Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, formerly snappyoncalifornia said:

Please clarify, is there now ANY monetary benefit to mark images as "exclusive"??? If not, does marking them non-exclusive immediately take effect? My aim is to put multiple agencies in play ASAP. I Thanks. 

 

Only contractual place where exclusive enters I can find (for non platinum) is that image marked as "exclusive" will be unilaterally within the realm of the of action for the Infringement team.

 

 

(note as we saw last time, they may throw out a bone later after all this- this is how the "exclusive" was created,  so i would wait a few days before uploading, but it does not look promising) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, formerly snappyoncalifornia said:

Maybe if we bang our pot and pans loud enough like last time we will get them to reinstate our 50/50 split. Maybe they're counting on it. 

I'm actually even more concerned about some of the other clauses, which leave a lot of room for them to manoevre, but none for us. I've been through all this before with G.

Edited by Cryptoprocta
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

I'm actually even more concerned about some of the other clauses, which leave a lot of room for them to manoevre, but none for us. I've been through all this before with G.

 

 

i'm worried about the distribution clause, which sets no limits on what distributor can charge.  I resisted opting out until now, because i did get some decent final amounts but i will at least remove some of the more dubious markets for sure, and maybe all together. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, formerly snappyoncalifornia said:

Maybe if we bang our pot and pans loud enough like last time we will get them to reinstate our 50/50 split. Maybe they're counting on it. 

Hope so .. but probably unlikely.

 

The 50/50 split seemed fair for exclusive content. If they don't reinstate it then it's only sensible for those with exclusive content to mark it as non exclusive (as there is now no difference) and supply as many agencies as possible with these images. We are also in business after all and somehow need to make up the 20+% shortfall in revenue.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very sad and is causing me to re-evaluate my relationship with Alamy. WE produce the content. You have no right to 80% of ANYONE'S labor. This is unconscionable. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

End of the day its a numbers game and put simply nobody cares where the images come from ! 

Which, is a shame. Business I`m afraid.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wilkopix said:

Hope so .. but probably unlikely.

 

The 50/50 split seemed fair for exclusive content. If they don't reinstate it then it's only sensible for those with exclusive content to mark it as non exclusive (as there is now no difference) and supply as many agencies as possible with these images. We are also in business after all and somehow need to make up the 20+% shortfall in revenue.

 

 

i have run out of "likes", so here is my 

 

 

LIKE

 

👍✔️

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

This is truly a bad development for those who took pains to set their images as exclusive.  This feels a lot like some of the jerking around we got when we had to re-annotate our images to maximize discoverability.

But as someone with only non-exclusive images, so far I see little down side from this change for me.  In fact, it seems my distributors sales will now net me 40% instead of 30%.

As consolation, think of the silver lining: some of you will now be able to submit to other libraries and double or triple your income.  I know it's a lot of work, but it is an opportunity.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should be grandfathered in to the 50-50 split. So much work put into EVERYTHING - shooting, photoshopping and keywording.  It's really disheartening.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Reimar said:

This is truly a bad development for those who took pains to set their images as exclusive.  This feels a lot like some of the jerking around we got when we had to re-annotate our images to maximize discoverability.

But as someone with only non-exclusive images, so far I see little down side from this change for me.  In fact, it seems my distributors sales will now net me 40% instead of 30%.

As consolation, think of the silver lining: some of you will now be able to submit to other libraries and double or triple your income.  I know it's a lot of work, but it is an opportunity.

You are missing the part where you are getting 40% of the amount that has already had the distributor cut taken, so more likely you will receive 18% of the total sale price.

Edited by BarryD
To clarify
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, formerly snappyoncalifornia said:

Maybe if we bang our pot and pans loud enough like last time we will get them to reinstate our 50/50 split. Maybe they're counting on it. 

Maybe we should just do a month long submission boycott for starters....

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Martin P Wilson said:

I was just getting back into my photography after a three year sabbatical. I have had a better tricle of sales this year and although the fees were dire I was going to start submitting to Alamy again. Not now, I will take a different route to making my photography support itself.

 

I won't be pulling my images from Alamy. I am not arrogant enouigh to think they would notice. After all, I am well aware that my photographs are not unique (except maybe the odd one) or believe that Alamy would lose a sale without my pictures, the client will no doubt find a suitable alternative amongst the 100's of million others on Alamy.

 

Martin

I've downloaded a handful of photos at the weekend - I can't be bothered to do the tags and titles to put them on sale anymore.

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

 

 

i'm worried about the distribution clause, which sets no limits on what distributor can charge.  I resisted opting out until now, because i did get some decent final amounts but i will at least remove some of the more dubious markets for sure, and maybe all together. 

I've now opted out of these sales - way too exploitative !

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Reimar said:

This is truly a bad development for those who took pains to set their images as exclusive.  This feels a lot like some of the jerking around we got when we had to re-annotate our images to maximize discoverability.

But as someone with only non-exclusive images, so far I see little down side from this change for me.  In fact, it seems my distributors sales will now net me 40% instead of 30%.

As consolation, think of the silver lining: some of you will now be able to submit to other libraries and double or triple your income.  I know it's a lot of work, but it is an opportunity.

 

 

Maybe i am missing something.  Assuming a distributor does not change their share (not part of our contract)

 

 

New Commission

 

Distributor= 40%

Alamy= 60% of Remaining so 36%

 

 

Contributor= 100%- 40% -36% = 24%

 

 

so that looks like a 20% drop in out earnings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BarryD said:

You are missing the part where you are getting 40% of the amount that has already had the distributor cut taken, so more likely you will receive 18%

For Content sales via Alamy Websites

 

 

60%

 

40%

 

 

 

 

For Content sales via our Distributors after deduction of Distributor fee or commission

 

 

 

60%

 

40%

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

OK, I get it.  If the distributor fee is still 40% before that, we lose.

That's a bit of a sneaky table.  The real "what we earn" should be listed.

Edited by Reimar
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

All that time wasted on exclusivity! 

All that time wasted on Alamy is more like it...

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jayembee69 said:

I've now opted out of these sales - way too exploitative !

 

 

i was still getting a few nice $$ from certain markets, so will review over next month.  But i still want @Alamyto address limitation on how much the Distributor can take which seems removed from our agreement. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Nathaniel Noir said:

Maybe we should just do a month long submission boycott for starters....

this has been done with other agencies who did the nasty, to little, if any, effect.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Reimar said:

The table above says the the 40% is what I "earn"

 

 

After deducting the Distributors cut.  so as of now, 40% of 60% ie 24%

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Alamy locked this topic
  • Alamy unlocked this topic
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.