IS should reconsider now

First pagePrevious pageof 6Next page
Displaying 41 to 60 of 119 matches.
AdShooter
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:21PM
Posted By slobo:
I have no problem with the new ranking system. My problem is unreasonably high goal for diamonds.


Well.... then you do have a problem with the system too. I'm a diamond and I'm not happy with it either.

(Edited on 2010-12-17 17:31:27 by AdShooter)
Thomas_EyeDesign
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 downloadsMember is an InspectorExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio ArtistMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:58PM
Well I've been uploading all year and getting good downloads, I'll still miss the mark by about 40,000 RC. which means I'll be down about $7,000 next year. 50% in the last three months not happening here.  Don't take this post as iStock H*uk me over post it's not, I'll deal with it and adjust. But a jump from 40,000 to 150,000 is one hell of a jump maybe it's time to reconsider.
Purdue9394
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:47PM
Posted By Gannet77:
Well, I'm such a sad person that I actually keep a log of daily sales as reported by the multimedia.de site, and according to those figures total downloads during Sep-Dec, so far, have been 49.6% of the total downloads for 2010...

Obviously the figures are approximate because of the fuzz factor, and not all contributors may be represented, but 30,000 is a pretty representative sample I would think.

Based on that, KKT would appear to be quite correct in his estimate.

On the other hand, I certainly don't make 50% of my sales during Sep-Dec; but apparently some people do.

(Edited on 2010-12-17 04:32:59 by Gannet77)


But, if you look a little bit closer, you would also notice that more than 5,400 contributors and more than 220,000 files have been added to the database in the September to December timeframe. Any conclusions about growth in sales during this period based on the istockcharts.multimedia.de database would be suspect.

P.S. There are still more than 50,000 contributors and 535,000 files missing from the stats in the database and all the sales of those files to boot.

(Edited on 2010-12-17 21:52:36 by Purdue9394)
StephanHoerold
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:17PM
I have seen a few comments in this thread stating that Kelly said 50% is made during the last three months. I don't think that's what he wrote. He wrote during the last four months.
DNY59
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:26PM
Posted By StephanHoerold:
I have seen a few comments in this thread stating that Kelly said 50% is made during the last three months. I don't think that's what he wrote. He wrote during the last four months.


That's right. However, I've been here 5+ years. For me it has never been true. And it's not true this year either.

(Edited on 2010-12-17 19:28:50 by DNY59)
cmannphoto
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:32PM
Posted By DNY59:


Posted By StephanHoerold:
I have seen a few comments in this thread stating that Kelly said 50% is made during the last three months. I don't think that's what he wrote. He wrote during the last four months.




That's right. However, I've been here 5+ years. For me it has never been true. And it's not true this year either.

(Edited on 2010-12-17 19:28:50 by DNY59)



I went back and found Kelly's post on Sept 8th and found some of the wording interesting.


"According to our projections 76% of Exclusive contributors will either retain their current royalty rate or move up.

If you are looking at the credit number on your stats page thinking “He is crazy, I am clearly going down”, remember: historically HALF of our annual credit usage take place in the last four months of the year. If that holds true, most of you should see your current redeemed credit total approximately double by the end of the year.

Again, these are our projections based on months of number crunching. We are confident they are accurate, but if they prove to be wildly off the mark, we will revisit them."

(Edited on 2010-12-17 19:33:31 by cmannphoto)
stacey_newman
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:20PM
Posted By Thomas_EyeDesign:
Well I've been uploading all year and getting good downloads, I'll still miss the mark by about 40,000 RC. which means I'll be down about $7,000 next year. 50% in the last three months not happening here. Don't take this post as iStock H*uk me over post it's not, I'll deal with it and adjust. But a jump from 40,000 to 150,000 is one hell of a jump maybe it's time to reconsider.

Will, I think contributors like you are those hit worst by the RC thing. I haven't been overly sympathetic about it, but if I am going to be, it is toward contributors like you who really do have an uphill battle in year one of the RC model.
PictureLake
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 1,249 Video downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:41PM
Well, Kelly was right about one thing, from my POV: If my RC total had doubled from that point, I would have retained my current royalty rate.
RASimon
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:45PM
My sales have dramatically slowed down over the past two months for no apparent reason.  That doesn't mean that a good bit of istocks overall sales don't occur in the last four months of the year but I know that this year, mine haven't. I know other contributors who've had excellent months in Nov/Dec.  Whatever the case may be, I think it is far past time to stop complaining about the change, accept it, move on or take your images elsewhere. 
Purdue9394
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:15PM
Posted By cmannphoto:

I went back and found Kelly's post on Sept 8th and found some of the wording interesting.

"According to our projections 76% of Exclusive contributors will either retain their current royalty rate or move up.

If you are looking at the credit number on your stats page thinking “He is crazy, I am clearly going down”, remember: historically HALF of our annual credit usage take place in the last four months of the year. If that holds true, most of you should see your current redeemed credit total approximately double by the end of the year.

Again, these are our projections based on months of number crunching. We are confident they are accurate, but if they prove to be wildly off the mark, we will revisit them."

(Edited on 2010-12-17 19:33:31 by cmannphoto)


The important part of the phrase is not "HALF"...It's "our".  The likely fact that half of credit usage occurs in Sept-Dec is plausible.  That's only a 17% increase in sales over what it would be if all months were equal in sales.  We know that the summer months are generally slow and that sales pick up in September.  The problem is that he didn't say "your"...He said "our".  That means that some contributors see much more than half their sales in the last four months and some see much less than half and on average, those sales will total about 50% of the annual number.

I still can't see how 76% of Exclusive contributors will retain their rate or move up.  So, iStock leadership, how far off that 76% number do the results have to be to warrant an adjustment?
RapidEye
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio ArtistMember has had a File Of The WeekAwarded to fabulous photographers with more than 100,000 downloads
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 10:06PM
If there is a statistical error in Kelly's statement, it may lie in the phrase "most of you".

If all the rest is true, it's quite possible that it's only a small fraction of contributors who get such a strong seasonal sales boost that they bring the averages up to the level claimed. But then "most of you" wouldn't "see your current redeemed credit total approximately double by the end of the year".

It hasn't happened for me, ever.
jamesbenet
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 Silver contributor and has 1,250 - 4,999 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto Audio ArtistMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer SpotlightMember has had a File Of The Week.
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 10:52PM
I've gone through all the phases from shock to acceptance, so I am in full scared production mode now.

We multimedia contributors are getting the short end of this correction as argued endlessly on the other threads and it seems there is no way out but to focus on one media type and in many years maybe get to a revenue level close to what we had when we provided a mix of all media. I argued for a handicap for every media type you contribute to help with the overall stats and vector is just way too high...

I wish I could still feel that I can provide mixed file-types without actually affecting my income negatively doing so. And no I am not even close to fulfilling the 50% RC for the last 4mo of the year. No surprise here I have few holiday files and of course that is one heavy reason for not doing so.

Probably nothing will change going forward so my advice is get to work harder and be warned that this business requires ever more time and skill to be successful at in the long term.

Every new file that is uploaded, every new contributor that signs up makes the pie shorter for all involved in production so only quality and skill will let you succeed and look above the rest of the pack and reap those rewards. And even then if you stop the uploading train you will slowly sink to low levels over time.

We must make a choice but crying about it won't help as the projections don't apply to all of us affected, many higher tier and lower tier contributors fit the projections and will see no change or up change so we got to be in a rough spot us middle tier.

I had 4 months to think about it and it still feels like a kick in the gut but at least we had time to prepare, most of the time we have no warning for the future. I am working hard and I'll see where this goes, no sense in shouting foul once more or ask for clemency.

The market will shrink in the coming years to just a few companies and I still feel iStock is top horse so I am hanging on, the future might be brighter than expected and we here are positioned better than the rest IMO.

I love this place today and I've yet to see what's in store for next year; I am rather optimistic about the future of this place and I think you fellow affected diamonds should give it a chance and then make your decisions for the future.

(Edited on 2010-12-17 22:52:46 by jamesbenet)
igermz
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:14PM
Posted By Purdue9394:

Posted By cmannphoto:
I went back and found Kelly's post on Sept 8th and found some of the wording interesting.
"According to our projections 76% of Exclusive contributors will either retain their current royalty rate or move up."
[...]
(Edited on 2010-12-17 19:33:31 by cmannphoto)

[...]
I still can't see how 76% of Exclusive contributors will retain their rate or move up. So, iStock leadership, how far off that 76% number do the results have to be to warrant an adjustment?

The "Bronze Canister" group of Exclusives seems to be the most numerous.  No one in that group can/will receive a lower (25%) commission percentage--this year.

The contributors with the highest hurdle (in number of Redeemed Credits) to jump in order to retain their current (40%) commission percentage are in the "Diamond Canister" category.  But, they (Diamond/BD) aren't especially numerous.

Some "Bronze Canister" and "Silver Canister" (very few Gold) contributors will actually see early "raises" as a result of the new system.

"Black Diamond Canister" contributors are especially scarce, can't lose a 45% commission rate that they never enjoyed, and tend to have large, productive portfolios--as evidenced by their current canister--probably ensuring at least their current 40% commission in most (All? 3-D render will still count as "Photo" credit?) cases.

Think: If 3/4 of the iStock Exclusive population is "Bronze" KKT's statement must be true.  The nearer to 3/4, the more likely it is to be true.

What's been added to the "compensation equation" is the dimension of time.  So that a contributor's "rate of flow" of redeemed credits is being considered--as if he/she were an oil well.  We're at a point in time (following the petroleum industry analogy) when dry or slow wells are being identified, as well as new gushers being found.  Investment follows, accordingly...
PaulCowan
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 downloads
Posted Sat Dec 18, 2010 1:36AM
Posted By tirc83:

Just to clarify the point I was trying to make.


1. The RC boundaries were set so that only z% would get the top commission, and y% would get the next from top, and x% the next tier down, etc


2. These cutoffs were based on the average stocker selling 50% in the last 3 months.








I'm not sure it was ever suggested that the average istocker gets 50% in the last three months. The claim was that iS gets 50% of its sales in the last few months (which appears to be true from the data) and I think it was just implied that this meant the same would go for the "average" istocker.


It is quite possible that they knew that - say - 5% of providers get a massive boost in that time period while 95% don't; and that new accounts give iS overall a steady sales increase while established individuals struggle to maintain their existing sales levels.


If so, then it is quite possible that the credit levels people are achieving are exactly in line with iStock predictions and so any adjustment in our favour would simply make the business unsustainable again.


Which would mean, of course, that all the talk about the 50% of sales and target adjustements was just a smokescreen to try to soothe all the frayed nerves a few months back.


EDIT: Just seen the text of the actual quote - so he did suggest people could expect to see a 50% increase (at least, from the date of his post to the year end), I think that was just disingenuous and I still think iStock is probably getting the figures it expects and any adjustment will be marginal and intended as a "woo yay" sop, rather than being significantly corrective

It is also very likely that three quarters of the exclusives are still bronze.

(Edited on 2010-12-18 01:45:00 by PaulCowan)
PaulCowan
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 downloads
Posted Sat Dec 18, 2010 1:59AM
Posted By igermz: What's been added to the "compensation equation" is the dimension of time. So that a contributor's "rate of flow" of redeemed credits is being considered--as if he/she were an oil well. We're at a point in time (following the petroleum industry analogy) when dry or slow wells are being identified, as well as new gushers being found. Investment follows, accordingly...



That's not a bad analogy but it is pretty insulting. The logical conclusion is that nobody should bother to supply niche images anymore, which are the real backbone of the collection (after all, you only need so many million photos of pretty girls, at some time most buyers will want less popular images and if they aren't available they will have to go elsewhere).


It's also not been pointed out that the whole system is skewed by the unbalanced way credits are handed out. Exclusives collect more credits per sale than non-exclusives due to the discriminatory pricing system, therefore I collect far fewer credits than a diamond exclusive selling the same number of images. One of the exclusives being pushed up into the Vetta sphere is likely to make far more per sale than another exclusive who isn't getting the Vetta promotion in the search engine and in the file price. So iStock isn't really measuring the rate of flow, it is measuring the price of each barrel, and then pricing each barrel at a different rate according to arbitrary criteria which don't always reflect quality.


It's like saying one oil well is less productive than another despite identical flows, because the oil company has decided to sell oil from one well at $100 a barrel and oil from its neighbour at $10 a barrel.
hsvrs
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveMember has had a submission accepted to the Designer Spotlight
Posted Sat Dec 18, 2010 2:09AM
well, about next year.. with all changings, -10% for EL, less for vetta.. it would just be more than fair if vetta-sale on getty would start same day all other goodies are taken away from us.
shank_ali
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contest
Posted Sat Dec 18, 2010 2:09AM

The RC margins are extreme and will need to be reviewed.It's pretty obvious a new margin needs to be introduced between 40,000-150,000 .Catch all inflated figures suggests the decision was rushed and not refined enough to help the higher producing contributor achieve the same earnings.


It's no good baiting Istockphoto into revealing what the 2012 RC totals are going to be this month.The year needs to end and all the Sales Data analysed from 2010.


It won't make pleasant reading,the new RC totals for 2012,because the intent of cutting contributors commissions is plain to see.
PaulCowan
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 downloads
Posted Sat Dec 18, 2010 2:40AM
I doubt if you will see 2012 "targets" for a long time - probably not until the middle of next year. Since they are based on a bell curve, it is irrelevant to iStock how individuals perform, they're not really trying to encourage you to sell more. All that matters is ensuring that the the cut-off points fall at the designated place on the curve.
anchev
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloads
Posted Sat Dec 18, 2010 2:50AM
I don't think there will be a RC plan for 2012 because 2012 is the end of the world
kelvinjay
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 downloadsExclusiveMember has won a contestForum Moderator
Posted Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:58AM
Posted By anchev:
I don't think there will be a RC plan for 2012 because 2012 is the end of the world



Actually, RCs will work as normal in 2012, but will be set at a higher rate, as December will be a shorter month, owing to the Apocalypse.

This thread has been locked.
First pagePrevious pageof 6Next page
Displaying 41 to 60 of 119 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)