Alamy Affiliate sale

[John Richmond]

Just had one of these drop in.

 

Affiliate Sale; Country: Worldwide ;

Usage: Commercial electronic, Websites, apps, social media and blogs (excludes advertising). Worldwide for 5 years. ;

Media: Website, app and social media ;

Start: 24-November-2017 ; End: 24-November-2022;

Additional Details: Websites, apps, social media and blogs (excludes advertising). Worldwide for 5 years. ;

 

Straight (quite reasonable) fee, zero Alamy commission recorded

 

Not one I've encountered before.  I've got a link to my Alamy portfolio on my two blogs and LinkedIn so I'm assuming it's come through that.  But I don't know.  Any clarification as to what is actually going on?

 

Edited to add that I've not signed up to anything through Alamy.

Edited November 24, 2017 by John Richmond

[John Richmond]

Update on this:

 

Looks like Alamy don't calculate the deductions in the Net Revenue Sales Report so show zero commission in there but do show the correct deductions in the Balance of Account Report which became available this morning.  It is their (previously discussed) Affiliate scheme.  I'm not signed up to it so it looks like another contributor has also benefitted from a sale of my image. 

 

No wonder I was confused.

[NYCat]

Affiliate scheme? I don't know what it is. Don't know if I ever knew. How could someone else benefit from your image?

 

Paulette

[wiskerke]

4 minutes ago, NYCat said:

Affiliate scheme? I don't know what it is. Don't know if I ever knew. How could someone else benefit from your image?

 

Paulette

 

Blog

 

wim

[Allan Bell]

53 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

 

Blog

 

wim

 

Does this mean if an image of mine is licensed through a buyer sent to Alamy by anothers website the other person gets a share of what I should be paid?

 

Giving me a reduced income from that sale. Not fair, I say, if others can benefit from my work while not contributing themselves.

 

Allan

 

 

[fotoDogue]

As mentioned in another thread, I have one of those Worldwide sales where there was no deduction in Net Revenue but there was an Affiliate Deduction in Balance of Account - Alamy 38.5%, Affiliate 23%. At the time I presumed it was a Distributor Sale but maybe I was mistaken.

 

I've noticed some kinks in My Alamy over the past few days, resulting in errors when I try to access my Dashboard as well as Balance of Account. Maybe half the time when I try to check one of the pages the screen shows no data.

 

If there is a new percentage for sales made through "Affiliate Websites" where photographers only receive 38.5% of sales shouldn't we have received noticed? All of this is rather confusing.

Edited November 27, 2017 by fotoDogue

[Allan Bell]

 

Agree we should have been notified of these new terms.

 

The only reason I would agree to a reduction in the 50/50 split is if Alamy were to take on the tagging for a 40/60% split.

 

Ignoring distributor sales of course. But I do not have to worry about them as I have all my images as PU negative.

 

Allan

 

[KevinS]

29 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

Agree we should have been notified of these new terms.

Not new. A forum regular posted about this months ago. I put a link on my website that grants a 20% discount. Starting Dec 1, a 25% discount is being offered for the holidays, and I'll add that to my website.  If I find the nice pie chart that I saw, I'll post here.

 

Found it;  http://www.alamy.com/customer/help/affiliate-program.aspx

Edited November 27, 2017 by KevinS

[fotoDogue]

There was some talk about what it would mean to Affiliates, and how to insert the html, but I don't remember much discussion about how it would affect photographers in terms of percentages. Not that I necessarily would have opted out but, photographers can opt out of distribution sales, which pays a lower percentage, so why not Affiliate sales as well?

 

I guess the numbers are a bit odd because the Affiliate program also takes a percentage (which isn't included in the breakdown). 20% is a hefty amount for adding a link to your website compared to 38.5 percent for the photographer who actually created the photo. I guess I just wish Alamy had explained this scheme fully instead of leaving us to guess what it actually means.

Edited November 27, 2017 by fotoDogue

[KevinS]

3 minutes ago, fotoDogue said:

There was some talk about what it would mean to Affiliates, and how to insert the html, but I don't remember much discussion about how it would affect photographers in terms of percentages. Not that I necessarily would have opted out but, photographers can opt out of distribution sales, which pays a lower percentage, so why not Affiliate sales as well?

 

I guess the numbers are a bit odd because the Affiliate program also takes a percentage (which isn't included in the breakdown). 20% is a hefty amount for adding a link to your website compared to 38.5 percent for the photographer who actually created the photo. I guess I just wish Alamy had explained this scheme fully instead of leaving us to guess what it actually means.

The link I posted shows 3% going to Rakuten. 

[fotoDogue]

2 minutes ago, KevinS said:

The link I posted shows 3% going to Rakuten. 

 

True, but those of us who weren't interested in the Affiliate program, or don't even have websites, probably didn't bother to read the details.

[KevinS]

The only reason I would agree to a reduction in the 50/50 split is if Alamy were to take on the tagging for a 40/60% split. ~Allan

 

What isn't clear to me is whether or not an Affiliate sale is a Direct sale.

• We will pay you 50% of a direct sale made by Alamy (from the Contributor contract)

[fotoDogue]

21 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

The only reason I would agree to a reduction in the 50/50 split is if Alamy were to take on the tagging for a 40/60% split.

 

In another thread, SpaceCadet wrote " The best (keywording) agency in the world is the one between your ears." So no, I wouldn't be happy about lowering the percentage for keywording.

One other agency I no longer work with charged a one time fee of 25 cents per image, against sales, to have images keyworded by a third party. It took weeks to get the images online and the results were pretty bad.

Edited November 28, 2017 by fotoDogue

[John Richmond]

Shelley from Alamy contacted me earlier to thank me for bringing the missing deduction figures in the Net Revenue screen to their attention.  Their technical team are on the matter.  That's the smaller area cleared up.

[Alamy]

19 hours ago, KevinS said:

Not new. A forum regular posted about this months ago. I put a link on my website that grants a 20% discount. Starting Dec 1, a 25% discount is being offered for the holidays, and I'll add that to my website.  If I find the nice pie chart that I saw, I'll post here.

 

Found it;  http://www.alamy.com/customer/help/affiliate-program.aspx

 

In addition to the page linked to above, we had added some extra info to the forum discussion on this back in August:

http://discussion.alamy.com/topic/7898-rakuten-marketing-affiliate-scheme/?do=findComment&comment=137986

 

Sales made through the affiliate scheme are an additional revenue stream, widening your opportunity for selling additional licences on Alamy. 

 

 

[fotoDogue]

21 hours ago, KevinS said:

What isn't clear to me is whether or not an Affiliate sale is a Direct sale.

• We will pay you 50% of a direct sale made by Alamy (from the Contributor contract)

 

I don't think it's either a Direct Sale or a Distributor Sale. It's not mentioned in the Alamy contract and it doesn't conform to any of the commission splits in the chart.

I'm guessing Alamy calls it an Affiliate Sale because it's an entirely different model.

[Allan Bell]

 

If one of my images is licensed through an affiliate scheme I would still expect to receive the full 50% of the sale price, as per my contract with alamy, as I have not contracted into the affiliate scheme.

 

To clarify I do not have my own website and do not need one so there is no way I could benefit from the affiliate scheme.

 

The affiliate scheme can only benefit those with their own website. To the rest of alamy contributors it is a reduction in income.

 

Allan

 

 

 

 

Edited November 28, 2017 by Allan Bell
added comment

[Matt Ashmore]

15 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

 

If one of my images is licensed through an affiliate scheme I would still expect to receive the full 50% of the sale price, as per my contract with alamy, as I have not contracted into the affiliate scheme.

 

To clarify I do not have my own website and do not need one so there is no way I could benefit from the affiliate scheme.

 

The affiliate scheme can only benefit those with their own website. To the rest of alamy contributors it is a reduction in income.

 

Allan

 

 

 

 

 

That's not really true though.

 

If someone has a blog and they have a link to Alamy (using the Afiliate Scheme) and someone reading the blog follows the link, falls in love with and then buys your image, then you benefit.

This might be someone who wouldn't otherwise know about Alamy and therefore there would have been absolutely no way that you would have sold that image through Alamy if they hadn't followed the link.

[fotoDogue]

I'm still on the fence about this. I understand it's a sale I wouldn't have otherwise made, and I realize Alamy wanted to offer Affiliates a strong incentive to participate, but I feel 20% is a lot, particularly when half is deducted from the photographer's share. I checked Amazon last night and, by comparison, they pay Affiliates 10%

 

I also feel it sets a bad precedent for Alamy to change the commission structure, in whole or in part,  without more formal notice than mentioning it on the forums, and without amending the Photographers Contract.

[Allan Bell]

41 minutes ago, Matt Ashmore said:

 

That's not really true though.

 

If someone has a blog and they have a link to Alamy (using the Afiliate Scheme) and someone reading the blog follows the link, falls in love with and then buys your image, then you benefit.

This might be someone who wouldn't otherwise know about Alamy and therefore there would have been absolutely no way that you would have sold that image through Alamy if they hadn't followed the link.

 

Thanks for your reply Matt. True I would benefit BUT ONLY to the tune of 38.5%.

 

There will be losers here as well as a few winners.

 

Allan

 

BIG EDIT:-  Contributors should be able to contract out of the affiliate scheme if they wish, as with the Personal use scheme.

 

 

Edited November 28, 2017 by Allan Bell
added comments

[KevinS]

I've given this further thought after Alamy's post above and decided to not participate in the affiliate program. All the program really does is drive traffic to the Alamy site. No sale occurs at my website, but a sale does occur through Alamy.com. Therefore, the split should be the 50% shown in the contract, and it is one of Alamy's strong features; 

Alamy Commission For sales through www.alamy.com	50%

 

I'm no lawyer and don't know if the contract allows the 38.5%, but I don't want to be the reason a contributor gets less than 50%. Now heading over to take down the Alamy thingy from my (low traffic) website.

 

Edited November 29, 2017 by KevinS
Clarify

[Matt Ashmore]

15 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

Thanks for your reply Matt. True I would benefit BUT ONLY to the tune of 38.5%.

 

There will be losers here as well as a few winners.

 

Allan

 

38.5% of something is better than 50% of nothing in my opinion.. but each to their own.

 

 

[Cryptoprocta]

6 minutes ago, Matt Ashmore said:

38.5% of something is better than 50% of nothing in my opinion.. but each to their own.

Yes, but if all that happens is that affiliates are higher in Google (other SEs are available) than Alamy, we all lose other than the affiliates.

However, for a while now I've noticed that if I'm searching in Google and click on an Alamy image it (apparently randomly) might take me to that file page, but more often it takes me to a general Alamy search page, where the file I clicked often isn't shown (not on that Alamy Search page), which must be annoying to potential buyers (depending on how many actually arrive via a search engine).

[Matt Ashmore]

1 minute ago, Cryptoprocta said:

Yes, but if all that happens is that affiliates are higher in Google (other SEs are available) than Alamy, we all lose other than the affiliates.

 

 

Whether or not individual photographers have the ability to exclude their images in search results visible to someone who has reached Alamy via an affiliate program link will not change this.

[John Richmond]

Well, whoever got the $7.70 from my affiliate sale owes me a beer.  Mines a pint of bitter and twisted.