Author Topic: Fotolia cuts commissions again (Read 23742 times)

Perry · « **Reply #25 on:** January 20, 2011, 06:29 »

Hahahaha.... to get the same percentage I have now (31%) I would have to sell my files as exclusive files. Are they stupid or what is their problem?

niserin · « **Reply #26 on:** January 20, 2011, 06:30 »

The biggest drop is with silvers - from 31 to 25%. They comprise the majority of fotolia contributors. Why don't I wonder... ?

leaf · « **Reply #27 on:** January 20, 2011, 06:31 »

Quote from: leremy on January 20, 2011, 06:25

Instead of attacking contributors, they should all cooperate and increase the price for buyers.

They did increase prices... we just don't get any of the increase..

Feb 2010
Price for 21 credits: $1.14/credit
Price for 3200 credits: $.75/credit

Jan 2011
Price for 25 credits: $1.20/credit
Price for 3000 credits: $0.80/credit

our cut is always based on a single credit no matter what the buyer pays for it.

Perry · « **Reply #28 on:** January 20, 2011, 06:35 »

We are so screwed. Again.

microstockinsider · « **Reply #29 on:** January 20, 2011, 06:48 »

Quote from: Perry on January 20, 2011, 06:27

Quote from: microstockinsider on January 20, 2011, 06:20
just posted a handy roll-over comparison thingy - shame it won't make you feel any better
http://microstockinsider.com/news/fotolia-new-commission-rates

Nice page. To make it even nicer, put the rankings there too http://www.fotolia.com/Info/Contributors#item_3

I looked at those, they are still the same (did I miss something?)
don't tempt fate I might need to do one in a few week/months!

lagereek · « **Reply #30 on:** January 20, 2011, 06:49 »

Doesnt bother me too much, FT and IS, cuts in commissions. What does bother me is that within 6 months, ALL top 6 agencies will do the same thing and then suddenly its NOT worthwhile, too much work for too little return.

Never thought I would say this but Im seriously considering Exclusivity and with the one that gives me the best return. Cant really see any other way.

qwerty · « **Reply #31 on:** January 20, 2011, 06:52 »

"Competition in the market is increasing, both amongst the photographers in the community, and amongst stock photography agencies. We've been monitoring the situation carefully, and have continued to increase our marketing spend in the number and frequency of ad campaigns. In addition, Fotolia continued its international leadership in new markets, with the opening of the Russian and Chinese web sites. With the increase in sales, the velocity of the rank changes has also accelerated. In order to sustain our continued efforts in marketing, we are making some changes to the royalty structures at the mid and lower tiers next week."

International leadership = we cut commissions for the 2nd time - IS and DT have only done it once

Please undertake your extra marketing out of the +70% you already take.

I encourage everybody to direct customers away from IS and FT to agencies that provide you and the customers a better deal

Ploink · « **Reply #32 on:** January 20, 2011, 06:55 »

Quote from: lagereek on January 20, 2011, 06:49

Never thought I would say this but Im seriously considering Exclusivity and with the one that gives me the best return. Cant really see any other way.

I'm with you there - the only problem being that SS doesn't offer exclusivity (yet)

On a different note: Were any changes in the subscriptions prices on FT mentioned?

maco0708 · « **Reply #33 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:16 »

Oh Crap.

As a iStock exclusive I was thinking about my options a whether it is worthwhile to go non-exclusive again (I was on majority of the sites about 2 years ago).
This Fotolia cut just tells me that the whole industry is doing down the drain.

I have no clue why Apple pays 70% to their APP (for smartphones) developers and we get ~30% (if that). It is pretty much the same process (I create it, they approve it and sell it).

dk · « **Reply #34 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:22 »

Quote from: sharpshot on January 20, 2011, 05:26

This is sickening but it's no surprise. I have to sell a lot more just to get back to the commission I'm unhappy with now. Looks like microstock is going to be unsustainable for me, unless something drastic happens and we all leave the sites that pay ridiculously low commissions. I just can't see that happening, the vast majority will continue to accept more and more commission cuts. Now I'm even more motivated to find another way to make a living.

Maybe it's a temporary thing because of the economic crisis, things should get back to normal at some point. The last couple of days i've noticed in horror that almost every single site i upload to has some sort of problem. Be it uploads not working, be it files missing, not showing up, uploaded but not showing, no views, disappearing sales, sites down for repair, delayed earnings, etc, etc. I don't remember this sort of mess in the past.

About fotolia, the main problem is that they don't know what files they want in the collection, they only now how many they can accept each month.
This year they accept a lot of landscapes for example where in the past they were known for not accepting them. In the end the have accepted less of my files from the big4 and so they are making me less money than any of the big4. I don't think it's irrelevant.

grp_photo · « **Reply #35 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:26 »

Haha

no surprise at all FUtolia!

yuliang11 · « **Reply #36 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:33 »

anyone dares to delete from fotolia?

trek · « **Reply #37 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:42 »

It may only be symbolic... but it felt good to delete a couple this morning.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #38 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:43 »

Quote from: dk on January 20, 2011, 07:22

Quote from: sharpshot on January 20, 2011, 05:26
This is sickening but it's no surprise. I have to sell a lot more just to get back to the commission I'm unhappy with now. Looks like microstock is going to be unsustainable for me, unless something drastic happens and we all leave the sites that pay ridiculously low commissions. I just can't see that happening, the vast majority will continue to accept more and more commission cuts. Now I'm even more motivated to find another way to make a living.

Maybe it's a temporary thing because of the economic crisis, things should get back to normal at some point.

Don't kid yourself. This is permanent and more cuts will be coming. This is the new normal. Raise prices and cut commissions.

Right now there is way more supply than demand and the value of contributors have dropped. This is pretty obvious from the way we're being treated. A couple years ago contributors were being courted. Now we're being taken advantage of pretty regularly.

The bottom isn't here yet. And it won't be until enough good performing contributors stop submitting to go make money elsewhere, outside of stock. Then after there is a shortage of good performing contributors and a lot of stale low production images the top tier sites may start a "we love you, come back to us" program with more incentives. We're a long way off from that. But I think this is the start.

yuliang11 · « **Reply #39 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:48 »

Quote from: yuliang11 on January 20, 2011, 07:33

anyone dares to delete from fotolia?

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #40 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:55 »

Quote from: trekandshoot on January 20, 2011, 07:42

It may only be symbolic... but it felt good to delete a couple this morning.

I think this will change soon too. The only tool contributors have is to delete images. The sites have all been watching this unfold in public and most sites will eventually change to a minimum time or will even remove the ability to delete.

In some ways open public forums are hurting contributors. People are airing out their thoughts and strategies for all of the sites to see. The sites are taking that info and making changes based on it to their advantage. Hard to win when you know nothing about your opponent's strategy and they know everything about yours.

"Let's delete our photos" = remove ability to delete
"Let's go to other sites" = more power for other sites to cut commissions
"I can't afford to leave, I have to put food on table" = make more changes because contributors are powerless

somethingpretentious · « **Reply #41 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:58 »

Fotolia silvers will be getting a 19,4% cut in their royalty payout. Maybe Fotolia could be hurting themselves more than they realize with such a slaughter. A very large number of pro top notch quality producers that have entered microstock in the last 1-2 years are still silvers and will not advance within the next year - at which time Fotolia will move the goal post again. These new pro top notch quality producers are the same people that will do (relatively) well under iStocks new redeemed credit race system..

Are they sending the new pros to iStock?

As it has already been pointed out here, we should also not forget that these "royalty %'s" actually has nothing to do with the actual royalty % that we recieve after the obsure credit and currency conversions that they have put in place to further milk contributers. The legislation is clearly lagging behind on this issue and I'm sure most contributers are completely in the blind about this, as it is human nature to assume that "royalty %" also means "royalty %".

I know microstock is the wild west, but A 19,4% paycut (with one weeks notice) is outrages.

eggshell · « **Reply #42 on:** January 20, 2011, 07:59 »

Quote from: lagereek on January 20, 2011, 06:49

Doesnt bother me too much, FT and IS, cuts in commissions. What does bother me is that within 6 months, ALL top 6 agencies will do the same thing and then suddenly its NOT worthwhile, too much work for too little return.

Never thought I would say this but Im seriously considering Exclusivity and with the one that gives me the best return. Cant really see any other way.

Pretty much resumes my thoughts . It was bound to happen , the question was who was going to be first follower of iS . Unfortunately the cruel logic shows that the other agencies will follow too - otherwise they are automaticaly handicapped . Exclusivity with any of the big ones seems more attractive than ever before . It would be a "funny" situation - the big contributors selling everywhere and all the mid and low tier ones going exclusive

rubyroo · « **Reply #43 on:** January 20, 2011, 08:09 »

My feeling is that some agencies acknowledge their own part and responsibility in boosting their own profits (beyond just marketing), while others take the easy way out by putting all the onus on what they are paying contributors.

IMO, those who address the issues at agency-end and treat contributors with respect for their work (both in respectful correspondence and in their pockets) will be the ones who ultimately have longevity.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #44 on:** January 20, 2011, 08:12 »

Quote from: qwerty on January 20, 2011, 06:52

I encourage everybody to direct customers away from IS and FT to agencies that provide you and the customers a better deal

And if that actually worked then those sites would have a huge amount of leverage to also cut your commissions.

There are too many contributors. Too much competition and too many images. There is way more supply than demand and until that flip-flops contributors are at a disadvantage in almost every way.

Some people keep saying this is a community and competition doesn't matter. It's common sense. The more people that need to share a loaf of bread, the less each of us will have to eat.

Artemis · « **Reply #45 on:** January 20, 2011, 08:26 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 20, 2011, 08:12

Quote from: qwerty on January 20, 2011, 06:52
I encourage everybody to direct customers away from IS and FT to agencies that provide you and the customers a better deal

And if that actually worked then those sites would have a huge amount of leverage to also cut your commissions.

There are too many contributors. Too much competition and too many images. There is way more supply than demand and until that flip-flops contributors are at a disadvantage in almost every way.

Some people keep saying this is a community and competition doesn't matter. It's common sense. The more people that need to share a loaf of bread, the less each of us will have to eat.

Exactely!
Add to add that some of the competition (as seen in another thread here) are willing to submit to sites that pay $0,02 commission as long as the end balance yields up.... the future looks bleak, very bleak...

MikLav · « **Reply #46 on:** January 20, 2011, 08:31 »

I just hope Shutterstock will not do that. I am am almost certain Dreamstime will not do that (though who knows)

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #47 on:** January 20, 2011, 08:34 »

Quote from: MikLav on January 20, 2011, 08:31

I just hope Shutterstock will not do that. I am am almost certain Dreamstime will not do that (though who knows)

Why wouldn't they?

rubyroo · « **Reply #48 on:** January 20, 2011, 08:35 »

My remaining ounces of hope are with those two (DT and SS). I trust them. If they take this route, that will be the time I'll consider throwing the towel in.

(I trust CanStock too - but my earnings there aren't high enough to keep me in the game).

They'd be my three 'hang on to the bitter end' agencies... although I hope SS and DT will buck the trend and do something positive for us all (God knows we need it now).

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #49 on:** January 20, 2011, 08:36 »

Quote from: somethingpretentious on January 20, 2011, 07:58

I know microstock is the wild west, but A 19,4% paycut (with one weeks notice) is outrages.

It's not one week's notice: they announced big news a few weeks ago, and I was pretty sure from the start that it was going to be a paycut. With certain agencies one can stay assured

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 20, 2011, 08:34

Quote from: MikLav on January 20, 2011, 08:31
I just hope Shutterstock will not do that. I am am almost certain Dreamstime will not do that (though who knows)

Why wouldn't they?

Since I joined SS 3+ years ago, I never heard bad news from them. This may well mean nothing about the future, but so far so good. Some mid/low earners are fair (scanstock, panthermedia, canstock and more...) but I can't say the same for any other big site. Thanks SS.