Jump to content
Alamy

Commission change - James West comments

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, JeffGreenberg said:

 

"on that contract"

as in, there are other contract(s) NOT subject to 40/60???!!!!

what are those other contracts receiving?  60/40???!!

(suddenly chokes & accidentally sprays cappuccino all over workspace) 

 

Why is that a surprise, Jeff? Contributors and agencies submitting to many outlets will have agreed terms agreeable to both parties. I'm sure that you're no stranger to this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

deleted by me

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, JeffGreenberg said:

It would be surprise to me if any individual or agency

is now receiving better than 50/50 from Alamy.

Someone surprise me...

 

My contributor page currently reads,

 

Your commission model is Alamy Green. You get 60% of each sale we make.”

 

Please understand that I also get billed per image, per month by Alamy, whether it makes a license or not. It’s always been this way since I began contributing (I optioned for this when signing up). FWIW I haven’t submitted to Alamy (or any other stock distributor) for several years.

 

FWIW (again) I feel that both the regular contributors and Alamy have a ‘fair’ perspective/case to make on both respective sides of this ‘argument’; so to strike a balance, couldn’t Alamy consider offering a higher contributor commission for a per image, per month fee, as I have always been (agreeably) subject to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JeffGreenberg said:

Are we pretending to misinterpret?

Or is English our second language?

Who-whom is now getting more than 50% FROM ALAMY??!!

 

Sorry about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, JeffGreenberg said:

Are we pretending to misinterpret?

Or is English our second language?

Who-whom is now getting more than 50% FROM ALAMY??!!

I guess that you've already tried, then? ;) 

If anyone is, then somehow I don't think that they'll be announcing it here! :D There have been one or two contributors notably absent from these discussions, though. Which, of course, signifies nothing.  B)

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't receive the email, it also didn't go into my spam folder, so where is it, Alamy?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slowly but surely image suppliers are moving toward the 40/60, Alamy is following many others in this area, we can complain as much as we want but it won't change the future in regard to getting our commissions lowered.

 

If Alamy would or could leave the rate at 50/50 for it's current contributors and offer a 40/60 contract to new future members would restore faith and good will.

 

We live in hope!

Paul.

------------------------------------------------

  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been too busy tonight adding more images to a POD site :mellow:  Taking action my way.

Edited by Bill Kuta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know why raising prices is not an option to consider as a way to raise income.

I mean a modest increase for licences that are usually bought by larger media companies, and a little larger increase for the more limited licences which are sold to smaller business

And do away with PU altogether as this is probably a very abused license.

And how about reducing the distributors portion to 30% and A and contributed split the remainder 35% each?

 

i just don’t understand how ONLY THE CONTRIBUTERS ARE TARGETED AND ALAMY DOESNT CONSIDER OTHER ALTERNATIVES!!

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Paul Mayall said:

 

If Alamy would or could leave the rate at 50/50 for it's current contributors and offer a 40/60 contract to new future members would restore faith and good will.

 

We live in hope!

Paul.

------------------------------------------------

 

True, but it would make for a lot of disgruntled / jealous new contributors. The only things we all seem to agree upon is that the commission rate should stay at the fair 50/50 split and that Alamy should look for other ways to increase its revenue. Methinks Alamy has gotten the message by now.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, KevinS said:

You might consider refraining from assuming things you have no information on. I did not supply Alamy with any wrong email address. What happened is that Alamy used a different address to send from. This caused the update to go into a spam folder at my mail provider (not on my Mail program here). I've found it and passed the info on to CR, who could now improve their service. It was Alamy who used a different address, not me.  

 

thats the beauty of making assumptions - one doesn't need all the facts- in order to assume

its an open forum and i am entitled to voice an opinion

 

 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Mitchell said:

 

True, but it would make for a lot of disgruntled / jealous new contributors. The only things we all seem to agree upon is that the commission rate should stay at the fair 50/50 split and that Alamy should look for other ways to increase its revenue. Methinks Alamy has gotten the message by now.

"Disgruntled Contributors" Alamy does not have any of those......

 

John,  While I have always believed that agencies or libraries should treat all contributors the same.  In this case it does make sense for  the long term contributors to continue be on a  a 50 /50 split on direct licenses.  In my opinion, it would be fare to publicly state that all new contributors will receive a 60 / 40 split on direct licenses.  I do feel that Alamy made a promise to me (us) and Alamy via James West's video has broken that promise.

 

FYI: I've spoken with several working photographer who contribute to Alamy and all of them have said " I don't care, Alamy is not producing anything for me."  These are all people with decades of experience as photographers and "Stock Photographers."  What does that tell you.  Some of them are brining in over $200,000.oo  a year in licenses, none of them RF.

 

James video was a huge mistake, one that he has not even taken the trouble to address to us.  Shall I say that I am very disappointed and feeling a bit had.

 

Going to finish my vodka martini, shaken not stirred.

 

Chuck Nacke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What bothers me is that we are asked to accept some direct correlation between economic conditions and the percentage we get from sales only when things go bad (or at least are expected to go bad: when 2% growth for Alamy means -20% for contributors…). Strangely, when things get better (2016, 2017), the terms of our contract don't change in our favor…

 

In the video, James West seems to consider that only revenue matters but I disagree with that. Sometimes, when an image is sold at a price I consider too low, I would rather not make the sale at all. I agree to sell an image for 100$, I would not agree to sell 100 images for 1$ each, even if the global revenue would be the same. And it's the same with the share we get on sales. If I do not sell images through other companies, it may be precisely because the share they reserve for their contributors does not seem fair to me…

 

At the end of the day, in our society, the value of our work comes down to the money we get out of it. If we get peanuts from an image sale, it means our work is worth peanuts (for the client, for Alamy, and in the end for us).

Edited by Olivier Parent
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ALAMY....I too have not received any email regarding the 20% commision grab.

 

Another 20%? It's a broken promise, and the end of what was a good relationship.

Last time we were told that they needed the money to expand and that we would all benefit from more sales, it didn't happen.

I have a tightly edited portfolio, I make periodic culls, and I only upload new images if I think they are at least as good as if not better than the competition.

Like many others here, my Alamy yearly revenue is in a slow decline. 

 

Alamy has tried everything it can to expand, it has failed. If it was going to break out of the stalemate it would have done it by now.

Taking another 20% from the hardworking people who trusted you is a real kick in the teeth. Shame on you.

 

I suspect, (like me), long standing members will no longer bother to add any quality new material and the collection will slowly decline and Alamy will eventually fade away. 

 

No more future uploads for me.

 

I'm now getting back to working on photo projects that pay me a proper return with 50/50 agents...........and they do the keywording!

 

Tony Watson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Stanmore said:

 

My contributor page currently reads,

 

Your commission model is Alamy Green. You get 60% of each sale we make.”

 

Please understand that I also get billed per image, per month by Alamy, whether it makes a license or not. It’s always been this way since I began contributing (I optioned for this when signing up). FWIW I haven’t submitted to Alamy (or any other stock distributor) for several years.

 

FWIW (again) I feel that both the regular contributors and Alamy have a ‘fair’ perspective/case to make on both respective sides of this ‘argument’; so to strike a balance, couldn’t Alamy consider offering a higher contributor commission for a per image, per month fee, as I have always been (agreeably) subject to?

That's extraordinary- are you really paying $500/year, because that's what 10c/image/month amounts to for 400 images. You should get this changed straight away. No-one has been offered those terms for years. It must have been abandoned in about 2005.

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Stanmore said:

 

My contributor page currently reads,

 

Your commission model is Alamy Green. You get 60% of each sale we make.”

 

Please understand that I also get billed per image, per month by Alamy, whether it makes a license or not. It’s always been this way since I began contributing (I optioned for this when signing up). FWIW I haven’t submitted to Alamy (or any other stock distributor) for several years.

 

FWIW (again) I feel that both the regular contributors and Alamy have a ‘fair’ perspective/case to make on both respective sides of this ‘argument’; so to strike a balance, couldn’t Alamy consider offering a higher contributor commission for a per image, per month fee, as I have always been (agreeably) subject to?

…...

Well, at least the efforts and sacrifices of early adopters were not wasted on most contributors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like most here I feel the 50/50 split should stay, it's already difficult to even cover costs at the photographers end so driving the market photos taken as a bi-product of another activity. The last reduction from 60/40 was supposed to bring benefits; it may have but only to Alamy not contributors who generally didn't see much of an upturn in either prices or quantity sold.

 

So will this 20% reduction to contributors see major sales increases? Last time I hoped it would, now more dubious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Mr West,

 
Like the vast majority of your 40,000 contributors, I am extremely disappointed by your decision to cut the royalty we receive by 20%. I’m luckier than some others in that I work mainly to commission, and am not solely dependent on the modest income I receive via Alamy. Nevertheless the roughly 10,000 images I have with you represent a considerable investment in time and effort, put in with the expectation that you would sell my work for the highest prices you could achieve (admittedly in a difficult and changing market).
 
I unwillingly accepted the earlier royalty cut in 2013 (even then, deceitfully presented as a 10% reduction - actually about 16.5%). I could accept that we were in a roughly equal partnership - my skill as a photographer balanced by your organisational and marketing talents. I now see that you regard us, our abilities and our experience (not to mention our loyalty) as disposable assets easily replaced from the vast global pool of camera-owning citizens. I shall reconsider my position if and when you bring in the new contract - I don’t look forward to withdrawing my images, but there are other libraries who will be pleased to accept them.
 
Incidentally, I suggest you change your ‘Why Alamy’ page to reflect the new reality - it is deceptive, to say the least, to offer a 50% royalty when you know full well that is about to change.
 
Yours sincerely,
Alex Ramsay
Edited by Alex Ramsay
wrong font size
  • Upvote 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alex Ramsay said:

Dear Mr West,

 
Like the vast majority of your 40,000 contributors, I am extremely disappointed by your decision to cut the royalty we receive by 20%. I’m luckier than some others in that I work mainly to commission, and am not solely dependent on the modest income I receive via Alamy. Nevertheless the roughly 10,000 images I have with you represent a considerable investment in time and effort, put in with the expectation that you would sell my work for the highest prices you could achieve (admittedly in a difficult and changing market).
 
I unwillingly accepted the earlier royalty cut in 2013 (even then, deceitfully presented as a 10% reduction - actually about 16.5%). I could accept that we were in a roughly equal partnership - my skill as a photographer balanced by your organisational and marketing talents. I now see that you regard us, our abilities and our experience (not to mention our loyalty) as disposable assets easily replaced from the vast global pool of camera-owning citizens. I shall reconsider my position if and when you bring in the new contract - I don’t look forward to withdrawing my images, but there are other libraries who will be pleased to accept them.
 
Incidentally, I suggest you change your ‘Why Alamy’ page to reflect the new reality - it is deceptive, to say the least, to offer a 50% royalty when you know full well that is about to change.
 
Yours sincerely,
Alex Ramsay

I am composing mine now as we type

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK my   communication is as follows  (please dont laugh - I am never sure when I am supposed to formal or informal)

Dear sir,

I am very new to your agency - only been
there about 5 months, and only recently started moving my photographyfrompure hobby to become my intended main income.  In that time I have been delighted to find an incredibly supportive and helpful community of photographers on the forums.
The announcement last week of a change to fees from 50%ofcommission to 60% of commission going to Alamy may be of minimal immediate impact on myself however it is still of concern.  I believe that a straightforward cut of fees in this manner with no adjustment or recognition of the essential contributions the photographers make to the business will ultimately see Alamy losing as a business.

If for whatever reason you truly believe that slicing your suppliers fees by 20% is necessary then I believe there are other steps you need to consider to minimize damage to Alamy and increase its viability as a continuing image library. 
 

  • You should consider taking over the job of keywording images from contributors - then you will be assured all images are optimized for being found and customers will not be aggravated by non relevant badly keyworded images appearing in their searches.  (if this suggestion makes you laugh at the idea of having to find the wages for the work this would ensue you may want to think again about how you are cutting contributors fees by 20%)
  • Bring in minimum pricing set by the contributors.  This has been frequently mentioned on the forum as prices have dropped.  It would only seem a fair compromize if you are reducing to fees to allow contributors to set the prices below which they cannot afford to sell their images.
  • Make a clear and transparent statement on how Alamy is being managed financially to make this cut necessary and detail all other cost cutting measures being utilized.  Include wage freezes or cuts for regular staff, cesstation of charity funding, collection of outstanding debts and loans owed to Alamy and cuts in dividends to shareholders.  At the moment it is hard for contributors not to feel they are being unfairly shouldered with these cuts - they need to know others are affected and it is not just them being milked as a cashcow.
  • Reflect on the path Alamy is taking in regard to the market and competitors in general.  Many stock photographers across multiple agencies are of the opinion that agencies are on a self destruct race to the bottom pricewise.  I do not believe demand for images will dry up or even reduce - I believe that demand for quality images will remain stable or even increase.  To benefit from this the focus needs to move from quantity to quality.  
  • Temporarily close Alamy to new contributors.  Draw up new higher standards for contribution and include keywording and captioning standards Properly catalogue and assess the library.  Cull every image that does not meet the new standards and start promoting Alamy as the home of quality images not found everywhere.
  • Finally read and re-read the threads on this fee change written on the forum.  There are many many excellent ideas from people way more experienced than I am.  I do not think anyone wants to see Alamy fail - you have in your contributors a resource far larger and better than just image suppliers - open up and use all that knowledge and experience from people who want to help make Alamy the biggest Library out there.


I hope you take this email in the spirit it is sent - and consider the ideas and feelings of myself and others in this matter
Yours Estelle Bowden

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tony said:

I suspect, (like me), long standing members will no longer bother to add any quality new material and the collection will slowly decline and Alamy will eventually fade away. 

Tony Watson

 

Alamy will not fade away by lack of material from individual contributors, Alamy's archive has grown very quickly in recent years through big agencies adding million's of images, this will continue no matter what the commission rate is set at.

Paul.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Alex Ramsay said:

Incidentally, I suggest you change your ‘Why Alamy’ page to reflect the new reality - it is deceptive, to say the least, to offer a 50% royalty when you know full well that is about to change.

That is misleading, for sure, to anyone looking at Alamy to sell for them. Not sure if this one is still accurate; also found with the contributor info aimed at newcomers;

How much money can I make on Alamy?

The average image license fee on Alamy is $90; ...

 

Edited by KevinS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KevinS said:

Not sure if this is still accurate; also found with the contributor info aimed at newcomers;

How much money can I make on Alamy?

The average image license fee on Alamy is $90; ...

 

I wish there was a reaction emoji  for rolling around laughing like they have on facebook  as well as the green arrow red arrow and heart

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The average image license fee on Alamy is $90

 

My average net revenue per image sold went down from $47 in 2017 to $28 in 2018 (so far). This was mostly due to a number of PU sales (due to their subject,  I am pretty sure they were NOT really PU). Just wondering how low the PU average net revenue will be when the commission is reduced to 40%, probably less than  $4 ....>:(

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Starsphinx said:

OK my   communication is as follows  (please dont laugh - I am never sure when I am supposed to formal or informal)

Dear sir,

I am very new to your agency - only been
there about 5 months, and only recently started moving my photographyfrompure hobby to become my intended main income.  In that time I have been delighted to find an incredibly supportive and helpful community of photographers on the forums.
The announcement last week of a change to fees from 50%ofcommission to 60% of commission going to Alamy may be of minimal immediate impact on myself however it is still of concern.  I believe that a straightforward cut of fees in this manner with no adjustment or recognition of the essential contributions the photographers make to the business will ultimately see Alamy losing as a business.

If for whatever reason you truly believe that slicing your suppliers fees by 20% is necessary then I believe there are other steps you need to consider to minimize damage to Alamy and increase its viability as a continuing image library. 
 

  • You should consider taking over the job of keywording images from contributors - then you will be assured all images are optimized for being found and customers will not be aggravated by non relevant badly keyworded images appearing in their searches.  (if this suggestion makes you laugh at the idea of having to find the wages for the work this would ensue you may want to think again about how you are cutting contributors fees by 20%)
  • Bring in minimum pricing set by the contributors.  This has been frequently mentioned on the forum as prices have dropped.  It would only seem a fair compromize if you are reducing to fees to allow contributors to set the prices below which they cannot afford to sell their images.
  • Make a clear and transparent statement on how Alamy is being managed financially to make this cut necessary and detail all other cost cutting measures being utilized.  Include wage freezes or cuts for regular staff, cesstation of charity funding, collection of outstanding debts and loans owed to Alamy and cuts in dividends to shareholders.  At the moment it is hard for contributors not to feel they are being unfairly shouldered with these cuts - they need to know others are affected and it is not just them being milked as a cashcow.
  • Reflect on the path Alamy is taking in regard to the market and competitors in general.  Many stock photographers across multiple agencies are of the opinion that agencies are on a self destruct race to the bottom pricewise.  I do not believe demand for images will dry up or even reduce - I believe that demand for quality images will remain stable or even increase.  To benefit from this the focus needs to move from quantity to quality.  
  • Temporarily close Alamy to new contributors.  Draw up new higher standards for contribution and include keywording and captioning standards Properly catalogue and assess the library.  Cull every image that does not meet the new standards and start promoting Alamy as the home of quality images not found everywhere.
  • Finally read and re-read the threads on this fee change written on the forum.  There are many many excellent ideas from people way more experienced than I am.  I do not think anyone wants to see Alamy fail - you have in your contributors a resource far larger and better than just image suppliers - open up and use all that knowledge and experience from people who want to help make Alamy the biggest Library out there.


I hope you take this email in the spirit it is sent - and consider the ideas and feelings of myself and others in this matter
Yours Estelle Bowden

I applaud everyone who is writing James West to express both their sense of betrayal at the proposed cut as well as offering suggestions on how Alamy could improve its standing in the market and how it could maintain the trust of its contributors.  I do have to say, however, that I could never allow Alamy (or anyone else) to do my keywording.  I travel to many out-of-the-way places around the world and photograph things that could only be properly identified by relying on good notes taken at the time, sometimes augmented and verified by Google searches during my image-processing work.  I don't think any paid employee is going to devote as much care and attention to this task as I do.  I think it's my keywording that is responsible for my relative success in selling my images.  I think more of us need to emphasize the need for Alamy to cull the dross out of its collection, maintain the 50/50 split for current contributors, and offer 60/40 for anyone who wants to sign up in the future.  Thanks for lending your voice to this effort.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • 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.