, same isolated coffee beans. :o
http://tinyurl.com/yf3axpm (http://tinyurl.com/yf3axpm)
-
Ditto
and I couldn't even find mine there. Must have been looking in wrong place.
Interesting - my JIU sales today are the higher than ever. I wonder if some of the Photos.com subscribers have migrated there.
All in all today is turning out to be one of my best in a long time. Will be interesting to see if this is a trend or just a blip on the radar.
-
I got 22 JIU subscription dls today, 1 Photos.com PPD yesterday. But no Photos.com subscription dls since the Nov 13 D-Day, and I used to average about 10 of those per day. My Stockxpert PPDs seem to be improving in the last few days, but that could just be a fluke. I am opted in on IS but not a single "Partner Program" sale has registered on my stats page there. What does it all mean? The ways of Getty are mysterious indeed.
-
I am opted in on IS but not a single "Partner Program" sale has registered on my stats page there. What does it all mean? The ways of Getty are mysterious indeed.
I think it means they report them just once a month.
At least, that's what I seem to recall having read. Anyone else remember that?
-
I am opted in on IS but not a single "Partner Program" sale has registered on my stats page there. What does it all mean? The ways of Getty are mysterious indeed.
I think it means they report them just once a month.
At least, that's what I seem to recall having read. Anyone else remember that?
That's correct. See http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=88699&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=88699&page=1), last post by sylvanworks.
It's been suggested elsewhere that you may see nothing until end of December, but I haven't seen that confirmed by any admin, so maybe end of November perhaps.
-
November 21, 2009
(Jupiterimages Unlimited subscription) 1 $0.30
??? ??? ??? ???
-
November 21, 2009
(Jupiterimages Unlimited subscription) 1 $0.30
??? ??? ??? ???
+1
this is my first jupiter sub since i joined 2 months ago, when the death knell was struck. on the whole, stockxpert has performed quite well just in terms of stockxpert's own credit sales. so, if anyone think it's not worth to join them now, you can reconsider.
-
My last Jupiter download was on Nov. 12th ...
-Mark
-
my last Photo.com Nov 12
last Jupiter Nov 16
-
I got three Jupiter sales today.
-
Three Jupiter sales for me also today.
-
Five for me... ;)
-
JIU sales the last 5 days. Better than average month overall.
-
I opted out from subs long ago, so JIU/Photo.com is not an issue to me, but I am having a relatively good month at StockXpert, especially in the past week (60% of this month's earnings).
-
I hope someone else finds the humor in this as well as the doom and gloom.
People were complaining about taking 30c payment at JUI and photos.com, and what did we get instead? 25 cent downloads, StockXpert will probably close and the sub photos will now come from iStock.
After reading the announcement and the StockXpert forum, it appears (and I may be wrong) that some content will be moved from StockXpert but the only way to be positive that a photos is transferred into the new 25c program is have it on IS and available for subscription sales.
What I haven't figured out, because I wasn't paying attention, is what happens to people who are not IS contributors, who will have their StockXpert portfolios moved to Getty's new sub site? Will they be made into IS members? Made members of the new site unnamed site? Or in limbo as contributors represented by an invisible agency Stockxpert. ;D Will they get a free pass into IS without the review process? It's going to be interesting watching for the answer to this one.
If StockXpert closes, I can cash out and have one less site to upload to. The benefit is my IS photos will have more exposure. Keep in mind that my favorite micro site is SS where I get 25c a download. That puts me in the minority who say, 25c is the same no matter what site is underpaying paying me. What the, "yet to be name", site needs to do, is tell me when I get the raise, the same as SS, for achieving a predetermined sales level. (hint: they are bringing this down to the same commission, but not offering any incentive.) So it's not the same as SS by any stretch of logic, even my warped truth that 25c is always 25c. :o
I hope someone at IS or Getty recognizes this flaw in their new improved distribution plan.
Further hint: After earning a total of $500, your rate increases to $.33 per download. Once you surpass a total lifetime earnings of $3,000, your rate will increase to $.36 per download, and after you reach $10,000 in lifetime earnings, your rate will increase to $.38 per download.
-
Just for the records: Usually I made ~$40-60 a month at StockXpert - December so far has brought $2,50. I've just requested a payout, and I'm under the impression that this could be my last payout there ever ...
-
For me December is about $20 which seems to be not as bad as for some others - but anyway much lower than before :(
It's a pity, StockXpert was a good site.
-
See I told you so. Nothing to worry about. ::)
OK pointing out that I was wrong about the StockXpert not closing, but we'll have to wait and see if the StinkySock site brings in more downloads and equals the returns for the subscription sales. As for the other downloads, dead as a doornail.
(http://pages.prodigy.net/mycroft-holmes/icons/checkflg.gif)
apparently they postponed the removal for 10 days. now it reads:
Alert: This image will not be available to download or license after November 12.
I think Racephoto is on to something. This is starting to sound like the Boy Who Cried Wolf. They keep threatening but no action.
I would love to be a fly on the wall at Getty/Photos.com when they are discussing this. Or more likely fielding calls from irate subscription holders who will be leaving the site once the good content is gone ;)
-
25 Jupiterimages Sales for January. 10 of those sales came in on January 16th. 426 images in StockXpert portfolio. Will be sad to see StockXpert go ...
-Mark
http://markwpayne.wordpress.com (http://markwpayne.wordpress.com)
-
Think this information is somewhere at the forum already, but will make a note in this section just to sum everything up.
SXis now closed, instead we have a Thinkstock.
If you:
1) have a SX account and turned On selling through subscription and you don't have account at Istock, your portfolio will migrate to Istock
2) have a SX, turned Off selling through subscription and would like to sell images at Thinkstock you shall turn subscriptions On (My Account->Profile , flag point 7 and save changes)
3) have both IS and SX accounts and have subscription sells turned on at both - your SX portfolio will migrate to IS, but duplicates from IS pack will be deleted from SX one.
In all the cases your payment from the one sell at ThinkStock will be $0.25
More detailed information can be found here - http://ministocking.blogspot.com/2010/02/thinkstockphotos-what-where-when-who.html (http://ministocking.blogspot.com/2010/02/thinkstockphotos-what-where-when-who.html)
-- I'm sorry I'm not quite sure if I'm allowed to give this link but hope moderators wouldn't be against --
-
Think this information is somewhere at the forum already, but will make a note in this section just to sum everything up.
SXis now closed, instead we have a Thinkstock.
If you:
1) have a SX account and turned On selling through subscription and you don't have account at Istock, your portfolio will migrate to Istock
2) have a SX, turned Off selling through subscription and would like to sell images at Thinkstock you shall turn subscriptions On (My Account->Profile , flag point 7 and save changes)
3) have both IS and SX accounts and have subscription sells turned on at both - your SX portfolio will migrate to IS, but duplicates from IS pack will be deleted from SX one.
In all the cases your payment from the one sell at ThinkStock will be $0.25
More detailed information can be found here - [url]http://ministocking.blogspot.com/2010/02/thinkstockphotos-what-where-when-who.html[/url] ([url]http://ministocking.blogspot.com/2010/02/thinkstockphotos-what-where-when-who.html[/url])
-- I'm sorry I'm not quite sure if I'm allowed to give this link but hope moderators wouldn't be against --
On that link it says about partner sites to click on opt-out then refresh...shouldn't it be opt in then refresh? here's the quote
"Luis said...
Enter IS website, then click on the bag/case on the left of the messages link! After, below My Uploads, are a few tabs, there is one called Partner Program (4th tab)! Then you choose opted-out and refresh data, then check one by one! After a few days they will appear on ThinkStock :)
"
-
Think this information is somewhere at the forum already, but will make a note in this section just to sum everything up.
SXis now closed, instead we have a Thinkstock.
If you:
1) have a SX account and turned On selling through subscription and you don't have account at Istock, your portfolio will migrate to Istock
2) have a SX, turned Off selling through subscription and would like to sell images at Thinkstock you shall turn subscriptions On (My Account->Profile , flag point 7 and save changes)
3) have both IS and SX accounts and have subscription sells turned on at both - your SX portfolio will migrate to IS, but duplicates from IS pack will be deleted from SX one.
In all the cases your payment from the one sell at ThinkStock will be $0.25
More detailed information can be found here - [url]http://ministocking.blogspot.com/2010/02/thinkstockphotos-what-where-when-who.html[/url] ([url]http://ministocking.blogspot.com/2010/02/thinkstockphotos-what-where-when-who.html[/url])
-- I'm sorry I'm not quite sure if I'm allowed to give this link but hope moderators wouldn't be against --
On that link it says about partner sites to click on opt-out then refresh...shouldn't it be opt in then refresh? here's the quote
"Luis said...
Enter IS website, then click on the bag/case on the left of the messages link! After, below My Uploads, are a few tabs, there is one called Partner Program (4th tab)! Then you choose opted-out and refresh data, then check one by one! After a few days they will appear on ThinkStock :)
"
Hi to all! I am Luis from that blog :) I have noticed a lot of views from here :)
I said on the post to click OPT-OUT and Refresh, so you can see which photos are opted-out, so you can add them, one by one :)
thanks for referring my blog!
-
Hi Luis,
can I ask you something?
I'm just curious...
I remember seeing your posts on IStock forum as well. At the end of the month, you were counting your Photos.com downloads.
Why are you so keen on selling your images for 0.25 cent with Getty?
I know you like SS, and I like them too. SS is a great site.
Do you realise that by accepting the Getty deal there is a real danger that SS will do the same in the future? Or what about DT and their higher level images?
No more commission increase at SS, no more higher level subs at DT.
Since you're very happy to contribute to 0.25 cent at Getty, what's to stop the other agencies to do the exact same thing some time in the future?
Everyone gets 0.25 cents. End of story. Might even include IS Exclusives if Getty can get away with it.
So I wonder, why are you doing it?
I'm guessing it's money. You want money and you want it now.
Forget about tomorrow.
But of course, this is your choice and I can only wish you luck,
-
Hi Luis,
can I ask you something?
I'm just curious...
I remember seeing your posts on IStock forum as well. At the end of the month, you were counting your Photos.com downloads.
Why are you so keen on selling your images for 0.25 cent with Getty?
I know you like SS, and I like them too. SS is a great site.
Do you realise that by accepting the Getty deal there is a real danger that SS will do the same in the future? Or what about DT and their higher level images?
No more commission increase at SS, no more higher level subs at DT.
Since you're very happy to contribute to 0.25 cent at Getty, what's to stop the other agencies to do the exact same thing some time in the future?
Everyone gets 0.25 cents. End of story. Might even include IS Exclusives if Getty can get away with it.
So I wonder, why are you doing it?
I'm guessing it's money. You want money and you want it now.
Forget about tomorrow.
But of course, this is your choice and I can only wish you luck,
Hi, how are you? No problem! I agree with you but honestly for now I am growing at IS, so I will continue on Partner Program! I know that 0.25$ is too low, but being non-exclusive you need to find $ all around right?.. I don't believe that SS will lose their customers, they will remain that big agency! About DT I am feeling a drop in sales, I guess I am too new to take big conclusions but I like DT a lot also, don't really know why but do!
SS won't suspend the raises, but if they do what can we do??.. I guess I would opt-out but why if everybody, I guess a lot, once ThinkStock have a lot of pictures there..!
What do u want me to do? What do you expect from Stock Agencies?? To remove ThinkStock new site?? OK I am with you!.. But they won't.. :(
And what about XP, Hemera collection??? Remove the portfolio?? I got there 900 photos! Microstock ain't easy, and unfortunately we need to keep up, unless you have a great portfolio and stick on IS, or better "exclusivity" on SS! (who knows one day right??) :P
-
Think this information is somewhere at the forum already, but will make a note in this section just to sum everything up.
SXis now closed, instead we have a Thinkstock.
If you:
1) have a SX account and turned On selling through subscription and you don't have account at Istock, your portfolio will migrate to Istock
2) have a SX, turned Off selling through subscription and would like to sell images at Thinkstock you shall turn subscriptions On (My Account->Profile , flag point 7 and save changes)
3) have both IS and SX accounts and have subscription sells turned on at both - your SX portfolio will migrate to IS, but duplicates from IS pack will be deleted from SX one.
This is the first mention from all of the sources I've seen that it is stated that StockXpert portfolio will migrate to IS. Is this correct? Did you mean "Thinkstock"?
-Mark
http://markwpayne.wordpress.com (http://markwpayne.wordpress.com)
-
Just for the sake of accuracy.
The only way to get files on IS is to have an IS account and upload them
The only way to get anything new on ThinkStock, is upload to IS and Opt In. There is no ThinkStock upload feature.
NO FILES ARE BEING MOVED FROM StockXpert TO IS!
Selected files from either StockXpert or IS at the time of the transition MIGHT be moved to ThinkStock. We have not been given details of this three phase program.
Think this information is somewhere at the forum already, but will make a note in this section just to sum everything up.
SXis now closed, instead we have a Thinkstock.
If you:
1) have a SX account and turned On selling through subscription and you don't have account at Istock, your portfolio will migrate to Istock
2) have a SX, turned Off selling through subscription and would like to sell images at Thinkstock you shall turn subscriptions On (My Account->Profile , flag point 7 and save changes)
3) have both IS and SX accounts and have subscription sells turned on at both - your SX portfolio will migrate to IS, but duplicates from IS pack will be deleted from SX one.
-
what race said.
-
The fewer good images on ThinkStock, the fewer customers will go there. That will make the higher paying subscription sites more competitive and increase payments to contributors. Staying out of ThinkStock is the way to go.
Saying that we need to be everywhere to make more money is BS. If we support the lower paying agencies, we will earn less money in the long run.
-
Just for the sake of accuracy.
The only way to get files on IS is to have an IS account and upload them
The only way to get anything new on ThinkStock, is upload to IS and Opt In. There is no ThinkStock upload feature.
NO FILES ARE BEING MOVED FROM StockXpert TO IS!
Selected files from either StockXpert or IS at the time of the transition MIGHT be moved to ThinkStock. We have not been given details of this three phase program.
Think this information is somewhere at the forum already, but will make a note in this section just to sum everything up.
SXis now closed, instead we have a Thinkstock.
If you:
1) have a SX account and turned On selling through subscription and you don't have account at Istock, your portfolio will migrate to Istock
2) have a SX, turned Off selling through subscription and would like to sell images at Thinkstock you shall turn subscriptions On (My Account->Profile , flag point 7 and save changes)
3) have both IS and SX accounts and have subscription sells turned on at both - your SX portfolio will migrate to IS, but duplicates from IS pack will be deleted from SX one.
That is how I understood it Race ... thanks for your clarification.
-Mark
http://markwpayne.wordpress.com (http://markwpayne.wordpress.com)
-
The fewer good images on ThinkStock, the fewer customers will go there. That will make the higher paying subscription sites more competitive and increase payments to contributors. Staying out of ThinkStock is the way to go.
Saying that we need to be everywhere to make more money is BS. If we support the lower paying agencies, we will earn less money in the long run.
Yes, we must seriously think about the future. A few more dollars from ThinkStock today, will only result in lower earnings tomorrow.
This is serious. ThinkStock is not just another new lower paying agency. It's Getty behind it. ThinkStock is a real threat for ALL.
-
Yeah, sorry for shouting and the red, but this is the third of fourth time I've read the same wrong interpretation.
ThinkStock is Getty's answer to SS with 10 million subs. If you don't opt in the best IS files, it's not going to hurt you or them. Different quality, different market.
As they have announced and I believe it's the factual position, IS will be for individual file sales and ThinkStock for subscriptions. Also if you have taken the time to go look at ThinkStock it has everything from multiple agencies that Getty now owns. A single site for all that material that was just scattered into various obscure locations. This should bring more buyers to the "other" huge subscription site.
It doesn't mean I'll get more sales or equal to what I did on StockXpert. But with more buyers and more views, I doubt that it will hurt! ;D