Julie Edwards Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 I have been looking at my sales and notice the following sales detail seems to be on the increase. Country: Worldwide Usage: iQ sale: Magazine, Editorial print and digital use. Repeat use.Industry sector: Media, design & publishingStart: 05 August 2015End: 05 August 2020 I realise we hand our image over to Alamy and agree that they are able to negotiate prices etc etc... I also recognise that the market is very difficult and prices reflect this BUT we mark our images as RM for a reason over RF and I can't help but feel that this is RF by the back door. Yes it has a 5 year term but the wording "Repeat Use" basically means its a 5 year RF license ... Maybe we need an iQ opt-out the same as Novel Use, Distribution etc..... I'm not saying I would opt out but it does need a great deal of thought..... Your Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 It is a worrying development Julie. I have several of these too and their frequency is increasing. I'm sure there was a similar thread about this not long ago but I haven't managed to find it yet. Pearl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 http://discussion.alamy.com/index.php?/topic/4195-feeling-somewhat-let-down/?hl=repeat As to thoughts, well if you want to be protective of your RM rights...you're in the wrong place. That ship sailed with agencies a long time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 I have been looking at my sales and notice the following sales detail seems to be on the increase. Country: Worldwide Usage: iQ sale: Magazine, Editorial print and digital use. Repeat use. Industry sector: Media, design & publishing Start: 05 August 2015 End: 05 August 2020 Oh, but it can be even worse: Country: Worldwide Usage: iQ sale: Magazine, editorial print and digital use, repeat use within a single issue. Discounted re-use. Industry sector: Media, design & publishing Start: 11 August 2015 End: 11 August 2020 And yes, my pictures are all RM. Cheers, Philippe That's not worse Philippe because you are getting some payment for the re-use. Julie's example means the magazine can re-use for the next 5 years without further payment. Pearl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted August 17, 2015 Author Share Posted August 17, 2015 The way i read it, its not even a single publication, but re-use by the client anywhere ? I am sure there used to be a "single publication" version.... can anyone confirm this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 The way i read it, its not even a single publication, but re-use by the client anywhere ? I am sure there used to be a "single publication" version.... can anyone confirm this? I've also had these in the last couple of months "repeat use within a single issue" & "repeat use for a single title" which are slightly more palatable Pearl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan_Andison Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 I have been looking at my sales and notice the following sales detail seems to be on the increase. Country: Worldwide Usage: iQ sale: Magazine, Editorial print and digital use. Repeat use. Industry sector: Media, design & publishing Start: 05 August 2015 End: 05 August 2020 I realise we hand our image over to Alamy and agree that they are able to negotiate prices etc etc... I also recognise that the market is very difficult and prices reflect this BUT we mark our images as RM for a reason over RF and I can't help but feel that this is RF by the back door. Yes it has a 5 year term but the wording "Repeat Use" basically means its a 5 year RF license ... Maybe we need an iQ opt-out the same as Novel Use, Distribution etc..... I'm not saying I would opt out but it does need a great deal of thought..... Your Thoughts? I posted about this a few months back after contact Alamy about it. Their response was, "They're unlikely to use it more than once and it's just in case". That was after I'd already told them that it had been used 3 times in in the space of 6 months. I mean, a walking magazine wouldn't really find a use for a walking image more than once in 5 years would they It effectively means Micro would make me more money for these images based on that licence given the increased volume of sales, enhanced licences and commercial sales. Anyway, as a result I've been converting certain images to RF where possible to increase my options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted August 17, 2015 Author Share Posted August 17, 2015 Sorry Duncan The problem is - I cannot convert to RF as they contain unreleased people... so I'm stuck in a hole.... I can't convert to RF but they are basically selling a RF license... It needs an opt out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Sorry Duncan The problem is - I cannot convert to RF as they contain unreleased people... so I'm stuck in a hole.... I can't convert to RF but they are basically selling a RF license... It needs an opt out... It's not really RF and even if it was by dint of multiple use, a RF license can be editorial only. All that's happening is that Alamy is hampering you from a potential exclusive license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted August 17, 2015 Author Share Posted August 17, 2015 Sorry Duncan The problem is - I cannot convert to RF as they contain unreleased people... so I'm stuck in a hole.... I can't convert to RF but they are basically selling a RF license... It needs an opt out... It's not really RF and even if it was by dint of multiple use, a RF license can be editorial only. All that's happening is that Alamy is hampering you from a potential exclusive license. It can be used over and over in any of the clients titles for 5 years....No not quite RF but not that far off... If i wanted these images RF, I cannot set them as such as they have unreleased people... Thats all i have said.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Sorry Duncan The problem is - I cannot convert to RF as they contain unreleased people... so I'm stuck in a hole.... I can't convert to RF but they are basically selling a RF license... It needs an opt out... It's not really RF and even if it was by dint of multiple use, a RF license can be editorial only. All that's happening is that Alamy is hampering you from a potential exclusive license. It can be used over and over in any of the clients titles for 5 years....No not quite RF but not that far off... If i wanted these images RF, I cannot set them as such as they have unreleased people... Thats all i have said.... The only parameter for RF is that it's sold by file size, nothing more, nothing less. RM can be sold on perpetual use for a client for x number of years. Alamy has been selling RM as RF lite for years and it's nothing to do with IQ which is just a organising tool for clients. An IQ opt out as per other thread is meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 RM = Rights Mangled (a sign of the times, unfortunately) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan_Andison Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 RM = Rights Mangled (a sign of the times, unfortunately) Haha, yeah. I've just adjusted what apply RM & RF. If I think it has potential elsewhere and I have MR & PR's, or it doesn't require them, it's now sold as RF. Everything else goes down as RM. Julie... Yeah, that's a bummer. No choice but to leave it as RM. I think someone had a brainfart when they came up with that condition for an IQ sale (and think it wouldn't be abused). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 I see that I have a $5.19 RM distributor sale waiting in the wings. Anyone wanna trade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Ten year worldwide licence including repeat use $44 gross. Is it really worth the effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Brook Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 We are getting to the point where RF is a much better license for photographers than RM (or what is called RM here, which I think means 'Rights Muddled') With RF you do sometimes actually get the full price - I had one last week and another the previous week, fees much bigger that I ever get at Alamy nowadays. I still also get quite a few editorial sales of RF material too. But I doubt that ten years repeat use is being offered. RM ( real RM) is still a good license though, particularly in the commercial marketplace, and four figure fees are still being paid for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 I see that I have a $5.19 RM distributor sale waiting in the wings. Anyone wanna trade? Got one too. An aerial picture showing deforestation. Think it covers the helicopter costs? Hell, it didn't even cover the parking meter ............... of the car, not the helicopter Very poor month so far. I need a miracle. Cheers, Philippe Oh meu Deus! Glad to know I wasn't the only one. I remain signed up for distributorship in that large South American country beginning with "B", so I have no one to blame but myself. Still, those tiny sales are always a bit of a shock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Brook Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 It might be worth pointing out that anyone breaking a sweat at $5 sales hasn't seen anything. Most sales reports from the big agencies (not microstock) will be spattered with $2, $1, even $0.5 sales.If Alamy is to be judged on that metric, they are top of the class. What's missing is either volume of sales, high end sales, or both, without which we are just glorified paupers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Personally, I've been happy with Alamy's low-volume sales (RM) at higher prices model. However, it is being replaced by the "glorified paupers" model, it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Brook Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Personally, I've been happy with Alamy's low-volume sales (RM) at higher prices model. However, it is being replaced by the "glorified paupers" model, it seems. With the competition they've got, and it's going to get a lot worse, the only way they can hope to do that is to split up the collection in the way that the majors have attempted to do. You would have to have a lot of the collection being sold at micro prices, allowing some to be sold at higher and some at much higher prices. Buyers wouldn't necessarily be paying any more. Often they seem to behave like ordinary consumers - buy a lot of cheap generic stuff saving enough of the budget for a few special things. Sometimes they would love to spend more on particular images, but their clients make a fuss. However to do this (split the collection) with the numbers here they would have to have big staffing levels. And that might mean lower commission rates for contributors. Prices aren't going to go up, they going to continue to drop, however much Alamy would dearly like them not to. The exception will be the agency RF collections, which are becoming, by default, their premium collections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Personally, I've been happy with Alamy's low-volume sales (RM) at higher prices model. However, it is being replaced by the "glorified paupers" model, it seems. With the competition they've got, and it's going to get a lot worse, the only way they can hope to do that is to split up the collection in the way that the majors have attempted to do. You would have to have a lot of the collection being sold at micro prices, allowing some to be sold at higher and some at much higher prices. Buyers wouldn't necessarily be paying any more. Often they seem to behave like ordinary consumers - buy a lot of cheap generic stuff saving enough of the budget for a few special things. Sometimes they would love to spend more on particular images, but their clients make a fuss. However to do this (split the collection) with the numbers here they would have to have big staffing levels. And that might mean lower commission rates for contributors. Prices aren't going to go up, they going to continue to drop, however much Alamy would dearly like them not to. The exception will be the agency RF collections, which are becoming, by default, their premium collections. I can see what you're getting at. It makes sense. Somehow sales volume has to be increased or Alamy risks being swallowed by its inventory. However, if Alamy split up their collection as you suggest, what would make them different from the other big agencies that have already done that? Why would buyers come here rather than ___________ and _______________, etc.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Brook Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Personally, I've been happy with Alamy's low-volume sales (RM) at higher prices model. However, it is being replaced by the "glorified paupers" model, it seems. With the competition they've got, and it's going to get a lot worse, the only way they can hope to do that is to split up the collection in the way that the majors have attempted to do. You would have to have a lot of the collection being sold at micro prices, allowing some to be sold at higher and some at much higher prices. Buyers wouldn't necessarily be paying any more. Often they seem to behave like ordinary consumers - buy a lot of cheap generic stuff saving enough of the budget for a few special things. Sometimes they would love to spend more on particular images, but their clients make a fuss. However to do this (split the collection) with the numbers here they would have to have big staffing levels. And that might mean lower commission rates for contributors. Prices aren't going to go up, they going to continue to drop, however much Alamy would dearly like them not to. The exception will be the agency RF collections, which are becoming, by default, their premium collections. I can see what you're getting at. It makes sense. Somehow sales volume has to be increased or Alamy risks being swallowed by its inventory. However, if Alamy split up their collection as you suggest, what would make them different from the other big agencies that have already done that? Why would buyers come here rather than ___________ and _______________, etc.? It's above my pay grade to suggest anything Alamy might, or might not do. I'm just giving this as an example of how prices can rise in an environment where they are dropping overall. The main advantage of this model for photographers is that it offers them a means of progressing, starting off at the low end, and, by dint of burning the midnight oil, get into a much better place. The alternative has been pretty well thrashed out on this forum: churn out zillions of the dear little things, and hope tomorrow isn't going to be too much different to today. But The only constant that I have been aware of is that nothing does stay the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Personally, I've been happy with Alamy's low-volume sales (RM) at higher prices model. However, it is being replaced by the "glorified paupers" model, it seems. With the competition they've got, and it's going to get a lot worse, the only way they can hope to do that is to split up the collection in the way that the majors have attempted to do. You would have to have a lot of the collection being sold at micro prices, allowing some to be sold at higher and some at much higher prices. Buyers wouldn't necessarily be paying any more. Often they seem to behave like ordinary consumers - buy a lot of cheap generic stuff saving enough of the budget for a few special things. Sometimes they would love to spend more on particular images, but their clients make a fuss. However to do this (split the collection) with the numbers here they would have to have big staffing levels. And that might mean lower commission rates for contributors. Prices aren't going to go up, they going to continue to drop, however much Alamy would dearly like them not to. The exception will be the agency RF collections, which are becoming, by default, their premium collections. I can see what you're getting at. It makes sense. Somehow sales volume has to be increased or Alamy risks being swallowed by its inventory. However, if Alamy split up their collection as you suggest, what would make them different from the other big agencies that have already done that? Why would buyers come here rather than ___________ and _______________, etc.? It's above my pay grade to suggest anything Alamy might, or might not do. I'm just giving this as an example of how prices can rise in an environment where they are dropping overall. The main advantage of this model for photographers is that it offers them a means of progressing, starting off at the low end, and, by dint of burning the midnight oil, get into a much better place. The alternative has been pretty well thrashed out on this forum: churn out zillions of the dear little things, and hope tomorrow isn't going to be too much different to today. But The only constant that I have been aware of is that nothing does stay the same. It's all above my pay grade, I'm afraid. There's no doubt, though, that churning out "dear little things" is becoming less and less lucrative. Alamy has no shortage of raw material if/when they do decide to change things. Guess all we can do is wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travelshots Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Some of Alamy's pricing is still reasonable but long life rights with RM can only mean less sales. Thank god Alamy have not really started a subscription model like Gettys Premium Access... you should see some of the prices .......but bring a magnifying glass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.