Author Topic: 123RF Serves Termination Notice to Pixmac (Read 37318 times)

zager · « **Reply #30 on:** March 10, 2011, 09:24 »

As I'm thinking about that all. It seems that some people don't care too much about the truth and those people are easily to be influenced by a public opinion (either valid or invalid). The dark side of this is that whatever Pixmac does, still is a bunch of the bad guys, because somebody told that somewhere.

Pixmac tries to generate money to it's sourcing agencies together with their contributors. Fixes/explains any errors in it's complex systems but that's not enough. The best thing would be to erase Pixmac out o the world, am I right? Not because Pixmac made a mistake, but because Pixmac can make more mistakes in future! And if we burn Pixmac, maybe there will remain only the agencies, that are fair to the contributors, never do a mistake and those that are open to them, and only those that answer every email and increase revenue to us contributors every year...

lisafx · « **Reply #31 on:** March 10, 2011, 09:40 »

I got the same letter from 123RF. We are being told two completely different things. Anglee from 123 tells us Pixmac is no longer a partner, but Eric at support tells us something completely different.

@zager - I would really like to believe you that there is no problem with Pixmac. My goal is to make money and removing a legitimate agency that sells my images and pays me acceptably for that is not in my best interest. But please don't blame contributors for being concerned after three of your major affiliates have severed their relationships with you claiming some sort of fraud.

If you really haven't been caching and reselling images without payment to your partners or contributors, then you need to work it out with DT, FT, and 123, because that's the rumor, and it is pretty persuasive IMO.

zager · « **Reply #33 on:** March 10, 2011, 10:29 »

The questions circling in my head again and again are:

- What should I do next?
- How can I change the perception of Pixmac? Is there a way or not?

It seems, most people don't care that we've been honest since beginning, effective, working hard, being open, innovative, fast growing, selling better than any newcomer of our age/size, increasing revenue split instead of decreasing it, etc. Part of the innovations is surely exploring new approaches and that brings challenges. But isn't that great that we're going to do that for all other agencies to get inspired?

m@m · « **Reply #34 on:** March 10, 2011, 10:31 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 10, 2011, 09:40

I got the same letter from 123RF. We are being told two completely different things. Anglee from 123 tells us Pixmac is no longer a partner, but Eric at support tells us something completely different.

@zager - I would really like to believe you that there is no problem with Pixmac. My goal is to make money and removing a legitimate agency that sells my images and pays me acceptably for that is not in my best interest. But please don't blame contributors for being concerned after three of your major affiliates have severed their relationships with you claiming some sort of fraud.

If you really haven't been caching and reselling images without payment to your partners or contributors, then you need to work it out with Dreamstime, Fotolia, and 123, because that's the rumor, and it is pretty persuasive IMO.

Very well said Lisa, those are my feelings and observations as well, thanks for this post.

dnf-style · « **Reply #36 on:** March 10, 2011, 12:58 »

I believe it would be fair if Alex could/would confirm this instead of letting you guys to think there is some dishonesty of Pixmac behind the termination.

Alex, I know you as an honest open guy so I do not get it when you are so not transparent about the reason 123RF is ending the coorporation.
It makes me think there are no mistakes meade by Pixmac but 123RF is affraid their contributors will leave because they believe Pixmac should burn.
Witchhunt is one of the first terms that spings to mind.

Frenk

mantonino · « **Reply #37 on:** March 10, 2011, 13:15 »

I disagree with this. I think after what happened with Bigstock people are a bit freaked. I like money. I will be uploading my 4000 images directly to Pixmac so they can represent my work. I may be the naive one of this group but I'm going to be the guinea pig, I guess. I think things have domino'd out of control, I tend to believe people and I do agree that at this point it's a bit of a witchhunt.

lisafx · « **Reply #38 on:** March 10, 2011, 13:26 »

Thanks Zager, and Merja for your detailed accounts of what's going on. Hope you will attempt to understand the concerns of contributors. We are given very little information about where and how our pictures are being represented, so we tend to be very wary.

I won't rule out uploading directly to Pixmac myself, like Mantonino is planning. Just want to do some more research and lay this issue to rest first.

And Zager, you are right, it would be nice if the agencies who have stopped their partnerships with you would be straightforward about why so we have more than guesswork and rumors to base our decisions on.

zager · « **Reply #39 on:** March 10, 2011, 15:19 »

Thank you mantonino and lisafx for giving us a chance. I'll try to do everything to work out this difficult situation.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #40 on:** March 10, 2011, 15:41 »

We have decided to join Pixmac after a productive and satisfying discussion with their management. They seem to be very open about issues and genuinely interested to treat the contributors fairly. The minimum image commission now is fixed to 25 cents which is low but not that unusual in the industry. Here is an interview with me on their blog: http://blog.pixmac.com/3132/elena-elisseeva-professional-microstock-producer/

And remember, the other agencies are their direct competitors. They may not be exactly 100% objective and honest in this case.

gostwyck · « **Reply #41 on:** March 10, 2011, 15:56 »

^^^ Very interesting blog Elena.

How do you 'join' Pixmac directly? I don't see any links to sell directly with them, much less any detail of commissions or ToS.

gostwyck · « **Reply #43 on:** March 10, 2011, 16:32 »

^^^ Thanks for that Zager, it does look interesting.

I'm still a little baffled why you don't just go for it and simply become a 'full-on' microstock agency. That's where the real money is surely? You appear to already have the staff, the offices, the hardware and the development expertise to make it happen. If you are experts at SEO and also have unique access to particular markets, as previously stated, then that can only help not hinder.

The more significant contributors, like Elena, that you are representing the more confidence that others will have to trust you and believe that you can build the sales to make it worthwhile uploading.

visceralimage · « **Reply #45 on:** March 10, 2011, 17:19 »

I, for one, appreciate that someone has come forward and admitted something wrong was done, it was Pixmac fault and they are willing to own the responsibility for this error. I got really tired of the "smokin mirror" routine by Zager saying it was a misunderstanding. "Bullsh*t"

I have made plenty of mistakes in my life; I plan to make a few more. When I make a mistake, I am honest and admit my mistake and take ownership of that mistake and attempt to make it right. I don't hide behind legal-mumble-jumble saying I can not comment because of pending legal problems. The truth will come out, admitting the truth will not hurt any legal case. You want our images; then show us the respect and stop the "smokin mirrors" routine. I am willing to trust someone that will be transparent; even if they have made mistakes in the past. I assume you are human, I expect you to muck-up once in-a-while or have an employee that mucks up.

Remember, these images are our life-blood; they are how we feed ourselves and our family. If someone steals them, we have lost everything.

lisafx · « **Reply #46 on:** March 10, 2011, 18:26 »

I feel like Zager has been pretty up-front and honest here. I think the smoke and mirrors are coming from other directions.

cathyslife · « **Reply #47 on:** March 10, 2011, 18:41 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 10, 2011, 18:26

I feel like Zager has been pretty up-front and honest here. I think the smoke and mirrors are coming from other directions.

And that's pretty much the problem...we are scattered all over the country and the world and are only connected by our computers...it's pretty difficult to know what is the truth and what is smoke and mirrors.

From reply #32 above, from Zager:

Quote

Well, as I've explained in our company blog (http://blog.pixmac.com/2394/explanation-of-single-purchase/). The reasons for all the three agencies were different.

Unfortunately, I can’t mention the company names, due to the nature of the legal processes. But the information was in the blogpost above. This is how it all happened:

As for the first agency that discontinued contract with us, the reason was that both companies are competitors in a certain country. And as we acquired the photographers content from a closing company in that country the situation got difficult with the first agency.

The second agency made an allegation after that independently. And we're working that out with them = explaining everything.

The third agency was a result of domino effect. In other words a mixture of loud photographers on forums, unclear information at that time etc. It was a security step on their side as they don’t want to loose photographers (And I understand that). There was no other issue (technical or legal) such as the allegation of the second agency because of which it all happened. We are currently in the termination period with the third company.

No other partner (out of 20+) terminated a contract with us.

If everything is above board, why are their legal processes going on in which you can't mention their names? If it were all a misunderstanding, there would be NO legal processes, would there? Would agencies really invest money in a legal battle if they knew it was just a misunderstanding?

Of course everyone has the right to believe what they want. Since I am never going to see the actual court documents, I prefer to err on the side of caution, at this particular point in time. And just because Zager says it's all a misunderstanding here in this forum, I prefer to have a little more proof. But that's just me.

m@m · « **Reply #48 on:** March 10, 2011, 20:00 »

...and me!

Phil · « **Reply #49 on:** March 10, 2011, 21:05 »

Quote from: zager on March 10, 2011, 16:04

Quote from: gostwyck on March 10, 2011, 15:56
How do you 'join' Pixmac directly? I don't see any links to sell directly with them, much less any detail of commissions or ToS.

We're not hiring a lot of photographers. Our primary focus is marketing, selling and perfect customer experience. On the other hand, we're working on a section to introduce contributors to Pixmac if they are interested.

This is some basic info:
http://blog.pixmac.com/2816/calling-all-photographers-submit-your-work-to-pixmac/

ToC:
http://blog.microstockgroup.com/major-press-release-from-pixmac-fairness-in-front/
http://www.pixmac.com/page/termsandconditions

Seems like every few months something problem pops up about pixmac (do a search on 'pixmac'), trust takes a long time to rebuild especially when new problems keep coming up

(although that's better than istock's almost daily issue LOL)

Commissions are different between the two docs you posted

You're T&C still talks exclusivity which you say in one of the docs is Exclusivity is something like DRM in music. It doesn’t work long term.
"We’re trying to become a true Open Company" good and thankfully you've got rid of the $0.02 commissions but "Subscription 30% ($0.25+) 40% ($0.25+)" implies that higher amounts are possible for subscription sales??, however based on your front page pricing, artists cannot recieve the more than the $0.25 minimum???
still have credits earned expire in 1 year so if you havent made payout too bad you lose your earnings.
etc etc

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: 123RF Serves Termination Notice to Pixmac (Read 37318 times)

zager

zager

zager

zager

zager

zager

lisafx

zager

zager

m@m

Penguin

dnf-style

mantonino

lisafx

zager

Elenathewise

gostwyck

zager

gostwyck

zager

visceralimage

lisafx

cathyslife

m@m

Phil

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors