Author Topic: Is StockXpert going down? (Read 20470 times)

melastmohican · « **on:** June 15, 2009, 12:57 »

It looks like Getty disconnected them from subscription sites. In the letter they sent to contributors they encourage them to submit images to IStock:

"As we phase out Stockxpert images on Photos.com and JIUnlimited, the plan is to introduce images to Photos.com and JIUnlimited from the iStockphoto collection.

As you may already know, iStockphoto is the industry leader in microstock. If you are not yet a contributor to iStockphoto, we would encourage you to apply, and start building your iStockphoto collection. 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."

What next, folding out their collection into IStock?

borg · « **Reply #1 on:** June 15, 2009, 13:16 »

It seems that the goal of every owner of microstock agency is to become respectable site and then be sold for approximately 50 million dollars...
After that follows the quenching because "Biggy" already has micorstock site...

And all efforts of contributors will be burned very soon...

We build them, they kill us, for reward!

That all folks!

It appears that the independent small sites have no purpose other than its own sale...

Milinz · « **Reply #2 on:** June 15, 2009, 14:52 »

Well, I am really pissed off due to this Getty manouvers!

They want me to upload my portfolio to istock? It is insane! iStock 'don't need' my vectors in contrary of hundreds of sales I am having on JUI/Photos.com!

I am going to put all my eggs into competition baskets!

Cheers!

dbvirago · « **Reply #3 on:** June 15, 2009, 14:55 »

Quote from: melastmohican on June 15, 2009, 12:57

"As you may already know, iStockphoto is the industry leader in microstock. If you are not yet a contributor to iStockphoto, we would encourage you to apply, and start building your iStockphoto collection. 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."

Any sentence beginning with 'As you may already know' is almost always BS.

willie · « **Reply #4 on:** June 15, 2009, 15:19 »

Luvly, and there goes the unpaid commissions of hundred of contributors. Into the pockets of Getty, I guess.

puravida · « **Reply #5 on:** June 15, 2009, 15:28 »

Quote from: Perseus on June 15, 2009, 15:19

Luvly, and there goes the unpaid commissions of hundred of contributors. Into the pockets of Getty, I guess.

I posted this on the other thread by mela . But I think I should paste it here :

M@M said "what's going to happen to the money we have already accumulated on StockXpert?"
My thoughts exactly.

Incidentally, then SV moved to Veer, they paid me what I had accumulated even if it was just a few dollars and did not reach payout point.

Let's see if Getty is as honourable as Corbis in this sense.

melastmohican · « **Reply #6 on:** June 15, 2009, 17:01 »

Why they spent time and money for pruning images that violate Getty policies?

Phil · « **Reply #7 on:** June 15, 2009, 18:18 »

Quote from: melastmohican on June 15, 2009, 12:57

It looks like Getty disconnected them from subscription sites. In the letter they sent to contributors they encourage them to submit images to IStock:

"As we phase out Stockxpert images on Photos.com and JIUnlimited, the plan is to introduce images to Photos.com and JIUnlimited from the iStockphoto collection.

As you may already know, iStockphoto is the industry leader in microstock. If you are not yet a contributor to iStockphoto, we would encourage you to apply, and start building your iStockphoto collection. 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."

What next, folding out their collection into IStock?

what a sad statement to contributors of another site, they wont fold them into they have told you to start moving across now.

cmillc22 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 15, 2009, 22:14 »

It appears the ship is going down and getty was the driver, i do not believe that they can close the doors and not pay contributors what is owed. Maybe they can do that for people who buy a subscription. All the uncertainty about StockXpert has got to be a problem for people who are thinking about joining or for buyers. Why would you buy a year subscription for a thousand dollars only for the place to close down in 4 months. Buyers do not care where they get their images but they do care about losing money for a product or subscription they have paid for. If this is not what Getty wants then why have we not heard them telling everyone not to worry or please do not leave we are on your side. Instead all i hear from them is silence. It is even hard to get any support or an admin to respond to a simple question.

ingesche · « **Reply #9 on:** June 16, 2009, 00:53 »

Quote from: Milinz on June 15, 2009, 14:52

...
They want me to upload my portfolio to istock? It is insane! iStock 'don't need' my vectors in contrary of hundreds of sales I am having on JUI/Photos.com!
...

Same thing here. I have had lots of vector sales on StockXpert, many of them through those two subscription sites. IStock has not accepted me as a vector artist yet. I like to use relatively simple shapes in most of my vectors, and IStock just isn't looking for those kinds of illustrations. Even though some of them sell very well at other agencies...

Inge

grp_photo · « **Reply #10 on:** June 16, 2009, 07:46 »

That's crazy. I'm not going to contribute to IS. But it is obviously the first step to close StockXpert I'm pretty sure the original StockXpert-Contributors will get kicked out of the site and in the end there will be just a straight redirect to IS same goes to SXC.

null · « **Reply #11 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:26 »

I got his email from StockXpert too : "As you may already know, iStockphoto is the industry leader in microstock."

I didn't know that.

Looking at my earnings, ShutterStock is the leader. What did I miss?

OxfordSquare · « **Reply #12 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:35 »

so whats the plan guys? Are you still uploading to stockxpert? On the one hand I would like to continue uploading cause its a good selling agency for me but on the other hand all my efforts (uploading time) could be wasted in a few month?!

OxfordSquare · « **Reply #13 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:37 »

Quote from: OxfordSquare on June 16, 2009, 08:35

so whats the plan guys? Are you still uploading to stockxpert? On the one hand I would like to continue uploading cause its a good selling agency for me but on the other hand all my efforts (uploading time) could be wasted in a few month?!

OxfordSquare · « **Reply #14 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:38 »

ups, i have to get familiar with this tool, sorry

OxfordSquare · « **Reply #15 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:38 »

deleted

Squat · « **Reply #16 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:50 »

Quote from: OxfordSquare on June 16, 2009, 08:35

so whats the plan guys? Are you still uploading to stockxpert? On the one hand I would like to continue uploading cause its a good selling agency for me but on the other hand all my efforts (uploading time) could be wasted in a few month?!

I just renewed my uploading of new images yesterday, and they were approved . That quick. Back to the old StockXpert review time I was used to getting. As those who read my thread on StockXpert know, this has not happened to me for a long time since November 2008. This change signals to me as a good change , that stability is once again maintained. Hopefully so.
My interpretation of the email is that "if you opted in, you can still get this by joining IS". But if you prefer you can stay on with StockXpert , except there will not be this option plan.
If , as pointed out elsewhere, they are planning to kill StockXpert, why would they resume the efficiency of their review system?

cmillc22 · « **Reply #17 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:55 »

Good question..... i will continue to upload until they tell me to take my ball and go home. The upload process is easy enough where it does not require a lot of time.

MichaelJay · « **Reply #18 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:58 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on June 16, 2009, 08:26

What did I miss?

Maybe, that your royalty payments are not necessarily an indication of overall market size?

astrocady · « **Reply #19 on:** June 16, 2009, 10:16 »

Quote from: tan510jomast on June 16, 2009, 08:50

<snip>
If , as pointed out elsewhere, they are planning to kill StockXpert, why would they resume the efficiency of their review system?

Because they don't care. Because the fired all the reviewers.

Pixart · « **Reply #20 on:** June 16, 2009, 10:20 »

Because noone is uploading right now?

lisafx · « **Reply #21 on:** June 16, 2009, 10:37 »

Quote from: dbvirago on June 15, 2009, 14:55

Quote from: melastmohican on June 15, 2009, 12:57
"As you may already know, iStockphoto is the industry leader in microstock. If you are not yet a contributor to iStockphoto, we would encourage you to apply, and start building your iStockphoto collection. 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."

Any sentence beginning with 'As you may already know' is almost always BS.

So true. Much like any sentence containing the phrase "Trust me (us)".

Calamity_John · « **Reply #22 on:** June 16, 2009, 10:41 »

.. "folding their collection into Istock" .. do you really think they would take the time?

What would be interesting to see is how (if) this is being presented to the buyers at JUI and photos.com who are suddenly going to start seeing images disappear. Especially since from the IS end it is not whole portfolios that are moving just the dregs from the portfolios of people that opt in.

What initially seems really bizarre to me is that they seem to have decided to close down StockXpert but feel they can use places like photos.com in some way.

However, if they are killing StockXpert .. why go through this intermediate step of doing this? .. my guess is irrespective of the future of StockXpert this move is about clearing out competition to generate some sales for the IS images to be placed their. I ca'tn figure another way that there is any sense to it.

and just to continue stream of consciousness with another however ... However, the encouragement to join IS and the lack of a single positive statement about StockXpert is very very telling.

massman · « **Reply #23 on:** June 16, 2009, 11:01 »

If I were a buyer and knew what was going on, I would be spending my subscription budget with a different agency (take your pick) or plundering the dollar bin at IS, as this seems to be the only content that will be replacing the removed StockXpert content.

As much as I liked StockXpert, under Getty control it's dead. I think independents and all other agencies have been done a favour here, providing independents don't panic and grab the insulting 25c offered via IS. Think about it.

Milinz · « **Reply #24 on:** June 16, 2009, 11:05 »

Quote from: massman on June 16, 2009, 11:01

If I were a buyer and knew what was going on, I would be spending my subscription budget with a different agency (take your pick) or plundering the dollar bin at IS, as this seems to be the only content that will be replacing the removed StockXpert content.

As much as I liked StockXpert, under Getty control it's dead. I think independents and all other agencies have been done a favour here, providing independents don't panic and grab the insulting 25c offered via IS. Think about it.

Well, as I am concerned they may stick that 25 cents in butt of their decision maker ;-)

willie · « **Reply #25 on:** June 16, 2009, 12:14 »

Quote from: lisafx on June 16, 2009, 10:37

Quote from: dbvirago on June 15, 2009, 14:55
Quote from: melastmohican on June 15, 2009, 12:57
"As you may already know, iStockphoto is the industry leader in microstock. If you are not yet a contributor to iStockphoto, we would encourage you to apply, and start building your iStockphoto collection. 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."

Any sentence beginning with 'As you may already know' is almost always BS.

So true. Much like any sentence containing the phrase "Trust me (us)".

ahem, furthermore, SS is the the "industry leader" not IS .

puravida · « **Reply #26 on:** June 16, 2009, 12:18 »

Quote from: Perseus on June 16, 2009, 12:14

Quote from: lisafx on June 16, 2009, 10:37
Quote from: dbvirago on June 15, 2009, 14:55
Any sentence beginning with 'As you may already know' is almost always BS.

So true. Much like any sentence containing the phrase "Trust me (us)".

ahem, furthermore, SS is the the "industry leader" not IS .

No, to IS they are THE industry leader. & to the exclusives IS is THE ONLY

Milinz · « **Reply #27 on:** June 16, 2009, 14:12 »

Quote from: puravida on June 16, 2009, 12:18

Quote from: Perseus on June 16, 2009, 12:14
Quote from: lisafx on June 16, 2009, 10:37
Quote from: dbvirago on June 15, 2009, 14:55
Any sentence beginning with 'As you may already know' is almost always BS.

So true. Much like any sentence containing the phrase "Trust me (us)".

ahem, furthermore, SS is the the "industry leader" not IS .

No, to IS they are THE industry leader. & to the exclusives IS is THE ONLY

LOL!

You don't even know what is the industry...

And, iStock is just one big typical bad driven company with bad policy... They won't last long - that is for sure!

Last hope to keep their exclusives is to kill StockXpert... Only that way their exclusives can make some money to cover some loss they are having with not being non-exclusive... Also, that will fill pockets of owners and buyers will pay more for same image quality and 'garbage' ;-)

I feel competition is rising here - they kill StockXpert - 3 new will rise!

It is lost war from start - it is simple: there can't be only one!

stockastic · « **Reply #28 on:** June 16, 2009, 14:31 »

Getty will just continue to jerk these companies around, changing the 'terms' of all the agreements, cutting contributor prices, and launching new marketing schemes every month, in pursuit of imposible profit figures.

That's what big companies do when they go on acquisition binges. Eventually, they wake up with a big hangover and lose interest. Then the market can reorganize and new alternatives can emerge.

Microstock is going to get worse before it gets better.

Milinz · « **Reply #29 on:** June 16, 2009, 14:55 »

Quote from: stockastic on June 16, 2009, 14:31

Getty will just continue to jerk these companies around, changing the 'terms' of all the agreements, cutting contributor prices, and launching new marketing schemes every month, in pursuit of imposible profit figures.

That's what big companies do when they go on acquisition binges. Eventually, they wake up with a big hangover and lose interest. Then the market can reorganize and new alternatives can emerge.

Microstock is going to get worse before it gets better.

Well... It is not Highlander anyhow ;-)

stockastic · « **Reply #30 on:** June 16, 2009, 16:11 »

What's "Highlander"?

lisafx · « **Reply #31 on:** June 16, 2009, 16:32 »

Quote from: stockastic on June 16, 2009, 16:11

What's "Highlander"?

I assume he's referring to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_(film)]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_(film)[/url]

Milinz · « **Reply #32 on:** June 16, 2009, 16:41 »

Quote from: lisafx on June 16, 2009, 16:32

Quote from: stockastic on June 16, 2009, 16:11
What's "Highlander"?

I assume he's referring to this:

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_(film)]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_(film)]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_(film)[/url]

;-)

Yup!

Here is working link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_(film)

stockastic · « **Reply #33 on:** June 16, 2009, 16:47 »

Never saw the movie but I remember a really boring TV show where guys stood around in long dark coats for half an hour and then fought with swords while lighting flashed.

And the connection with Getty....?

Milinz · « **Reply #34 on:** June 16, 2009, 16:52 »

Quote from: stockastic on June 16, 2009, 16:47

Never saw the movie but I remember a really boring TV show where guys stood around in long dark coats for half an hour and then fought with swords while lighting flashed.

And the connection with Getty....?

Sentence about that there must be only one...

LOL!

Do you understand this:
http://www.fotolia.com/id/14820876

That is just one of my illustrations what Getty or 'getty owed' sites will not have ;-)
I hope others will do similar!

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #35 on:** June 16, 2009, 17:16 »

I'm really confused by all that is going on there. Please don't confuse me even further.

I'm torn between uploading and waiting. I'm new there and don't know which of the "admin" posts are to be trusted. Does anyone think that Getty will allow StockXpert to compete with the iStock group? Do you think we are in danger of losing any images in the StockXpert database? What do you plan to do with your images currently in the StockXpert database?

Are there any REALLY knowledgeable answers?

lathspell · « **Reply #36 on:** June 16, 2009, 17:21 »

Quote from: FlemishDreams on June 16, 2009, 08:26

Looking at my earnings, ShutterStock is the leader. What did I miss?

You missed i.e. my earnings numbers. From my point even StockXpert was outnumbering SS in the end, not to mention a few local agencies with a reliable monthly income of at least twice what SS makes me ...

Milinz · « **Reply #37 on:** June 16, 2009, 17:25 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on June 16, 2009, 17:16

I'm really confused by all that is going on there. Please don't confuse me even further.

I'm torn between uploading and waiting. I'm new there and don't know which of the "admin" posts are to be trusted. Does anyone think that Getty will allow StockXpert to compete with the iStock group? Do you think we are in danger of losing any images in the StockXpert database? What do you plan to do with your images currently in the StockXpert database?

Are there any REALLY knowledgeable answers?

Logical answer:

Getty is cutting all StockXpert subs sales from JUI/Photos.com where they was 30 cents/dl as well no more sales through photos.com where single sales was pretty well paid.
They also advised that we all should apply to istock as istock is 'the best blabla'...

My files counting now 850 images and somewhere about 50 footage on stockxpert will stay there until further notice (or should I say they will make me some money)...

All my new images will go everywhere else except to Getty or Getty owed sites if and until they transfer all my images accepted from StockXpert to istock.

On the other way, I will no longer support Getty and I will play for all other colored teams except for them!

melastmohican · « **Reply #38 on:** June 16, 2009, 17:25 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on June 16, 2009, 17:16

I'm really confused by all that is going on there. Please don't confuse me even further.

I'm torn between uploading and waiting. I'm new there and don't know which of the "admin" posts are to be trusted. Does anyone think that Getty will allow StockXpert to compete with the iStock group? Do you think we are in danger of losing any images in the StockXpert database? What do you plan to do with your images currently in the StockXpert database?

Are there any REALLY knowledgeable answers?

I do not really know what Getty plans but I might think of 3 posibilities
1. Shut down StockXpert
2. Merge it into IS
3. Try to reposition it so there is no direct competition between IS and StockXpert

No. I do not think you will loose images or unpaid royalties. Only thin you lost already was time if they are gone.

Since Getty acquisition number of rejections was constantly growing so actually I am happy to sto uploading and wait to see what happen.

penywise · « **Reply #39 on:** June 16, 2009, 18:45 »

Sigh, well this is just frustrating. I personally don't have an account at IS yet... In fact, they just turned me down again today for "These images are very similar in subject matter or style" (I'm still wrapping my head around how a hospital gurney in a garbage bin looks anything similar to framing a photo with corner samples or a drawer of keys in an apothecary chest, but that's just me). But I've always loved StockXpert, but now I'm wondering seriously about the future.

stockastic · « **Reply #40 on:** June 16, 2009, 19:01 »

So Getty is saying that we should now submit all our images to IStock at a rate of 15 per week, IS will approve 60% of them (the rest have "artifacts"), reject half of your best sellers, and pay 25 cents instead of 30. Hey, that's what I call a "leader".

stockastic · « **Reply #41 on:** June 16, 2009, 19:47 »

I'd say that Getty will simply shut down StockXpert and any others they buy that compete with IS. But they won't do it in a day, because they don't want to lose customers. The whole idea is to take down these sites in stages while herding all their existing customers over to IS.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #42 on:** June 16, 2009, 22:28 »

Quote from: stockastic on June 16, 2009, 19:47

I'd say that Getty will simply shut down StockXpert and any others they buy that compete with IS. But they won't do it in a day, because they don't want to lose customers. The whole idea is to take down these sites in stages while herding all their existing customers over to IS.

I totally agree. They will NOT fold StockXpert into Istock - they encourage contributors to "start building portfolios" on Istock. If they were adding StockXpert to their collection that would not be necessary. They will eventually just close it down, since there is no point in marketing 2 different micro-sites with similar collections, it's confusing for customers. And yes, they don't want to do it abruptly since they want all StockXpert customers to switch over to Istock. Would be silly to let them go to Fotolia instead. However, they made opting in for Jupiter subs ridiculously difficult - you literally have to add each single file, there is no "select all" option. Well, maybe there is one for exclusives:)

null · « **Reply #43 on:** June 16, 2009, 23:15 »

Quote from: MichaelJay on June 16, 2009, 08:58

Quote from: FlemishDreams on June 16, 2009, 08:26
What did I miss?
Maybe, that your royalty payments are not necessarily an indication of overall market size?

Yes, I'm biased

null · « **Reply #44 on:** June 16, 2009, 23:24 »

Quote from: stockastic on June 16, 2009, 19:47

I'd say that Getty will simply shut down StockXpert and any others they buy that compete with IS. But they won't do it in a day, because they don't want to lose customers. The whole idea is to take down these sites in stages while herding all their existing customers over to IS.

At least it's clear now what Getty plans to do with StockXpert: they bought their customers, not their contributors.
But somehow, it doesn't make sense, since many images on StockXpert are not on IS. If I were Getty, I would position StockXpert as a B-site and IS as an A-site. Losing all those StockXpert non-IS images to the competition (DT,SS,FT) is dumb. Independents on both IS and StockXpert could be encouraged to delete their IS images on StockXpert, and keep the left-overs on StockXpert. That would be corporate logic: different quality, different prices, maximize income, not feeding the competition.

Xalanx · « **Reply #45 on:** June 16, 2009, 23:48 »

Have you all considered that it could be like - Getty told StockXpert "announce the JIU / Photos.com stuff and also say something nice about your bigger step-sister, istock, aye?". An order from above, directly. Rather than a not-so-subtle suggestion to start moving your photos to istock, because StockXpert will be shut down?

eppic · « **Reply #46 on:** June 16, 2009, 23:58 »

Hmmmm maybe I should request a payout from StockXpert while I still have the chance! Most of my sales came from Photos.com and Jupiter, so I imagine my sales at StockXpert will really tumble now.

MichaelJay · « **Reply #47 on:** June 17, 2009, 02:00 »

Quote from: Elenathewise on June 16, 2009, 22:28

there is no "select all" option. Well, maybe there is one for exclusives:)

No, there isn't.

gostwyck · « **Reply #48 on:** June 17, 2009, 05:35 »

It is an interesting dilemma that Getty have with StockXpert.

Judging by my own sales, in proportion to the greater collection, StockXpert appear to have annual sales of about $4-5M. That might be chickenfeed in comparison to IS and Getty but nonetheless it is still a valuable asset and it is probably higher than the sales of JIU/PC combined too.

If they close StockXpert down then they lose the value of their asset and StockXpert customers are probably more likely to go to DT/FT/BigStock as they are a closer fit price-wise than IS. Giving the competition a boost is not going to be a particularly attractive option. On the other hand if they don't continue to invest in marketing and infrastructure for StockXpert then it will probably die a slow death anyway.

I can't really see the sense in boosting JIU/PC (with IS images) whilst at the same time ignoring or killing off StockXpert. All 3 companies are still competing for customers against IS __ unless you believe the market is firmly segmented price-wise. In that case you might as well support StockXpert and JIU/PC as they are primarily competing against other agencies. My guess is that they haven't got much choice but to support StockXpert into the future.

What would you do if you were in charge of Getty?

hqimages · « **Reply #49 on:** June 17, 2009, 06:10 »

Quote from: gostwyck on June 17, 2009, 05:35

It is an interesting dilemma that Getty have with StockXpert.

Judging by my own sales, in proportion to the greater collection, StockXpert appear to have annual sales of about $4-5M. That might be chickenfeed in comparison to IS and Getty but nonetheless it is still a valuable asset and it is probably higher than the sales of JIU/PC combined too.

If they close StockXpert down then they lose the value of their asset and StockXpert customers are probably more likely to go to DT/FT/BigStock as they are a closer fit price-wise than IS. Giving the competition a boost is not going to be a particularly attractive option. On the other hand if they don't continue to invest in marketing and infrastructure for StockXpert then it will probably die a slow death anyway.

I can't really see the sense in boosting JIU/PC (with IS images) whilst at the same time ignoring or killing off StockXpert. All 3 companies are still competing for customers against IS __ unless you believe the market is firmly segmented price-wise. In that case you might as well support StockXpert and JIU/PC as they are primarily competing against other agencies. My guess is that they haven't got much choice but to support StockXpert into the future.

What would you do if you were in charge of Getty?

No business will ever compete with itself.. istock and StockXpert share the same business model, therefore StockXpert competes directly with istock, and that is not good business, in fact, it's business class 101, do not compete with yourself. There is no hope for those looking for some, the only hope was that StockXpert could be changed entirely so that it does not compete with istock directly, turn it into a subs site? No they want photos.com for that, so I'm afraid StockXpert is gone.

dirkr · « **Reply #50 on:** June 17, 2009, 06:23 »

Quote from: gostwyck on June 17, 2009, 05:35

It is an interesting dilemma that Getty have with StockXpert.

Judging by my own sales, in proportion to the greater collection, StockXpert appear to have annual sales of about $4-5M. That might be chickenfeed in comparison to IS and Getty but nonetheless it is still a valuable asset and it is probably higher than the sales of JIU/PC combined too.

If they close StockXpert down then they lose the value of their asset and StockXpert customers are probably more likely to go to DT/FT/BigStock as they are a closer fit price-wise than IS. Giving the competition a boost is not going to be a particularly attractive option. On the other hand if they don't continue to invest in marketing and infrastructure for StockXpert then it will probably die a slow death anyway.

I can't really see the sense in boosting JIU/PC (with IS images) whilst at the same time ignoring or killing off StockXpert. All 3 companies are still competing for customers against IS __ unless you believe the market is firmly segmented price-wise. In that case you might as well support StockXpert and JIU/PC as they are primarily competing against other agencies. My guess is that they haven't got much choice but to support StockXpert into the future.

What would you do if you were in charge of Getty?

I don't see such a big problem in keeping the competition inhouse - it's still better than letting the customers move to an outside competitor.
Having different branches and let them compete can be a viable business, so there might be a reason to keep StockXpert alive.

But what I expect: Their margins are greatly different at Istock (paying 20% - 40% depending on exclusivity status and cannister level) and StockXpert (paying 50% and more - they pay 50% based on a credit value of 1$, independent of volume discounts).
That is where they will try to have changes - cut royalties for contributors.
If they do that, what harm is in there for them in keeping a second venue inhouse.

loop · « **Reply #51 on:** June 17, 2009, 06:33 »

I would keep StockXpert as cheaper site, to compete in price with FT and DT, allow exclusives to send content there (different content of what is sent to istock, obviously), and use intensively the site to attract buyers looking for exclusive content to IS. And I would close the free stockexchange site or reduce it to even more crappy content.

But no idea of what they are going to do.

gostwyck · « **Reply #52 on:** June 17, 2009, 06:55 »

Quote from: loop on June 17, 2009, 06:33

I would keep StockXpert as cheaper site, to compete in price with FT and DT, allow exclusives to send content there (different content of what is sent to istock, obviously), and use intensively the site to attract buyers looking for exclusive content to IS. And I would close the free stockexchange site or reduce it to even more crappy content.

That's a good option. They could have the images from IS that are destined for JIU/PC.

borg · « **Reply #53 on:** June 17, 2009, 06:57 »

Why to buy a business of 80 million dollars, and then shut it down...!?

Makes sense only if it was the only competition...

puravida · « **Reply #54 on:** June 17, 2009, 07:11 »

All very excellent speculation. That's just what it is. But yes, I think there is truth in some, if not all of your speculation.

And what should we expect of Getty?

I think their history would be a hint. Getty's business ethics and takeover culture.
We know how they've been treating contributors so far, and this is not going to change.

No established firm changes business ethics and culture overnight.
I would say, expect what Getty has been giving us lately to continue.

astrocady · « **Reply #55 on:** June 17, 2009, 09:24 »

Quote from: hqimages on June 17, 2009, 06:10

No business will ever compete with itself.. istock and StockXpert share the same business model, therefore StockXpert competes directly with istock, and that is not good business, in fact, it's business class 101, do not compete with yourself. There is no hope for those looking for some, the only hope was that StockXpert could be changed entirely so that it does not compete with istock directly, turn it into a subs site? No they want photos.com for that, so I'm afraid StockXpert is gone.

I think, after gutting it all they can, that they'll turn it into a really cheap pay as you go site. Pictures for a buck with 10 cents going to the contributors. Then they will have...
iStock -- premium and unique products at highish prices
photo.com -- subscritpion site with iStock's low selling stock
StockXpert -- ultra cheap without the large upfront charge of subscription sites, offering non-istock photos competing directly with iStocks other contributors.

gostwyck · « **Reply #56 on:** June 17, 2009, 09:29 »

Quote from: astrocady on June 17, 2009, 09:24

I think, after gutting it all they can, that they'll turn it into a really cheap pay as you go site. Pictures for a buck with 10 cents going to the contributors.

I can't see that happening at all. How many contributors would accept 10c a pop? It would also devalue the industry as a whole (as they are doing to some extent with JIU/PC).

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #57 on:** June 17, 2009, 09:44 »

Quote from: gostwyck on June 17, 2009, 05:35

It is an interesting dilemma that Getty have with StockXpert....
What would you do if you were in charge of Getty?

I'd set up a separate inspection system with different rules: creative filtering, raster illustrations and simple vectors are encouraged instead of largely refused. Fill the site with as much cheap imagery as you can, PPD only. Subs are at Photos.com+/JIU. Higher priced stuff at IS and Getty. I would keep populating the Photos.com+/JIU site with content 1 year old (maybe 6 months) and older from StockXpert - you get a stream of new stuff, but give it a shot at PPD first before selling as subs. I wouldn't allow duplicating new content from IS or StockXpert on the subs site.

Oh, and I'd grandfather in to the new inspection system all current StockXpert contributors for vector/raster/3D submissions to the new site. This is especially to catch all the vector contributors who can't get approved for vectors at IS.

travismanley · « **Reply #58 on:** June 17, 2009, 10:07 »

Really pissed about this obviously but, cant say I didnt see it coming when IS announced they would be selling out photos at Photos.com and Jupiterimages. The thing that drives me crazy is I have about five times that amount of photos at SX then I do at IS.

My sales at SX were doing really well to with about 200% more of my sales coming from the partner sites rather than SX itself. This is really disappointing.

gostwyck · « **Reply #59 on:** June 17, 2009, 11:00 »

Quote from: jsnover on June 17, 2009, 09:44

I'd set up a separate inspection system with different rules: creative filtering, raster illustrations and simple vectors are encouraged instead of largely refused. Fill the site with as much cheap imagery as you can, PPD only. Subs are at Photos.com+/JIU. Higher priced stuff at IS and Getty. I would keep populating the Photos.com+/JIU site with content 1 year old (maybe 6 months) and older from StockXpert - you get a stream of new stuff, but give it a shot at PPD first before selling as subs. I wouldn't allow duplicating new content from IS or StockXpert on the subs site.

Oh, and I'd grandfather in to the new inspection system all current StockXpert contributors for vector/raster/3D submissions to the new site. This is especially to catch all the vector contributors who can't get approved for vectors at IS.

That's another good solution too. Gives them an even bigger spread of the potential microstock market.

puravida · « **Reply #60 on:** June 17, 2009, 11:28 »

Quote from: gostwyck on June 17, 2009, 05:35

It is an interesting dilemma that Getty have with StockXpert....
What would you do if you were in charge of Getty?

I would quit and join Corbis

m@m · « **Reply #61 on:** June 17, 2009, 11:39 »

I used the same post on another thread, but I think it may be usefull here as well...

I contacted StockXpert's support asking them about the future of the site as well as the commissions accumulated there, and this is what I got back:

"We have not been told that there is no plan to shut StockXpert down in the short term so you will continue to get earnings from StockXpert. In the event of it closing, you will be informed at that time and more info will be available.

Until then it is business as usual and there is no need for you to worry."

What do you guys think?...does StockXpert might have only 90 more days to live?

runamock · « **Reply #62 on:** June 17, 2009, 11:50 »

Quote from: m@m on June 17, 2009, 11:39

I contacted StockXpert's support asking them about the future of the site as well as the commissions accumulated there, and this is what I got back:

"We have not been told that there is no plan to shut StockXpert down in the short term"

Huh? Then there is a plan to shut StockXpert down

MikLav · « **Reply #63 on:** June 17, 2009, 12:01 »

I just hope they will keep StockXpert, although it doesn't look very promising... Despite the issues with new images my sales are not bad - and StockXpert has different customer base comparing with istock. I am quite sure they will loose a big deal of customers if they close StockXpert and point them to istock.

lisafx · « **Reply #64 on:** June 17, 2009, 12:30 »

Thanks for posting that M@m. They are not denying that StockXpert will close, just saying they haven't heard. That doesn't sound at all promising.

I guess I will stop uploading there. Breaks my heart, though, as sales have continued to be steady for me. In fact, I am having a better month there then I have had in awhile. Maybe customers using up their credits and loading up on sub images in preparation for going elsewhere?

Nothing against Istock, but I hope StockXpert's customers go to SS, DT, etc. instead. Getty's treatment of contributors in this situation has been pitiful.

puravida · « **Reply #65 on:** June 17, 2009, 12:51 »

Quote from: runamock on June 17, 2009, 11:50

Huh? Then there is a plan to shut StockXpert down

at least -not- in the -short term-

this is polticians rhetoric. Getty's CEOs should forget about stock photography and get into politics. they talk the same way:
example:
-"there is (no need) for everyone to panic" -
-"we are (not going) to have another great depression"
- " (not everyone) of us are going to lose our jobs".

puravida · « **Reply #66 on:** June 17, 2009, 13:02 »

Quote from: lisafx on June 17, 2009, 12:30

Thanks for posting that M@m. They are not denying that StockXpert will close, just saying they haven't heard. That doesn't sound at all promising.

I guess I will stop uploading there. Breaks my heart, though, as sales have continued to be steady for me. In fact, I am having a better month there then I have had in awhile. Maybe customers using up their credits and loading up on sub images in preparation for going elsewhere?

Nothing against Istock, but I hope StockXpert's customers go to SS, DT, etc. instead. Getty's treatment of contributors in this situation has been pitiful.

you think this is pitiful? wait till Getty takes over SS, DT,etc.. too

runamock · « **Reply #67 on:** June 17, 2009, 13:08 »

Quote from: puravida on June 17, 2009, 12:51

Quote from: runamock on June 17, 2009, 11:50
Huh? Then there is a plan to shut StockXpert down

at least -not- in the -short term-

this is polticians rhetoric. Getty's CEOs should forget about stock photography and get into politics. they talk the same way:
example:
-"there is (no need) for everyone to panic" -
-"we are (not going) to have another great depression"
- " (not everyone) of us are going to lose our jobs".

'Play on words' but according to the post by m&m they say 'we have not been told that there is no plan'. Not, there is no plan...

Gregor909 · « **Reply #68 on:** June 17, 2009, 13:20 »

Quote from: loop on June 17, 2009, 06:33

I would keep StockXpert as cheaper site, to compete in price with FT and DT, allow exclusives to send content there (different content of what is sent to istock, obviously), and use intensively the site to attract buyers looking for exclusive content to IS. And I would close the free stockexchange site or reduce it to even more crappy content.

But no idea of what they are going to do.

Yes, that's IMO what's most likely going to happen!
And that would explain this very strange statement from one of the moderators on the StockXpert forum;

Quote

In the future if there are royalty changes or other changes that you feel are unfair or that you are not happy about, you can make the decision at that time to remove your images from StockXpert. Until that day comes, I invite you to continue to upload your images to the site.

Milinz · « **Reply #69 on:** June 17, 2009, 13:32 »

Well StockXpert CREW was always fair for me and they never made any thing similar to iStock crew... Any their rejection was stated correctly and they've helped me to understand microstock better and best of all other sites and their reviewers!
Only who can be close to this BEST is lead of acquisition at Shutterstock who always make good decisions as well some people on DT! Lately there are some positive moves at FT also!

SO, I will always remember that STOCKXPERT had one of THE BEST CREW and most fair reviewers in microstock industry!

So, StockXpert guys and girls and all in HAAP MEDIA I really wish to give you credit and my respect for all you've done and you are doing now as true profesionals unlikely as to some amateurs on iStock!

pieman · « **Reply #70 on:** June 17, 2009, 13:34 »

Quote from: Milinz on June 17, 2009, 13:32

So, StockXpert guys and girls and all in HAAP MEDIA I really wish to give you credit and my respect for all you've done and you are doing now as true profesionals unlikely as to some amateurs on iStock!

I was hoping for more cap locks here. If this was the iStockphoto Forums your post would have been rejected.

Squat · « **Reply #71 on:** June 17, 2009, 13:50 »

Quote from: Gregor909 on June 17, 2009, 13:20

Yes, that's IMO what's most likely going to happen!
And that would explain this very strange statement from one of the moderators on the StockXpert forum;

Quote
In the future if there are royalty changes or other changes that you feel are unfair or that you are not happy about, you can make the decision at that time to remove your images from StockXpert. Until that day comes, I invite you to continue to upload your images to the site.

#1 . with this much we have to give StockXpert and the people working there the benefit of the doubt. I don't think they know anything more than what the bosses want them to know.
#2. StockXpert has been a good site to us before this complication started, so I think they deserve a little patience and cooperation from us too.
#3. the statement by the moderator [ you can make the decision at that time to remove your images from StockXpert ] is something that StockXpert has allowed us to do freely, viz to delete our images
anytime we want. This is something no other sites allow us to do.
I think we should bear with them and wish them well because of this, especially point #3.
They cannot turn things around if we don't give them a chance .
If not, like the mod said, we can delete the images when the time comes that the terms are no longer fair to us.

runamock · « **Reply #72 on:** June 17, 2009, 13:58 »

Quote from: pieman on June 17, 2009, 13:34

Quote from: Milinz on June 17, 2009, 13:32

So, StockXpert guys and girls and all in HAAP MEDIA I really wish to give you credit and my respect for all you've done and you are doing now as true profesionals unlikely as to some amateurs on iStock!

I was hoping for more cap locks here. If this was the iStockphoto Forums your post would have been rejected.

willie · « **Reply #73 on:** June 17, 2009, 14:20 »

Quote from: runamock on June 17, 2009, 13:58

Quote from: pieman on June 17, 2009, 13:34
Quote from: Milinz on June 17, 2009, 13:32

So, StockXpert guys and girls and all in HAAP MEDIA I really wish to give you credit and my respect for all you've done and you are doing now as true profesionals unlikely as to some amateurs on iStock!

I was hoping for more cap locks here. If this was the iStockphoto Forums your post would have been rejected.

rofl Milinz the human sequencer

massman · « **Reply #74 on:** June 17, 2009, 14:31 »

Quote from: lisafx on June 17, 2009, 12:30

Nothing against Istock, but I hope StockXpert's customers go to SS, DT, etc. instead. Getty's treatment of contributors in this situation has been pitiful.

I think this may be the case, the Photos.com collection is going to look pretty feeble without the StockXpert content, at least in the short term, or perhaps always, with IS upload restrictions and rejections for 'not stock' they may never catch up.

lisafx · « **Reply #75 on:** June 17, 2009, 15:51 »

Quote from: massman on June 17, 2009, 14:31

I think this may be the case, the Photos.com collection is going to look pretty feeble without the StockXpert content, at least in the short term, or perhaps always, with IS upload restrictions and rejections for 'not stock' they may never catch up.

^^ So true.

Not to mention the contributors with large ports that will be opting out because of the lowball commission reduction, and also those that won't take the time to opt thousands of images in one-by-one.

melastmohican · « **Reply #76 on:** June 17, 2009, 15:58 »

Why they keep deactivating files that may violate copyrights or trademarks? Just got messages about two files that show details of luxury cars.

Milinz · « **Reply #77 on:** June 17, 2009, 16:14 »

Quote from: pieman on June 17, 2009, 13:34

Quote from: Milinz on June 17, 2009, 13:32

So, StockXpert guys and girls and all in HAAP MEDIA I really wish to give you credit and my respect for all you've done and you are doing now as true profesionals unlikely as to some amateurs on iStock!

I was hoping for more cap locks here. If this was the iStockphoto Forums your post would have been rejected.

Hopefully this is not iStockphoto Forum

And I am looking this from competition aspect where HAAP MEDIA comes out from good deal for them and iStock pops-in...

It means less work for HAAP MEDIA (StockXpert) and more for iStock - also, money stream is changed from Hungary to Canada!

Well, I am based in Serbia and HAAP MEDIA is in Hungary - so we are neighbours and I like to do business with my neigbours!

Istock gave me only frustration until now... StockXpert made me decent sales and good money.

So, what you were talking about locking? Maybe they should ban me because I say what I think? Sorry all who don't agree with me - it is my right to think, act and talk differently!

Istock guys know exactly what I think about their policy, their reviews, organization and I stated that to them long time ago! Well - that may be one of reasons why my images are 'not needed' there

bittersweet · « **Reply #78 on:** June 17, 2009, 16:59 »

Quote from: Milinz on June 17, 2009, 16:14

Istock guys know exactly what I think about their policy, their reviews, organization and I stated that to them long time ago! Well - that may be one of reasons why my images are 'not needed' there

You might be on to something there!

Milinz · « **Reply #79 on:** June 17, 2009, 17:16 »

Quote from: whatalife on June 17, 2009, 16:59

Quote from: Milinz on June 17, 2009, 16:14

Istock guys know exactly what I think about their policy, their reviews, organization and I stated that to them long time ago! Well - that may be one of reasons why my images are 'not needed' there

You might be on to something there!

LOL!

Really? I don't care about their policy, organization and reviews because all that sucks!

I am sure that founders of iStock didn't had in mind such policy when they've started site.

Anyway I just care to prove that their policy sucks and I already did that with their LCV rejected images on other sites earning money!

The last what I tend to do with them is to get approved as illustrator and upload only ONE vector file just for joke and to make my payout money - then there is bailout and disabling all files I have with them keeping accepted contributor status for some better times

dasar · « **Reply #80 on:** June 17, 2009, 17:26 »

Since there is valid concern within the RF market place that Getty is removing all competition via its acquisitions and pricing controls, then a short note to the United States Department of Justice Anti-Trust Division expressing your concerns would be an appropriate and effective way to voice your opinion.

<a href=" newbielink:http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/newcase [nonactive]" rel="nofollow"> newbielink:http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/newcase [nonactive][/url]

The Sherman Act also makes it a crime to monopolize any part of interstate commerce. An unlawful monopoly exists when only one firm controls the market for a product or service, and it has obtained that market power, not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anticompetitive conduct.

Milinz · « **Reply #81 on:** June 17, 2009, 17:28 »

Quote from: dasar on June 17, 2009, 17:26

Since there is valid concern within the RF market place that Getty is removing all competition via its acquisitions and pricing controls, then a short note to the United States Department of Justice Anti-Trust Division expressing your concerns would be an appropriate and effective way to voice your opinion.

<a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/newcase" rel="nofollow">www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/newcase[/url]

The Sherman Act also makes it a crime to monopolize any part of interstate commerce. An unlawful monopoly exists when only one firm controls the market for a product or service, and it has obtained that market power, not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anticompetitive conduct.

Getty decision makers know that better than US government! Trust me on this: They are moving on world theatre... They are not affected by US law... There is Corbis as couner-vague!

What they did now is just making EU positioned company making less and Canadian company making more money.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Is StockXpert going down? (Read 20470 times)

Milinz

dbvirago

grp_photo

lisafx

Milinz

Milinz

Milinz

lisafx

Milinz

Milinz

WarrenPrice

Milinz

Xalanx

m@m

lisafx

Milinz

lisafx

Milinz

bittersweet

Milinz

Milinz

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors