I still don't understand why we can't get together and run our own site.  We are the suppliers and without us the sites are worth nothing.  Are we going to let them take bigger chunks of our earnings?  At the moment we don't seem to have any power.  It might be hard to set up but I don't see any barriers in this market.  We could get in contact with the buyers, offer them lower prices and still make more money than we do now.

  I have carried one basket of eggs before, I tripped and broke a lot of them. It took my chickens a long time to get my revenue back.

Peace,
AVAVA

I'm a slower learner than you. I carried them in one basket a couple of times, thinking I would be more careful the second time. It's so easy to be merrily dancing along watching a great income flow one minute never imagining the world can change very quickly. Honestly, nothing against all you hard working exclusives, enjoy the times while they are good.

Good Point Loop,

 There are many ways to make money from photography, stock is just one. Photography Rocks!

Cheers,
AVAVA

If it's a camera you better be fast. I think they fall faster than gravity.

AV

Hi All,

 Just an example of what happens when Istock buries your work. I made over $4000 dollars over the past 3 weeks at three other Micro stock agencies with 1400 new uploads and the sales are growing daily. At the same time I made $105 dollars at Istock over the same period fulfilling my weekly quota of 15 images with my strongest work and my RPI is dropping there. I am making less at Istock this month than I was there with 30 images nine months ago. My new work is so deep in the search I have trouble finding it. Please read the comments I made on the Key wording blog this is the strangest part of the ongoing puzzle of how to make money at IS.
 To be fair I was able to upload 1400 images to the other sites or at least two, the others are in progress. Giving me a much bigger presence at the competitors. If you do the RPI from just the past three weeks I am making twice as much per image at the other sites and I think the 1400 will return more in the long run than the 115 images I have at Istock.
 I really think they are doing the math back at Getty and changes will take place. That is my take on it for what it's worth.

 Hang in there,
 AVAVA

My pleasure Tubed,

 Thanks for the support. Today I made a whopping .23 cents at IS. I don't know weather to spend it all on gum or buy two pieces and save the rest for my retirement. 

Best,
J

Hi AVAVA - BTW - nice to meet you here on these boards ... I live in China - its Saturday afternoon here so while you posted I slept .... interesting stuff ... many thanks for your input!!

Well AVAVA - I would say things are looking pretty rosy  But then I, like you, try really hard to stay postive - in everything there is opportunity ... it is simply a quesion of finding where that opportunity lies !!!! peace .... and many downloads to you ....

But it isn't Getty any more, as they were sold to Hellman & Friedman.  It will be interesting to see if Hellman & Friedman let the Getty managers run things their way or if they have plans of their own.  They have a reputation for buying a business at a low valuation and selling for a higher price later.  Getty were struggling and their share price was falling.  Will Hellman & Friedman be able to turn them around?

I still don't understand why we can't get together and run our own site.

The details ! The devil is in the details.
A camel is a horse designed by a committee
If we get the 50 best selling photographers toghether it will be pretty hard to find an agreement.
Or not ?

No!  its not that difficult, not if youve got the connections and know-how.
I know a guy, previously working with Thomas Knoll, you know, the guy who invented PS and Adobe.
This guy is a certified GENIUS. At the moment he is killing himself in ironi at all differant search-engines and how sites really are functioning.
All that is needed is 200 of the best photographers, no rubbish, none of that" run-of-the-mill " crap but genuine stock-photographers.
Were already working on it AND  thanks to cretain skill combined with luck, the buyers/clients are already there.
The art is to offer something above the ludicrous "young business girl" or " business team against white".

Think Im joking?   hold on for six, seven months.

I don't really thing that any new "me too" site can work if not backed by a really heavy invstment. Think of LuckyOliver, gimmestock, and scores more of vanished or semi-vanished sites. Having "better content" it's not a new idea, and then, you would need a lot of "better content", at least one million images.
Last great ideas that I remember at the microstock market are the concept of microstock itself, by istock, and appliying the subscription model at this idea, by Shutterstock.

Hi All,

 I can speak on some base of knowledge here as I am part owner in two Photographer owned Macro RF/RR/RM collections. Both companies have 20-25 legal owners and then a bunch of contributing photographers. We started the first one over 4 years ago and it is now a very strong company. You can find them on Getty " Blend Images " and " Cultura ". Both companies are completely separate from one another and have completely different owners and are available at about every image seller out there. They are both based on completely different niche collections so they do not compete with each other for sales.

 It takes the right group of people to make a thing like this work. It has to be made up of true " GIVERS " and not " TAKERS " as well as people that will produce and not just have the others make their company stronger. This doesn't come easy some days but it is totally doable. I coach soccer and I relate the two a lot. A good team must be made up of players who's entire efforts are to put the ball in the net as a team, not as an individual. It doesn't matter who's foot the ball comes off to make the goal it is the entire team that makes it happen.

 Micro is a bit different of a beast but if you look at the recent polls that show how few photographers are making almost all of Istocks income off a very limited number of images I think a group producing top quality content could make an impact in Micro. I don't think you need 4 million images to play I think about 200,000 really strong images could make a very strong niche Micro collection launch.

 Do the numbers. You would have to find 50 shooters that could produce 4,000 images each for the launch. That is very doable especially from the bigger guns out there. Then you can add on contributors like any other site and your next years production can be offset by your new contributors.

  You are still going to be very small in comparison to a Getty so it would be important that your quality was the best in Micro. Now someone like Getty or Corbis see your returns after a few years and they come in and make you an offer for buy out. The collection is sold for a profit to the owners and the work continues to make money under the new owners control just the old owners return would be diminished to what was set in the sales agreement ( much smaller portion than when you were an owner, maybe even a buy out of the copyrights of the owners images for a higher sale price with no further return for the previous owners ).

 It sounds easy but I can tell you it takes a very special group of people who are not just looking out for themselves but the entire company. These people are out there you just have to do the research to find these 50 special producers.

 These are just examples but to answer the question YES! It can be done and has, just not in Micro yet. Will someone step up in the Micro market and try to build a niche collection of the best work ? Who is going to step up and start this baby and then give their entire lives to the growth and beginning of such a venture for several years.

 Keep thinking you guys this is good stuff, I love it!

Best,
AVAVA