Author Topic: All complain about Fotolia $ 1. But Shutterstock sells but also for just $ 0.25? (Read 9083 times)

Maximilian · « **on:** April 30, 2014, 13:57 »

All complain about Fotolia $ 1. But Shutterstock sells but also for just $ 0.25?
Someone explain me - whats the different thing with these two. I also hate to give my images in highest size for 0,25-0,35$.
?

Ron · « **Reply #1 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:02 »

Volume.

Plus an EL cost 80 euro not 1 dollar.

Mantis · « **Reply #2 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:08 »

Quote from: Maximilian on April 30, 2014, 13:57

All complain about Fotolia $ 1. But Shutterstock sells but also for just $ 0.25?
Someone explain me - whats the different thing with these two. I also hate to give my images in highest size for 0,25-0,35$.
?

I made $67 on FT for April. I had a BME on SS with the same portfolio of 2800 images @ over 14 times that amount thanks to od's, el's and single downloads.

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #3 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:08 »

1$ is what the customer pays, not what you get

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #5 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:11 »

Fotolia sells to the buyer for $1 each. SS doesn't do that. $249 for a month's subscription or $29 for TWO images on demand - that's $14.50 apiece, not $1

SS doesn't pay me 25 cents royalty each subscription sale - I earn 38 cents. The more you sell the more you earn, even on subscriptions.

Only about 36% of my earnings last month at SS came from subscription sales. If anyone were daft enough to sell via DPC, 100% of their sales would be subscriiptions (I know there's Fotolia, assuming anything except video sells there in the future if DPC were to get going).

Try to get your information straight before you start an anti-subscription thread. This has been gone over many times. Lots of people don't like subscriptions.

For me, now the opt out has been offered (although it should really be an opt in), the big issue is the very very low entry point for the DPC - $10 versus $249. It's being offered to people who buy infrequently (and never), NOT to volume buyers where you have a prayer of making the subscription model work

Ron · « **Reply #6 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:13 »

Quote from: MatHayward on April 30, 2014, 14:10

Quote from: Ron on April 30, 2014, 14:02
Volume.

Plus an EL cost 80 euro not 1 dollar.

Right now only Standard licenses are available at DPC. Very soon an EL at DPC will be available for $50 with a $30 commission (60%) paid to the photographer.

-Mat

Thats not bad.

Mantis · « **Reply #7 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:15 »

Quote from: MatHayward on April 30, 2014, 14:10

Quote from: Ron on April 30, 2014, 14:02
Volume.

Plus an EL cost 80 euro not 1 dollar.

Right now only Standard licenses are available at DPC. Very soon an EL at DPC will be available for $50 with a $30 commission (60%) paid to the photographer.

-Mat

While this is probably a step in the right direction why don't they just integrate this into Fotolia? It's not a big enough hook for me to opt back in to FT, and mainly because I just don't trust them, and they've earned that mistrust.

robhainer · « **Reply #8 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:22 »

Except it undercuts the cost of an EL on Fotolia unless you're at the lowest level.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #9 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:26 »

Quote from: Ron on April 30, 2014, 14:13

Quote from: MatHayward on April 30, 2014, 14:10
Quote from: Ron on April 30, 2014, 14:02
Volume.

Plus an EL cost 80 euro not 1 dollar.

Right now only Standard licenses are available at DPC. Very soon an EL at DPC will be available for $50 with a $30 commission (60%) paid to the photographer.

-Mat

Thats not bad.

That's a sop. How many ELs do you think DPC will produce compared with the number of 25c commissions?

Mantis · « **Reply #10 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:27 »

Quote from: robhainer on April 30, 2014, 14:22

Except it undercuts the cost of an EL on Fotolia unless you're at the lowest level.

Well, to a couple of other posts on here, I don't recall when my last EL from Fotolia was.

Ron · « **Reply #11 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:28 »

I am just saying the royalty is not bad. Nothing more, nothing less.

bolsher · « **Reply #12 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:33 »

Quote from: Maximilian on April 30, 2014, 13:57

All complain about Fotolia $ 1. But Shutterstock sells but also for just $ 0.25?
Someone explain me - whats the different thing with these two. I also hate to give my images in highest size for 0,25-0,35$.
?

Big mistake: Sub= Buyer download what he don t need because he has a sub, daily limited. So he download 25 images.
dollarphotoclub: NO SUB! He bought for 10 or 99 dollar a package, download WHAT HE NEEDS!!!, ergo we can't live from the amount. Also Dollarphotoclub get the buyers from the other agencies real subs.

And i don t want to talk about the "Mini-Sub" at Fotolia. where Fotolia earns about 90%, thats another story...

fujiko · « **Reply #13 on:** April 30, 2014, 14:55 »

Quote from: Maximilian on April 30, 2014, 13:57

All complain about Fotolia $ 1. But Shutterstock sells but also for just $ 0.25?
Someone explain me - whats the different thing with these two. I also hate to give my images in highest size for 0,25-0,35$.
?

Shutterstock is a high volume subscription service with a moderately high price for a huge amount of images.
DPC is a low entry price concurrent on demand service priced like a subscription and promoted to be cheaper than Sutterstock subscription. On DPC own words, Shutterstock is the expensive one here.

cthoman · « **Reply #14 on:** April 30, 2014, 16:09 »

Aren't both of them low? If I could change both I would.

max headroom · « **Reply #15 on:** May 03, 2014, 16:35 »

Quote from: MatHayward on April 30, 2014, 14:10

Quote from: Ron on April 30, 2014, 14:02
Volume.

Plus an EL cost 80 euro not 1 dollar.

Right now only Standard licenses are available at DPC. Very soon an EL at DPC will be available for $50 with a $30 commission (60%) paid to the photographer.

-Mat

Then they will change their name as "50 Dollars Photo Club" right?

Goofy · « **Reply #16 on:** May 03, 2014, 18:52 »

Don't zap the newbie too hard- noticed a negative 2. Fair question to ask if they truly don't know. It is the season pro's roles to educate this newbie which I think they are now much more informed by the comments so far...

qwerty · « **Reply #17 on:** May 03, 2014, 19:14 »

with subscription model at shutterstock you get additional volume as people want to get value and fill their plate from the all you can eat buffet (well 25 a day) So you get additional sales because people are committed to creating "value" from the $249 they just spent. + most serious microstockers at on 50% higher due to progressing levels

The dollar club is basically an on demand full size for $1. + fotolia also pick up the membership fee ontop. Volume may go up a little but I can't see it offsetting the massive discount offered. Full size sells for 6-20 times this on most other microstock sites.

Bad both ways.

Subcription buyer can probably buy all the photos they need at lower cost. = Less sales for contributors
Credit buyer can buy photos at 1/6th the cost. = substantially less revenue.

Benefits for Fotolia
Gain market share back to keep afloat
Increase margins by effectively reducing commissions to contributors
Keep to pocket 100% of the "membership fee"

Benefits to contributors
yet to see any

gillian vann · « **Reply #18 on:** May 03, 2014, 19:32 »

Quote from: MatHayward on April 30, 2014, 14:10

Quote from: Ron on April 30, 2014, 14:02
Volume.

Plus an EL cost 80 euro not 1 dollar.

Right now only Standard licenses are available at DPC. Very soon an EL at DPC will be available for $50 with a $30 commission (60%) paid to the photographer.

-Mat

define "very soon"

fotorob · « **Reply #19 on:** May 04, 2014, 01:16 »

Quote from: qwerty on May 03, 2014, 19:14

Benefits for Fotolia
[...]
Increase margins by effectively reducing commissions to contributors

That's not true compared to the subscription model of Fotolia. They would earn more with their subs programm or "mini subs" model than with the DPC if it comes to high volume buyers.

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #20 on:** May 04, 2014, 02:56 »

Quote from: fotorob on May 04, 2014, 01:16

Quote from: qwerty on May 03, 2014, 19:14
Benefits for Fotolia
[...]
Increase margins by effectively reducing commissions to contributors

That's not true compared the the subscription model of Fotolia. They would earn more with their subs programm or "mini subs" model than with the DPC if it comes to high volume buyers.

Is it written "I am a professional stock photographer" under your avatar?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #21 on:** May 04, 2014, 04:26 »

Quote from: fotorob on May 04, 2014, 01:16

Quote from: qwerty on May 03, 2014, 19:14
Benefits for Fotolia
[...]
Increase margins by effectively reducing commissions to contributors

That's not true compared the the subscription model of Fotolia. They would earn more with their subs programm or "mini subs" model than with the DPC if it comes to high volume buyers.

that is why you have over 12k files at DPC and that is also why this industry won't go anywhere (for contributors)

maybe I am missing something but the person giving me a minus isn't thinking well, Robert said DPC is undercutting FT like I have said a few times and even made maths in a topic somewhere AND that is why I said why keeping your stuff in there?

dirkr · « **Reply #22 on:** May 04, 2014, 04:29 »

Quote from: fotorob on May 04, 2014, 01:16

Quote from: qwerty on May 03, 2014, 19:14
Benefits for Fotolia
[...]
Increase margins by effectively reducing commissions to contributors

That's not true compared the the subscription model of Fotolia. They would earn more with their subs programm or "mini subs" model than with the DPC if it comes to high volume buyers.

Why does this post get so many negative votes?

Robert is right, DPC is not about FT's margin, but about undercutting the on demand business of their competitors. Which is even worse.

But don't let the facts get in your way...

I would love to see the discussions about this staying factually correct, there is enough to complain about DPC, adding wrong statement to the rightful complaints makes the whole discussion look ill-informed and makes it an easy target for those who want to defend FT.

roede-orm · « **Reply #23 on:** May 04, 2014, 04:35 »

Quote from: dirkr on May 04, 2014, 04:29

Quote from: fotorob on May 04, 2014, 01:16
Quote from: qwerty on May 03, 2014, 19:14
Benefits for Fotolia
[...]
Increase margins by effectively reducing commissions to contributors

That's not true compared the the subscription model of Fotolia. They would earn more with their subs programm or "mini subs" model than with the DPC if it comes to high volume buyers.

Why does this post get so many negative votes?

Robert is right, DPC is not about FT's margin, but about undercutting the on demand business of their competitors. Which is even worse.

But don't let the facts get in your way...

I would love to see the discussions about this staying factually correct, there is enough to complain about DPC, adding wrong statement to the rightful complaints makes the whole discussion look ill-informed and makes it an easy target for those who want to defend FT.

Totally agree to this! The situation is not better when it is reflected wrong. Thank you Robert for the correction!

cobalt · « **Reply #24 on:** May 04, 2014, 04:38 »

I agree, if you just look at subscription packages the DPC will share every dollar spent with the artist, while if a customer buys a 200 dollar monthly package at a normal subs agency they will only use a fraction of their possible downloads. So the majority of the money goes to the agency, the artists take no part in that. Any downloads not used cannot be transferred into the next month. They are lost for the artist.

If Fotolia had informed me in advance and given me the option to individually opt in files for 1 dollar sales, I would probably have added some files. But it would have been low sellers or lower quality files.

When istock started the Thinkstock program the exclusives were able to individually opt in files.

The problem with the 1 dollar club is that there is no upsell potential. 1 dollar unlimited (soon maybe some limits) is a high risk venture for me and threatens the files I am offering on Fotolia (and other agencies) for higher prices.

The worst part is to just take my content without informing me and throwing it into a new business model without consent.

ogm · « **Reply #25 on:** May 04, 2014, 10:16 »

Quote from: cobalt on May 04, 2014, 04:38

If Fotolia had informed me in advance and given me the option to individually opt in files for 1 dollar sales, I would probably have added some files. But it would have been low sellers or lower quality files.

Yes, absolutely agree! It have to be a choice of every one contributor, for himself! Me and nobody other, on behalf of me can decide, how could I sell my files!

Batman · « **Reply #26 on:** May 06, 2014, 12:18 »

Quote from: Maximilian on April 30, 2014, 13:57

All complain about Fotolia $ 1. But Shutterstock sells but also for just $ 0.25?
Someone explain me - whats the different thing with these two. I also hate to give my images in highest size for 0,25-0,35$.
?

Difference is SS doesn't sell for $ 0.25 your point is a mistake and not true. DPC sells for $1 pays small percentage. They didn't ask they just started it and pretend it wasn't FT. They only add opt out after protest when FT DPC got caught lying trying to cheat us.

SS I knew I was joined up with sub site. I get $ 0.38 minimum for download much more for od and single. What's your point?

Maximilian · « **Reply #27 on:** May 06, 2014, 12:58 »

I am annoyed of course. I as a supplier would simply ignored. But that's not the point I have here on the subject.

The point is, the price paid by a customer. The share of sales I get. And this is based on the maximum resolution that I offer.

38 cents .. and less ..

Regardless of the current debate, which will be ruined by DPC prices ...
My picture for a few cents in full resolution. ppfff

So what i say is true: yes ss sells the images for 0,25€ and less in FULL SIZE.
"Download... including access to all JPEG and Vector sizes!"
price: €0.27/image and less

What I basically it does not fit, the full resolution at low price.
example: My image on a 4x4 meters Poster for 25 cents ..

luissantos84 · « **Reply #28 on:** May 06, 2014, 13:01 »

how long have you been contributing to SS Max?

Ron · « **Reply #29 on:** May 06, 2014, 13:03 »

Actually Max is right. They do sell for +/- 25 cent. Just calculate the sub pricing.

Maximilian · « **Reply #30 on:** May 06, 2014, 13:04 »

only 4 weeks. The Food for Thought was a thread in this forum. this is about: Do you reduce your images for Shutterstock? Many do so for reasons of acceptability, or even the fact that you will receive the same amount for a smaller image anyway.

ShadySue · « **Reply #31 on:** May 06, 2014, 17:30 »

Quote from: Maximilian on May 06, 2014, 13:04

only 4 weeks. The Food for Thought was a thread in this forum. this is about: Do you reduce your images for Shutterstock? Many do so for reasons of acceptability, or even the fact that you will receive the same amount for a smaller image anyway.

I've been seeing a different side of this just recently, having always thought as you set out above.

Your/my photo could be a double page spread in a newspaper or magazine and be in a bin very shortly afterwards.
Your/my tiny image could be on the web for many years. Sure, some sites refresh their images regularly, but you might be surprised how many don't.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #32 on:** May 06, 2014, 18:08 »

Quote from: Maximilian on May 06, 2014, 13:04

only 4 weeks. The Food for Thought was a thread in this forum. this is about: Do you reduce your images for Shutterstock? Many do so for reasons of acceptability, or even the fact that you will receive the same amount for a smaller image anyway.

You have to understand that most buyers buy lots of images simply BECAUSE they can download 25 images / day. That doesn't mean every downloaded image will be used. It could end up as 'one of many choices' and may eventually not be used at all. With the more expensive credit downloads, buyers will make more conscious decisions and then you image may not be downloaded at all. So in that respect, subscription royalties can be beneficial. They may be low, but these tiny royalties add up.

Then there is the occasional Extended License and multiple single downloads and On Demand sales that get us (decent) money.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: All complain about Fotolia $ 1. But Shutterstock sells but also for just $ 0.25? (Read 9083 times)

Maximilian

Ron

Mantis

Beppe Grillo

MatHayward

Jo Ann Snover

Ron

Mantis

robhainer

BaldricksTrousers

Mantis

Ron

bolsher

fujiko

cthoman

max headroom

Goofy

qwerty

gillian vann

fotorob

Beppe Grillo

luissantos84

dirkr

roede-orm

cobalt

ogm

Batman

Maximilian

luissantos84

Ron

Maximilian

ShadySue

Noedelhap

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors