pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Photos.com and JIUUnlimited to be handled by IS  (Read 54383 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lisafx

« Reply #100 on: June 17, 2009, 16:23 »
0
Am I the only one who has noticed that istock exclusives have been silent on the subject of independents getting the shaft with the .05 royalty decrease?

Not that I should be surprised, but it is somewhat disappointing after a number of us where very active in sharing our experiences with Photos.com and JIU and very vocal in advocating a better deal for exclusives.

Some of the most vocal and militant exclusives involved in the "opt out" campaign are suddenly apologists for Getty/HF now that it is only independents getting lowballed? 

Can someone explain this to me?


Milinz

« Reply #101 on: June 17, 2009, 16:36 »
0
What is there to explain?

You see your stats at StockXpert. Just think about how many similar stats are there...

They will try to transfer that sales to iStock exclusives...

But, I don't think that with independents excluded they will have great deal for their buyers! We as non-exclusives bring much more than they can bring to market in order of istock standard blabla standards... I was always working with breaking the standards and rules - it is called OUT OF THE BOX - with good success. I am quite sure they will have uniform images on photos.com/JUI and all that will draw buyers from istock to one of that two bigger competitiors or to veer and other sites not owned by Getty ;-)

Anyway, in long term istock will go down for sure because Getty don't care about people - they care only about pluses and minuses with management making that minuses dissapear and pluses multiply!

So... In some time there will be some similar message posted on istock stating that contributors are free to apply to photos.com and JUI  :D
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 16:47 by Milinz »

m@m

« Reply #102 on: June 17, 2009, 17:29 »
0
Am I the only one who has noticed that istock exclusives have been silent on the subject of independents getting the shaft with the .05 royalty decrease?

Not that I should be surprised, but it is somewhat disappointing after a number of us where very active in sharing our experiences with Photos.com and JIU and very vocal in advocating a better deal for exclusives.

Some of the most vocal and militant exclusives involved in the "opt out" campaign are suddenly apologists for Getty/HF now that it is only independents getting lowballed? 

Can someone explain this to me?

Sad to so say Lisa, but did you really spected things to have gone differently?

« Reply #103 on: June 17, 2009, 17:32 »
0
I took a look at the Photos.com forum.  

LOTS of buyers PISSED that the site changed when PhotosPlus started, ... lots of new pictures, but not on their subscription plan. Basically playing a heavy hand to force the upgrade to their buyers.  

Interestingly, a few were threatening defection to iStock...  

Anyway, it was an interesting read.  (We aren't going to be affected by it at all. We opted out on StockXpert, and we are opting out on iStock.)

Gebbie

bittersweet

« Reply #104 on: June 17, 2009, 17:38 »
0
Some of the most vocal and militant exclusives involved in the "opt out" campaign are suddenly apologists for Getty/HF now that it is only independents getting lowballed?  
I haven't been following the IS forums for a while and definitely lost interested in this subs thing early on, since I didn't intend to participate.

Are you saying that there are exclusives on the iS forums saying that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing?? No wonder we get such a bad rap.

ETA: I went and read the last couple of pages of the thread, and I guess I see what you mean. However, I suspect Sean might be right about many exclusives, having already made their choice about participating, have just not been keeping up with further developments in the situation (except maybe for those are are planning to opt-in). (Not trying to be an apologist for them, just thinking out loud.)  ;)
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 17:46 by whatalife »

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #105 on: June 17, 2009, 17:49 »
0
Am I the only one who has noticed that istock exclusives have been silent on the subject of independents getting the shaft with the .05 royalty decrease?

Not that I should be surprised, but it is somewhat disappointing after a number of us where very active in sharing our experiences with Photos.com and JIU and very vocal in advocating a better deal for exclusives.

Some of the most vocal and militant exclusives involved in the "opt out" campaign are suddenly apologists for Getty/HF now that it is only independents getting lowballed? 

Can someone explain this to me?

Surprised me much too. I thought the exclusives were unhappy with being screwed, O well, as they say, silence mean consent. It's a terrible thought but once you (Arschkriecher ) used to lick, it's hard to stand up shout (* Bwana, No)
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 18:02 by puravida »

bittersweet

« Reply #106 on: June 17, 2009, 17:52 »
0
So you think there's no possibility that those who believe that even the modified exclusive plan sucks have already opted out, and have spoken in that way, rather than ranting further on the forum about it?

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #107 on: June 17, 2009, 18:09 »
0
If you're asking me (whatalife). I say that exclusive have no choice, unlike the indies. They either roll over and die, or bitch under their breath.
Other than a handful who were outspoken, I think most of them, even Sean, were pretty softspoken. A change of character from the heavy handed brash attitude they once had here in this forum whenever someone screams at IS.
Out of character? that's only to put it mildly, a gross understatement.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 18:12 by puravida »

bittersweet

« Reply #108 on: June 17, 2009, 18:30 »
0
They have the choice of whether or not to participate. Many I have spoken to have opted out.

I'm not I get what you are saying with the "softspoken" stuff. Are you saying that you are surprised we aren't screaming to defend IS on this particular issue? Could it be because some of us agree with what is being said? I guess that doesn't go along with the favored stereotype of the exclusive sheeple.

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #109 on: June 17, 2009, 18:51 »
0
No, I was expecting the strong minded exclusives to form a coalition to migrate en masse out of exclusivity in protest to show their disapproval to Getty's heavy handedness.  If that doesn't move Getty to retract their action, it would at least shift the power with a great number of strong portfolios being made available elsewhere.
Shaking the tree that buyers would move elsewhere too, but Getty knows none of these strong hearts would dare move a muscle like this. NATO.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 18:57 by puravida »

bittersweet

« Reply #110 on: June 17, 2009, 19:36 »
0
No, I was expecting the strong minded exclusives to form a coalition to migrate en masse out of exclusivity in protest to show their disapproval to Getty's heavy handedness. 

I don't know about anyone else or a coalition, and they probably don't really give a flip, but that's exactly what I did.

« Reply #111 on: June 17, 2009, 19:49 »
0
No, I was expecting the strong minded exclusives to form a coalition to migrate en masse out of exclusivity in protest to show their disapproval to Getty's heavy handedness.  If that doesn't move Getty to retract their action, it would at least shift the power with a great number of strong portfolios being made available elsewhere.
Shaking the tree that buyers would move elsewhere too, but Getty knows none of these strong hearts would dare move a muscle like this. NATO.

Sorry, I'm opting out at this point.  I don't see anything huge to protest over right now.  Either you want to participate or you don't.

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #112 on: June 17, 2009, 19:50 »
0
No, I was expecting the strong minded exclusives to form a coalition to migrate en masse out of exclusivity in protest to show their disapproval to Getty's heavy handedness. 

I don't know about anyone else or a coalition, and they probably don't really give a flip, but that's exactly what I did.

Wow, that's awesome. I wish you good results ! There should be more like you!

bittersweet

« Reply #113 on: June 17, 2009, 20:30 »
0
No, I was expecting the strong minded exclusives to form a coalition to migrate en masse out of exclusivity in protest to show their disapproval to Getty's heavy handedness. 

I don't know about anyone else or a coalition, and they probably don't really give a flip, but that's exactly what I did.

Wow, that's awesome. I wish you good results ! There should be more like you!

Well, thanks, but my opinion on this has stayed the same. Everyone has to make their own choice for their own reasons and it's not up to me to browbeat someone else into agreeing with what I've decided for myself.

« Reply #114 on: June 17, 2009, 22:18 »
0
So you think there's no possibility that those who believe that even the modified exclusive plan sucks have already opted out, and have spoken in that way, rather than ranting further on the forum about it?

That's my position. I've said I don't like the original changes, said it's a lousy business choice in the original threads - and for what it's worth I think as far as Getty is concerned this one is even worse, because of what it does to independent contributors - it makes it very difficult for the independents who are prolific shooters to get their ports up in large volumes on the Gety owned subs site- and it's that sort of continuing volume of new stufff that  subs sites need to get people to keep on coming back and renewing their subscriptions. totally wierd. For exclusives it means less competition on photos.com/JUI so subs sales of their underperforming stuff may go better there- but it makes competition between istock itself and the subs much more likely as there will be more overlap betwen the two sites and much more co-identification so istock itself it more likely to lose sales. All in all very very strange marketing. Let alone the issues about treatment of suppliers.

But there's no point rehashing things on the istock forums again. I've said my piece multiple times and been ignored.   Nothing I can do except opt out.

« Reply #115 on: June 17, 2009, 22:37 »
0
I think we are automatically opted out unless you opted in, I never opted in in the first place, so Istock won't get my images for this crappy deal.. It's unfortunate to lose the income from StockXpert though.. Getty is typical corporate America and unfortunately they will listen to their board and investors and not to their contributors so I will just do my part to not help them screw us more..

« Reply #116 on: June 17, 2009, 22:53 »
0
So you think there's no possibility that those who believe that even the modified exclusive plan sucks have already opted out, and have spoken in that way, rather than ranting further on the forum about it?
That's about where I am - I opted out and will stay opted out unless something changes. I'm sorry Lisa feels that independents got hung out to dry by exclusives, but I see a rather more fragmented situation. There were exclusives who (to my way of thinking) are slitting their own throats and everyone else's in the process by putting content both on iStock and on the partner sites.

There's one diamond independent who said he'd opted in (in the IS forums) - this type of thing undercuts other independents' ability to get Getty's attention when they lose a ton of content after they drop the StockXpert stuff.  Seems you should be at least as upset about the lack of solidarity in the indepdent ranks. Both hurt contributors in the long run.

I looked at the possibility of going independent again when this whole mess started, but honestly with the situation at the other micros at the moment, it really isn't a very appealing prospect. FT and DT have or are about to cut commissions. 123rf and BigStock sales haven't been good for many, and quite a number seem to have had SS (long the strong lead dog in the group of other agencies) not do so well.

As I see it the only thing that will change Getty's mind is when the Photos.com+/JIU subscribers yell at them because there's a huge drop in available images. At that point I assume they'll rethink their commission grab and offer something more reasaonable. Talking isn't going to do squat at this point, IMO.

So, if you want change, opt out. If you take the money and opt in, then don't complain about the outcome.

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #117 on: June 17, 2009, 23:17 »
0

-------------------->>>
There's one diamond independent who said he'd opted in (in the IS forums) - this type of thing undercuts other independents' ability to get Getty's attention when they lose a ton of content after they drop the StockXpert stuff.  Seems you should be at least as upset about the lack of solidarity in the indepdent ranks. Both hurt contributors in the long run.


--->>>should be at least as upset about the lack of solidarity in the indepdent ranks===>>
YES, self interest is a hideous double edge sword.

SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #118 on: June 17, 2009, 23:23 »
0
I'm an exclusive - the announcement is a bad deal for independents. if you hold out for a better deal and are successful, that's good for exclusives in the long run too. Most contributors have already made their decisions and aren't going back to those threads. expecting anyone to stand up for anyone in an istock thread is unrealistic. the alliances shift so much, it's like watching Survivor.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2009, 23:49 by hawk_eye »

« Reply #119 on: June 18, 2009, 02:46 »
0
No, I was expecting the strong minded exclusives to form a coalition to migrate en masse out of exclusivity in protest to show their disapproval to Getty's heavy handedness.  If that doesn't move Getty to retract their action, it would at least shift the power with a great number of strong portfolios being made available elsewhere.
Shaking the tree that buyers would move elsewhere too, but Getty knows none of these strong hearts would dare move a muscle like this. NATO.

I have to wonder whether such a move would play directly into grubby hands of Getty, instantly improving their bottom line, somewhere some Suits would get a bonus. And history would indicate that 'elsewhere' will become a smaller place.

bittersweet

« Reply #120 on: June 18, 2009, 05:47 »
0
No, I was expecting the strong minded exclusives to form a coalition to migrate en masse out of exclusivity in protest to show their disapproval to Getty's heavy handedness.  If that doesn't move Getty to retract their action, it would at least shift the power with a great number of strong portfolios being made available elsewhere.
Shaking the tree that buyers would move elsewhere too, but Getty knows none of these strong hearts would dare move a muscle like this. NATO.

I have to wonder whether such a move would play directly into grubby hands of Getty, instantly improving their bottom line, somewhere some Suits would get a bonus. And history would indicate that 'elsewhere' will become a smaller place.

Not that there is a snowball's chance in hell of it happening, but losing a significant number of exclusives, who then turn around and duplicate their formerly exclusive to istock wares on competing sites with lower prices and higher commissions would negate much of why (it is widely argued) buyers were willing to pay the higher prices in the first place.

I harbor absolutely no delusions that my individual action is going to "stick it to Getty" even a little bit. I am feeling a whole lot better about myself though now that I won't be completely at the mercy of whatever their next surprise is going to be.

« Reply #121 on: June 18, 2009, 07:37 »
0
Lets hope that buyers at Photos.com and JUI will be informed they can find all removed images at StockXpert...if it stays alive of course.

lisafx

« Reply #122 on: June 18, 2009, 15:11 »
0

ETA: I went and read the last couple of pages of the thread, and I guess I see what you mean. However, I suspect Sean might be right about many exclusives, having already made their choice about participating, have just not been keeping up with further developments in the situation (except maybe for those are are planning to opt-in). (Not trying to be an apologist for them, just thinking out loud.)  ;)

I normally don't whine about stuff like this.  Must have been at a low ebb yesterday when I wrote this gripe.  I didn't see Sean's response as I have been afraid to check in at the istock thread to see if I have been burned in effigy ;)

That does make sense though, about not keeping up after making their own decisions.  It's just a bummer that non-exclusives are getting hosed and hardly a peep from anybody (at the time I posted).

bittersweet

« Reply #123 on: June 18, 2009, 15:17 »
0
Maybe the more important actions are the quiet ones and not the ones that are "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"  ;)

lisafx

« Reply #124 on: June 18, 2009, 15:24 »
0


There's one diamond independent who said he'd opted in (in the IS forums) - this type of thing undercuts other independents' ability to get Getty's attention when they lose a ton of content after they drop the StockXpert stuff.  Seems you should be at least as upset about the lack of solidarity in the indepdent ranks. Both hurt contributors in the long run.


If you mean me, I am not happy about that and already made the same point up a bit further up in this thread.  And in addition to the diamond there is a high level, prolific gold independent who also said she's opting in.  Personally I think they are nuts.  

Don't know yet what the real biggies - Yuri, Andres, et al. are planning to do.  They don't seem to bother with forums much.  Maybe it's no big deal to them.  Hope I am that rich one day that this stuff doesn't matter to me either ;)

Very pertinent Shakespeare quote Whatalife.  Hope you are right :D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
photos.com

Started by dbvirago New Sites - General

6 Replies
8162 Views
Last post October 02, 2006, 05:02
by pelmof
2 Replies
3413 Views
Last post March 31, 2007, 23:32
by a.k.a.-tom
1 Replies
3643 Views
Last post July 05, 2007, 20:00
by steve-oh
23 Replies
11276 Views
Last post February 17, 2011, 11:32
by TheSmilingAssassin
3 Replies
2711 Views
Last post March 24, 2016, 10:30
by PeterChigmaroff

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors