Mostphotos launches web price and subs

[Magnum]

Good timing  but will it work?

http://www.mostphotos.com/buying_images_subscription

[luissantos84]

Good timing   but will it work?

not there.. is the one that got no review and 25$ right?

[njnightsky]

HOpe it works have not had one sale there.

[Fotonaut]

I�m leaving. Don't like subscription models. Didn't even get advance notice.

[Perry]

Good timing   but will it work?

Where can the info be found?

[Magnum]

Good timing  but will it work?

Where can the info be found?

http://www.mostphotos.com/buying_images_subscription

[FD]

"as low as 0.19 �" - I developed an allergy to that kind of sentences. Another one bites the dust.
Update: checked the forums - nothing about it. Also no info on what the contributor's share will be on subs. Obviously, this has been introduced bei Nacht und Nebel. I'm pissed off since my images were there full size as a way of backup, and they seem to undercut ShutterStock.

[Fotonaut]

I also like "our HUGE database with millions of images." Plural.

[FD]

Good timing  but will it work?

They undercut the SS subs plan 199eu/25 a day by a 199eu/30 a day subs plan. What's more, they did it totally under the radar. I didn't upload my full size 24MP stuff there to be dowloaded under a subs plan. What evil devil stinged them?

Update: I started a new thread on their (dead) forum under "subscriptions".

Undercutting my best selling microstock site SS by a subs plan of 30 full size images for 199eu is not why I uploaded my largest size images here. Subs sites always get my smaller sizes. Introducing this drastic change apparently under the radar is not a very fair thing to do. I expect at least to know what the contributor share on a subs sale will be and if we will be able to opt out.

[microstockphoto.co.uk]

Well, at least microstock isn't boring: there's something new every day.

I'm waiting to "know what the contributor share on a subs sale will be" as well before deciding whether it's good or not.

If .19 � is what we earn - and they base their earnings on unused subscriptions only - then it's the usual $.25 (more or less): not great but not even a new low. If we get less that that, it's a different thing.

Of course SS is better because it's realistically possible to grow from base $.25.

And I agree they should inform us before changing terms.

[madelaide]

There we go again, selling cheap images ever cheaper.  How can single EUR25 images compete with subs it the same site? It'll be like Crestock. 

Time to leave.

[FD]

Time to leave.

I am waiting for their reply on the opting-out and contributor share question. I used them for backup. It will teach me a lesson again : don't waste time uploading to low-sellers or beginners. Plus, they never keep their promises, none of them, changing goalposts midway.

[FD]

If .19 � is what we earn - and they base their earnings on unused subscriptions only - then it's the usual $.25 (more or less): not great but not even a new low. If we get less that that, it's a different thing.

I don't want to give away full 24MP sizes for 0.25$. Even 0.25$ is too low, that's why we boycotted TS. There are sites around that don't have subs and a 2$ web size price (60% for me). I don't want to undercut those.

Update: apparently I stirred them up:
Arian:

I will type a long and detailed answer/explanation in this thread, first thing tomorrow.

[microstockphoto.co.uk]

I never resized for subs so it's not an issue for me.

But I understand that other people do, so I agree they should allow to opt out of subs or charge higher prices for greater sizes or limit subs to a small size... otherwise - for those concerned - it's easy to delete port (which doesn't sell at full price anyway) and reupload at lower res for subs, given there are no reviews.

Thanks for asking on their forum, I am waiting for their reply.

[FD]

Update, after the long reply of Arian.

1) No mentioning of opting out the subs so your largest sizes there will be available for HeroTurko at a price lower than at Shutterstock. No mentioning of extended licenses, so buyers can do all they want with the images "as low as 0.19euro".

2) The plan clearly hasn't been thought through, as they will calculate your subs share after the month passed by. A scheme that proved unworkable. In the worst case you'll get 11 cents or so. Considering all the glitches on MP in the past, I don't think they can handle the bookkeeping well.

I also politely expressed my disgust about the fact that this major policy change was introduced overnight without any warning or preliminary discussion.

I don't like to cannibalize my sales at much better paying sites so I deleted my images there quickly. Enough time wasted there. Good luck on MP.

[Arian]

Like I have said the subscription plans are something we pushed online yesterday for testing. No fuzz or marketing has been made.

Now that we have seen the reactions we decided to give an option out setting.
The setting can be found in the setting page → site → subscription settings

This is how we always have worked, constantly developing new stuff. We are always open for feedbacks and we change and modify stuff to find a balance.  It is not an easy task to keep so many members happy.

[Phil]

bit of an odd one, we'll be midstock and we'll offer subs... too low for me, I opted out (thanks for providing the ability to do so)

[Red Dove]

Another site reduced to sweeping the crumbs from the table.......If I had ever sold anything there I'd be bothered.

[FD]

bit of an odd one, we'll be midstock and we'll offer subs... too low for me, I opted out (thanks for providing the ability to do so)

Too late for me. After the initial answer (no opting out) I deleted all my shots. I didn't want my full sizes up for grabs on Heroturko. The small web size was a good idea. The subs were not, very badly thought through. They should have put it up for discussion so we could have presented the numbers of the main subs sites, numbers they didn't know apparently. They are a bunch of nice guys but they seem to lack knowledge of the industry. We could have helped them on the forum.

It was a good backup site actually. But personally, I lost my trust. If they can pull this trick overnight bei Nacht und Nebel, they can do it again. I don't plan to reupload all soon wasting many hours again. The MP-Index has always been a bad idea. I had 3 sales there in the beginning when everybody had about the same Index. After that, the feelgood, hugging and vengeance clubs took over, bypassing commercial value.  You can't mix a Flickr approach with a commercial approach.

[madelaide]

Is subs there already in action?

[RacePhoto]

Is subs there already in action?

Not sure from the forum but thanks to the people who wrote, we now have an opt out button.

Adrian: "Like I have said the subscription plans are something we just put online for testing. No fuzz or marketing has been made. Now that we have seen the reactions we decided to give the option out setting.
The setting can be found in the setting page → site → subscription settings"

I'm out and it was easy. Most of the photos I have there are nowhere else. One is on StockXpert/ThinkStock for some strange reason?

I hate to take this to some other level, but individal image Opt. in would be the answer, with the default being, nothing is included until we click to allow it. Default in programs like this should always be automatically not included and the option to get in as a choice. Not the reverse that we see on the sites, everything in, unless we catch it and opt out.

[sharpshot]

Their buyer seems to of left, so I don't know if this will make much difference but they have made a mess of it.  Such a shame from a site that was different and might of had a chance a few years ago, if they had just tried harder to market it and keep contributors interested.

[Dreamframer]

Nothing surprises me anymore. I think everyone will go down with their prices. It's just a matter of time. There is no guarantied minimum price for images. Which means we sold our souls by starting microstock business.

[Arian]

The reason why we haven't emailed our members about the subscription yet, is because the sub plans has been in a beta version. The reason why we made it visible online was to see the reactions of our photographers and see how it works in reality. This strategi has worked out well because we've already tweaked it a lot since we launched a couple of days ago.

Must also point out that we haven't made it visible to our customers yet, no marketing has been made and therefore not a single subscription has been sold yet.

Singel purchasers and subscription customers are two different type of buyers. If we don�t have subscription plans we are loosing subscription customers, easy as that.

* The deal is still at 50% on all sales, including the subscriptions.
* The minimum limit on 10� to make a withdrawal is still the same.
* The setting to option out from the subscription is also available.


-----------------------------------------------------------------

Like we all know there are new stock agencies launching every day. Most of them don't survive long. What makes a site survive is either a LOT of money or the site must have something unique. Mostphotos has survived because of the business model that stands out in the industry and we are working further on that.
The MP crew does't have a lot of money, but what we have are skilled developers and we are using that to our advantage. Marketing will come, but when the site is ready.

[UncleGene]

Arian, could you please explain what is the exact meaning of "high resolution" in "Remove my high resolution pictures from subscription plan"?

[Arian]

When you opt out, your images will be excluded and will not be available for sale via subscriptions. Both high res and low res will be gone.
If a customer has bought subscription he wont even be able to see your images when he is loged in, because you have excluded them. We dont want to confuse the buyers with "you can download this but not this". When the buyer buys a subscription we'll only show the images available on subscription.

The customers can buy your images via creditcard when they are logged out. Just like the way it used to be. Excluding your images from the subscription means that your target customers will mainly be one time customers, dropping in via Google.

You will definitely make a higher revenue on Mostphotos if you are a part of the subscriptions. Because that way you will target two type of customers, singel buyers and regular customers.

/Arian

[Magnum]

Change that subscription tab,  It�s really unclear.

[madelaide]

Personally I think it should be ok to offer a choice of viewing other images not available as subs, if the buyer wishes to see more.

Glad to see an opt-out was given. Thank you.

[RacePhoto]

I opted out. Not that I have anything that anyone wants except some esoteric artsy shots that no micro site would take, and too small for Alamy.

Now that I read the plan again, and it looks familiar, I'm wondering if I shouldn't give Mostphotos a chance with the Sub plan at 50%?

Subscription commission:

Subscription price / amount of sold images * 50% commission

For example if a buyer buys a subscription for 200� / month.
During his first month he downloads 10 images from 10 different photographers.
The commission to each photographer will then be:
200� / 10 images * 50% commission

That is 10� to each photographer.

The commission is in other words an amount that is affected by the number of pictures the purchaser downloads during the subscription month.

What's the minimum? Wouldn't everyone like to believe that someone will pay 200� and only download 10 images.

[Arian]

Hello RacePhoto!
It depends on how many images a photo-buyer will download. Statistics (from other agencies with the same prices) shows that in average photographers will earn 0,3 �/image from a subscription plan.

[oboy]

I�m leaving. Don't like subscription models. Didn't even get advance notice.

It is possible to opt out. The setting can be found in the Settings → Site → Subscription plans.

[RacePhoto]

Hello RacePhoto!
It depends on how many images a photo-buyer will download. Statistics (from other agencies with the same prices) shows that in average photographers will earn 0,3 �/image from a subscription plan.

Darn good if that holds true.

On the other hand, if someone buys the Pro plan and downloads 50 images a day, the photographers will get 13c ( 0.1 �) per download. Medium plan isn't much different at .11 �/image commission or 15 cents.

0,3 �/image is $4.18 which would be very nice. Heck 1 �/image would be better than most micro sites at $1.39 a download.

Something to watch. That and sales. If sales pick up, I'm sure uploads will pick up.

Don't get me wrong. When I first saw this type of plan where downloads and revenue sharing was distributed according to sales, I thought it was interesting. Then there was an uprising and the mob with pitchforks and flares had it struck down, before it ever went into effect on the major site that proposed it. This should be a good review of whether it works in the real world. I can't spend statistics, or hypothetical percentages, only real earnings. 

[Arian]

Well said RacePhoto!
I believe too that only time can tell how it will work out.
In the future the will probably be some tweeking of prices and limits/day, but we have too test this model to know how to tweek it.
We need Mostphotos to survive and step up to the next level and in order to do that we have to beat some competitors on the way and bring new ways and ideas into this business.

It is said that one of the keys to success is to constantly changing and improving. But of course we can't make it without the help of our members. 

[jm]

Old thread!

I believe too that only time can tell how it will work out.

Time did tell. Unfortunately I didn't know about opt out possibility. Yesterday I sold vector for .11 EUR.

[Karimala]

Whatever is going on at Mostphotos, it's good.  I was reaching payout about twice a year before the switch, but lately it's been at least once a month. 

[luissantos84]

Whatever is going on at Mostphotos, it's good.  I was reaching payout about twice a year before the switch, but lately it's been at least once a month. 

I agree but the min payout is 10EUR

[Karimala]

   Yeh, it's still not much money, but 10EUR once a month is a whole lot better than twice a year!  LOL

[luissantos84]

  Yeh, it's still not much money, but 10EUR once a month is a whole lot better than twice a year!  LOL

thats right, I love their backup too, I am there since May 11 and have 25 sales for 55EUR, so not bad, actually very nice comparing to a lot of small agencies

[jm]

 I hope I will not reach 10 euro payout by selling of 91 vectors. 

[sharpshot]

I think my average subs commission there is much higher than most sites.  They do things differently but it works for me.  Not a big earning site but I still like them.

[Carl]

I choose to allow my images to be available to the subscription buyers and evaluate after a year.

[THP Creative]

Just to revive this thread - is anyone selling ANYTHING here at mostphotos?  I think I have had 8 sales last year (annoyingly just about .80 short of a payout!), but they are just so far and few between, even with subscriptions.

[sharpshot]

I had 40 sales in 2011.  I'm also getting lots of referral sales.  Selling subs and lower sizes has made a big difference.  It's still a low earning site but I'm sticking with them.

[THP Creative]

wow sharpshot, I'm glad to hear that for you at least its going ok, especially "lots of referral sales".  So others must be selling alright as well.

I hope 2012 picks up for my portfolio with them