MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => DepositPhotos => Topic started by: stock-will-eat-itself on July 01, 2014, 09:25
-
For those that have missed this new plan: £30 for 5 images - 1 month plan: the royalty paid is 30c per image.
In reality this is an image pack similar to Shutterstock repackaged as a 1 month subscription with a 3% royalty payout.
Here is a transcript of a live chat I've just had with DP over their 5 images per month Plan.
ME:
Hi Marina, can you confirm what the royalty % is paid to contributors via the 1 month - 5 images per month plan at £30? Thanks
DP:
You receive the same commissions for all subscription sales since the image price for one image starts at $0,15 per image under our daily plans.
Even though one image purchased by subscription is $0,15, you receive your fixed commission rate.
So, if a customer pays $0,15, you receive your fixed rate.
ME:
Yes but if a customer buys a 1 month - 5 images per month plan the royalty is 3%. This plan appears to be an image pack not a subscription, is this an error on your site? Thanks
DP:
It is a monthly plan which allows customers to download 5 images within one month.
Please take a look at our daily plans, you don't receive less than 30 cents per subscription download even though one image is 15 cents or 20 cents.
So, it is a win-win situation. If we raise your royalties per monthly subscription download, then we will have to lower your royalties for daily subscription downloads.
Your commissions are much higher when your files are sold by credits.
ME:
Yes but I also receive 30c even if the individual image is sold for over 9$ through this plan. I'm not so sure this is a win-win situation for me. I think I have all the information I need, 3% royalty is too low for me. I'll be in touch about my future as a contributor at Deposit Photo's. Thanks for your time.
DP:
It is not an individual sale, it is a monthly subscription plan.
If we raise your royalties per monthly subscription download, then we will have to lower your royalties for daily subscription downloads.
Please double check our daily plans.
ME:
I'm not convinced this is really a subscription plan, how is this any different to an Images on Demand pack that ShutterStock offers - they offer £29 for 5 image downloads? Their royalty is 30%.
DP:
In a month these downloads expire.
ME:
OK thanks Marina, I'm still not convinced this plan is fair balance between agency and artist with this plan. Thank you for your time.
DP:
Would you agree to receive less for daily subscription sales than $0,30?
ME:
I'd be happier if the 1 month Plan was resold as an Image Pack with a fair percentage paid.
DP:
We will take it into account.
We are currently working on our new plans and payment methods.
ME:
OK thank you, do you know when the new plans and payments will be reviewed?
DP:
Currently, we are working on API re-sales.
API re-sellers will be able to purchase images by credits only in order to re-sell them.
I already explained you our subscription policy.
We cannot pay higher royalties for monthly subscription sales while keeping the same rate for daily plan sales.
___________________________________________________
More info on this plan in this thread.
http://www.microstockgroup.com/depositphotos/depositphotos-pays-3-to-contributors-on-5-image-'subscription'/ (http://www.microstockgroup.com/depositphotos/depositphotos-pays-3-to-contributors-on-5-image-'subscription'/)
-
We cannot pay higher royalties for monthly subscription sales while keeping the same rate for daily plan sales.
Of course they can, we have put a man on the moon, surely they can pay any royalty they want, they just won't. :(
-
What the support spiel ignores is that the way subscription plans work, buyers do not download all their allotment.
Shutterstock survived for years (prior to the ramp up of all the non subscription products) with a payout per sub download that exceeded the buyer price *if* a buyer purchased everyone of the 750 images they were entitled to.
To suggest that they'd have to drop the royalty to 15 cents in order to pay more than 30 on a $9.80 sale is ridiculous. And I wonder how many people let their one month allotment expire without purchasing all they paid for - probably fewer than for a 25 a day subscription, but if/when it happens, DP makes out like an even bigger bandit.
And credits expire too - at most sites after 12 months - so having an expiration date doesn't make something a subscription.
-
We cannot pay higher royalties for monthly subscription sales while keeping the same rate for daily plan sales.
Of course they can, we have put a man on the moon, surely they can pay any royalty they want, they just won't. :(
Completely agree.
Even Fotolia could do that.
If they can't pay higher royalties for the so called "monthly subscriptions" we can't keep our content there.
-
dont understand.. why is someone still uploading there.. lol
-
Thanks to SWEI for your persistance in getting a detailed answer to the questions we all have. Replies suggest they are rethinking some of the worst policies like Shotshop deal. They might rethink this too if they get enough complaints. Less than .30 would be unacceptable for any sub sale tho.
FT now gives our earned % of sub packages but you won't get less than your base sub rate .30 or whatever it is, so no lowering of royalties. If they can manage it then so can DP.
-
That conversation is like talking to a robot. They just keep repeating the same stuff over and over again, ignoring the real problem. Classic ::) I dont believe they will change something in our favour.
-
It seems to be a BIG MISTAKE that I ever became a contributor to Depositphotos. Would not recommend them to anyone else, contributor or buyer, due to the experiences with them - first the shotshop deal and now this!!
The agency priced its own sub rates - and they themselves set the contributor share on that. So there seems no rationale for them to now come up with a monthly pack with 5 images and call it a sub plan paying out a sub rate to contributor - while keeping a huge chunk of revenue (97%) for themselves.
I have already deactivated a big part of my port at DP. This only motivates me toward more deactivations - while keeping a close watch on them. Because - and this is another issue of concern - they reportedly don't delete deactivated content. Instead I understand that they hang on to it in full resolution, for reasons that beat my understanding.
This is a no win agency from my perspective as a contributor. >:(
-
Anyone else sensing an attitude from DP support? They seem annoyed that we're even asking about this.
Summer is the leanest time of the year for my family, with my wife being off (she's a teacher) and no paychecks coming in. I hate to even think about dropping any agency this time of year, but man is it hard to ignore just how bad this mess is with DP.
-
How many post more we need for a deactivation day? I open the first... this is the third post in a week!
-
Anyone else sensing an attitude from DP support? They seem annoyed that we're even asking about this.
Summer is the leanest time of the year for my family, with my wife being off (she's a teacher) and no paychecks coming in. I hate to even think about dropping any agency this time of year, but man is it hard to ignore just how bad this mess is with DP.
I fear if this is just sucked up by contributors then it becomes the norm for all agencies and image packs disappear and these new 1 month subscriptions with a 3% royalty will take their place.
Deposit Photos are setting a really scary precedent by putting everything under the "subscription" umbrella, its a fallacy to think other agencies won't follow suit.
-
Well, all my images are off DP but one of a whore house brothel bed. Fitting.
This is yet another project to contact other contributors, or it will indeed likely become the norm. I am sure they could care less about my 2800 images but the way they screw contributors (like FT) they are raking in the doe. A few million meaningful deactivations could mean something.
-
...I fear if this is just sucked up by contributors then it becomes the norm for all agencies and image packs disappear and these new 1 month subscriptions with a 3% royalty will take their place.
Deposit Photos are setting a really scary precedent by putting everything under the "subscription" umbrella, its a fallacy to think other agencies won't follow suit.
Aren't others already doing it? This is exactly what DPC is. Sell 10 images for a buck each and call it a "subscription".
DP and DPC are just at the forefront of this trend to push things under a "subscription" banner so they can pay us less.
-
I'm not a fan of DPC but at least you can opt out.
This plan from Deposit Photo's is far more disturbing, selling image packs under a subscription banner and getting away with paying 3% is truly shocking, and no opt out as far as I can tell.
There are many ex-exclusive iStock contributors there who migrated thinking they were supporting a fair trade agency, I doubt any of them would be happy if they knew what was happening here.
I'm pulling my port and shutting my account, they can go and mug someone else.
-
I'm not a fan of DPC but at least you can opt out.
This plan from Deposit Photo's is far more disturbing, selling image packs under a subscription banner and getting away with paying 3% is truly shocking, and no opt out as far as I can tell.
There are many ex-exclusive iStock contributors there who migrated thinking they were supporting a fair trade agency, I doubt any of them would be happy if they knew what was happening here.
I'm pulling my port and shutting my account, they can go and mug someone else.
Here Here
-
$1.09 to go and I pull my (very small) port too!
THREE PER CENT????????
-
API resellers will be able to purchase for credit price and resell?! Resell as in cut us out by at credit price and sell on their site ???
-
Gee, I don't want someone to compete with me with my own image for $12 bucks, please tell me I misunderstood that :)
-
Gee, I don't want someone to compete with me with my own image for $12 bucks, please tell me I misunderstood that :)
That's the same message I received from them and I interpreted it the same way.
-
Scam machine.
-
Relax, now from Depositphotos told me that the contributor payout scheme will be changed!
-
Relax, now from Depositphotos told me that the contributor payout scheme will be changed!
Is that on the site somewhere? In writing somewhere?
In addition to waiting until something actually changes to "relax", with Deposit Photos past behavior as a guide, contributors need to continue to check after an improvement to ensure things stay improved (the Shotshop scam being a recent example).
I'm fully relaxed as Deposit Photos doesn't have any of my work, but unless you were joking, I can't see any reason a Deposit Photos contributor would want to relax.
-
Relax, now from Depositphotos told me that the contributor payout scheme will be changed!
As of today, July 25, 2014, per DP: "Based on your feedbacks, we are reconsidering our daily and monthly plans to have a win-win offer for buyers and the sellers."
Here was their entire response to me:
"First of all, I would like to mention that we have changed our API policy, so our re-sellers are able to purchase our files by credits only to re-sell them on their websites.
Our monthly plans allow our customers to download images on a monthly basis. For instance, $49 subscription allows to download 5 images per month, while with credits they will pay $60 for 5 vector files. So, this subscription is the most convenient plan for designers with tight budgets who download images rarely. Unlike credits, monthly downloads expire every month.
We offer daily subscription plans as well starting at 15 cents per image. Those subscriptions are highly popular among high-volume customers. Even though one image under daily plans is much less than 30 cents, you receive your fixed rate. Based on your feedbacks, we are reconsidering our daily and monthly plans to have a win-win offer for buyers and the sellers.
Concerning your royalties: I recommend you to reactivate all your portfolio and join our updated API re-seller program to start selling again. I can't promise but if you expand you portfolio and your sales grow, you will be moved to the next level with higher commissions."
-
Relax, now from Depositphotos told me that the contributor payout scheme will be changed!
changed to screw the contributors more?
-
We offer daily subscription plans as well starting at 15 cents per image. Those subscriptions are highly popular among high-volume customers...
Concerning your royalties:
I recommend you to reactivate all your portfolio and join our updated API re-seller program to start selling again. I can't promise but if you expand you portfolio and your sales grow, you will be moved to the next level with higher commissions."
Whh... ;D ;D ;D Pleasseeee... some ..*.. have no mercy ;D
So glad I'm done with them and don't have to "expand the portfolio".
Wake up people ::)
-
I actually did a live chat and was informed that that is not the case with any API programs
-
As of today, July 25, 2014, per DP: "Based on your feedbacks, we are reconsidering our daily and monthly plans to have a win-win offer for buyers and the sellers."
******(does this mean the Chang/improvement is done already.)
Here was their entire response to me:
"First of all, I would like to mention that we have changed our API policy, so our re-sellers are able to purchase our files by credits only to re-sell them on their websites.
*******(this sounds like our images can be purchased with credits and sold on the buyers website without continuing to give us a cut, .... I did a live chat and was told this is not the case.
Our monthly plans allow our customers to download images on a monthly basis. For instance, $49 subscription allows to download 5 images per month, while with credits they will pay $60 for 5 vector files. So, this subscription is the most convenient plan for designers with tight budgets who download images rarely. Unlike credits, monthly downloads expire every mo
*******this is the same setup we have now that we don't want.
Why do I care....I'm running out of agencies to quit (that actually generate real sales) and really want things to work on this one, I am hoping they are sincere about future changes.
-
"...Concerning your royalties: I recommend you to reactivate all your portfolio and join our updated API re-seller program to start selling again. I can't promise but if you expand you portfolio and your sales grow, you will be moved to the next level with higher commissions."
Did I read that right?
Is he saying you'd maybe be given a boost other than by the normal process of more sales if you give them another chance?
And if he can't promise, what exactly is that statement worth?
-
"...Concerning your royalties: I recommend you to reactivate all your portfolio and join our updated API re-seller program to start selling again. I can't promise but if you expand you portfolio and your sales grow, you will be moved to the next level with higher commissions."
Did I read that right?
Is he saying you'd maybe be given a boost other than by the normal process of more sales if you give them another chance?
And if he can't promise, what exactly is that statement worth?
Since I was opted out of API and partner sites, and only on DP, Vikky is simply saying that by reactivating my images AND OPTING BACK IN (expanding) to API my sales MIGHT grow enough to get to a higher royalty tier. It's the carrot. We know how that usually ends up.
-
"...Concerning your royalties: I recommend you to reactivate all your portfolio and join our updated API re-seller program to start selling again. I can't promise but if you expand you portfolio and your sales grow, you will be moved to the next level with higher commissions."
Did I read that right?
Is he saying you'd maybe be given a boost other than by the normal process of more sales if you give them another chance?
And if he can't promise, what exactly is that statement worth?
Since I was opted out of API and partner sites, and only on DP, Vikky is simply saying that by reactivating my images AND OPTING BACK IN (expanding) to API my sales MIGHT grow enough to get to a higher royalty tier. It's the carrot. We know how that usually ends up.
like doubling sales on 123RF or cutting our percentage at DT being good for us?
-
"...Concerning your royalties: I recommend you to reactivate all your portfolio and join our updated API re-seller program to start selling again. I can't promise but if you expand you portfolio and your sales grow, you will be moved to the next level with higher commissions."
Did I read that right?
Is he saying you'd maybe be given a boost other than by the normal process of more sales if you give them another chance?
And if he can't promise, what exactly is that statement worth?
Since I was opted out of API and partner sites, and only on DP, Vikky is simply saying that by reactivating my images AND OPTING BACK IN (expanding) to API my sales MIGHT grow enough to get to a higher royalty tier. It's the carrot. We know how that usually ends up.
like doubling sales on 123RF or cutting our percentage at DT being good for us?
Yes just like that. ???
-
Can help myself again, sorry...
"I can't promise but if you expand you portfolio and your sales grow, you will be moved to the next level with higher commissions"
I can't promise but if you mark up my prices and my sales grow, you will have chance to sell (more of) my work with this higher commissions
Or don't bother.
-
Can help myself again, sorry...
"I can't promise but if you expand you portfolio and your sales grow, you will be moved to the next level with higher commissions"
I can't promise but if you mark up my prices and my sales grow, you will have chance to sell (more of) my work with this higher commissions
Or don't bother.
That's about the size of it. I've stopped uploading to DP over this cr*p. The agencies just push and push. When they push too far they back off and give in just a tiny little bit to get us back to business as usual. Then they they slowly start pushing again.
-
im deactivating files and when i click out 500 .... 404 error!
-
I've stopped uploading as well. I've never been a believer in
deactivation. Far too much time and effort has gone into building
up the portfolio. This will send a softer message perhaps but a
clear message nevertheless.
DP has been exceedingly disappointing. They really appeared to
be an agency on its way to top tier status when I began 3 years
ago. An agency that was finding buyers for some of my images
that no other agency could find.....like I say, exceedingly disappointing.
-
0 images on line.
If anyone is in Google and find my images and only want 5... i will receive more than 0,30 of 9.95
-
I've stopped uploading as well. I've never been a believer in deactivation. Far too much time and effort has gone into building up the portfolio. This will send a softer message perhaps but a clear message nevertheless.
DP has been exceedingly disappointing. They really appeared to be an agency on its way to top tier status when I began 3 years ago...
I'm really not concerned with sending messages anymore. I hate to say it but I just can't be bothered. There are too many jokers* in this business, too many to think we'll ever really send them any sort of message that they'll care about enough to make serious changes. They'll always pull these tricks and schemes until they get caught and then offer up some mea culpa. Delete images, don't delete them, it doesn't matter. DPC lost 7 million images, and are they slowing down at all? Did they change anything significantly enough to win us all back?
If anything I think the effort to send a message is, in itself, a bad message. We work way too hard trying to get these companies to change. And for what... a slightly less crappy deal? At a time when we've got many more better options, companies offering better royalties, better pricing, and we've got better things to aim for like Stocksy, Offset, Creative Market, etc., why beg for pennies?
We know what DP is. They've always been like this, it's just easier to see now. I'm not going to beg them for some consolation, some minor effort to change what they're doing just so they can find another way to reach their goal later on. And they will, they'll always find new ways to screw us.
I'm fine with just taking them out of my upload rotation and moving on. If they don't get the message, that's fine too.
* I used to be a parking valet and "joker" was the term used for anyone trying to sneak into the valet lot without actually using the valet service and to avoid paying, but not having to park in the non-valet lot. I really like the term for microstock companies trying to sneak one by us, pulling these 3% royalty schemes, partner program shenanigans, inclusion in dollar clubs, etc.
-
Wait, what? I know there is a plan that says 5 images A DAY for 1 month, which would be 36 cents per image (for the buyer), but now we're talking a subscription of 5 images in ONE MONTH?
-
Just had a live chat. I expressed my disgust at the low 3% subscription royalties and urged them to sell them as Image Packs so we'd be getting a fair royalty for those sales. She would pass it on to the 'developers'. I don't think they are going to change anything so it looks like I'll have to pull my port in order to stop this theft. They're only 3% of my microstock income but it still sucks donkey ass.
-
I deactivated all my files... 15 minutes clicking... a good month in deposhit is a bad day in shutter...
-
I've said it before and I'll say it again: There is nothing this sorry bunch can say or do at this point to ever make me upload another of my images to their site, and I cannot understand the mindset of people who, knowing what we know, are still with them.
-
I have stopped uploading to Depositphotos since this fiasco started. This is the first time ever I'm also considering pulling my whole portfolio (I have invested much time in uploading and keywording, but 3%? - No thanks!)
Many of the sites have pulled incredible stunts like this, but this might be the worst one yet...
-
My live chat went something like this:
Woman: "Don't worry, most clients will want credit sales instead of a monthly subscription, because they don't want to be tied to a subscription plan."
Me: "Why, is there a minimum amount of months for a subscription then?"
Woman: "No, they can cancel their subscription after one month."
(http://forums.superherohype.com/images/smilies/55ms9.gif)
-
Now this is really bad. I thought istock has the worst kind of commission in the market.
-
This situation is a great opportunity for contributors to get together and exercise their power. As a minor site, DP is likely far more vulnerable to focused, sustained contributor action than a larger site. The key is SUSTAINED action. Nobody cares about deactivation days, as we've seen.
DP isn't just cheating contributors, it's cheating against their competitors by not sticking within the fuzziest lines of ethical behaviour. Competitors can't really respond in a meaningful way so it's really up to contributors to slap down this form of abuse.
Sustained action would involve things like:
1. Deleting your entire port (I did).
2. Tell your buyer contacts that DP cheats contributors (I do this).
3. Get on social media and warn others about DP's behaviour. An angry tweet or two a day at @Depositphotos from a core group of determined contributors will add up over a sustained period of time (I'm willing to do this as part of a group).
4. Gently but firmly let "scabs" know that they are betraying their fellow contributors. Do it on this forum and take it to social media too, if you have to.
I'm sure there are lots of other things that can be done.
Putting a big dent in DP would give contributors a sense of their real power as a group and would encourage additional campaigns against bad behaviour. It would take the pressure off the other companies to compete against bald-faced bad behaviour. It would provide a small but meaningful rebalancing of power that would benefit everybody (possibly even DP if they change and survive).
This is an opportunity. If we waste it, then we're stupid and we deserve 3%.
-
...Gently but firmly let "scabs" know that they are betraying their fellow contributors. Do it on this forum and take it to social media too, if you have to...
Define "scabs". Active contributors? Inactive? People who didn't delete portfolios?
And do you really want to take it to public naming and shaming of contributors? This isn't DPC where things started out so terribly. DP was a decent deal for a while. I don't think it's right to shame people who have contributed there just because some of us haven't gone as far as deleting our portfolios.
-
This is worse than DPC. More than once DP went behind our backs while they were extorting contributors. And this time around they confirmed the shady deal and are not even pretending to care. Let's remember that this is a minor agency that barely sells anything. If people knew they would get 3% of the higher priced sales most would never open an account in DP.
-
...Gently but firmly let "scabs" know that they are betraying their fellow contributors. Do it on this forum and take it to social media too, if you have to...
And do you really want to take it to public naming and shaming of contributors?
I meant exactly what I wrote. Gently but firmly inform. Do it privately or publicly. There are lots of examples of people doing just that on this forum and the exchanges I've seen have been pretty civil.
I put the word 'scabs' in quotation marks because I can't do comical air quotes with my fingers over the internet. I'm a contributor and I understand the various points of view on this issue. The company is the bad guy, not fellow contributors. I would only define a 'scab' as someone who vigorously defends the company and the 3% even after being presented with the facts.
But the social media is the core tactic. All you need is a core group of 6-7 committed people engaging on social media a couple of times everyday. That's enough to pollute their social streams and would do far more than a download day. I'm up for that if anyone else is but a single person can't do it alone or they look like a kook with a grudge. You need a group.
-
But the social media is the core tactic. All you need is a core group of 6-7 committed people engaging on social media a couple of times everyday. That's enough to pollute their social streams and would do far more than a download day. I'm up for that if anyone else is but a single person can't do it alone or they look like a kook with a grudge. You need a group.
You want a group to 'pollute' the social streams of agencies or fellow contributors? Target fellow contributors sound like harassment.
-
You have clearly not read what I have posted.
-
You have clearly not read what I have posted.
Is this at me or someone else? You avoid answering my question. Who you going to target in social media - agencies or contributors?
-
3. Get on social media and warn others about DP's behaviour. An angry tweet or two a day at @Depositphotos from a core group of determined contributors will add up over a sustained period of time (I'm willing to do this as part of a group).
-
I received an e-mail from DP regarding the 3% royalty.
Currently, we are changing our monthly subscription royalties, so you will be receiving 44% out of each monthly subscription download.
-
I received an e-mail from DP regarding the 3% royalty.
Currently, we are changing our monthly subscription royalties, so you will be receiving 44% out of each monthly subscription download.
We shall see. But I did write them a constructive, point by point email and made recommendations. One of them was to take those phony subs and pay us 50 percent, not 3 percent. I even did the math for them to show how we came up with 3 percent. Their response was that they would take that into consideration.
That would be a positive move for them but I wonder if there is a back door remedy that maintains their current revenue take.
-
I don't see how calling other contributors "scabs" and then lashing out at them on social media is a good idea. In fact, it's just wrong. This isn't a union, and we aren't on a picket line.
-
4. Gently but firmly let "scabs" know that they are betraying their fellow contributors. Do it on this forum and take it to social media too, if you have to.
This was where you insult fellow contributors and suggest attacking them on social media, not point 3 you quoted above. Still you refuse to answer my question but your statement I quoted, #4 says it all.
Bullying fellow contribs on social media is messed up. Are you a teenager or adult?
-
Pixelbytes are you the contributor with over 30,000 images on DP? If so, you have a very nice portfolio.
-
Bullying fellow contribs on social media is messed up. Are you a teenager or adult?
I dunno, did you feel like you were betraying your fellow contributors when the royalty was 3%? Is that why you're acting so defensive? I guess you can relax now that they're adjusting the rate.
Does the fact that they're adjusting the rate make you feel a little guilty about accepting that 3% without protest? Is that why you're taking the least charitable interpretation of what I posted?
-
Pixelbytes are you the contributor with over 30,000 images on DP? If so, you have a very nice portfolio.
LOL! Not me. I don't like to work that hard. I just don't like bullys is all.
-
Does the fact that they're adjusting the rate make you feel a little guilty about accepting that 3% without protest? Is that why you're taking the least charitable interpretation of what I posted?
I ask you three times to clarify what you posted. You did not do it. You leave me to make up my mind. Now you complain I am uncharitable? I think you are joking.
-
Bullying fellow contribs on social media is messed up. Are you a teenager or adult?
I dunno, did you feel like you were betraying your fellow contributors when the royalty was 3%? Is that why you're acting so defensive? I guess you can relax now that they're adjusting the rate.
Does the fact that they're adjusting the rate make you feel a little guilty about accepting that 3% without protest? Is that why you're taking the least charitable interpretation of what I posted?
Maybe it's because what you were saying is wrong. I certainly don't feel guilty about contributing there. I have no obligation to you.
-
Ok, trolls, here is what I wrote:
"I put the word 'scabs' in quotation marks because I can't do comical air quotes with my fingers over the internet. I'm a contributor and I understand the various points of view on this issue. The company is the bad guy, not fellow contributors. I would only define a 'scab' as someone who vigorously defends the company and the 3% even after being presented with the facts."
-
Anyhow, this issue isn't going anywhere and you're both getting wound up over nothing.
-
I sure hope the 3% to 44% is real and actually happens. Could mean a significant enhancement to people's income.
-
Bullying fellow contribs on social media is messed up. Are you a teenager or adult?
I dunno, did you feel like you were betraying your fellow contributors when the royalty was 3%? Is that why you're acting so defensive? I guess you can relax now that they're adjusting the rate.
Does the fact that they're adjusting the rate make you feel a little guilty about accepting that 3% without protest? Is that why you're taking the least charitable interpretation of what I posted?
Maybe it's because what you were saying is wrong. I certainly don't feel guilty about contributing there. I have no obligation to you.
That sounds a lot like the prisoner's dilemma. Everyone is making 'rational' decisions that lead to worse outcomes for everyone. If everyone would stop supporting bad sites we would all be better off. You can see how this has played out in the past with IS,FT, DP, and DPC giving better terms to contributors when a large enough group of contributors have worked together. Imagine what would happen if contributors really got their act together.
-
Pixelbytes are you the contributor with over 30,000 images on DP? If so, you have a very nice portfolio.
LOL! Not me. I don't like to work that hard. I just don't like bullys is all.
Oh ok, I saw your profile picture was for sale on DP so I thought that was you.
-
So, I asked for a time frame, DP replied as follows:
Yes, we are currently changing monthly subscription royalties to 44%, so you'd be receiving 44% out of each monthly download. I guess it will take around 1-2 months. It could be earlier though.
Fingers crossed!
-
Bullying fellow contribs on social media is messed up. Are you a teenager or adult?
I dunno, did you feel like you were betraying your fellow contributors when the royalty was 3%? Is that why you're acting so defensive? I guess you can relax now that they're adjusting the rate.
Does the fact that they're adjusting the rate make you feel a little guilty about accepting that 3% without protest? Is that why you're taking the least charitable interpretation of what I posted?
Maybe it's because what you were saying is wrong. I certainly don't feel guilty about contributing there. I have no obligation to you.
That sounds a lot like the prisoner's dilemma. Everyone is making 'rational' decisions that lead to worse outcomes for everyone. If everyone would stop supporting bad sites we would all be better off. You can see how this has played out in the past with IS,FT, DP, and DPC giving better terms to contributors when a large enough group of contributors have worked together. Imagine what would happen if contributors really got their act together.
When did we get better terms from is, dp, ft and dpc? DP lies and changes price or commission with no notice, makes everything subs for 3% with lies. You believe and trust them? Wait 2 montyhs for what, the next way to cheat and lie to us. Yes I can see how it has played out in the past, we get worse and worse % and lower money.
-
I received an e-mail from DP regarding the 3% royalty.
Currently, we are changing our monthly subscription royalties, so you will be receiving 44% out of each monthly subscription download.
2 months no change, anybody believe DP crooks now?
-
I have contacted DP again about this issue. They said:
"Hello ***,
Your royalties on the monthly subscription downloads were changed to 44% a few weeks ago. You have recently had a few sales by daily subscription, so that's why you have not noticed these changes."
So far, all subscription sales were either $0,30 or $0,44, so I don't know if this is at all correct. Has anyone received MONTHLY subscription sales that were more than $0,30?
-
I'm also interested to know this.
Although I'm not sure I'd consider uploading even if the royalty really was increased to 44%.
-
My lowest subscription sales are $0.31
-
I just checked my stats there and almost all subs sales were at the base rate, but I did have two this month that were higher: one for $0.47 and the other for $1.28. So we are getting some at higher rates but the frequency is very low (for me at least).
-
Ok, so it might be worth it to continue uploading (from a business standpoint)?
-
Interesting, someone needs to get a Monthly Sub DL not a Weekly sub DL. Since a few weeks ago?
That will be interesting to see how it's changed things.
I have contacted DP again about this issue. They said:
"Hello ***,
Your royalties on the monthly subscription downloads were changed to 44% a few weeks ago. You have recently had a few sales by daily subscription, so that's why you have not noticed these changes."
So far, all subscription sales were either $0,30 or $0,44, so I don't know if this is at all correct. Has anyone received MONTHLY subscription sales that were more than $0,30?
-
not changed just got .30 sub nov 3 time to say bye bye to more lies.
-
Do not understand why someone still uploading there :) sorry
-
Do not understand why someone still uploading there :) sorry
because people need to buy peanuts to accompany beer...
-
No change but I got a $.44 sale not a 44% sale.
-
what the F uck ? 3% ???? i would make more money uploading on Flickr and selling some prints from time to time.
-
i'm impressed by this development, i was thinking it couldn't get any worse than istock's 15% but this proves i was wrong !
now, what's next ? what can be lower than 3% ? being paid with coupons for free cheeseburgers ? win a free t-shirt ? unbelievable these guys are still in biz.
-
i'm impressed by this development, i was thinking it couldn't get any worse than istock's 15% but this proves i was wrong !
now, what's next ? what can be lower than 3% ? being paid with coupons for free cheeseburgers ? win a free t-shirt ? unbelievable these guys are still in biz.
Why is this unbelievable?
They earn 97%, and there is no shortage of suppliers.
For me, it's completely expected that they are in the business. More so, I wouldn't be surprised if business was flourishing for them.
-
What Hobostocker means is that its unbelievable people are still supplying them with content to be in business.
-
And getting cheeseburgers would be a raise. 8)
What Hobostocker means is that its unbelievable people are still supplying them with content to be in business.
-
It seems that CafePress is paying out 3% to some contributors these days. That's 2 companies already, I'm sure more will follow suit.
-
There is a simple answer, don't deal with distributors that only pay 3%.
There's no financial motivation to do so anyway.