Jump to content

Changes to the Newspaper Scheme - official thread


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone, 

 

We have just sent an email to everyone who is opted out of the Newspaper Scheme as we are making some changes around this option. Please note, the scheme is separate to Live News and the changes does not apply to images sold via the Live News feed.

 

The scheme was originally introduced in 2009, with many newspapers requiring their suppliers to move onto pre-negotiated flat rates for image usages within their online and offline publications. These rates were often lower in value than standard stock licences, but this was in many cases offset against a higher usage volume. Due to the difference in price per licence, we offered contributors a route to opt-out of such pricing. This meant that your images were hidden from newspaper clients, who would only see them if they were browsing Alamy as a guest rather than logged in as a newspaper customer.

 

Fast forward to now and the market has changed dramatically – the volume of images used across the board by newspaper clients is far higher and the standard licence prices (industry-wide) are now much more in line with the pre-negotiated rates, in most cases virtually identical.

 

Only around 1000 of our 160 000 contributors are currently opted out of this scheme, but it is causing a more complex and confusing search experience for the customer. Given that there is now little to no difference in pricing and that this group of contributors are missing out on sales potential, we will be retiring the option to opt out.

 

As of 24th November 2020, images currently opted out of the Newspaper Scheme will be available for all newspaper clients. This will significantly boost the sales potential for the contributors who were opted out and we are hoping this will be a positive experience for everyone. 

 

Many thanks,

Alamy

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 our behalf that those images can be sold everywhere.

The UK newspaper scheme is just another instance of Alamy ignoring the will of its contributors, who hold the copyright of their work. Sadly the onl chance to no get into the UK newspaper scheme to mark "Don't sell for editorial" for all images in the Image Manager. That means a lot of loss of sales for contributors and for Alamy. Just because I do not want to offer my photos in a flatrate for newspapers in a single country, I am forced to stop all editorial use worldwide.

The calculation behind this it that you might anger some contributors and lose some sales, but the remaing one will compensate that loss, because they are happy with every penny they still earn. It is the same idea as a Netflix price increase. If the price increases by 10% and only 5% leave after the price increase, it still pays off for Netflix, although its customers are worse off then before. 

I am sure you already think about other options you could take away from the contrbutors.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Skyscraperfan said:

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.

This is not correct. An opportunity was given to confirm opt-out in 2016.

Hi Mark

Following our recent contract changes, we can confirm you're opted OUT of Alamy claiming DACS payback for secondary uses of images sold by us.

 

If you're happy to be opted OUT you don't need to do anything and we won't claim on your behalf.


If you'd prefer to be opted IN let us know by replying OPT IN to this email. If you'd only like us to claim for TV usages of your images, please email us at dacspayback@alamy.com and let us know.

The market has changed over the years and Alamy has to stay competitive.

Edited by spacecadet
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Skyscraperfan said:


That's what I wrote. They removed the opportunity to opt out.

It was part of a contract change. It's not correct to say that the opportunity was removed unilaterally. Everyone had the option to be in or out for the duration of the contract. Or to leave.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

It was part of a contract change. It's not correct to say that the opportunity was removed unilaterally. Everyone had the option to be in or out for the duration of the contract. Or to leave.

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.

Edited by Skyscraperfan
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

i understand the need for an announcement.  But why are the "discussions" about the announcement Not allowed in the "Discussion" Forum.  Is this a new policy of the Forum, that we should now have discussions in announcement?  Prior announcement were left up for "discussions" before. 

 

Here being the most recent example

 

  

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

i understand the need for an announcement.  But why are the "discussions" about the announcement Not allowed in the "Discussion" Forum.  Is this a new policy of the Forum, that we should now have discussions in announcement?  Prior announcement were left up for "discussions" before. 

 

Here being the most recent example

 

  

 

We just want to keep discussions in one place on the official thread - you can discuss everything here.

 

Having one thread keeps it easy for everyone to keep track - us included.

 

Thanks

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Alamy said:

 

We just want to keep discussions in one place on the official thread - you can discuss everything here.

 

Having one thread keeps it easy for everyone to keep track - us included.

 

Thanks

 

 

Thanks

 

i think the main issue is most of us start at the Discussion level of the Forum, since this is where Discussions have historically resided.  No problem with the change, but it may be good to publicise it so we can change our habits and bookmarks.

Edited by meanderingemu
Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. My understanding was that this section of the forum was just for Announcements. That's why I started a thread myself and didn't even notice this. I expect that a lot of other contributors will do the same and that there will be lots of related threads started below in the Discussion area. And then closed down again!

Edited by geogphotos
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That explains why topics sometimes get duplicated. I did wonder.

I just have the one forum bookmark- unread content. Seems to show everything.

http://discussion.alamy.com/index.php?/discover/unread/&stream_read=all

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 customers which images are not available in the scheme even before the customer or future customer has logged in. The UK newspaper scheme will not include all photos of Alamy anyway, as some may have restrictions. So it would be better to make those restrictions more visible if a newspaper editor browses through the images without logging in. Of course Alamy has to avoid that a newspaper signs up to the scheme and then realizes that some very nice photos are not included.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I received the mail as well, and looks like most people didnt read the important sentences at the end.

"This will significantly boost your sales " is the key message. Alamy knows whats good for me and you. Like good parents. I just wonder which new gear I'll buy next year, a fullframe Sony probably, couple of lenses.

But - sorry, sentence above is not complete  ....... " This will significantly boost your sales potential "

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Andreas said:

"This will significantly boost your sales " is the key message.

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.

Edited by Skyscraperfan
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Skyscraperfan said:

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.

it did boost my revenue by $2.48 last month. 

  • Haha 3
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I opt out newspaper scheme is I don't want be in microstock. I don't know how others feel, but it sucks for me to sell a photo and see the price of $. I don't feel the need to be insulted.🙄

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Gabbro said:

The reason I opt out newspaper scheme is I don't want be in microstock. I don't know how others feel, but it sucks for me to sell a photo and see the price of $. I don't feel the need to be insulted.🙄

 

Hi Gabbro, Not relevant to the thread but you have a typo . Should be 'snow angel' not angle.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

Hi Gabbro, Not relevant to the thread but you have a typo . Should be 'snow angel' not angle.

 Thanks for pointing that out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been in the Newspaper scheme ever since I joined Alamy but for me a Newspaper sale is, shall we say, a rarity. However, last month I had a couple of licences which were both $$ and when I looked at my sales data I was taken aback to discover they were both Newspaper. Could it just be.......

Jim ;)

Edited by Broad Norfolk
Grammatical error!
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Skyscraperfan said:

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.

I am a. News shooter and get a lot of sales from the scheme.  I agree that online sales do attract a low price, there are occasional high value sales.  On this scheme it is about volume.  It must be said that newspaper sales have dropped a little during the pandemic my revenue has remained steady.

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had opted out of the newspaper scheme, although I was in it initially.

 

I still had newspaper sales, but obviously not so many.

 

I felt it better to have 1 sale at $20 a month, rather than 3 at $5.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the Newspaper scheme. I don't find that sales are at all voluminous. 

 

Actually, it is a terrible indictment of the stock photography industry, and the way that agencies have continued to undercut each other, that we have UK's largest circulation newspaper paying considerably less for an image ( print/web/online archive forever) than does an individual buying Personal Use licence. 

 

Country: United Kingdom
Usage: Editorial
Media: Newspaper - national
Print run: up to 2 million
Placement: Inside and online
Image Size: 1/4 page
Start: 08 September 2020
End: 09 September 2020
Any placement in paper and online. One use in a single editorial article used within the print and digital versions of a single publication. Digital usage includes archive rights for the lifetime of the article.

 

It is embarrassing to try to explain to friends and neighbours how the picture in the paper will only bring me a couple of quid.

 

I don't understand the logic of why an opt out cannot be maintained for the very small percentage of contributors who want it ( for whatever reason/s). Surely, the newspaper buyer logged in as a guest can cope with the simple concept that not EVERY image is available to them at the level of fees they have set up.

 

This has nothing to do with helping those contributors it is all about helping Alamy.

 

If you want additional income I find Personal Use a much better option. Will it stay an option I wonder?

$ 8.72
Edited by geogphotos
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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.