"Royalty-free" and "Editorial Royalty-free"?

[Peter P]

Hi All,

I've just had a "royalty-free" sale for a whopping $1.31 (I know, don't spend it all in one place).

Also this month I've had a couple of "editorial royalty-free" sales for $10 each.

These latter "editorial royalty-free" images were for "non commercial, one time, personal/home use" use.  Doesn't sound editorial to me.

The "royalty-free" sale was a larger image and is stated for editorial use on web sites etc.  I've seen the image online.

Any idea why this royalty free sale, an explicitly editorial sale to a business, should sell to a news site for less (a lot less!) than a personal home use image?  Seems the wrong way around to me.

Thanks,

Peter P.

 

[sooth]

1 hour ago, Peter P said:

Hi All,

I've just had a "royalty-free" sale for a whopping $1.31 (I know, don't spend it all in one place).

Also this month I've had a couple of "editorial royalty-free" sales for $10 each.

These latter "editorial royalty-free" images were for "non commercial, one time, personal/home use" use.  Doesn't sound editorial to me.

The "royalty-free" sale was a larger image and is stated for editorial use on web sites etc.  I've seen the image online.

Any idea why this royalty free sale, an explicitly editorial sale to a business, should sell to a news site for less (a lot less!) than a personal home use image?  Seems the wrong way around to me.

Thanks,

Peter P.

 

typical economics. these (repeat) business customers work out bulk deals with Alamy for lower prices. There was a time when the reverse was true, when images sold to a business regularly sold for more than for personal home usages.

Edited February 10 by sooth