Author Topic: iStock to start Subscription packages. (Read 54322 times)

bittersweet · « **Reply #150 on:** April 21, 2008, 11:14 »

Quote from: Waldo4 on April 21, 2008, 10:41

It relates to the minimum guarantee. I have not found the minimum guarantee per credit language (please correct me if I am wrong). It seems moreso that they guarantee a bare minimum, that no file can be sold that will net a royalty of less than .19, but that only relates to the smallest files. From what I have seen it is entirely possible that for larger files that # can in fact dip below .19 per credit, they just guarantee that you will get at least .19 for the download.

I'm not entirely sure that I'm understanding exactly what you are saying, but this is what they have said. The minimum *per credit* price that we will be paid on is 94 cents, so that 19 cents per credit is the 20% royalty paid to non-exclusives/base level contributors. Other canister level exclusives will receive at least their percentage of that 94 cents. This is a per credit used, not per image downloaded, payment. They have said that in some cases this may mean that they are paying out more than they are taking in for a single download, but that overall they think it will work out profitably for everyone (due to the fact that they will keep 100% on days the sub is not used).

Does that clear up what you were confused about? Or am I completely missing it?

ErickN · « **Reply #151 on:** April 21, 2008, 11:20 »

Quote from: Waldo4 on April 21, 2008, 10:41

I have not found the minimum guarantee per credit language (please correct me if I am wrong). It seems moreso that they guarantee a bare minimum, that no file can be sold that will net a royalty of less than .19, but that only relates to the smallest files. From what I have seen it is entirely possible that for larger files that # can in fact dip below .19 per credit, they just guarantee that you will get at least .19 for the download.

In the FAQ page, they talk about a "minimum payout per credit", not per download : http://www.istockphoto.com/opt-out-info.php

Though, they insist on saying : "You will never earn less per credit than you do now", which (as I said in my previous post) is at least misleading (you can earn less per credit than you do now, if you currently earn more on average than the minimum).

Quote from: Waldo4 on April 21, 2008, 10:41

However I do think that the two extreme cases, where the customer downloads the quota completely triggering the .19 floor, or vice versa where you get an only sale lottery ticket, will be rare cases. The full quotas will show up at first, but over time as the novelty wears off we'll see on average that just about every sub sale is from a customer partially using their quota.

I hope you're right about the future partial use of the quotas. But I don't think that the triggering of the minimum payout ($0.19) will be such a rare case. Sub buyers don't need to use their full quotas to make it happen :

- In the FAQ first example, a buyer with 30 credits/day uses 10 credits including 5 on one of your images, you earn $1 ($0.2 per credit, we're already almost at the minimum)

- If the same buyer uses only 12 credits, including 5 on one of your images, your earning ends at a calculated $0.83 ($0.17 per credit), so it will be increased to $0.95 (the minimum $0.19 per credit). That's for a buyer using only 40% of his/her daily quota.

(examples are based on non-exclusive minimum $0.19/credit, but they remain valid for exclusives too).

Waldo4 · « **Reply #152 on:** April 21, 2008, 11:31 »

Yeah I see that, my bad, all of the earlier stuff that I had read had not been disambiguated between minimum payout and minimum payout per credit, but alas they fixed it and I was wrong (good). Disregard the beginning of my last post.

madelaide · « **Reply #153 on:** April 21, 2008, 12:28 »

Quote from: ErickN on April 21, 2008, 06:55

But a quick and dirty analysis of my recent (ppd) sales shows an average royalty of around $0.24/credit (26% more than the minimum $0.19).

That's exactly my situation. I'm staying opted in for the start, and see how it develops.

A question I saw in the forum, but then no answer was posted (it seems). Given that subs sales earnings are in fact calculated according to the total dlds of the subscriber that day, do we only get to know how much we got from a subs sale the following day?

Regards,
Adelaide

CofkoCof · « **Reply #154 on:** April 21, 2008, 12:32 »

Quote from: madelaide on April 21, 2008, 12:28

Quote from: ErickN on April 21, 2008, 06:55
But a quick and dirty analysis of my recent (ppd) sales shows an average royalty of around $0.24/credit (26% more than the minimum $0.19).

That's exactly my situation. I'm staying opted in for the start, and see how it develops.

A question I saw in the forum, but then no answer was posted (it seems). Given that subs sales earnings are in fact calculated according to the total dlds of the subscriber that day, do we only get to know how much we got from a subs sale the following day?

Regards,
Adelaide

Yes, I think calculations will be done at midnight. So you might wake up and find nothing or you might get a hold of all those unspent daily quotas.

madelaide · « **Reply #155 on:** April 21, 2008, 12:43 »

Quote from: CofkoCof on April 21, 2008, 12:32

Yes, I think calculations will be done at midnight. So you might wake up and find nothing or you might get a hold of all those unspent daily quotas.

Just to make things more complicate, doesn't the 24h period counts at the buyer's time zone, not IS office's?

Regards,
Adelaide

bittersweet · « **Reply #156 on:** April 21, 2008, 14:22 »

Quote from: madelaide on April 21, 2008, 12:43

Quote from: CofkoCof on April 21, 2008, 12:32
Yes, I think calculations will be done at midnight. So you might wake up and find nothing or you might get a hold of all those unspent daily quotas.

Just to make things more complicate, doesn't the 24h period counts at the buyer's time zone, not IS office's?

Regards,
Adelaide

These questions are answered on the FAQ page:

Quote

How can I keep track of my Subscription earnings?

When you go to the file download page for any image (from your 'My Uploads' page), you'll see a new column showing each file's Subscription earnings. You'll be able to track each individual file's Subscription earnings here, with updates every 24 hours.

Is the 24 hour credit limit localized?

At first everything will operate on Calgary time (MST). Once we're satisfied that everything is stable, we will localize the 24 hour period for each individual Subscriber. Contributors will then see earnings staggering out across a full day.

Since the royalties are somewhat dependent on the amount of remaining unused credits at the end of the day, I don't see how they can possibly calculate it in advance of knowing it, so yes, there will be a delay before we see it.

jsnover · « **Reply #157 on:** April 21, 2008, 19:37 »

iStock made a calculator with some example royalties available this afternoon. I realize this isn't final, but I think I finally see the "catch" - the reason I'd generally prefer (as a contributor) to get a credit sale versus a subscription one.

If I sell lots of large images (or vectors), I am going to get the minimum payout more often than I do now with credit sales. In my case (independent) that is a $1.90 royalty on a 10 credit sale. Most of my large sales are over $2.00, many at $2.50 or $2.75.

I did an example where the buyer has 30 credits a day, spends 10 of them, all 10 on my file. For a 6 month or 1 year subscription I'd get $1.90; if it's 3 months I'd get $2.00

For a 15 credit example, for all subscription terms (30 credits a day) I'd get $2.85. One of my new vectors (15 credits per) has sold 8 times for a total of $27.60. If those had been subscription sales I'd have made $22.80.

The reason I can be worse off with subscriptions than the current plan is that we don't often make the minimums guaranteed by the subscription plan - it's generally quite a bit more.

Things look a little better with 60 credits a day, but if a buyer only uses 45 of those, 15 on my vector, I'm back to the minimum $2.85. Even if my vector is the only file bought - 15 credits is all the buyer spends, I only get $3.90.

I think the lower credits per day packages are the most likely (the subscription biggie does 25 per day 750 per month, for example). I don't expect the 480 credits a day with only 10 spent all on me is a very likely scenario - not impossible, but not likely.

le_cyclope · « **Reply #158 on:** April 21, 2008, 20:02 »

Quote from: jsnover on April 21, 2008, 19:37

The reason I can be worse off with subscriptions than the current plan is that we don't often make the minimums guaranteed by the subscription plan - it's generally quite a bit more.

I agree on that.

But the real unknown is how many more subscribers will this attract? How many more dl will we get with this?

Remember that any subscriber switching from another site which gives us .25 or .30$ will bring us more money. A medium size dl will bring us a minimum of 5x0.19 = 0.95$.

If that buyer comes from SS, that's 0.60$ more...

I guess time will tell...

Claude

hatman12 · « **Reply #159 on:** April 21, 2008, 20:10 »

Well this is broadly similar to what I was trying to point out in my 'not as good as I thought' thread, in that existing 26c credits get replaced by new 19c subscription credits. In an absolute worst case scenario this would result in a drop in income of 26%.

Of course that worst case scenario will probably never occur.

Set against the 'risk' of the new scheme must be the positives: the possibility of iStock attracting many more customers, the possibility of existing customers buying more images (perhaps even a probability for larger portfolios and those containing 'sets') plus the 'free lottery ticket' of unused credits.

Given the strength of iStock's marketing, my gut feel is that over the longer term this plan will result in an increased income for larger portfolios due to the tendency for subscribers to make multiple purchases. The risk is higher for small portfolios.

I should think its a given that a high percentage of existing customers will switch to subscriptions.

Kngkyle · « **Reply #160 on:** April 21, 2008, 20:11 »

Interesting calculator.

The most a diamond can earn from a single XS download is $105.50.
The most a non-exclusive can earn from a single XS download is $91.20.

You have to really hit the jackpot for that though. Still something to hope for. Overall I am thinking this might actually get us more money than the current pay-per download set up.

I think (and hope) that this will be enough to put an end to a lot of the smaller Microstock sites that are only alive because of their subscription plans. I would much rather have a higher concentration of buyers at the big 6 sites instead of spread out over 40+ microstock sites. So it's time for Crestock, Canstockphoto, Albuno to start shutting down or make some changes.

madelaide · « **Reply #161 on:** April 21, 2008, 20:35 »

We can only dream of a busy day in the life of a subscription buyer, when he doesn't have much time and dlds only a fraction of his credits.

It may take some time for the new model show its real face. There are positive aspects, and different prices for different sizes is a plus compared to other companies.

Now the opt-in/out option will fuel some discussions in the near future, as it may affect best match.

Regards,
Adelaide

cascoly · « **Reply #162 on:** April 21, 2008, 20:38 »

IS still hasnt addressed the basic question of WHY subscribers would sign on to this plan, when they are going to lose a fair % of their credits unless they are downloading every single day, including weekends. for any subscription service, the weekend DLs drop significantly - but when you have a quota per month, that's not a problem. with IS's plan a buyer loses if they dont work on weekends

it looks like a good deal for sellers, but i'm not expecting a big jump in income. [i'd be delighted to be proved wrong!]

s

http://pix-now.com/main.php

madelaide · « **Reply #163 on:** April 21, 2008, 20:53 »

I'm puzzled with Cascoly's message. Don't sites that sell subs packages have a daily dld limit? StockXpert does.

Regards,
Adelaide

ErickN · « **Reply #164 on:** April 21, 2008, 21:01 »

Just playing with the calculator :

scenario 1 : buyer buys an XL
- non exclusive
- 60 credits/day - 1 user - 3 months
- credits used by buyer : 15
- credits used on your files : 15
==> total royalty : $3.90

scenario 2 : buyer buys an XXL
- non exclusive
- 60 credits/day - 1 user - 3 months
- credits used by buyer : 20
- credits used on your files : 20
==> total royalty : $3.80

Conclusion : in this particular case, you earn less for an XXL than an XL

After trying several scenarios, the "minimum royalty per credit" case seems to be the most common unfortunately, which would lead to a decrease in $/credit and $/download averages.

To get more than the minimum royalty per credit, you have to hope that a buyer will spend only a small part of his daily quota, and only on some of your images.

Susan S. · « **Reply #165 on:** April 21, 2008, 21:04 »

Quote from: hatman12 on April 21, 2008, 20:10

Well this is broadly similar to what I was trying to point out in my 'not as good as I thought' thread, in that existing 26c credits get replaced by new 19c subscription credits. In an absolute worst case scenario this would result in a drop in income of 26%.

Of course that worst case scenario will probably never occur.

Set against the 'risk' of the new scheme must be the positives: the possibility of iStock attracting many more customers, the possibility of existing customers buying more images (perhaps even a probability for larger portfolios and those containing 'sets') plus the 'free lottery ticket' of unused credits.

Given the strength of iStock's marketing, my gut feel is that over the longer term this plan will result in an increased income for larger portfolios due to the tendency for subscribers to make multiple purchases. The risk is higher for small portfolios.

I should think its a given that a high percentage of existing customers will switch to subscriptions.

Actually I don't think it's a given that a high percentage of customers will switch at all. Surely the only buyers who are interested will be the heavy users who will already be buying credit bundles. Or whose bean counters insist on subscriptions so they are currently buying elsewhere.
The smallest subscription package indicated by the calculator is ten credits a day over six months, (1800 downloads) costing around 600$. This is a decent outlay - and presumably any istock customer who is interested in that sort of outlay will currently be saving money by buying the 600$ credit bundle. Which gives a per credit price of 1$, not far short of the minimum. I can't see the buyers who are currently paying more per credit than this buying these very large subscriptions

jsnover · « **Reply #166 on:** April 21, 2008, 21:44 »

Quote from: cascoly on April 21, 2008, 20:38

IS still hasnt addressed the basic question of WHY subscribers would sign on to this plan, ...for any subscription service, the weekend DLs drop significantly - but when you have a quota per month, that's not a problem.

But none of the subscription sites (microstock ones) work this way. They all have a daily limit which they show as a monthly total assuming you download your entire quota each day. You don't get to roll over one day's unused credits to the next.

As to the why, I assume it's the exclusive content and that some large corporate buyers want to buy from the market leader (remember that old phrase from the computer business, "you'll never get fired for buying IBM"?).

hatman12 · « **Reply #167 on:** April 21, 2008, 23:47 »

With iStock's plan, contributors will actually start to look forward to weekends and public holidays - its on those days that there is a chance of a sudden lottery win from unspent credits.

Also, I see from my statistics last year that Shutterstock income fell the least during the summer lull and ROSE the least during the Sept to Christmas rush; this suggests that subscription plans reduce the seasonal volatility.

bittersweet · « **Reply #168 on:** April 22, 2008, 01:11 »

Quote from: hatman12 on April 21, 2008, 23:47

With iStock's plan, contributors will actually start to look forward to weekends and public holidays - its on those days that there is a chance of a sudden lottery win from unspent credits.

Also, I see from my statistics last year that Shutterstock income fell the least during the summer lull and ROSE the least during the Sept to Christmas rush; this suggests that subscription plans reduce the seasonal volatility.

I was thinking that too about the timing which falls right before things start to taper off a bit for the western summer. It might be another very strategic move on their part.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #169 on:** April 22, 2008, 01:26 »

I see a lot of arguing about the minimum payout / image. But we should not forget that often people buy your image when they have subscription and in the end do not use that image. Especially if they just want to use up their daily limit. I guess the percentage of not used images is higher than in the normal way when images get downloaded.
I am not really a fan of subscription like on the other agencies. But here iStock is giving us a great deal.

I do not know if the chances of this "lottery wins" increase on the weekend. There are not the same amount of buyers who just buy less images, there are just fewer buyers who probably buy the same amount of images they would buy during the week. So if the buyer do not use his subscription on a particular day we get nothing. iStock is looking forward to the weekends

cascoly · « **Reply #170 on:** April 22, 2008, 02:51 »

Quote from: jsnover on April 21, 2008, 21:44

Quote from: cascoly on April 21, 2008, 20:38
IS still hasnt addressed the basic question of WHY subscribers would sign on to this plan, ...for any subscription service, the weekend DLs drop significantly - but when you have a quota per month, that's not a problem.

But none of the subscription sites (microstock ones) work this way. They all have a daily limit which they show as a monthly total assuming you download your entire quota each day. You don't get to roll over one day's unused credits to the next.

ok, since i dont buy, i've never looked closely at the subscription agreement - i thought credits would available throughout the month -- if credits are lost if not used daily, why are weekends so slow? do most buyers really not care about losing 8/30 days? almost 25% of their credits?

s

bittersweet · « **Reply #171 on:** April 22, 2008, 07:39 »

Quote from: cascoly on April 22, 2008, 02:51

Quote from: jsnover on April 21, 2008, 21:44
Quote from: cascoly on April 21, 2008, 20:38
IS still hasnt addressed the basic question of WHY subscribers would sign on to this plan, ...for any subscription service, the weekend DLs drop significantly - but when you have a quota per month, that's not a problem.

But none of the subscription sites (microstock ones) work this way. They all have a daily limit which they show as a monthly total assuming you download your entire quota each day. You don't get to roll over one day's unused credits to the next.

ok, since i dont buy, i've never looked closely at the subscription agreement - i thought credits would available throughout the month -- if credits are lost if not used daily, why are weekends so slow? do most buyers really not care about losing 8/30 days? almost 25% of their credits?

s

iStock's subscription plan does not begin until May 26th. The "pay as you go" credit system that they have always had involves credits that expire after a year. No credits are lost otherwise. They will continue to run this option alongside subscriptions which will be offered beginning May 26.

kabby · « **Reply #172 on:** April 22, 2008, 08:24 »

Quote from: Kngkyle on April 21, 2008, 20:11

Interesting calculator.

The most a diamond can earn from a single XS download is $105.50.
The most a non-exclusive can earn from a single XS download is $91.20.

You have to really hit the jackpot for that though. Still something to hope for. Overall I am thinking this might actually get us more money than the current pay-per download set up.

I think (and hope) that this will be enough to put an end to a lot of the smaller Microstock sites that are only alive because of their subscription plans. I would much rather have a higher concentration of buyers at the big 6 sites instead of spread out over 40+ microstock sites. So it's time for Crestock, Canstockphoto, Albuno to start shutting down or make some changes.

Weird I just checked it out today and I put in 480 credits/day, over 100 users, and subscription duration of 3 months... and it shows
-The most a diamond can earn from a single XS download is $105.50.
-The most a non-exclusive can earn from a single XS download is $52.75. (If they use all 480 credits on your images then it goes to $91.20)

Looks like maybe they changed pricing... or maybe I missed something

thesentinel · « **Reply #173 on:** April 22, 2008, 09:05 »

Quote from: cascoly on April 22, 2008, 02:51

ok, since i dont buy, i've never looked closely at the subscription agreement - i thought credits would available throughout the month -- if credits are lost if not used daily, why are weekends so slow? do most buyers really not care about losing 8/30 days? almost 25% of their credits?

That is exactly why subscription plans work, and the more that subscriptions are used by 9 to 5, 5 day a week businesses rather than home based ones the more profit there is in it.

leaf · « **Reply #174 on:** April 22, 2008, 09:25 »

it will be interesting to see how the istock plan works out in the end.... I am looking forward to hearing what types of actual commissions people end up getting.

It will probably take a few weeks / months to get some decent stats though as all the new subscription customers are going to be eager at the start and download lots of pictures. The one picture jackpots are only going to come later on i would guess.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: iStock to start Subscription packages. (Read 54322 times)

bittersweet

ErickN

Waldo4

madelaide

CofkoCof

madelaide

bittersweet

jsnover

le_cyclope

hatman12

Kngkyle

madelaide

cascoly

madelaide

ErickN

Susan S.

jsnover

hatman12

bittersweet

Freezingpictures

cascoly

bittersweet

kabby

thesentinel

leaf

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors