Jump to content

Skyscraperfan

Verified
  • Content Count

    108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

90 Forum reputation = neutral

About Skyscraperfan

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={26C109E9-EC1D-4CC0-8F2C-BC81E2009434}&name=Mathias+Beinling
  • Images
    888
  • Joined Alamy
    15 Jan 2007

Recent Profile Visitors

264 profile views
  1. I could imagine a separate search page for the UK News scheme that even works without login. At Amazon Prime theree is also some content that you can watch with your subscription, while other content can only be watched for an extra fee or without an additional package for example.The system at Amazon Prime is quite complicated, but you can see what you get for your subscription even without logging in. So one solution whoul be putting an "available under the UK news scheme" under every photo that is available under that scheme. At least for visitors from the UK. That would have the nice side
  2. I wish contributors could set minumum prices for their work. If a customer does not want to pay that price, he has to buy another photo instead.
  3. If multiple news organizations own PA Media, that is even worse. So many of Alamy's clients own a part of the company. That should raise eyebrowse. Imagine Alamy would stop those cheap sales to newspapers. Wouldn't they even veto that decision in their own interest? At least the annual report of PA Group states that they are aware of those conflects of interest.That gives me some hope.
  4. Yes, we should get back more control about who can buy a license for my photos and who can't. I was not aware that Alamy and the Daily Mail are now part of the same company. So this new company could sell the image licenses to itself and even choose how much it pays for the license, because if you negotiate with yourself, you might choose a very low price at the cost of the contributors. So sales within the same company should not be possible unless there is a clear rule that the price has to be at least as high as a sale to a competitor. When I joined Alamy, we still had the chanc
  5. Would be interesting to hear from the 159,000 contributors who have already opted in. Did they have a significant boost in sales? And does that also mean a significant boost in earnings or just many sales for a pound each? Of course I always enjoy earning more, but not at any cost.
  6. The UK Newsaper scheme still is a black box from a contributor's view. How high is the commission for us in that scheme? 50% or 40%? And how much does a package for 100 photos per month typically cost a newspaper? Is Alamy turning into a microstock agency with commissions of a dollar or so per photo? Could my photos end up at a front page and I will only receive a dollar? I can understand that Alamy wants to avoid angry customers of the newspaper scheme who see that some of the photos are no longer available once they have logged in. However there should be ways to communicate to the custom
  7. It was an uniateral change, because it came into effect, if you did not actively reject it. The same with the "affliates". How many contributors - except those who spend a lot of time here - are aware that sometimes they will not get 50% but obly 38.5%, because an afflilate gets his share? In the past years each contract change took away either money or options from the contributors and automatically went into effect.
  8. That is very unfortunate. We had a reason to opt out of this scheme. Another time you have shown us that we can't trust you. When I signed up, you said that we will always get 65% commission and that will never change. Then you lowered it to first 60% and then 50% and even that only for exclusive images. You also opted people into the DACS collection by Alamy and some time later totally removed the option to opt out. So you take half of your continutors DACS money, even if they never explicitly opted in. You also removed the option to put geographic restrictions on our photos and decided on ou
  9. Yes, you could be right in that regard. Alamy showed a Donald Trump style negotiation tactic: Threaten more than you really want and when you take back a part of that thread, the other side sees that as a success, although you exactly got what you want. However it could also be that Alamy really thought we would accept those 40%.
  10. The thing with the just 38,5% for affiliate sales shocks me. That's even less than 40% it somehow secretly sneaked into the commission table at one point. I never got an email saying "Dear contributor, for some sales you will only get 38,5% from now on" Alamy is just not trustable. In the contract it cleary says in the beginning "We will pay you 50% of a direct sale made by Alamy" and then the table says something different that no one of us has ever actively agreed on. We take the photos and Alamy sells them. That is the deal. I do not see why we should pay any money to "affiliate
  11. That almost is a Royalty Free license, although you chose your photo to be Rights Managed.
  12. Rights Managed does not mean exclusive. It just means that the rights are defined like "1/4 page, circulation up to 50,000, worldwide, 5 years ....."
  13. I wanted to point out that the Brexit argument came from James West. He used Brexit as one reason for the commission cut. We will not reach an agreement, if Brexit will happen, and maybe that is another topic, but I really wonder what negative effect it would have on sales. Are their customs in place for digital goods? I though that Alamy has offices in different countries to avoid that.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.