Exclusivity Revisited

[NomisH]

I was very upset when Alamy took away exclusivity as a meaningful option other than to the few whales who actually make real money on the platform.

I personally felt that exclusivity was a good deal for a 50% split and felt that Alamy benefited by attracting a loyal, diverse and eclectic "exclusive" group of hobbyists and amateurs.

I'm definitely not in this for the money - I know I'm mediocre at best - but the fact of a photo selling (for whatever price) drives me on. It's like a game.

So I unchecked "exclusive" on all my photos and then started uploading to SS.

And with less than 20% of my small portfolio uploaded to SS (since June of this year, 800 images) I have already sold 31 images compared to 26 sales on Alamy since July 2017.

(Obviously there is no comparison with regard to money but I can't imagine Alamy is not heading in the same direction as SS with regards to contributor payments.)

My point is that by removing the exclusivity of their images, Alamy seems to have removed a big incentive for it's customers to pay a premium for an image.

Why would a potential buyer, having found an image they like on Alamy, not look elsewhere to see if they can find the same image for less?

 

 

[meanderingemu]

48 minutes ago, NomisH said:

I was very upset when Alamy took away exclusivity as a meaningful option other than to the few whales who actually make real money on the platform.

I personally felt that exclusivity was a good deal for a 50% split and felt that Alamy benefited by attracting a loyal, diverse and eclectic "exclusive" group of hobbyists and amateurs.

I'm definitely not in this for the money - I know I'm mediocre at best - but the fact of a photo selling (for whatever price) drives me on. It's like a game.

So I unchecked "exclusive" on all my photos and then started uploading to SS.

And with less than 20% of my small portfolio uploaded to SS (since June of this year, 800 images) I have already sold 31 images compared to 26 sales on Alamy since July 2017.

(Obviously there is no comparison with regard to money but I can't imagine Alamy is not heading in the same direction as SS with regards to contributor payments.)

My point is that by removing the exclusivity of their images, Alamy seems to have removed a big incentive for it's customers to pay a premium for an image.

Why would a potential buyer, having found an image they like on Alamy, not look elsewhere to see if they can find the same image for less?

 

 

 

 

but the incentive was there prior to the change.  They only difference now is that You are offering the same image for 10 cents.  

 

Don't get me wrong, I also have images on some MS. but i manage my offering based on market- certain images and markets are more suited to MS- high volume images, but some are still better served by Alamy- 40% of Alamy's fees is generally better

[FocusUno]

4 hours ago, NomisH said:

Why would a potential buyer, having found an image they like on Alamy, not look elsewhere to see if they can find the same image for less?

 😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  😬  

For many, time is money, mate.

Some deadlines are hard.

How many things did you buy this month?
How many times did you check every bloody

source to verify you got very lowest worldwide price?!!

 

Edited September 24, 2021 by FocusUno

[NomisH]

32 minutes ago, FocusUno said:

Time is money, mate.

Some deadlines are hard.

How many things did you buy this month?
How many times did you check every bloody

source to verify you got very lowest worldwide price?!!

 

As I buyer, I would go straight to SS for the lowest prices. Why bother with ALAMY, knowing that exclusive is no longer the case? And everyone has deadlines but everyone also normally has to keep to a budget. Or do you live in blank cheque world? Must be nice.

[NomisH]

1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

but the incentive was there prior to the change.  They only difference now is that You are offering the same image for 10 cents.  

 

Don't get me wrong, I also have images on some MS. but i manage my offering based on market- certain images and markets are more suited to MS- high volume images, but some are still better served by Alamy- 40% of Alamy's fees is generally better

My point is $10 or $0.10, makes no difference to me. The thrill is in the purchase. I chose ALAMY originally because they seemed to be a nice outfit offering a fair deal and that meant something in these days of racing to the bottom. Maybe I'm not typical but do you think this is a good (or just necessary) thing that ALAMY did?

[Jill Morgan]

1 hour ago, FocusUno said:

Time is money, mate.

Some deadlines are hard.

How many things did you buy this month?
How many times did you check every bloody

source to verify you got very lowest worldwide price?!!

 

 

Jeff, I buy images and if I see an image I like, I simply right click and search on google for the image.  It will tell me in 5 seconds if I can find it in one of the cheap joints.

 

Jill

[Jill Morgan]

57 minutes ago, NomisH said:

My point is $10 or $0.10, makes no difference to me. The thrill is in the purchase. I chose ALAMY originally because they seemed to be a nice outfit offering a fair deal and that meant something in these days of racing to the bottom. Maybe I'm not typical but do you think this is a good (or just necessary) thing that ALAMY did?

 

That reasoning is one of the reasons image pricing has plummeted.

 

Jill

[sb photos]

2 hours ago, Jill Morgan said:

 

That reasoning is one of the reasons image pricing has plummeted.

 

Jill

 

I agree with you Jill. 

[geogphotos]

4 hours ago, NomisH said:

My point is $10 or $0.10, makes no difference to me. The thrill is in the purchase. I chose ALAMY originally because they seemed to be a nice outfit offering a fair deal and that meant something in these days of racing to the bottom. Maybe I'm not typical but do you think this is a good (or just necessary) thing that ALAMY did?

 But you are leading the charge in the race to the bottom because it just makes no difference to you. You just want your thrill.

 

I don't know what job you do but how would you feel if amateurs undermined your income by working for next to nothing because they didn't need the money?

 

In my view a fundamental mistake Alamy made was to accept images that are also on MS sites. 

Edited September 24, 2021 by geogphotos

[Colblimp]

4 hours ago, NomisH said:

My point is $10 or $0.10, makes no difference to me. The thrill is in the purchase. 

This comment shows you’re part of the problem. What a ridiculous statement to make. You, along with many thousands of others, are contributing to killing the industry by this line of thinking. Photography is my full time job and it’s always a struggle. What you posted doesn’t help. Unbelievable! 😠

[Steve F]

James Allworth's comments on exclusivity:

 

 

 

Also, number of sales is not so important, it's the net fee that you receive that is.

Edited September 24, 2021 by Steve F

[BobD]

I must be contrary, I closed my SS account earlier this week.

[meanderingemu]

what i don't get is what this has anything to do with the change in Contract.  Even before the change if the thrill is all about number of time you see someone downloading your image maSSive MS were still your best offer.  In fact you were penalising your thrill by coming exclusive here. 

[meanderingemu]

 

9 hours ago, NomisH said:

As I buyer, I would go straight to SS for the lowest prices. Why bother with ALAMY, knowing that exclusive is no longer the case? And everyone has deadlines but everyone also normally has to keep to a budget. Or do you live in blank cheque world? Must be nice.

 

 

and yet plenty still do, so Alamy must still offer something, special. You also get what you pay for, there are stuff i wouldn't buy from Walmart even if way cheaper than the small speciality boutique.  

 

[BobD]

In my working days we used to say. ' turnover for vanity, profit for sanity '.

 

 

I could do much better things in photography for the 'thrill of the picture'.

As I said in another thread, in stock sales and income is all that matters.

[BobD]

5 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

In my view a fundamental mistake Alamy made was to accept images that are also on MS sites. 

 

This is very true, If Alamy had not accepted images that were also on MS I would never have given it a try.

[NomisH]

6 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 But you are leading the charge in the race to the bottom because it just makes no difference to you. You just want your thrill.

 

I don't know what job you do but how would you feel if amateurs undermined your income by working for next to nothing because they didn't need the money?

 

In my view a fundamental mistake Alamy made was to accept images that are also on MS sites. 

I didn't go there first. I was exclusive to ALAMY and very loyal. ALAMY chose to head to the bottom. That's my point. And for people like me who will never make a living from this, it doesn't matter what ALAMY do. I can pursue my hobby with or without. For people who do rely on this income, well...

[NomisH]

1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

what i don't get is what this has anything to do with the change in Contract.  Even before the change if the thrill is all about number of time you see someone downloading your image maSSive MS were still your best offer.  In fact you were penalising your thrill by coming exclusive here. 

Again, my point was that I liked ALAMY and felt they were offering a fair deal. Changing the contract left me feeling betrayed. I guess you liked the change in contract terms?

[NomisH]

6 hours ago, Colblimp said:

This comment shows you’re part of the problem. What a ridiculous statement to make. You, along with many thousands of others, are contributing to killing the industry by this line of thinking. Photography is my full time job and it’s always a struggle. What you posted doesn’t help. Unbelievable! 😠

Poor reasoning, indeed. Free market capitalism is my fault, yes. I was LOYAL to ALAMY and felt they offered a fair deal. They chose to break that deal and I responded. Instead of just moaning, why not supplement your income with a job in an Amazon warehouse. I hear they have plenty of openings.

[NomisH]

Everyone here seems fine with what ALAMY did. And every industry is facing a race to the bottom. Stop voting for the status quo if you are upset by this.

[Steve F]

21 minutes ago, NomisH said:

Everyone here seems fine with what ALAMY did. And every industry is facing a race to the bottom. Stop voting for the status quo if you are upset by this.

 

That just seems a purposefully argumentative statement. No contributors are happy with the commission change and many of us have expressed it repeatedly here. Some people have quit Alamy as a result, but if people want to continue doing stock, there aren't many options available that pay a higher commission than Alamy.

 

Your original point was that Alamy has encouraged people to be non-exclusive, which means Alamy may not be able to get a premium for an image if it's online cheaper elsewhere. This is why I linked you to James Allworth's comments:

 

"I agree there is less incentive now to remain exclusive to Alamy compared to previously, and everyone within the business is aware of this, however the benefits as I see them are:

• You won’t be “competing” with yourself across other agents. In many cases, the main competition for Alamy are with sites that have a far lower average sale price than us. Placing portfolios there which will average out at a significantly lower average price means it can impact the rate of sales here where our average price is much closer to $30 and can often go much higher. Many buyers check multiple sites and it removes our bargaining power to gain higher fees if they find the same images elsewhere, cheaper."

 

You are correct that Alamy probably often won't be able to get a premium for an image on their site if it's available for peanuts elsewhere. But no one has forced you to go non-exclusive.

 

The point of several people above is that, aside from the fact that you're competing with yourself at much lower prices if you have the same images on microstock, you're helping the race to the bottom by having images on microstock. And you've contradicted yourself by saying it's not about the money ("for whatever price"), but then complaining about the commission change.

[meanderingemu]

1 hour ago, NomisH said:

Everyone here seems fine with what ALAMY did. And every industry is facing a race to the bottom. Stop voting for the status quo if you are upset by this.

 

 

and you are fine with what some maSSive MS did last year cutting commission by more than 30% for your average contributor? 

Edited September 24, 2021 by meanderingemu

[meanderingemu]

i love the irony of someone upset about a commission drop of 20% running to a distributor that just did a 30%+ one a year before, and probably is one of the leading indicator Alamy used in doing their changes.  

 

this reminds me of plenty of voting decisions in the recent past around the world, i'm upset about one thing currently, so i'll vote for someone worse just to show them (this is general not specific to one in particular)

Edited September 24, 2021 by meanderingemu

[Chuck Nacke]

9 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 But you are leading the charge in the race to the bottom because it just makes no difference to you. You just want your thrill.

 

I don't know what job you do but how would you feel if amateurs undermined your income by working for next to nothing because they didn't need the money?

 

In my view a fundamental mistake Alamy made was to accept images that are also on MS sites. 

Another "rare" case where I agree with you 100%.

 

The original post is in my humble opinion "Utter Rubbish."

 

Chuck

[John Mitchell]

I agree that Alamy probably let the fox into the hen house by allowing microstock images through the door, but I don't see how this could have been prevented. Alamy would have had to revise its entire "open-door" policy.

 

As far as "exclusivity" is concerned, it never really existed. The move was mainly to appease us after the first commission kerfuffle. If Alamy had been truly serious about offering exclusive imagery, they would have devised an exclusive contract option for contributors in addition to the existing non-exclusive one. The honour system was bound to fail IMO.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 24, 2021 by John Mitchell