Author Topic: New Royalty Rate Cut for Exclusives at Istock (Read 27838 times)

alejandrophotography · « **on:** June 27, 2013, 03:51 »

Looks like they finally did it. They Just gave us a huge pay cut at Istock and didn't even announce it in a newsletter

Redeemed credits    Non-Exclusive    Exclusive    Vetta®
1,200,000      20%     30%    30%
125,000      19%     28%    28%
35,000      18%     26%    26%
11,000      17%      24%    24%
1,500      16%      22%    22%
Default      15%      22%    22%

newbielink:http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=354592&page=1 [nonactive]

JPSDK · « **Reply #1 on:** June 27, 2013, 03:54 »

There is no end to it....
I mean, it first stops when numbers are at ZERO.

Disgusting.
Im glad Im out of there.

cobalt · « **Reply #2 on:** June 27, 2013, 03:55 »

I hope it is not true. This will just force people to leave istock. There is absolutely no way they can "spin" this into positive news. Together with the loss of E+ and control over prices, this will be a disaster for all those who do stock full time and feed their families from this income.

gemmy12 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 27, 2013, 04:07 »

lolzzz man...! and we were thinking what worse istock can further do.. now i seriously think that istock seriously thinking of ending exclusive program completely soon and before that they want to test everything possible they can do to get even an extra penny from photographers

gillian vann · « **Reply #4 on:** June 27, 2013, 04:43 »

Quote

Good morning one and all,

This isn't something I've been briefed on, so I'll leave it to someone at HQ to explain why those particular figures are being shown, but it does strike me as rather odd that the Vetta rates and regular photo rates are exactly the same, which would incline me to think it's a simple copy & paste error, but I'm sure Lobo will be able to offer an official explanation shortly.

"shortly".... just like how the Google situation was explained and resolved?

let's face facts, there are more photographers on the planet than required, so we are reduced to "sweat shop" payrates. I know in the city I live in I face that every day. I lose jobs to newbies who undercut me (and end up working for $15/hour), I lose jobs to interns/students, I lose jobs to the owner's daughter who just got a "good" camera... I love what I do and that's why I tolerate being paid so poorly. dammit.

loop · « **Reply #5 on:** June 27, 2013, 04:48 »

Hope it's a mistake. That would be the end of exclusivity.

alejandrophotography · « **Reply #6 on:** June 27, 2013, 04:49 »

And of course none of the moderators know or have been briefed on anything... Total B.S.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #7 on:** June 27, 2013, 04:55 »

Quote from: gillian on June 27, 2013, 04:43

Quote
Good morning one and all,

This isn't something I've been briefed on, so I'll leave it to someone at HQ to explain why those particular figures are being shown, but it does strike me as rather odd that the Vetta rates and regular photo rates are exactly the same, which would incline me to think it's a simple copy & paste error, but I'm sure Lobo will be able to offer an official explanation shortly.

"shortly".... just like how the Google situation was explained and resolved?

let's face facts, there are more photographers on the planet than required, so we are reduced to "sweat shop" payrates. I know in the city I live in I face that every day. I lose jobs to newbies who undercut me (and end up working for $15/hour), I lose jobs to interns/students, I lose jobs to the owner's daughter who just got a "good" camera... I love what I do and that's why I tolerate being paid so poorly. dammit.

Did people get a different percentage from Vetta sales, compared with ordinary sales? Obviously, since vetta is a higher price point the return from it will be higher even if the percentage is the same.

I wonder if they are chopping 25% off Yuri's "exclusive" earnings.

jjneff · « **Reply #8 on:** June 27, 2013, 04:56 »

This is no mistake, look at the video structure as well.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #9 on:** June 27, 2013, 04:57 »

There has been no official confirmation as of yet, so it could still be a (very, very bad) copypaste error.

ShadySue · « **Reply #10 on:** June 27, 2013, 04:59 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on June 27, 2013, 04:57

There has been no official confirmation as of yet, so it could still be a (very, very bad) copypaste error.

Why did they need to change the chart? What was wrong with the one which was there already?

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #11 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:01 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 04:55

Did people get a different percentage from Vetta sales, compared with ordinary sales? Obviously, since vetta is a higher price point the return from it will be higher even if the percentage is the same.

I wonder if they are chopping 25% off Yuri's "exclusive" earnings.

They cut the Vetta rate to 28% a few years ago when they massively raised its prices, arguing that you'd get the same amount.

Wouldn't surprise me if this is the kind of image exclusive rates they've struck with Yuri and his mini-me's and are looking to roll out to the remaining exclusives shortly.

Getty hates photographers.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #12 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:03 »

Quote from: ShadySue on June 27, 2013, 04:59

Quote from: Noedelhap on June 27, 2013, 04:57
There has been no official confirmation as of yet, so it could still be a (very, very bad) copypaste error.
Why did they need to change the chart? What was wrong with the one which was there already?

Don't ask me, I don't work there

ShadySue · « **Reply #13 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:07 »

Quote from: fotoVoyager on June 27, 2013, 05:01

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 04:55
Did people get a different percentage from Vetta sales, compared with ordinary sales? Obviously, since vetta is a higher price point the return from it will be higher even if the percentage is the same.

I wonder if they are chopping 25% off Yuri's "exclusive" earnings.

They cut the Vetta rate to 28% a few years ago when they massively raised its prices, arguing that you'd get the same amount.

Wouldn't surprise me if this is the kind of image exclusive rates they've struck with Yuri and his mini-me's and are looking to roll out to the remaining exclusives shortly.

Getty hates photographers.

My conspiracy theory is that they had agreed a higher rate with Yuri, so they're cutting everyone else's rate to compensate.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #14 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:08 »

Quote from: fotoVoyager on June 27, 2013, 05:01

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 04:55
Did people get a different percentage from Vetta sales, compared with ordinary sales? Obviously, since vetta is a higher price point the return from it will be higher even if the percentage is the same.

I wonder if they are chopping 25% off Yuri's "exclusive" earnings.

They cut the Vetta rate to 28% a few years ago when they massively raised its prices, arguing that you'd get the same amount.

Wouldn't surprise me if this is the kind of image exclusive rates they've struck with Yuri and his mini-me's and are looking to roll out to the remaining exclusives shortly.

Getty hates photographers.

I doubt if it would be worth Yuri's while to dump all the other sites in return for 30% commission at iS instead of 20%. Long ago he said he would go exclusive if they offered him 60%.

What they appear to have done is "normalise" the exclusive rate to the existing Vetta rate. I expect they will soon stop listing the two separately.

I'm sure Getty doesn't hate us. What farmer hates his milch cow?

jjneff · « **Reply #15 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:12 »

Getty dosen't hate us they just like beating their milk cow on a regular basis, it's called an abusive relationship

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #16 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:18 »

For those who can't be bothered to do the sums, here are the percentage cuts for each RC level:
1.2m -33.3%
124k - 30%
35k -24.7%
11K -20%
Below 11k -12%

ShadySue · « **Reply #17 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:20 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 05:08

I'm sure Getty doesn't hate us. What farmer hates his milch cow?

Many (not all) farmers do everything they can to spend as little as possible on keeping his cow producing more and more, and kill them when their production decreases. It's just business.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #18 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:26 »

Quote from: jjneff on June 27, 2013, 05:12

Getty dosen't hate us they just like beating their milk cow on a regular basis, it's called an abusive relationship

It's actually well known in farming circles that unhappy cows yield less milk.

I think that's why they used to pat us and give us an occasional tasty apple back in the early days.

gillian vann · « **Reply #19 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:56 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 05:26

It's actually well known in farming circles that unhappy cows yield less milk.

I think that's why they used to pat us and give us an occasional tasty apple back in the early days.

that is true, but we have pastures.

ShadySue · « **Reply #20 on:** June 27, 2013, 05:58 »

Quote from: gillian on June 27, 2013, 05:56

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 05:26

It's actually well known in farming circles that unhappy cows yield less milk.

I think that's why they used to pat us and give us an occasional tasty apple back in the early days.

that is true, but we have pastures.

And many don't http://www.ciwf.org.uk/cows_belong_in_fields/about_intensive_dairy_farming.aspx

cobalt · « **Reply #21 on:** June 27, 2013, 06:36 »

I really hope it is a mistake. And like Paul has said it is incredible that they can´t wake somebody up to confirm this. 30 000 people are affected by these rates, it is not the kind of thing you let the intern post on the website. Can´t believe those stats can be changed and published without top level approval and oversight.

It MUST be a mistake. Who would stay exclusive for a 7% difference?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #22 on:** June 27, 2013, 06:53 »

And exclusive flash and audio get 0% now, lol. Poor Yuri, after his whole sound/audio interview to be reduced to 0%, lol.

I'm calling incompetence. I doubt they'd miss the opportunity to drop the Vetta rate at the same time. And I can't imagine they'd do this without a real announcement.

MichaelJayFoto · « **Reply #23 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:02 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on June 27, 2013, 06:53

And exclusive flash and audio get 0% now, lol. Poor Yuri, after his whole sound/audio interview to be reduced to 0%, lol.

No, we all learned (or do we just speculate?) that Yuri has a special contract and those rates are certainly not valid for him. Maybe it's the opposite: Because they have to pay him more now, the budget for the rest of the exclusives needs to be stretched, and for audio there is non left at all.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #24 on:** June 27, 2013, 07:08 »

It's not a 7% difference, though, is it? All the non-exclusive material has been dropped into the "Main" collection, with prices of 1, 4, 7 and 10 credits, whereas the bottom end exclusive files seem to be priced at 5, 7, 12 and 17 for those sizes, so you have to multiply together the higher commission and the higher prices.

An independent medium file brings in 15% x 7 x credit price, an exclusive medium file brings in 22% x 12 x credit price.
So the ratio at the bottom end is 105: 264

Exclusivity provides a return 2.5x that of independence, even for a base-level contributor on 22%. And on top of that you have higher-priced collections that you might get into, or even Getty sales.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New Royalty Rate Cut for Exclusives at Istock (Read 27838 times)

alejandrophotography

JPSDK

cobalt

gemmy12

gillian vann

loop

alejandrophotography

BaldricksTrousers

jjneff

Noedelhap

ShadySue

fotoVoyager

Noedelhap

ShadySue

BaldricksTrousers

jjneff

BaldricksTrousers

ShadySue

BaldricksTrousers

gillian vann

ShadySue

cobalt

Sean Locke Photography

MichaelJayFoto

BaldricksTrousers

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors