Important!: Royalty Changes and iStock Collections

Displaying 1721 to 1740 of 2633 matches.
FrankRamspott
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Illustration downloadsMember is an InspectorExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:45AM

The redeemed credits levels are ridiculous too high. Especially within the new Illustration category. There have to be a system with realistic numbers. How many Illustrators can manage to get even a 35% rate?


I will reach Diamond level within the next month. Then I'll earning 40% selling raster IMAGES and vector IMAGES. In 2011 my earnings will drop substantially, because of the splitting of Photos and Vector in two different categories. Both are IMAGES, aren't they. Next years numbers would be a drop back to 35% in the Photo category and a super drop back from 40% to 30% in the Illustration category. That's a joke! Is that iStock's new bahavior of saying "Thank You" for almost 5 years of hard work?
Vaara
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:47AM

Of course Getty wants to pump as much money from iStock and its contributors as possible. That what companies are supposed to do. In many cases iStock now brings fresher images than the same search in Getty. For them that's obviously a problem, because the iStock images are cheaper. If their higher priced sales go down and iStock sales go up at the same pace, they have to get the money from somewhere. Like iStock contributors pockets.


Most of the contributors seem to be angry about the changes. Proven tactic would be to let people rant for a while, then thank them for input and introduce minor changes to credit limits to "address the concerns". And then we are happy again... Or at least we feel we fought a good fight.


Royalties will always be kept as low as possible without losing significant amount of quality images and their makers. Time will tell if this change is enough to cause a massive escape to greener pastures. If such things exists, greens of the iStock pastures are pretty darn saturated already


In the short term, this propably won't have much effect on me personally. And in theory I have a chance to get a higher percentage faster than in the current model. But I can see why older (downloads-wise) contributors are furious.


 
amriphoto
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio ArtistMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer SpotlightMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:48AM
If Nr. 3 and Nr. 4 in the list of all time best selling contributors won´t reach the 1.400.000 milestone, there must be a clear error in your calculations:


Posted By kkthompson:
With that overriding objective, we wanted to produce a solution that:
- would not change most contributors' total compensation (except for the better)
DrRave
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash Artist
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:49AM

I don't believe what I am reading... no way iStock would not do this to us. This is not right. After over 6 years, I will end up with a 33.3% paycut???? Whats the point in being exclusive in the first place.


Contributors with higher redemmed credit are anyway rewarded by higher income, so what is the point of all this?


It appears that almost everyone will be getting paycuts and iStock/getty will be getting that amount instead. For what, i don't understand?


This is not going to work, and most people I have spoken to are looking for alternatives already. Please do not destroy iStock, please.


DrRave
spooh
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorMember has had a File Of The Week.
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:49AM
Seems like iStock doesn't have time to tidy up after F5 mess, becouse is busy ripping off contributors with new terms.

Namely, what I mean PureRippingOff:
- removed +10% on ExtLicence
- lowered Vetta royalties
- lowering already earned base royalty

One thing I know for sure. It's no longer safe for me to be fulltime iStocker. Maybe 2012 goal for 25% royalty will be 600000 redeemed credits. Who knows.

(Edited on 2010-09-08 01:50:20 by spooh)

(Edited on 2010-09-08 01:54:50 by spooh)
Whiteway
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:53AM
Posted By SoopySue:
Posted By Whiteway:
I wonder what the dollar-value is of 'bad vibes'?

zero, unless the vibes turn into concerted action.

It's not just bad vibes within iStock forums, Liz. These things have a way of escaping into the business-sphere.

If anyone can discern even the remotest sign of generosity of spirit in these new proposals, do please post. And those who welcome a hard-nosed, number-crunching, business-centred approach, welcome to the wheel. If royalties go down to 10%, will you work three times as hard 'because that's the way it is'?

If my sales and the reports of others are anything to go by, download numbers for most established members are decreasing. Accordingly, the credits expended (per contributor) are reducing - this is part of an overall 'plan'. Then, having planned it so that everyone has fewer credits spent on their work, we (brilliant!) make new rules that say you have to gain more credits in order to stand still. Does anyone fancy being taken for an idiot?
mkrberlin
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloads
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:57AM
This should be a wake up call for all people who believe on exclusivity, on what agency ever. Dont make yourself controlled by one business partner. Here you become a excellent lesson what it means.
markrhiggins
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloads
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 1:59AM
Cutting commission and putting up prices may not increase profit. Buyers have options and I am sure many have realised it in the last 12 months. Contributors have options. They want the best reward for their efforts. It may be they will concentrate more on other agencies. My sales have gone up significantly since Istock raised prices - not here of course, but with other agencies. I wouldn't pull my images off. Just let them earn something but concentrate on where I can best be rewarded. Exclusives have bigger issues. They are treated much better than us but are locked in and vulnerable to broad changes like this.

(Edited on 2010-09-08 02:00:26 by markrhiggins)
xiver
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloads
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:00AM
they shouldn't even started below 30% for non exclusives in the first place, what a rip off
AF-studio
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer Spotlight
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:00AM
Thank you IS for lower incom
jonlarter
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsMember has had a File Of The WeekMember has won a contest
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:00AM

I just made silver and the extra royalty I gained for doing that looks like it will be taken off me next year when this kicks in if I'm reading it all right. If there's any more room in the not happy section I think I'll sit down there


Became exclusive here as soon as I was able to, wondering if that was a bad decision now.
craftvision
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio ArtistMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer SpotlightMember has had a File Of The WeekMask of the Diablo Azul - Member has won between 1 and 3 Steel Cage matches
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:01AM

The required credit levels are very high, I think that is the main problem with most of the people and I am afraid it will go higher as I assume they are kept on the low side for the first year to get people used to the idea.


Other than that, it is a fair system in theory, more sustainable and better than what we have now in my opinion.
jallfree
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:06AM

 As predicted by people (some on other forums) drop a bomb then give something back. 


Still a paycut, I'd have to triple my sales to keep the same %%
SteveStone
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:07AM
So now my royaltiy rates are connected to the continuing downward slide in downloads. I can't find anything positive in this as a contributor. Deeply disappointed.
jonpic
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer Spotlight
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:08AM
Just who is in charge at HQ? It seems we are paying a lot of managers to tinker around, changing canister levels now seems a waste of time and money as we are now effectively scrapping canisters. And declaring most contributers will be better off does not seem to play out.
9Lives
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Illustration downloadsMask of the Plata Bigote - Member has won between 4 and 6 Steel Cage matches
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:08AM

I'll wait a few days to see if any of this is amended but as far as I'm concerned all of my respect for iStock/Getty has been lost and that's not going to be fixed anytime soon.  I'll be looking in to all of my other options and doing my homework on whats best for me.  If this does turn out to be another bad news announcement only to "soften the blow" later I still see it as a massive insult to our collective intelligence as contributors.


As a vector artist this is yet another slap in the face HOW THE H*CK are our credits worth less than the photos?! I think it's ridiculous that we need to "wait and see" what they might have in store for us.  Did we not hear the same thing about exclusive plus?  Still waiting.  As for Vetta royalties going down while prices go up?  Bullshit. Sorry that's the nicest word I can think of.  I'll deactivate my Vetta files before I see them moved to Getty after getting a nice taste of pathetic excuse for sales/royalties in the "iStock Vector" collection.


Oh and I love that the rates we got for extended licenses (already a joke) are going down another 10%. /sarcasm


Already have an email from an admin at another site that wants to help smooth my transition, I'm taking the offer seriously.


If I do decide to cancel my exclusivity (and that's looking like a very strong possibility as things stand) I WILL NOT be leaving my portfolio around here so Getty and Co make 85%.


Not that my voice matters in the midst of 1,722 posts, but just in case anyone from iStock is still reading this is coming from someone who was a buyer on this site in 2001 and a contributor for years and a HUGE evangelist when it came to promoting to anyone I came across.  Now I'll be using that voice in the opposite direction and won't hesitate to tell people what iStock has really become.


Disappointed, insulted, and I think...done.
standby
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:09AM
Posted By tirc83:
//
Posted By alptraum:



Still looks like a pay cut, but at least there is a realistic target to aim for.



lipstick on a pig, if you ask me.


Yes but if it's only a pig that's left on the dance floor - wouldn't you want it looking as attractive as possible?

LOL
firemanYU
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:10AM
^^ in that case take another beer.
Targosz
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 1,249 Video downloads
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:10AM
I suppose as many of you here, I had plans and hopes for the future with istock.

I still do, however whats the point in working for a corporation that can decide every year, that the next year you'll make less money then the previous year?

Some people claim they will get a 33% cut... That is terrifying news for let's say a full time istocker with a family and mortgage...

If it turns out to be truth, I believe it's the dumbest change istock could ever make. Aren't you afraid that contributors (the big ones, not like me) might decide to leave istock for an other agency?

And what's the point of changing the previous system? What was wrong in gaining a higher royality based on your lifetime downloads!? It seemed fair to me.
Reynardt
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloads
Posted Wed Sep 8, 2010 2:10AM
Posted By jonlarter:

I just made silver and the extra royalty I gained for doing that looks like it will be taken off me next year when this kicks in if I'm reading it all right. If there's any more room in the not happy section I think I'll sit down there sad


Became exclusive here as soon as I was able to, wondering if that was a bad decision now.


Yip, sorry pal. Supppose this is the wrath of business. Thank goodness I'm not exclusively here. I'm going to seize all uploads untill I've received my first payment, then become the iStock Ghost. Bye iS.

(Edited on 2010-09-08 02:11:12 by Reynardt)
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1721 to 1740 of 2633 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)