$0.18 sale!!!

[Jansos]

On 19/11/2021 at 12:33, Allan Bell said:

 

You have public conveniences?  Lincoln seem to be demolishing theirs.

 

Allan

 

No doubt turning them into artisan cafes and the like! 

[Phil]

On 20/11/2021 at 04:29, adyj_uk said:

Video is clearly the medium to focus my efforts going forward.

 

Shhhh!  Don't give more the idea...    😄

[Graham]

I also had a $0.18 gross, $0.07 net sale today.  I will be interested to see if this is Novel Use when the details are available tomorrow.  If it is, I am going to opt out: it is just insulting that my images are being sold at these rates.  As far as I am concerned, they can Novel Use off.

 

There is another thread about what would make you more productive.  Certainly these figures are demotivating, and every time I get a sale like this (even if there are also more reasonable $$ sales in the month) I slow down my work on stock images and concentrate instead on POD uploads, and enjoy taking the time to produce a more artistic look.  What would make me more productive is an end to these demotivating ridiculously small fees: I would prefer to have nothing at all over my raised blood pressure whenever one comes in.

 

Graham

[spacecadet]

8 minutes ago, Graham said:

the details are available tomorrow.

You can look them up now. Download from Net Revenue. I think it will give NU if it is one- I haven't had one for a decade- but alas there are non-NU RM sales for that little now. I had 26c last week. 10c net, duration for ever.

[Robert M Estall]

Yeh, all the pittance sales I take as a personal slap in the face. Surely Alamy can see how demoralizing they are to all photographers?

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Robert M Estall said:

Yeh, all the pittance sales I take as a personal slap in the face. Surely Alamy can see how demoralizing they are to all photographers?

 

To state the obvious - Alamy wants/needs to increase revenue or at least maintain it.   They have determined that one avenue to this is via packaged/bundled/bulk image sales.  Contributor image revenues in the pennies/image is a consequence of the bulk image pack sales.   But it's just business - not personal.  😆  

Edited November 22, 2021 by Phil

[Graham]

I now have the licence details for the $0.18 sale. Here they are.

 

Country: United Kingdom
Usage: Editorial, Use in syndicated editorial news features, single context only. Includes archive rights in-perpetuity.
Media: Newspaper - national
Print run: Unlimited
Insert: more than 25
Placement: National
Image Size: up to full area
Start: 22 November 2021
Duration: In perpetuity

 

it is for a national newspaper, full area, unlimited print run, in perpetuity.

 

Many of my sales are for newspaper editorial, but these are for a few dollars, sometimes just about creeping into double figures if I am lucky.  But here is a national newspaper editorial sale unlimited print run for a small fraction of a dollar.  What on earth is going on here?

 

Graham

[geogphotos]

14 hours ago, Phil said:

 

To state the obvious - Alamy wants/needs to increase revenue or at least maintain it.   They have determined that one avenue to this is via packaged/bundled/bulk image sales.  Contributor image revenues in the pennies/image is a consequence of the bulk image pack sales.   But it's just business - not personal.  😆  

 

 

I think we all understand what is happening Phil. But whether it is good business to sell 5 or 6 high res images, available for syndication, and in perpetuity, to a national newspaper for just $1 is what is under discussion. And expecting photographers to accept 5p/7c as commission as 'fair' reward.

 

 

Of course, contributors take it as an insult to have their images treated this way. And whether it is good business to be so demotivating as to deter contributors from contributing I would very much doubt.  

 

Unfortunately I am not allowed to mention other agencies. 

Edited November 23, 2021 by geogphotos

[geogphotos]

40 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

Unfortunately I am not allowed to mention other agencies. 

 

But it might be better for Alamy to point out these other agencies to these low fee buyers and tell them to come back when they can't find what they are looking for there. 

 

After all in these deals Alamy is only getting $60 for 500-600 pictures that they are handing out in perpetuity.

Edited November 23, 2021 by geogphotos

[Phil]

5 hours ago, geogphotos said:

After all in these deals Alamy is only getting $60 for 500-600 pictures that they are handing out in perpetuity.

 

That is an absurdly low price for such a quantity of images in perpetuity,

 

Alamy came to the conclusion that it is good business for them to offer image packs or they would not have implemented the scheme,   Whats good for Alamy is not necessarily good for individual contributors however.  Only time will tell.

 

Alamy is approaching 280 million "assets" submitted by a large and likely growing base of contributors.   If the contributor base is outraged at such low image prices why does the number of images and contributors continue to grow?     No one aware of the very low individual prices is likely pleased.  Maybe they only look at their total portfolio returns?  But other than a few contributors that left after the recent contract change its not obvious that many seem to be expressing their displeasure by leaving.  Whats the alternative? 

Edited November 23, 2021 by Phil

[Cryptoprocta]

Bear in mind that in the main maligned-on-this-forum agencies, extended licences are needed for some of the sorts of uses Alamy seems to be giving away for cents.

Thus my 'other place' has not only netted me more in total every year, but also my individual highest sale each year has usually been from there, with only a couple of exceptions.

[geogphotos]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

That is an absurdly low price for such a quantity of images in perpetuity,

 

Alamy came to the conclusion that it is good business for them to offer image packs or they would not have implemented the scheme,   Whats good for Alamy is not necessarily good for individual contributors however.  Only time will tell.

 

Alamy is approaching 280 million "assets" submitted by a large and likely growing base of contributors.   If the contributor base is outraged at such low image prices why does the number of images and contributors continue to grow?     No one aware of the very low individual prices is likely pleased.  Maybe they only look at their total portfolio returns?  But other than a few contributors that left after the recent contract change its not obvious that many seem to be expressing their displeasure by leaving.  Whats the alternative? 

 

Yes, and again I agree and understand. There are alternatives though not necessarily ones that are obvious, easy, or which suit everybody. The number of images continues to grow because Alamy is actively taking images from whether it can find them. Quantity is King. Newbies continue to arrive, no doubt at a faster rate than Oldies leave. Other agencies/organisation are invited to sign up. All that is, as you say, a matter for Alamy and nothing to do with us. I have no idea about the relative overall quality that Newbies bring ( and where they bring them from) compared to the impact of losing the Oldies. 

 

As to us as individuals we each need to make our own assessments. I had paused submissions for six months and was (honestly) thinking about the pressing the FTP button and sending in some of my summer backlog - the ones most suitable not all of them - to Alamy. Three 'sales' around the 10 cents mark have stopped me in my tracks. Now I am well aware that Alamy would not care less about that, but it is a forum for contributors to discuss whatever they want so you can't blame us for having a moan. 

 

What I can do without reference to anybody else is take an average of my Nett monthly income from my 70k images, work out the mean RPI, and then consider whether or not it is likely to be worth my time submitting more. If I add another 1000 images what is the cost/benefit ratio of that?

 

And I can then consider other possible options - most likely the 'do nothing' is going to be favourite for the time-being. But there are other outlets for stock and sometimes it is just good for morale to try something different eg) one's own website

 

5p 'sales' and how it makes us feel are all part of these personal equations. Just to agree once more with you when you say:

 

 "Whats good for Alamy is not necessarily good for individual contributors"

 

The next question is what are we each going to do about that as individual contributors?

Edited November 23, 2021 by geogphotos

[Radim]

I fully agree

10 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

Yes, and again I agree and understand. There are alternatives though not necessarily ones that are obvious, easy, or which suit everybody. The number of images continues to grow because Alamy is actively taking images from whether it can find them. Quantity is King. Newbies continue to arrive, no doubt at a faster rate than Oldies leave. Other agencies/organisation are invited to sign up. All that is, as you say, a matter for Alamy and nothing to do with us. I have no idea about the relative overall quality that Newbies bring ( and where they bring them from) compared to the impact of losing the Oldies. 

 

As to us as individuals we each need to make our own assessments. I had paused submissions for six months and was (honestly) thinking about the pressing the FTP button and sending in some of my summer backlog - the ones most suitable not all of them - to Alamy. Three 'sales' around the 10 cents mark have stopped me in my tracks. Now I am well aware that Alamy would not care less about that, but it is a forum for contributors to discus whatever they want so you can't blame us for having a moan. 

 

What I can do without reference to anybody else is take an average of my Nett monthly income from my 70k images, work out the mean RPI, and then consider whether or not it is likely to be worth my time submitting more. If I add another 1000 images what is the cost/benefit ratio of that?

 

And I can then consider other possible options - most likely the 'do nothing' is going to be favourite for the time-being. But there are other outlets for stock and sometimes it is just good for morale to try something different eg) one's own website

 

5p 'sales' and how it makes us feel are all part of these personal equations. Just to agree once more with you when you say:

 

 "Whats good for Alamy is not necessarily good for individual contributors"

 

The next question is what are we each going to do about that as individual contributors?

I fully agree 

[Pietrach]

On 19/11/2021 at 15:22, geogphotos said:

Alamy response:

 

"I’ve had a look and this particular customer has an image pack with us where they pay a set fee and can licence a set number of images for that. The fee is then split between the contributors. The stock industry has become very competitive and in order to keep customers we have to consider our pricing and offer image packs in order to keep customers. Our sales teams work extremely hard to negotiate on deals with all forms of customers and always try to get the best market value possible for each license."

I pretty much stopped uploading images after the first cut to 40% but every now and again I have doubts if I did the right thing. Posts like this reaffirm me that it was indeed a good decision. Things will not get any better. I am sticking with occasional live news.

[Ognyan Yosifov]

I've been waiting 6 months for an image to appear in "sales"...

It was spotted in May, used as a MAGAZINE COVER and multiple usages across a local publishing group...

At one point I asked Alamy what's going on with this image...

I was told they KNOW there's a relevant download and it's a NOVEL USE ( at that point it started sound VERY suspicious...) ...

So, fast forward and today I FINALLY GOT IT -  YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSS !!!!!!!!

 

DETAILS

Country: United Kingdom ; Usage: Editorial ;  Media: Newspaper - national ;  Print run: Unlimited ;  Insert: more than 25 ;  Placement: National ;  Start: 23-November-2021 ; Duration: In perpetuity ;    Additional Details: Use in syndicated editorial news features, single context only.   To summarize it: -MAGAZINE COVER -COUNTLESS USAGES ACROSS A "PUBLISHING GROUP"

GROSS: 18 CENTS

 

SO, WHAT THE H%$&K, is going on ???

Edited November 23, 2021 by Ognyan Yosifov

[geogphotos]

6 minutes ago, Ognyan Yosifov said:

 

 

SO, WHAT THE H%$&K, is going on ???

 

 

Alamy is offering the cheapest deal in town, undercutting all the micros by miles. And then telling us how competitive the market is and that they have to work hard to get these deals ( so we shouldn't complain!)

 

hari-kari??😝🤑

 

An opt out would be sensible. I see one stock site that when a regular image is zoomed a message saying:

 

'Looking for bulk deals ? Try our XXX collection' ( link embedded)

 

After all the stuff about NU this is much worse and nobody can opt out. Not good is it?

Edited November 23, 2021 by geogphotos

[Ognyan Yosifov]

Just now, geogphotos said:

 

 

Alamy is offering the cheapest deal in town, undercutting all the micros by miles. And then telling us how competitive the market is and that they have to work hard to get these deals ( so we shouldn't complain!)

 

hari-kari??😝🤑

Got it!

I'm just the next in line ...🙊

[Phil]

12 minutes ago, Ognyan Yosifov said:

I was told they KNOW there's a relevant download and it's a NOVEL USE

 

There's your answer...  NOVEL USE.

 

Quote:

" The images in the novel use pool give them the freedom to explore these schemes, prototypes and trials, with a variety of price points and licenses."

 

Gives carte blanche to sell the image however they can.

 

[Ognyan Yosifov]

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

There's your answer...  NOVEL USE.

 

Quote:

" The images in the novel use pool give them the freedom to explore these schemes, prototypes and trials, with a variety of price points and licenses."

 

Gives carte blanche to sell the image however they can.

 

Yeah!

April is rapidly approaching ....

[geogphotos]

Novel Use is/was for novel uses. ( ie new, unusual, trial uses of images to explore a new market) 

 

That does not cover deals to national newspapers to include syndication and perpetual use.

 

The three that I have had last week all have different licence terms.

[Phil]

14 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

That does not cover deals to national newspapers to include syndication and perpetual use.

 

Agreed.   Seems an abuse of the Novel Use offering.   Perhaps a note to Alamy Member Services would shine some light on it.

[geogphotos]

3 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Agreed.   Seems an abuse of the Novel Use offering.   Perhaps a note to Alamy Member Services would shine some light on it.

 

 

Alamy response:

 

"I’ve had a look and this particular customer has an image pack with us where they pay a set fee and can licence a set number of images for that. The fee is then split between the contributors. The stock industry has become very competitive and in order to keep customers we have to consider our pricing and offer image packs in order to keep customers. Our sales teams work extremely hard to negotiate on deals with all forms of customers and always try to get the best market value possible for each license."

 

But why does the set number of images need to such that the overall gross fee is $00.18 each ?

 

I doubt that even the newspaper ( in one of my examples) involved WANTS that to happen if they were to realise just what it meant. 

 

 

Edited November 23, 2021 by geogphotos

[Ognyan Yosifov]

5 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Agreed.   Seems an abuse of the Novel Use offering.   Perhaps a note to Alamy Member Services would shine some light on it.

I'll definitely contact the Alamy desk about it.

[Phil]

Wonder if Alamy is selling combined Novel Use & Image Pack offerings for the same transaction?

 

I would think it would be one or the other but not both. 

 

[Nick Hatton]

Just had the exact same sale come in $0 .18 what is it all about?