Betty LaRue Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 I sold an image in mid June (three months ago) for $89.00, my take at 50%. Today I see it was refunded and resold at 40% for me. Must be nice to make untold amounts of money from all contributors who get shafted when we finally get a decent license amount. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShep Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 Me too Betty, me too. Exactly the same figures and timescale. Steve 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radim Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 today I have the same experience, the same amount for a picture sold in June, Country: Worldwide Usage: Single company - multiple use editorial only Industry sector: Education Start: 17 June 2021 Duration: Unlimited I feel the same, lousy 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkK Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 (edited) 5 hours ago, Betty LaRue said: I sold an image in mid June (three months ago) for $89.00, my take at 50%. Today I see it was refunded and resold at 40% for me. Must be nice to make untold amounts of money from all contributors who get shafted when we finally get a decent license amount. Same thing happened to me today except when I look at the numbers I actually PAID 9.50 for the photo to be used. I hope I am missing something. The first sale shows the 50 percent commission (thus the logical assumption was that it was sold prior to the contract changes but I was never informed of the sale until now). 20/9/2021 JKM6RR Lincoln Electric sign 2 RM -89.00 44.50 -44.50 20/9/2021 JKM6RR Lincoln Electric sign 2 RM 89.00 -53.40 35.60 Edited September 20, 2021 by MarkK Update…..just found that the photo was invoiced previously on June 17, 2021 for the same price….well before the contract changes 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Ventura Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 I hope Alamy addresses this! Definitely not right! 2 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 Same thing happened to me today, same original price as well ($89.00). 🙁 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VbFolly Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 That does seem very unfair - I hope you all get your 50% back. It must be a day for refunds. I had a $40 book sale from May refunded today (one that hadn't cleared). It hasn't reappeared yet, so I'm going backwards at the moment. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 I have had one of those today also; not such a large amount involved, but seems unfair. I think this is something that Alamy should address. Kumar 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meanderingemu Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 @Alamy didnt you state earlier that sale date is based on day client download in discussions of sales that went through after contributor opted out of distributor program? How can definition now change? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvallee Posted September 20, 2021 Share Posted September 20, 2021 Same here. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted September 20, 2021 Author Share Posted September 20, 2021 I would say I’m glad I wasn’t singled out, but I wouldn’t wish it on anyone else. I think it’s a shame, but not our shame. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nacke Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 7 hours ago, Betty LaRue said: I sold an image in mid June (three months ago) for $89.00, my take at 50%. Today I see it was refunded and resold at 40% for me. Must be nice to make untold amounts of money from all contributors who get shafted when we finally get a decent license amount. I am not accusing anybody of anything "dishonest", but in my opinion, it is Alamy that should absorb to difference. Just my opinion and I do not know the details, but it is the right thing to do. I would also suggest that communication is an important part of the issue on both sides. Chuck 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radim Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 PA/Alamy basic principle is mainly not to harm the interests of buyers. Unfortunately, contributors are in second place The loss of a client is a bigger scarecrow than the loss of one or more contributors. We are on the side that has no way to defend itself. PA/Alamy can say at any time that if we don't like anything, we can leave. Our relationship is not equal. We are pulling for the shorter end of the rope for a very long time. From this point of view, I do not believe that the agreement on the change of commission will be corrected. I do not believe that in the future awaits us in the sector stock photography some improvement. That is the reality. Still, keep a steady mind and stay safe😀 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broad Norfolk Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 Appears very unethical! 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meanderingemu Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 5 hours ago, Radim said: PA/Alamy basic principle is mainly not to harm the interests of buyers. Unfortunately, contributors are in second place The loss of a client is a bigger scarecrow than the loss of one or more contributors. We are on the side that has no way to defend itself. PA/Alamy can say at any time that if we don't like anything, we can leave. Our relationship is not equal. We are pulling for the shorter end of the rope for a very long time. From this point of view, I do not believe that the agreement on the change of commission will be corrected. I do not believe that in the future awaits us in the sector stock photography some improvement. That is the reality. Still, keep a steady mind and stay safe😀 But what is the impact on the client? There is no change whatsoever to them, in fact they might have negative perception if they found that by changing the date Alamy just keeps a bigger portion of the fee. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alamy Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 13 hours ago, meanderingemu said: @Alamy didnt you state earlier that sale date is based on day client download in discussions of sales that went through after contributor opted out of distributor program? How can definition now change? Hi Commission is calculated at date of invoice, not date of download. Taking distribution as an example, we take download date into consideration if a distributor has used an image after you have opted out of the scheme. In this case if the distributor downloaded the image before you opted out, they are still able to use the image. However the commission wouldn't be calculated until they invoiced the use. We understand the frustration here but as we report images to you when they happen rather than when we have received money unfortunately images do sometimes get refunded and rebilled. Any images rebilled after the 24th July will remain at the new commission rate. Thanks, Alamy 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Alamy said: We understand the frustration here but as we report images to you when they happen rather than when we have received money unfortunately images do sometimes get refunded and rebilled. Any images rebilled after the 24th July will remain at the new commission rate. Having it explained doesn't make it appear any less sleazy or unethical. I never thought I would use those words about Alamy. It would cost very little to retain goodwill here, rather than the letter of the contract. But goodwill obviously means nothing now. A trust has been broken. Take it or leave it. Edited September 21, 2021 by spacecadet 2 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Myford Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 18 minutes ago, Alamy said: Hi Commission is calculated at date of invoice, not date of download. Taking distribution as an example, we take download date into consideration if a distributor has used an image after you have opted out of the scheme. In this case if the distributor downloaded the image before you opted out, they are still able to use the image. However the commission wouldn't be calculated until they invoiced the use. We understand the frustration here but as we report images to you when they happen rather than when we have received money unfortunately images do sometimes get refunded and rebilled. Any images rebilled after the 24th July will remain at the new commission rate. Thanks, Alamy So by that logic every licence that has been issued since the formation of Alamy can theoretically be "refunded" - with no change of cost to the client - and simply rebilled at the current commission rate. Sounds like a giant loophole to breach the terms of the contract and raise extra money at contributors expense. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvallee Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 39 minutes ago, Alamy said: Hi Commission is calculated at date of invoice, not date of download. Taking distribution as an example, we take download date into consideration if a distributor has used an image after you have opted out of the scheme. In this case if the distributor downloaded the image before you opted out, they are still able to use the image. However the commission wouldn't be calculated until they invoiced the use. We understand the frustration here but as we report images to you when they happen rather than when we have received money unfortunately images do sometimes get refunded and rebilled. Any images rebilled after the 24th July will remain at the new commission rate. Thanks, Alamy @Alamy, Are you telling me that I have to pay you $8.90 for the client's privilege to cancel that sale, while nobody lost any money, neither you nor him/her?? This is completely outrageous. Please tell me I'm mis-reading this. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShep Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 I'm struggling to think of a reason why a customer would buy an image in June, then refund it in September and buy it again instantly at the same price with the original terms - including the June start date. Steve 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radim Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 Yes, I see it the same way. The client does not lose any money, Alamy will increase the commission only the contributor will pay their joke. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sultanpepa Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 Commission should be calculated at the date of FIRST invoice. Refunding and rebilling for clerical errors and exchange rate adjustments which in effect changes the commission rate is totally unethical and possibly illegal. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvallee Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 (edited) 21 hours ago, Sultanpepa said: Commission should be calculated at the date of FIRST invoice. Refunding and rebilling for clerical errors and exchange rate adjustments which in effect changes the commission rate is totally unethical and possibly illegal. My thoughts entirely. This was a direct sale, refunded and rebilled. How can the supplier (us) be made liable for the (no cost) cancellation???????? This can't be legal. Edited September 22, 2021 by gvallee 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sb photos Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 6 hours ago, Radim said: PA/Alamy basic principle is mainly not to harm the interests of buyers. Unfortunately, contributors are in second place 😀 A lot worse than second place. What’s happening may be covered by the contract, but is most certainly unethical. Does Alamy still want to encourage contributors or are they only interested in the numbers from the big agencies. I think we all know the answer. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodvandigtid Posted September 21, 2021 Share Posted September 21, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, Alamy said: Hi We understand the frustration here but as we report images to you when they happen rather than when we have received money unfortunately images do sometimes get refunded and rebilled. Any images rebilled after the 24th July will remain at the new commission rate. Thanks, Alamy You understand our frustration? Forget about excuses and do the decent and proper thing for those whose pictures generate business and money for you and keep people employed. It should be a simple thing to program but wait, PA/Alamy are getting shockingly bad in terms of software/data updates. Come on Emily Shelley show some professionalism and leadership and get these kind of cases resolved fairly - there shouldn't be that many and they will be short in terms of time-span. Edited September 21, 2021 by Nodvandigtid "some" to "show" 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts