Cryptoprocta

I've cut the post, but just to say I wasn't suggesting that you don't do that. My 'other place' has a nightmare reputation, but I still earn more per month, on a dormant portfolio on 30%, than I do with more files on Alamy (at 60%) (but way down on the Glory Days). I was just stupid to let that one go dormant and put all my work into Alamy, thinking that was the better strategy for the long term. We live and learn.

They're not, the one Starsphinx references hasn 't got a great reputation: but once you've been through the first four stages: denial (Alamy is a warm-fuzzy, supplier-friendly company) anger (how could they do this to us, we thought they loved us as much as we loved them) bargaining (I won't upload for under 50% / for exclusive files / for high selling suppliers ...) depression (this is awful, I never thought Alamy would kick us in the teeth like (most of) the others), you're left with: acceptance (I will quit altogether [and all that work has been for nought], I will just go ahead as usual [accepting the kick in the teeth and knowing more may well follow], I will try to follow the money [by spreading to the agencies which sell more, even for a smaller cut and a smaller rpd, as it will make more in the short term, and we have no idea what will happen in the long term], or some combination of the latter two)

Of course, it's a business, they always have their own needs foremost. What we choose to infer is up to us.

Alamy didn't say we were assured. A question asked that. You'll notice that at the time, our share was 87%, and Alamy said only that it "wouldn't be in their interest to change terms to the detriment of contributors", no assurance, no promise, and they must have cut the contributor's share more times than I was aware. And now they have decded that it is in their interest to change the terms to our detriment - again. BTW, interesting reading, marginally relevant: http://www.epuk.org/news/alamy-responds-to-epuk-s-open-letter Hahaha (HOLLOW laugh) about infringements. :-(

Ok, I'll be interested to see that. However, making promises like that would show at best extreme naivety.

Did they actually promise that? If so, where? After all, they've cut our share at least twice in their history that I know of (only one of these since I started).

Have no idea, but that scenario is pretty much moot.

They're not 'donating to charities' - effectively the vast majority of the profits from Alamy support their own family 'charity', the Fischer Family Trust. That's Alamy's reason for existing.

So we're paying for James West's entrepreneurial failure.

Yeah, but shareholders want returns, loans have to be repaid, and they want all the profit to support their "charity". Contributors not only don't need to be paid back (with interest!), but after they have been screwed, they don't even have to be returned to their previous level (vide "paying for the US office").

Yeah, they'll just let us rant, but nothing will happen. They're having a good laugh, though.

That's a supreme example of rubbing our noses in it.

Actually, there is. It's a midstock like Alamy in prices, but only allows a very small number of new entrants each year. Clue: it's got an embarrassingly "Cutesy" name.

It's called "Divide and conquer"

Again, it's too ripe for manipulation, e.g. by search positioning.