Suggestion regarding reduction in commissions to contributors

[Steve Purnell]

A radical suggestion here and a post that will probably be taken down quickly as it will obviously prove controversial but we are, once again, seeing a reduction in the commissions to be paid to contributors. Would it not be too much to ask to get the buyers to pay a little more rather than to hit your suppliers without who you don't have a business. Thank you for listening.

[Steve F]

On 17/06/2021 at 09:16, Steve Purnell said:

A radical suggestion here and a post that will probably be taken down quickly as it will obviously prove controversial but we are, once again, seeing a reduction in the commissions to be paid to contributors. Would it not be too much to ask to get the buyers to pay a little more rather than to hit your suppliers without who you don't have a business. Thank you for listening.

 

It's probably not commercially viable to charge more in today's market. But if the proportion of unique imagery on Alamy is so small compared to the main catalogue, surely you can advertise the unique imagery as a strength somehow??? And not punish contributors that stick with Alamy only?

 

I understand the problem of people mistakenly(?) saying images are unique on Alamy when they're not, but surely that is just a minority? I've never sold on another platform for example.

 

Also, how about working on increasing the number of sales rather than taking money from contributors to fund the business?

Edited June 21, 2021 by Steve F

[wiskerke]

5 hours ago, Steve F said:

It's probably not commercially viable to charge more in today's market. But if the proportion of unique imagery on Alamy is so small compared to the main catalogue, surely you can advertise the unique imagery as a strength somehow???

 

Only if the quality would warrant it, which seems to be not the case.

 

wim

[Steve F]

Just now, wiskerke said:

 

Only if the quality would warrant it, which seems to be not the case.

 

wim

 

Gee thanks 😉