Rob, you're not exclusive any more. Am I just spacing something I already knew or is this a recent change?

Will you be uploading elsewhere? And you can't be a geezer or that'd make me even more ancient

darn it.. more competition!

Quote from: michealo on February 26, 2011, 11:46

...I am talking about the ROI from events. Not from PP from IS.

@Sean I sure you made a return on your HQ lypse investment? No?

I don't know how Sean did, but I went to the HQ lypse and have not made in sales what it cost me to attend - airfare, hotel, taxis, meals, $500 ticket cost. That's absolutely fine as I figured the experience would be worth it for me - an opportunity learn that has real value IMO.

I've talked with others who attended that lypse and have attended others (this was my one and only). The common thread seems to be the experience, not the financial payback. So if someone somewhere once did make it pay I don't think that changes the general situation for most attendees.

The top selling photo from Malta had over 900 dls, I am pretty sure for that contributor that that photo alone probably paid for their trip.
The top selling photo from Berlin had over 600 dls, and of course this isn't the only picture they had.

I am not an iStock apologist but facts are facts. Lots of contributors make money from official lypses.

Personally I have never made my money back from an official lypse but I am happy to accept I'm not all that great a photographer ...

I've never been to an iStockalypse but I have been to several minilypses.  the Red Rock events in Utah - I attended the first two, paid for themselves within a year (just looking at sales from photos taken at that event only).  Other minilypses I've been less fortunate and have not recouped what I spent.  However.. the friendships I made and the many different things I learned were well worth the price.  It just all depends on how you look at it. 

Can I just say how nauseating it is to read all the "thank you Kelly" posts on the Istock thread about this?!  

Note to the fawning sycophants confused and misguided - Kelly/Istock/Getty, aren't responsible for getting you this "raise".  Nobody at HQ "fought" for you - least of all Kelly "money isn't going to be what makes you happy" Thompson.  

They are only doing this in response to the majority, who opted out of their insulting, cheapo PP royalties in the first place.  Believe me, if they could get away with keeping your royalties low and just sweetening the pot for the holdouts, they would do it.  

+1

If it were up to Kelly/istock/getty, most contributors wouldn't be getting paid at all. And they are almost there!

Quote from: lisafx on February 28, 2011, 10:28

Can I just say how nauseating it is to read all the "thank you Kelly" posts on the Istock thread about this?!  

Note to the fawning sycophants confused and misguided - Kelly/Istock/Getty, aren't responsible for getting you this "raise".  Nobody at HQ "fought" for you - least of all Kelly "money isn't going to be what makes you happy" Thompson.   

They are only doing this in response to the majority, who opted out of their insulting, cheapo PP royalties in the first place.  Believe me, if they could get away with keeping your royalties low and just sweetening the pot for the holdouts, they would do it.  

Lisa, why don't you just tell it as it is, instead of beating around the bush? I just want to say thank you Kelly for this raise, I know we have helped line your pockets beyond belief, but it is a small price to pay for enriching our lives. I would not be half the person I am today without iStock, thank you Kelly and may God bless you and all your children and all your childrens children, you have truly touched the lives of so many and indeed you are a truly noble and gracious person. Thank you Kelly, thank you!!! 

 

Well, most of my opinions on this have been well covered, but I will add to the chorus in case anyone's counting up who feels how...

My first reaction is happiness that, apparently, the boycott of TS by many of us has been successful in starving it for content.  It is rewarding to have this tangible confirmation that if enough of us band together, we can affect the conditions we work under. 

Of course, .28 is ridiculous.  I've seen the figure of an 8 cent raise mentioned several times, but for independents it's just a 3 cent raise.  And still 2 cents under what we were making through StockXpert two years ago.  Not tempting.  Sorry. 

Funny thing is, if they had simply kept us at the .30 we were making when they bought StockXpert, I would have stayed opted in.  But now, seeing how Getty wants to undermine the fairer agencies, how they have been directing Istock buyers to Thinkstock, and their insatiable greed and ruthlessness toward contributors and buyers alike, I can't imagine myself supporting them, even if the .30 was offered.

Because of the income I have built up on Istock, I can't afford to quit them right now.  But I don't have any TS income, so I can definitely afford not to start up with them in the first place.   I object to helping Getty further undermine the industry where I make my living.  And fortunately, the lowball offer of .28 makes the decision that much easier

And to everyone who has been opted in to the partner program and is getting a raise as a result of those who have stood firm against it:  You're welcome.

Thank you, Lisa and everyone else!   

I totally agree with Lisa's post and want out of Getty soooooooooooo bad, but I just can't swing it yet financially.  However, I also can't justify myself contributing my hard work to a company that acts like a giant robber baron, so I stopped uploading new content when they moved StockXpert to TS.  Currently I'm developing new avenues for revenue and will completely leave the Getty racket once my income is up to a certain level.

What's happening in Wisconsin isn't unlike what Getty is doing to our industry...the little guy always making concessions and sacrifices so the big guy can take more and more and more.  Enough already!     

I used to routinely earn $500 per month at IS.  Now I'm lucky if I break $100.  TS earnings through StockXpert and IS combined are less than half of what my StockXpert earnings alone were before Getty bought Jupiter.  None of the other agencies...not one of them!...has been losing money for me.  Only Getty...and now they have the audacity to preach how money doesn't make people happy?  F* 'em.  Getty isn't profiting me one bit and I'll be ending my relationship with them in the next few months once I have my new revenue streams up and running.

Wow, 20% of your former earnings at IS?!  That is a shocking drop!  Certainly there are a large combination of factors at work, but I have to wonder if migration of your sales to PP may be involved?

Don't blame you for developing other revenue streams.  I think that's the smart thing for any of us who rely on our photography income to pay our bills.  Hope they work out well for you

Quote from: Komar on February 28, 2011, 10:51

Quote from: lisafx on February 28, 2011, 10:28

Can I just say how nauseating it is to read all the "thank you Kelly" posts on the Istock thread about this?!  

Note to the fawning sycophants confused and misguided - Kelly/Istock/Getty, aren't responsible for getting you this "raise".  Nobody at HQ "fought" for you - least of all Kelly "money isn't going to be what makes you happy" Thompson.   

They are only doing this in response to the majority, who opted out of their insulting, cheapo PP royalties in the first place.  Believe me, if they could get away with keeping your royalties low and just sweetening the pot for the holdouts, they would do it.  

Lisa, why don't you just tell it as it is, instead of beating around the bush? I just want to say thank you Kelly for this raise, I know we have helped line your pockets beyond belief, but it is a small price to pay for enriching our lives. I would not be half the person I am today without iStock, thank you Kelly and may God bless you and all your children and all your children's children, you have truly touched the lives of so many and indeed you are a truly noble and gracious person. Thank you Kelly, thank you!!! 

You guys are awesome!   

Money doesn't make me happy?  BS.     I'd love to read Kelly's post where he says that. 

What doesn't make me happy is watching my monthly income decrease month after month after month and increasingly worrying whether I'll be able to pay the electric bill or rent, all because of Getty's cannibalistic decisions.  I used to routinely earn $500 per month at IS.  Now I'm lucky if I break $100.  TS earnings through StockXpert and IS combined are less than half of what my StockXpert earnings alone were before Getty bought Jupiter.  None of the other agencies...not one of them!...has been losing money for me.  Only Getty...and now they have the audacity to preach how money doesn't make people happy?  F* 'em.  Getty isn't profiting me one bit and I'll be ending my relationship with them in the next few months once I have my new revenue streams up and running.

Kelly's post where he says "But money isn�t going to be what makes you all happy."  is here:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=253522&page=1 

it is in the 3rd to the last paragraph of the first post in the thread. 

Quote from: lisafx on March 01, 2011, 15:18

Wow, 20% of your former earnings at IS?!  That is a shocking drop!  Certainly there are a large combination of factors at work, but I have to wonder if migration of your sales to PP may be involved?

(My bold) I was wondering the same. I can't help noticing that several contributors to the PP, including some of our learned and outspoken members here, appear to be complaining of particulary severe drops in income at IS.

Coincidence or could it be 'cause and effect'?

I've taken a nasty hit at iS in the last two months and I rather thought that might end up getting linked to the PP. However, why would cannibalisation take place this year and not last year as the system was already up and running then? Or has there been a massive surge in PP sales in the last two months (despite the conclusion being touted that the commission rise shows that TS is suffering)?

The 15% pay cut obviously has to be taken into consideration this year, as well as the broken search and the impact of the various price hikes on buyers between last Feb and this one. In terms of downloads, which are a better indicator than earnings, I am down 28% year-on-year for regular sales. But last February I was already 50% below my peak sales volume in 2006, as the decline has been going on for years.

I also see other well-established suppliers who have not contributed to the PP complaining of similar or worse year-on-year declines to mine and other people who are happy with the month.

So the data don't seem to support any conclusions.

Quote from: Karimala on March 01, 2011, 13:54

I used to routinely earn $500 per month at IS.  Now I'm lucky if I break $100.  TS earnings through StockXpert and IS combined are less than half of what my StockXpert earnings alone were before Getty bought Jupiter.  None of the other agencies...not one of them!...has been losing money for me.  Only Getty...and now they have the audacity to preach how money doesn't make people happy?  F* 'em.  Getty isn't profiting me one bit and I'll be ending my relationship with them in the next few months once I have my new revenue streams up and running.

Wow, 20% of your former earnings at IS?!  That is a shocking drop!  Certainly there are a large combination of factors at work, but I have to wonder if migration of your sales to PP may be involved?

Don't blame you for developing other revenue streams.  I think that's the smart thing for any of us who rely on our photography income to pay our bills.  Hope they work out well for you

My drop from $500 to $100 per month has been occurring over a period of a few years and started with iStock's first search engine tweak.  That alone dropped my earnings by about 1/3 and it's never recovered.  Slowly but surely, with every little search engine tweak, every little price increase, every freakin' new "Woo yay" moment, my income has slowly been whittled away.  The latest drop may very well be due to my participation in the PP program, but it's just one drop out of many.  It's just not worth it anymore to stay with IS.  Paying them 84% of a license sale is simply too costly for my business, and they have effectively priced themselves out of my market.   

My drop from $500 to $100 per month has been occurring over a period of a few years and started with iStock's first search engine tweak.  That alone dropped my earnings by about 1/3 and it's never recovered.  Slowly but surely, with every little search engine tweak, every little price increase, every freakin' new "Woo yay" moment, my income has slowly been whittled away.  The latest drop may very well be due to my participation in the PP program, but it's just one drop out of many.  It's just not worth it anymore to stay with IS.  Paying them 84% of a license sale is simply too costly for my business, and they have effectively priced themselves out of my market.   

Ah.  I didn't realize it had been a gradual decline.  Things have been going downhill there for some time, definitely.  Certainly they have accelerated since September, though. 

One disaster after another.  How long can Istock sustain this? 

Guess iStock didn't lie.  They said they'd deliver PP payouts by the 30th, and here they come.  I've seen two of them already, at a munificent .28 per.

Wow, me too. I thought I had 25 cent sales but I'm so happy that I got 3 cents more each. Celebration time! <where's that sarcastic font when I need it> Yup, Feb 30th. here we are.

Now we can wait for March and see if it's going to be Wed. the 30th or the Tuesday after the last Friday, or ?