Additional Revenue Options and a sale of $0

[Carol Cornwell]

I sold an image today and my commission is $0. How is that even possible? The only thing I can attribute this is that I have opted into Additional Revenue Options. A few months ago my commission was $.20 cents. Is this due to Additional Revenue Options and is Distribution or third party distribution the culprit? How would I even determine say, opt into Madagascar and out of Zimbabwe? I can opt out of all of them next month, and am trying to decide if my images are being given away for free, if there are loops in the system that are exploited by unscrupulous buyers, why Alamy would consider this a good business model and where to turn for some answers. My work is selling well overall, but I do not want to devalue the collection. And certainly $0 on an image from the Great Bamboo Forest in Kyoto Japan is devaluing the images. 

[Carol Cornwell]

It has been updated to .20 cents. 

[Carol Cornwell]

Back down to $0.

 

I know others on this forum brought up this issue. Exact same as mine. Same countries. Germany and China. Same issue. Alamy, is this fair to your contributors? I am invested in Alamy. I chose to work with Alamy. This is alarming and distressing. I would love for Alamy to shed some light on this? I am not running for the door and am over-all very happy with Alamy, but $0? I cannot justify selling a top image shot in Japan for $0.

Are you expecting pro-bono here and why? Please help. Someone, anyone? So everytime a sales says Alamy Access 750 Bilder pro Monat I get $0? Even if it is 20 cents and rounded down to zero, that means Alamy gets 30 cents. Why is Alamy even entertaining selling your best images for under a dollar? I am at a loss here, I researched and vetted Alamy, perhaps Alamy needs to do the same. Vet your clients or change the pricing model. You are screwing us with no recourse. All photographers have to be business people our entire lives, and this is just weird with no justifiable business model. Please help me to figure this out. Someone?

[Carol Cornwell]

21 minutes ago, Carol Cornwell said:

Back down to $0.

 

I know others on this forum brought up this issue. Exact same as mine. Same countries. Germany and China. Same issue. Alamy, is this fair to your contributors? I am invested in Alamy. I chose to work with Alamy. This is alarming and distressing. I would love for Alamy to shed some light on this? I am not running for the door and am over-all very happy with Alamy, but $0? I cannot justify selling a top image shot in Japan for $0.

Are you expecting pro-bono here and why? Please help. Someone, anyone? So everytime a sales says Alamy Access 750 Bilder pro Monat I get $0? Even if it is 20 cents and rounded down to zero, that means Alamy gets 30 cents. Why is Alamy even entertaining selling your best images for under a dollar? I am at a loss here, I researched and vetted Alamy, perhaps Alamy needs to do the same. Vet your clients or change the pricing model. You are screwing us with no recourse. All photographers have to be business people our entire lives, and this is just weird with no justifiable business model. Please help me to figure this out. Someone?

 

[Phil]

Your image was likely licensed as part of a 750 image/month image pack or subscription business model which heavily discounts per/image prices.  These sales models may also be further discounted for large customers and institutions.  

 

 

[M.Chapman]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

Your image was likely licensed as part of a 750 image/month image pack or subscription business model which heavily discounts per/image prices.  These sales models may also be further discounted for large customers and institutions.  

 

 

But, if the photographer actually only gets $0.00 after Alamy and the distributor have taken their share something is going seriously wrong... Maybe it's an IT problem/software problem or does Alamy really think it's OK to generate revenue for themselves with nothing going to the contributor?

 

I suggest we need some urgent clarification from Alamy as to what's going on, especially as the distribution opt out starts tomorrow.

 

Mark

[Phil]

9 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

But, if the photographer actually only gets $0.00 after Alamy and the distributor have taken their share something is going seriously wrong... Maybe it's an IT problem/software problem or does Alamy really think it's OK to generate revenue for themselves with nothing going to the contributor?

 

I suggest we need some urgent clarification from Alamy as to what's going on, especially as the distribution opt out starts tomorrow.

 

Mark

From comments I've seen in other Alamy forum threads regarding this same topic the indicated $0.00 license sale is actually a rounded down figure from a very low price license sale  i.e. 0.10-0.15 etc.    Not sure what the break point is for Alamy's rounding-down sales reporting.

Edited March 31, 2022 by Phil

[M.Chapman]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

From comments I've seen in other Alamy forum threads regarding this same topic the indicated $0.00 license sale is actually a rounded down figure from a very low price license sale  i.e. 0.10-0.15 etc.    Not sure what the break point is for Alamy's rounding-down sales reporting.

 

On 29/03/2022 at 23:51, Carol Cornwell said:

It has been updated to .20 cents. 

 

4 hours ago, Carol Cornwell said:

Back down to $0.

 

Some software glitches going on maybe?

 

Mark

[geogphotos]

12 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

 

 

 

Some software glitches going on maybe?

 

Mark

 

 

Possibly Carol is reporting $0 from the summary page.

 

Alamy can't charge zero for images. 

[Normspics]

Surely there should be a default minimum commission that is paid in circumstances like Carol, there has to be a transactional compensation for every licence.

[Graham]

On 31/03/2022 at 21:23, Normspics said:

Surely there should be a default minimum commission that is paid in circumstances like Carol, there has to be a transactional compensation for every licence.

Clause 8.3 of the contributor contract allows Alamy to offer complimentary Content, that is, give away your images.
 

If you have opted into Novel Use, Clause 9.1 also permits Alamy to grant “high volume low unit price licences. Where Alamy does not make a charge to these third parties, you will not receive payment.”

 

I have opted out of Novel Use this year, because there are simply too many sub micro stock priced licences being granted, which I find demotivating. In days gone by, the licence used to state Novel Use, but nowadays it does not, and one can only make assumptions that the low figures correlate to Novel Use:  I will discover the truth or otherwise of that this coming year. 

Graham

Edited April 3, 2022 by Graham

[David Kilpatrick]

I was told I could opt out in April but have had no notice of how to do so and can't find it - anyone know how?

 

[DJ Myford]

Go to your dashboard and click on "Additional revenue options", then select as appropriate.

[meanderingemu]

On 03/04/2022 at 02:39, Graham said:

Clause 8.3 of the contributor contract allows Alamy to offer complimentary Content, that is, give away your images.
 

If you have opted into Novel Use, Clause 9.1 also permits Alamy to grant “high volume low unit price licences. Where Alamy does not make a charge to these third parties, you will not receive payment.”

 

 

 

i am now curious how Alamy reports these licences to the individuals?  

Alamy is supposed to report all licence fee under 12.1.  There does not seem to be exclusion if said fee is Zero.  

 

[spacecadet]

1 hour ago, David Kilpatrick said:

I was told I could opt out in April but have had no notice of how to do so and can't find it - anyone know how?

 

WB, David.