Commission change - James West comments

[Craig Yates]

47 minutes ago, Southpole said:

It is what it is crack on and keep uploading

Hmmm, but my motivation is driven by sales and earning money, Both my sales volume and revenue are up on last year.

My motivation is now damaged at the thought of lower rewards. 50/50 should be a minimum split Alamy.

If we all feel this demotivation and stop uploading, Alamy will die and it will be self inflicted by it's leadership or in this case lack of leadership.

Any business watching that video would not hire that man, i wonder how many out takes exist from the making of that video. Someone should have watched

it and advised him to delete it.

I think Alamy has a lost a lot of key customers and based on all the data it has in front of it, is forecasting a sudden dip in revenue, and to counter that

it's decided to rob it's supply chain.

A strong leader would deal with this in a positive way, lots of good suggestions and ideas appear in these threads, a listening leader would consider some of these.

A good leader needs brains around him to cultivate success, he should listen to the brains in this forum.

Ramble and speech over!!

 

[Cryptoprocta]

13 hours ago, Starsphinx said:

I have posted on the other thread about an agency that has some payments at 60% - there are agencies out there still paying proper percentages.

I don't think it'll be the same agency, but I was once on an agency which paid all payments at 60%, and had exactly one sale via them.

And from what I read elsewhere, that's the case with most of the high-paying agencies.

 

The difference is those agencies with specialisms, where buyers can go and know what they search for is what they get, with a search unsullied by spamming, mididentifications and search engine malgorithms. But for most of these, you need to be able go supply a certain high number of images per period of time (month or quarter), usually of subjects in their specialism which they have no, or very few, examples already. And the quality expected is super-high.

 

Alamy has us by the short and curlies, as they know we'll find out that 40% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

My position is knowing that 30% at my micro has consistently earned me more than 50% at Alamy, so 40% at Alamy is now looking particularly unattractive.

[Gordon Scammell]

On 5 December 2018 at 00:36, Alamy said:

Exclusivity button is to inform us that the image is not elsewhere - can be useful for price negotiations or tracking infringements. We don't insist on it.

'...tracking infringements...' - really?  Your ability to track infringements is as effective as a chocolate teapot.  Useless.  Absolutely useless.

[Starsphinx]

1 minute ago, Cryptoprocta said:

I don't think it'll be the same agency, but I was once on an agency which paid all payments at 60%, and had exactly one sale via them.

And from what I read elsewhere, that's the case with most of the high-paying agencies.

 

The difference is those agencies with specialisms, where buyers can go and know what they search for is what they get, with a search unsullied by spamming, mididentifications and search engine malgorithms. But for most of these, you need to be able go supply a certain high number of images per period of time (month or quarter), usually of subjects in their specialism which they have no, or very few, examples already. And the quality expected is super-high.

 

Alamy has us by the short and curlies, as they know we'll find out that 40% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

My position is knowing that 30% at my micro has consistently earned me more than 50% at Alamy, so 40% at Alamy is now looking particularly unattractive.

It is a micro stock agency.  I have a total of 69 images with them.  In the past 2 years I have uploaded a grand total of 4 images to them.  Since joining Alamy I have not looked at them or my account until this news. I was totally focused on Alamy and uploaded nearly 400 images.  In that time I have had one sale from Alamy for **c and 2  from the other place both individually worth more than the Alamy sale.  I dont believe they are specialist and I believe they can match or possibly exceed Alamy in number of sales.  While the big 3 and 4 figures sales are probably not going to happen there I suspect their low to middle prices mean net sales will be similar.  It just seemed important to let people know that there is this available out there.

[Allan Bell]

8 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Allan....please give me your email. I will give you mine and you can keep yours private if you like, and send it to me.

I would be very distressed to lose you as my friend...I have a feeling we’ve both suffered losses recently.

Betty

 

Have sent you an email Betty.

 

Thank you for asking.

 

Allan

 

 

[Allan Bell]

 

Sorry but I have to post again on the OPs post.

 

I am of the opinion that Alamy are using the cut in contributors payments where they know that there will be no comebacks if and when their expansion plans fail miserably. Not like obtaining a bank loan where they must present their case properly, (not as in James fudged attempt with us the contributors), and with guarantees that repayment will be met.

 

This is their easiest solution to a CASH GRAB in my opinion with no comebacks on Alamy, OR SO THEY THINK.

 

Lose your suppliers and you lose your business.

 

We are not employees of Alamy but it would be wise to consider their suppliers as such. In any company it makes good business sense to look after their employees.

 

Allan

 

 

[David McGill]

45 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

It is a micro stock agency.  I have a total of 69 images with them.  In the past 2 years I have uploaded a grand total of 4 images to them.  Since joining Alamy I have not looked at them or my account until this news. I was totally focused on Alamy and uploaded nearly 400 images.  In that time I have had one sale from Alamy for **c and 2  from the other place both individually worth more than the Alamy sale.  I dont believe they are specialist and I believe they can match or possibly exceed Alamy in number of sales.  While the big 3 and 4 figures sales are probably not going to happen there I suspect their low to middle prices mean net sales will be similar.  It just seemed important to let people know that there is this available out there.

Estelle - Having looked at your website I realise the site you mention is an RF one. The vast majority of my Alamy images are RM as I believed that they would earn more. However, my recent fees have reduced to the extent that I will be getting a shade under $9 (gross!) for a RM image that was published recently in a quality UK Sunday newspaper. In years gone by the payment could well have been about 4/5 times that. I do have images with an RF library, not the one you mention. My top downloaded image is one of the wood burning stove in our house, the top fee I have had for that has been 74p (my share), while it has been "sold" for as little as 20p (my share)!

I have found that for RF work I have to put a lot more into preparing these images for sale as I have to strip out logos and exclude identifiable people. If I am only going to get 25p or so per download is it actually worth the effort? I like taking photos of aircraft both military and airliners but to submit them to RF agencies I have to clone out the airline's logo and colour scheme, the registration number and the type of aircraft if it is visible on the fuselage. The same goes for military aircraft, every marking has to be stripped out.

I am now at a quandary about what to do with Alamy, in the end I may well continue to submit as others have said 40% of something is much better than 100% of nothing! 

 

David

 

[Starsphinx]

4 minutes ago, David McGill said:

Estelle - Having looked at your website I realise the site you mention is an RF one. The vast majority of my Alamy images are RM as I believed that they would earn more. However, my recent fees have reduced to the extent that I will be getting a shade under $9 (gross!) for a RM image that was published recently in a quality UK Sunday newspaper. In years gone by the payment could well have been about 4/5 times that. I do have images with an RF library, not the one you mention. My top downloaded image is one of the wood burning stove in our house, the top fee I have had for that has been 74p (my share), while it has been "sold" for as little as 20p (my share)!

I have found that for RF work I have to put a lot more into preparing these images for sale as I have to strip out logos and exclude identifiable people. If I am only going to get 25p or so per download is it actually worth the effort? I like taking photos of aircraft both military and airliners but to submit them to RF agencies I have to clone out the airline's logo and colour scheme, the registration number and the type of aircraft if it is visible on the fuselage. The same goes for military aircraft, every marking has to be stripped out.

I am now at a quandary about what to do with Alamy, in the end I may well continue to submit as others have said 40% of something is much better than 100% of nothing! 

 

David

 

It is going to be different for everyone - but I am getting more than 25p an image on there (£1.57  still isn't huge though. Their structure is such that the more often an image sells the higher the price becomes - they do offer licences for print and extended licences which are triple figure - triple pound not pence)  also as I am finding out this morning being US based they have some huge holes when it comes to British stuff - with indications stuff from those holes would sell.
I do not tend to do the removal of logos etc but mark things as editorial - I would imagine your plane would be fine under editorial rules.  Try searching their stuff for military aircraft and you will see what I mean - those images definitely have not been fully stripped.
All I am doing is sharing my Alamy port to a wider market - I figure I have already done the work for here so lets see what happens when I upload elsewhere.

[chris_rabe]

Found an agency I wasn't aware of before offering 50/50, with self pricing, and includes editorial.

 

It's RF only, but if I'm honest, most of my catalogue will be best listed under that. Besides, I need to start earning now. I was playing the patience game with Alamy, but feel like that has now just wasted a lot of the last few months worth of potential sales for me.

 

I'd still like to know if I can remove my images immediately due to the change.

[KevinS]

9 minutes ago, chris_rabe said:

I'd still like to know if I can remove my images immediately due to the change.

Not sure about 'immediately'. If you terminate, it's 45 days. If you wait until the new contract is out, you can terminate during the 45 day period, termination taking effect 45 days after the release date.

A while ago I went back and forth with senior staff over the change in commission that resulted in contributors getting less than 50% of affiliate sales. I may have been the only one to complain about the bait & switch tactic used to implement affiliate sales. When I mentioned that I was thinking of leaving, he eagerly offered to expedite deletion of my images. What great service! You might get that offer if you get a hold of senior staff, otherwise I think it's 45 days. 

[Starsphinx]

26 minutes ago, chris_rabe said:

Found an agency I wasn't aware of before offering 50/50, with self pricing, and includes editorial.

 

It's RF only, but if I'm honest, most of my catalogue will be best listed under that. Besides, I need to start earning now. I was playing the patience game with Alamy, but feel like that has now just wasted a lot of the last few months worth of potential sales for me.

 

I'd still like to know if I can remove my images immediately due to the change.

And of course the annoying thing is you are not allowed to share your information on here for the benefit of others.

[Skyscraperfan]

24 minutes ago, chris_rabe said:

I'd still like to know if I can remove my images immediately due to the change.

 

Removal makes you lose all that leverage. If many people remove their images, Alamy knows that they probably will not even come back if the 50/50 split is reinstalled, because it simply is too much work to prepare all those photos again. It is easier to ristrict them to personal use. That shows Alamy that we still have some good will to continue once 50/50 is back. The worst that can happen is that you delete your photos now and next week Alamy says "Okay, we go back to 50/50!". After reuploading the photos it would take ages until they get back their former image ranks.

[chris_rabe]

2 minutes ago, Skyscraperfan said:

 

Removal makes you lose all that leverage. If many people remove their images, Alamy knows that they probably will not even come back if the 50/50 split is reinstalled, because it simply is too much work to prepare all those photos again. It is easier to ristrict them to personal use. That shows Alamy that we still have some good will to continue once 50/50 is back. The worst that can happen is that you delete your photos now and next week Alamy says "Okay, we go back to 50/50!". After reuploading the photos it would take ages until they get back their former image ranks.

 

I suppose I should say, remove immediately at time I choose to before new contract comes into effect. So, maybe not today, or next week, but at any time before new contract.

 

 

[Joseph Clemson]

1 hour ago, chris_rabe said:

Found an agency I wasn't aware of before offering 50/50, with self pricing, and includes editorial.

 

It's RF only, but if I'm honest, most of my catalogue will be best listed under that. Besides, I need to start earning now. I was playing the patience game with Alamy, but feel like that has now just wasted a lot of the last few months worth of potential sales for me.

 

I'd still like to know if I can remove my images immediately due to the change.

 

The only large microstock agency I know with self-pricing and a 50/50 spit is one with a watery theme to its name. If this is the one you are thinking of, be careful because it is very good at video sales but still image sales are almost non-existent. It also did the dirty on many contributors by introducing a subscription service to which not all contributors were invited and sales for the rest were massively impacted.

 

As a general point I'm thinking that the grass is not likely to be much greener wherever the disaffected contributors go,  especially those like myself with a generalist soft editorial collection.

[Foreign Export]

4 minutes ago, Joseph Clemson said:

 

The only large microstock agency I know with self-pricing and a 50/50 spit is one with a watery theme to its name. If this is the one you are thinking of, be careful because it is very good at video sales but still image sales are almost non-existent. It also did the dirty on many contributors by introducing a subscription service to which not all contributors were invited and sales for the rest were massively impacted.

 

As a general point I'm thinking that the grass is not likely to be much greener wherever the disaffected contributors go,  especially those like myself with a generalist soft editorial collection.

 

I think its pretty straightforward- decide whether to be in stock or not

Quite frankly the agencies are much of a muchness - each needs to decide what to spend their time on

 

 

 

[Skyscraperfan]

If I do not find any agency which offers me 50%, I might simply offer my images for free. The most important goal for me is getting my images published. I would rather do that for free than accepting a deal that leaves me with less than 50%. Even microstock would be okay for me, as long as I get my 50% or more.

[Martin P Wilson]

50 minutes ago, Skyscraperfan said:

 

Removal makes you lose all that leverage. If many people remove their images, Alamy knows that they probably will not even come back if the 50/50 split is reinstalled, because it simply is too much work to prepare all those photos again. It is easier to ristrict them to personal use. That shows Alamy that we still have some good will to continue once 50/50 is back. The worst that can happen is that you delete your photos now and next week Alamy says "Okay, we go back to 50/50!". After reuploading the photos it would take ages until they get back their former image ranks.

 

For me the damage is done. If they go back to 50-50 my opinion will not change; I will not be submitting any more work. I had effectively taken that decision 2 years ago. Partly Alamy, but especially my belief that stock is on its last legs as a business for photographers and not really very inspiring photographically. I was keeping a watching brief, the commssion change and the way it was done is, as I have said, the final straw. I will take some time to consider my position with regard to my existing Alamy portfolio, it will make no real difference to me or Alamy whether I remove it or not. As an act of solidarity with others removal may add to the weight of opinion.

[Foreign Export]

Im certainly not deleting my images - I've invested the time and i want a return for that investment

But as I've said before i won't be uploading any more - as i value my time to do that above a 40% share of any proceeds

[chris_rabe]

10 minutes ago, Skyscraperfan said:

If I do not find any agency which offers me 50%, I might simply offer my images for free. The most important goal for me is getting my images published. I would rather do that for free than accepting a deal that leaves me with less than 50%. Even microstock would be okay for me, as long as I get my 50% or more.

 

Giving them away for free makes no sense to me... 

[chris_rabe]

18 minutes ago, Joseph Clemson said:

 

The only large microstock agency I know with self-pricing and a 50/50 spit is one with a watery theme to its name. If this is the one you are thinking of, be careful because it is very good at video sales but still image sales are almost non-existent. It also did the dirty on many contributors by introducing a subscription service to which not all contributors were invited and sales for the rest were massively impacted.

 

As a general point I'm thinking that the grass is not likely to be much greener wherever the disaffected contributors go,  especially those like myself with a generalist soft editorial collection.

 

That's the one. Am reading up on them.

 

Thanks for the info.

 

I find the way some people are pricing their own images quite bizarre...

 

I do keep meaning to do more video, so don't mind that too much.

 

It amazes me how the stock industry has devalued photography - for seamingly no reason other than pricing competitors out the window.

[Starsphinx]

Just found an interesting article that people may want to read right now  https://www.microstockman.com/microstock-photography-sites/

[Skyscraperfan]

It's interesting that in some businesses companies are FOR a minimum wage, although it means that they have to pay more. The idea is that if every competitor has to pay the same minimum wage, no one can become more profitable than competitors by cutting wages. I would like to see something like that in the stock industry. If all agree that the creators have to get 50%, every stock agency knows that their competitors also have to pay 50%. So the competitors can't offer cheaper prizes by cutting commissions. That way everyone would benefit.

Of course that can't be ruled by law, as those competitors sit in different countries, but if a few market leaders agreed to 50%, the other would have to follow or lose all creators.

[Alex Ramsay]

18 minutes ago, Skyscraperfan said:

If I do not find any agency which offers me 50%, I might simply offer my images for free. The most important goal for me is getting my images published. I would rather do that for free than accepting a deal that leaves me with less than 50%. Even microstock would be okay for me, as long as I get my 50% or more.

 

What? And if you can't find anyone to publish them, will you start paying the publishers to use your images? There's a long tradition of vanity publishing in the book world - I'd certainly be sorry to see it spread to our line of work

[Starsphinx]

1 minute ago, Skyscraperfan said:

It's interesting that in some businesses companies are FOR a minimum wage, although it means that they have to pay more. The idea is that if every competitor has to pay the same minimum wage, no one can become more profitable than competitors by cutting wages. I would like to see something like that in the stock industry. If all agree that the creators have to get 50%, every stock agency knows that their competitors also have to pay 50%. So the competitors can't offer cheaper prizes by cutting commissions. That way everyone would benefit.

Of course that can't be ruled by law, as those competitors sit in different countries, but if a few market leaders agreed to 50%, the other would have to follow or lose all creators.

It could be used innovatively as a selling point - for both attracting contributors and for making sales - along the lines of "we pick our photographs carefully - thats why we pay a minimum of 50% to the people who create them"

[KevinS]

15 minutes ago, Starsphinx said:

Just found an interesting article that people may want to read right now  https://www.microstockman.com/microstock-photography-sites/

Thanks!