Sale Fees - what a contrast!

[ROC]

What a difference in a week. I sold one image for $0.17 (UK newspapers, perpetual print run. 57MB   5472x3748 pixels).  Not happy. 
Then another $325 (German calendar. 5MB. 1539x1026 pixels).  Very happy. 
I would love to know how the sale price is decided.  

[sb photos]

5 hours ago, ROC said:

What a difference in a week. I sold one image for $0.17 (UK newspapers, perpetual print run. 57MB   5472x3748 pixels).  Not happy. 
Then another $325 (German calendar. 5MB. 1539x1026 pixels).  Very happy. 
I would love to know how the sale price is decided.  

 

It's only a mix of the ridiculously low and higher value sales that keep us contributing, otherwise it's not worth the effort.

[wiskerke]

5 hours ago, ROC said:

What a difference in a week. I sold one image for $0.17 (UK newspapers, perpetual print run. 57MB   5472x3748 pixels).  Not happy. 
Then another $325 (German calendar. 5MB. 1539x1026 pixels).  Very happy. 
I would love to know how the sale price is decided.  

 

Owners of UK newspapers are very poor.

 

wim

[spacecadet]

19 hours ago, wiskerke said:

 

Owners of UK newspapers are very poor.

 

wim

True, by the other non-pecuniary meaning of "poor"

Edited December 13, 2021 by spacecadet

[Brian1947]

5 hours ago, spacecadet said:

True, by the other non-pecuniary meaning of "poor"

Seem quite efficient when it comes to negotiating fees

[Sultanpepa]

On 12/12/2021 at 14:18, sb photos said:

 

It's only a mix of the ridiculously low and higher value sales that keep us contributing, otherwise it's not worth the effort.

 

No higher value sales (anything over $50) here since the beginning of September. 

[aphperspective]

This month so far 10 for $18 Gross the net is pitifully low for that effort. We live in hope.🙄

[meanderingemu]

4 hours ago, Sultanpepa said:

 

No higher value sales (anything over $50) here since the beginning of September. 

 

 

I have had One over the period.  What bothers me is that it was for an easy readily available corporate logo,  compared to the pennies i got for a one time only image that i'm one of rare representation on the database. 

[Chuck Nacke]

December has not been great, so far.

 

Five licenses as of 12/13 with an average of $21.84 per

I have found that older, more rare images tend to generate

higher fees (over $100.00)

 

My standing average of all licenses as of 2021 is over $40.00

Which is not great but better than most other agencies / libraries.

 

I do think that Alamy could generate higher or better license fees and

I do believe that they are doing what they can in a difficult market.

 

Chuck

 

[Betty LaRue]

7 hours ago, Sultanpepa said:

 

No higher value sales (anything over $50) here since the beginning of September. 

I’ve had 6 of $50 or more since Sept. 1st. Yet I still feel this is far below the standard of just a couple of years ago. Add in our cut decreasing and it’s discouraging, for sure. I’ve now passed (2021) the sales volume of my highest 2 years, but for far less earnings.

[Allan Bell]

10 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

I’ve now passed (2021) the sales volume of my highest 2 years, but for far less earnings.

 

Me too.😭

Allan

 

[wiskerke]

1 hour ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Me too.😭

Allan

 

+1

Volume: +18.58 %

However the earnings gap is closing: -1.14 %

- Still at roughly about half of my best year (2016).

 

wim

[John Mitchell]

Lots of contrast here. After a string of low sales this month, two $$$ ones were invoiced today. Both were older "rare" images.

 

Volume is looking almost the same as last year for me but revenue will be way down.

[Nodvandigtid]

Sadly the market is what it is – I might think a picture is worth “x” but if the buyer will only pay “y”.

 

One of my favourite films is the wonderful “Trading places” - set at this time of the year.

 

Here's an extract from the pawn-broker scene that I think sums it up;

 

Pawn broker (PB) - I'll give you fifty bucks for it

Louis Winthorpe (LW) "No no this is the thinnest water-resistant watch in the world, singularly unique, sculptured in design, hand-crafted in Switzerland and water-resistant to three atmospheres. This is the sports watch of the eighties. $6955 retail".

PB - "You got a receipt?"

LW - "It tells time simultaneously in Monte Carlo, Beverly Hills, London, Paris, Rome and Gstaad"..

PB "In Philadelphia it's worth fifty bucks".

LW "Just gimme the money"

 

Will there be an Alamy Christmas message this year I wonder?

Best wishes to everyone over the holiday season and the new year,

[meanderingemu]

and of course it is one of my rare decent $$ licence fee that gets cancelled this week, wiping out pretty much my month.  No explanation, just we gave the money back (well technically me never collected it, and left it hanging around for 3 months)

 

i think i need a break from this. 

[Stephen Lloyd]

At this point:

 

Most sales ever in terms of numbers since 2006 (Yippee!! Let the fireworks go off")

Lowest revenue. Ever (Oops, can't afford the fireworks)

 

I have a now 4 moths outstanding one that appeared in Conde Nast still to come it - which may scrape me over the lowest.

 

To date I've kept most of my images on Alamy, but this may not last if the situation remains as it is re pricing and the reward to effort ratio..

 

 

 

 

[Betty LaRue]

So far this month, I’ve had 7 images licensed, that for my share, is a grand total of $65. Not that long ago I wouldn’t have been excited to earn that amount for one image. It would have just been moderately acceptable. And I realize the averages are much worse for some of you. 
Today I had one reported for less than a dollar, my share. I spent more in gasoline just getting there to shoot it.

When it means I’ll spend more to take an image than I earn from it, why bother? I agree with what others have expressed in the forum, that many of us photographers will only be submitting no or almost no cost images and most new images submitted will not offer the quality we used to submit. Almost all of my images submitted since the prices have become so low are of things taken on my own property. Food, butterflies, flowers. I can only take so many of those, and already have too many multiples, something I used to try to shy away from.
How long can an agency profit from aging images, with little fresh quality work?

[meanderingemu]

3 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

So far this month, I’ve had 7 images licensed, that for my share, is a grand total of $65. Not that long ago I wouldn’t have been excited to earn that amount for one image. It would have just been moderately acceptable. And I realize the averages are much worse for some of you. 
Today I had one reported for less than a dollar, my share. I spent more in gasoline just getting there to shoot it.

When it means I’ll spend more to take an image than I earn from it, why bother? I agree with what others have expressed in the forum, that many of us photographers will only be submitting no or almost no cost images and most new images submitted will not offer the quality we used to submit. Almost all of my images submitted since the prices have become so low are of things taken on my own property. Food, butterflies, flowers. I can only take so many of those, and already have too many multiples, something I used to try to shy away from.
How long can an agency profit from aging images, with little fresh quality work?

 

 

and it not only the time/cost involved with the picture taking.  It's all the other things contributors would work with Alamy when we felt it was a partnership.  I used to once a week review my search results, try to remove obvious false positives, check my spelling mistakes (my dear "friend chickens"), rework some of the live news captions to be more targeted to stock searches and cull some of them-reupload those that could be improved after a second look.....   but my time now is spent on non Stock photo work, same expected payout, higher enjoyment 

[Rick Lewis]

Well, I just made, (my 40%), 67¢ for a Christmas image.

 

My sales are up 27% over last year but my gross is down 27%, coincidentally, which means my net is way down.

 

Hoping 2022 brings higher grossing sales.  

[Bob J]

15 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

So far this month, I’ve had 7 images licensed, that for my share, is a grand total of $65. Not that long ago I wouldn’t have been excited to earn that amount for one image. It would have just been moderately acceptable. And I realize the averages are much worse for some of you. 
Today I had one reported for less than a dollar, my share. I spent more in gasoline just getting there to shoot it.

When it means I’ll spend more to take an image than I earn from it, why bother? I agree with what others have expressed in the forum, that many of us photographers will only be submitting no or almost no cost images and most new images submitted will not offer the quality we used to submit. Almost all of my images submitted since the prices have become so low are of things taken on my own property. Food, butterflies, flowers. I can only take so many of those, and already have too many multiples, something I used to try to shy away from.
How long can an agency profit from aging images, with little fresh quality work?

It's a similar tale here - my highest ever sales year in terms of volume and my lowest in terms of revenue. The point about zero cost is, I think, an important one and I have come to the same conclusion. I had two sales this week one for $21 dollars but that attracted 60% to Alamy and then (after that) a 40% levy on the distributor commission for outside market fees - I think I ended up with about $5. Today a popular image that I normally sell for about $40 got sold for $2 and that has been a theme this year. It seems non viable to go somewhere, at cost, specifically in the hope that it can generate sales worthy images.

[Derek2021]

I am really unhappy about the fees taken from my sales. They total around 70-75% of each sale. I work hard and spend a lot of money shooting unique images. And a lot of time uploading and tagging. Basically we do all the work and the platform takes all the money. I have had many gallery exhibitions as well and that was usually 40% to them Commission on my sales with me having 60%. How do they justify this. And it is not at all fair. First a distribution fee of 60% And then the remainder they take another distributer fee of 40 percent leaving me with 30$ of a 120$ Sale. How is that fair? How do artists like me make any money from our hard work and talent. This is robbery. I spend also a lot of money upgrading my camera and and system to stay up to standard spending 7500€ in the last 2 years. What for when I make nothing on these sites 

Edited December 25, 2021 by Derek2021

[Stokie]

From the sublime (nearly) to the ridiculous. 

 

Had a $85 sale yesterday to $0.17 sale today!

 

John.

[Gina Kelly]

Had a sale today for .15 cents gross, .04 cents net 😭

[geogphotos]

4 cents! That truly is GROSS.

[Colin Woods]

And today I have two at $0.15. Which means that Alamy have managed to undercut their own risible 17 cent license fee by 12%. Good work Alamy. Coming soon, Aston Martin shopping trolleys and Rolex kids' watches.