hotbrightsky Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 So I received an email this morning telling me that Alamy would automatically opt me back IN to the UK Newspaper Scheme unless I replied to their email with the correct magic phrase. This despite me having deliberately opted OUT of this scheme previously. The email subject line encourages contributors to "increase your sales by opting-in". Anyone who has no interest in joining this scheme may not have proceeded to read the full contents of the email which explains that Alamy intends to do it for you! This is the same stunt they tried with DACS payments and I also have experience of Alamy staff changing my opt-out dates from other schemes in order to facilitate unreported image sales. Does anyone else agree with me that this is a fundamentally bad business practice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Alamy has never tried to opt me back in to letting them make my DACS claim. It sends an email annually to remind me that I'm opted out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chexy Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I received the same email this morning and I am totally pissed off. I deliberately set my preferences on My Dashboard under 'Additional Revenue Options' and I expect that to be respected. I should not have to send an email by May 19th to be opted out again as I never opted in. My Dashboard at the moment still says I am opted out. If this is not the case Alamy are indeed being unscrupulous and very disrespectful. I am not in the Distributor scheme either. Do not change this by sending me an email. No means No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
York Photographer Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Just checked, I'm still out of the Newspaper Scheme and NU, but I only recently opted out after some tragically low newspaper sales. Will be remaining that way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I received the same mail, opting me in if I dont get active and say no. (If you're happy to be opted-in and boost your revenue then you don't need to do anything but if you'd rather stay opted-out just reply with 'no thanks' by 19th May.) NO - NO. I dont like if I get forced to something somebody else thinks its good for me, I'm old enough. The way Alamy handles this is not ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I too received the email telling me that I have to opt out of something I've already opted out of. I've avoided the Newspaper Scheme since its inception because I objected to giving my images away for peanuts. But nowadays all sales are for peanuts so is there any point in continuing to be fussy? Opinions anyone? Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Chapman Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I figure that some money is better than none. But the frustrating thing is that online newspaper publications often seem to omit the credit line and also get "lifted" and republished elsewhere without payment. That can give rise to opportunities to get infringement payments. However, so far, I've only managed to get compensation for one such usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CM photo Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I have also had an email "offering" to opt me in if I don't let them know to the contrary. What's particularly worrying is that this went into my spam folder so if I hadn't noticed it on my iphone I could have been opted in without knowing it. Sharp practice Alamy. I thought you were more ethical than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Ashmore Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I agree with Geoff. I have had one image used twice by one of the papers and i got paid twice. i have two images that have both been used twice by another paper (which I found through Google) during April (so not been reported yet). And I know of another image of mine which was used by a newspaper last month (reported in the April found images thread). I'd reckon that about 1/3 of my total sales have been to newspapers. So the values do start to add up even if an individual sale prices don't always set the world alight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvallee Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I had opted out of Newspaper Scheme years ago in disgust at prices, but I recently came to the same conclusion as you Alan. Many licenses and/or distributor sales are very low these days, so I rejoined a few months back. Gen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liverpix Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Yes, bad business practice. If they want us to rejoin, they should negotiate higher prices with the newspapers or give us a higher cut of the profits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 After years of resisting "the scheme" because of the low prices reported, I took on a "what the heck" attitude and signed up last year. So far, I've had only one sale -- to the Guardian online, a photo taken last fall in Montreal. The lack of sales doesn't really surprise me given the 100% non-UK content of my collection. Is it worth it? Time will tell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 I'm still in it as although they don't pay much, it's something at least, and often a newspaper will use the same image more than once. I've had several images used by the same newspaper multiple times. An example is one of an ambulance, which 2 newspapers have used more than once for any story relating to the NHS. Also a Brexit image has been used several times by the same newspaper, so I get paid for each use (as long as it's RM of course). UK newspaper scheme sales still get you more than many distributor sales. Some newspapers have different deals too, so it's not always a tiny amount, sometimes just "not great". Plus you should consider that they may go towards improving your ranking, giving more exposure to other clients in future. Geoff. +1, particularly where ranking is (was) concerned Kumar (the Doc one) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
York Photographer Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 No, too cheap is too cheap regardless of volume. If I was selling thousands to newspapers per month may be, But given the papers inaccurate reporting and that its ten's per month, I'd rather they didn't use them at those low prices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 Several in favour and one against. I think I'm going to take a chance and allow the opt-out to lapse. The ranking is a factor, but mainly it's because my average fee over this year is so low that I don't think it will have a significantly detrimental effect any longer. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 In. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
York Photographer Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 Recently had a full page front cover of a national newspaper supplement, you couldn't buy a fish supper for what I got after commision! I'd rather they hadn't used it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 After years of resisting "the scheme" because of the low prices reported, I took on a "what the heck" attitude and signed up last year. So far, I've had only one sale -- to the Guardian online, a photo taken last fall in Montreal. The lack of sales doesn't really surprise me given the 100% non-UK content of my collection. Is it worth it? Time will tell... Same here John. One sale in almost 4 years. Price wasn't bad though. For photographers outside the UK and then Europe, don't look for too many newspaper sales. Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 After years of resisting "the scheme" because of the low prices reported, I took on a "what the heck" attitude and signed up last year. So far, I've had only one sale -- to the Guardian online, a photo taken last fall in Montreal. The lack of sales doesn't really surprise me given the 100% non-UK content of my collection. Is it worth it? Time will tell... Same here John. One sale in almost 4 years. Price wasn't bad though. For photographers outside the UK and then Europe, don't look for too many newspaper sales. Jill Same here. One sale ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabbro Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 No, thanks! That was my reply to that same email you all got. But I left the door "unlocked" by suggesting Alamy to negotiate a decent price with newspapers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 NS was 28% of my sales by volume, under 10% by revenue. Rubbish but it's presumably helped put my bhz on page 1, so whatya gonna do? I'm not missing the Mail because some of its replacements pay 2-3 times as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losdemas Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 Just got the email - difficult choice. It does appear to help with ranking, but I've always opted out owing to not just the low fees, but the lack of reporting by those papers purchasing licences and the huge amount of images lifted once they go online. Decided to stay where I am: no NU, no newspaper-scheme and selective distribution. Cutting off my nose to spite my face? Maybe, but I've never been wild on that huge honker! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 After years of resisting "the scheme" because of the low prices reported, I took on a "what the heck" attitude and signed up last year. So far, I've had only one sale -- to the Guardian online, a photo taken last fall in Montreal. The lack of sales doesn't really surprise me given the 100% non-UK content of my collection. Is it worth it? Time will tell... Same here John. One sale in almost 4 years. Price wasn't bad though. For photographers outside the UK and then Europe, don't look for too many newspaper sales. Jill Same here. One sale ever. Better than nowt, as my English mother used to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 After years of resisting "the scheme" because of the low prices reported, I took on a "what the heck" attitude and signed up last year. So far, I've had only one sale -- to the Guardian online, a photo taken last fall in Montreal. The lack of sales doesn't really surprise me given the 100% non-UK content of my collection. Is it worth it? Time will tell... Same here John. One sale in almost 4 years. Price wasn't bad though. For photographers outside the UK and then Europe, don't look for too many newspaper sales. Jill Same here. One sale ever. Better than nowt, as my English mother used to say. My Irish father would tell me it "It was better than a kick in the ass" Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted May 5, 2017 Share Posted May 5, 2017 Better than nowt, as my English mother used to say. My Irish father would tell me it "It was better than a kick in the ass" Jill The one I usually use is "better than a poke in the eye with a bent stick". No idea of its heritage though. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.