MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Alamy prices vary so much & no data on iQ sale size  (Read 15106 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 27, 2012, 22:08 »
0
Alamy shows prices in $ for royalty free sales, but when I get a sale, the price shown in my sales report has (so far) never matched the displayed prices? Why is that?

So today I got a sale for the maximum size of an image for $200 (gross) but the site says it should cost $315. A few weeks ago, I sold something listed at $190 but the sale was for $152 (from which their 60.80 commission is deducted)

Do they just discount images for big customers? I thought that distributor sales would be shown as such and there's nothing indicating that was the case here. The amounts are too large to be currency issues.

Perhaps someone who has sold royalty free there for longer than me (I was just RM while exclusive) can explain how this works...
« Last Edit: December 20, 2012, 03:23 by jsnover »


Ed

« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2012, 22:40 »
0
Do they just discount images for big customers?

You nailed it.  They discount sales for big customers.  The calculator on their site is way off and has been for quite a few years.  This is not just limited to RF but is also applicable to RM sales.

They are re-designing the site in 2013.  Not sure if they are going to change the calculator or not.

« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2012, 02:35 »
0
I thought that distributor sales would be shown as such and there's nothing indicating that was the case here. ..
It does say when it is distributor sales and you would know anyway as you get 40% commision instead of 60%

ShadySue

« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2012, 04:12 »
0
What they said ^^.  Plus:
http://www.alamy.com/forums/Default.aspx?g=posts&t=14470
and various previous threads.

Poncke

« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2012, 04:52 »
0
I had one RF sale and it matched with the prices on the image

ShadySue

« Reply #5 on: November 28, 2012, 05:04 »
0
I had one RF sale and it matched with the prices on the image
I think that I've read that the negotiations are more likely with RM.

Poncke

« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2012, 06:34 »
-1
I had one RF sale and it matched with the prices on the image
I think that I've read that the negotiations are more likely with RM.

Oh ok, sorry I missed the part about RM. Yeah, the calculator is very off for what I understand. Alamy is negotiating deals to get sales, so giving away RM images for peanuts.

ShadySue

« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2012, 08:20 »
0
I had one RF sale and it matched with the prices on the image
I think that I've read that the negotiations are more likely with RM.

Oh ok, sorry I missed the part about RM. Yeah, the calculator is very off for what I understand. Alamy is negotiating deals to get sales, so giving away RM images for peanuts.

No, I was wrong (sorry). I see the OP was referring to RF files, so I guess negotiations are open for all files.

« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2012, 11:40 »
0
Thanks for the answers.

There's no calculator that I see for RF sales - just a list of prices based on size. The sale for $200 represents a 37% discount on the "list" price, which is a pretty hefty whack. When you combine big discounts with long waits for balances to clear, it does take some of the fun out the whole process :)

The only other observation is that I have no idea what possible value the chart that shows you your "zooms" is. I don't think anything I've sold this year has ever shown up as a zoom. As long as there are sales, I don't much care, but someone must have thought people zooming images meant something.

« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2012, 12:06 »
0
People say they get about about 1 sale per 5 zooms on average, and that's how it's working out for me, with most sales having been zoomed within the last few months.

ShadySue

« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2012, 12:34 »
0
The only other observation is that I have no idea what possible value the chart that shows you your "zooms" is. I don't think anything I've sold this year has ever shown up as a zoom. As long as there are sales, I don't much care, but someone must have thought people zooming images meant something.
It's only a select group of Alamy's biggest buyers whose zooms show up in Measures.
Also now that they have a hover-enlarge thingy, zooms aren't so common.

It's a quaint site altogether.

« Reply #11 on: November 28, 2012, 13:14 »
0
...It's a quaint site altogether.

Quaint is good for a village tea shop, not so much for an internet storefront :)

« Reply #12 on: November 28, 2012, 13:28 »
0
Thanks for the answers.

There's no calculator that I see for RF sales - just a list of prices based on size. The sale for $200 represents a 37% discount on the "list" price, which is a pretty hefty whack. When you combine big discounts with long waits for balances to clear, it does take some of the fun out the whole process :) ...

Fun? doing stock? I must have missed out...

I had RF sales at Alamy for full resolution images with a discount of 95% - I kid you not!

aspp

« Reply #13 on: November 28, 2012, 13:44 »
0
The only other observation is that I have no idea what possible value the chart that shows you your "zooms" is. I don't think anything I've sold this year has ever shown up as a zoom. As long as there are sales, I don't much care, but someone must have thought people zooming images meant something.

Zooms vs views give us a cross section of how our images and their keywords are performing. Zooms vs views is used to calculate the CTR which affects our search positioning. So we have a sense of how well (or how badly) our images are performing. If our images are showing up in lots of views but not getting zoomed then either they have been over enthusiastically keyworded or else maybe the images would be better moved to a different pseudonym - rather than dragging down our CTR and affecting our search placement.

Quite often newspaper sales show up first as a zoom. If I see that something has been zoomed which is probably a newspaper or syndicated sale then searching for the pseudonym in Google News often finds the use long before it is ever reported.

Poncke

« Reply #14 on: November 28, 2012, 14:35 »
0
The only other observation is that I have no idea what possible value the chart that shows you your "zooms" is. I don't think anything I've sold this year has ever shown up as a zoom. As long as there are sales, I don't much care, but someone must have thought people zooming images meant something.

Zooms vs views give us a cross section of how our images and their keywords are performing. Zooms vs views is used to calculate the CTR which affects our search positioning. So we have a sense of how well (or how badly) our images are performing. If our images are showing up in lots of views but not getting zoomed then either they have been over enthusiastically keyworded or else maybe the images would be better moved to a different pseudonym - rather than dragging down our CTR and affecting our search placement.

Quite often newspaper sales show up first as a zoom. If I see that something has been zoomed which is probably a newspaper or syndicated sale then searching for the pseudonym in Google News often finds the use long before it is ever reported.
I think I have that keywording problem, but my days at Alamy have been counted already.

ShadySue

« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2012, 14:47 »
0
The only other observation is that I have no idea what possible value the chart that shows you your "zooms" is. I don't think anything I've sold this year has ever shown up as a zoom. As long as there are sales, I don't much care, but someone must have thought people zooming images meant something.

Zooms vs views give us a cross section of how our images and their keywords are performing. Zooms vs views is used to calculate the CTR which affects our search positioning. So we have a sense of how well (or how badly) our images are performing. If our images are showing up in lots of views but not getting zoomed then either they have been over enthusiastically keyworded or else maybe the images would be better moved to a different pseudonym - rather than dragging down our CTR and affecting our search placement.
...
QED - quaint.
They have a really weird system for ordering images in the search, but gives you the means to 'game' the system.

« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2012, 00:48 »
0
So today's gem is a sale of a small size - 758 x 505 pixels - royalty free (i.e. not Novel Use) for $7.83 - of which my 60% is $4.70. Not a horrible return for a regular license (i.e. not EL) but the "list" price on that size is $95! They're selling it at a 92% discount...

It beats the 31 cent royalty from Pocketstock, but that's really damning with faint praise.

ShadySue

« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2012, 04:11 »
0
So today's gem is a sale of a small size - 758 x 505 pixels - royalty free (i.e. not Novel Use) for $7.83 - of which my 60% is $4.70. Not a horrible return for a regular license (i.e. not EL) but the "list" price on that size is $95! They're selling it at a 92% discount...
OUCH!
Was that sold through the UK newspaper scheme? (that will show in the details).

Poncke

« Reply #18 on: December 05, 2012, 05:50 »
0
So today's gem is a sale of a small size - 758 x 505 pixels - royalty free (i.e. not Novel Use) for $7.83 - of which my 60% is $4.70. Not a horrible return for a regular license (i.e. not EL) but the "list" price on that size is $95! They're selling it at a 92% discount...

It beats the 31 cent royalty from Pocketstock, but that's really damning with faint praise.
isnt it 50% ?

ShadySue

« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2012, 08:23 »
0
So today's gem is a sale of a small size - 758 x 505 pixels - royalty free (i.e. not Novel Use) for $7.83 - of which my 60% is $4.70. Not a horrible return for a regular license (i.e. not EL) but the "list" price on that size is $95! They're selling it at a 92% discount...

It beats the 31 cent royalty from Pocketstock, but that's really damning with faint praise.
isnt it 50% ?
Not until 1st January. Currently it's 60% if the sale is directly from Alamy,and 40% is sold via a distributor (which you can opt out of).

« Reply #20 on: December 05, 2012, 11:00 »
0
So today's gem is a sale of a small size - 758 x 505 pixels - royalty free (i.e. not Novel Use) for $7.83 - of which my 60% is $4.70. Not a horrible return for a regular license (i.e. not EL) but the "list" price on that size is $95! They're selling it at a 92% discount...
OUCH!
Was that sold through the UK newspaper scheme? (that will show in the details).

I don't see anything referencing a UK newspaper scheme on the page "Summary of Items Sold". I find the maze of reports of what I've earned and which page has what detail very, very disorienting - so perhaps that's in some other report?

ShadySue

« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2012, 11:06 »
0
So today's gem is a sale of a small size - 758 x 505 pixels - royalty free (i.e. not Novel Use) for $7.83 - of which my 60% is $4.70. Not a horrible return for a regular license (i.e. not EL) but the "list" price on that size is $95! They're selling it at a 92% discount...
OUCH!
Was that sold through the UK newspaper scheme? (that will show in the details).

I don't see anything referencing a UK newspaper scheme on the page "Summary of Items Sold". I find the maze of reports of what I've earned and which page has what detail very, very disorienting - so perhaps that's in some other report?

No, it would be in the usage on that page.
Actually, looking at my own sales, my UK newspaper sales have all been higher than that. My low (sub $10 gross) sales are all 'editorial website' 1/4 page sales with a time of one week. One which popped in from yesterday is $27 gross, but with a time of one month.
Also some small sales can be reuses of the same photo, by the same company if RM - there's a discount for second and subsequent uses.

« Reply #22 on: December 05, 2012, 11:29 »
0
I don't see anything labeled "Usage" on the page www.alamy.com/stock-photography-contrib-sales-history.asp. It says Royalty Free in the license column and in the Details column:
 "1 MB
758 x 505 pixels
160 KB compressed"

Perhaps usage is only for RM sales? On my older (while exclusive) "Traditional License" sales I see a breakdown of Usage: xxx in the Details column

ShadySue

« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2012, 11:48 »
0
I don't see anything labeled "Usage" on the page www.alamy.com/stock-photography-contrib-sales-history.asp. It says Royalty Free in the license column and in the Details column:
 "1 MB
758 x 505 pixels
160 KB compressed"

Perhaps usage is only for RM sales? On my older (while exclusive) "Traditional License" sales I see a breakdown of Usage: xxx in the Details column


Oh, of course; I wasn't thinking of RF, sorry. RF wouldn't give a usage.
No explanation, then, other than a buyer with a huge bulk discount.

« Reply #24 on: December 20, 2012, 02:47 »
0
So today's new Alamy experience was an Alamy iQ sale. Royalty free, listed like this "Royalty-free  Usage: iQ sale: Corporate Package Use Internal use and external non-advertising use". The gross was $76.72 & alamy took their 40%

So with an iQ sale, I apparently don't see any information about what size was purchased, so it's hard to say if this was a huge discount on a $365 sale or a small discount on a $95 sale. Has anyone else had an iQ sale on a royalty free image? I tried searching Alamy's forums but got a "runtime error" page. Is there any way (other than writing to support) to find out what size they got for $76.72?

« Reply #25 on: December 20, 2012, 05:51 »
0
Recently I had a similar one :

Usage: iQ sale: Magazine, editorial print and digital use, cover and/or inside, repeat use within a single issue
$ 54.80

I've no idea about the size too.

But to be honest after 0.25$ on FT for the same image. I do like Alamy 

RacePhoto

« Reply #26 on: December 21, 2012, 11:21 »
0
Didn't notice this was new in Nov 2012, I must not be getting the news feed or I just missed it? Thanks!

http://www.alamy.com/Blog/contributor/archive/2012/11/15/5260.aspx

It appears that the buyers can see where something has been used or licensed before. I don't see where we can or ever did for RF?

The RF I've sold, list my file and the download size, nothing else?

30 MB
6750 x 1530 pixels
1 MB compressed

Can you explain the what size question? I may be missing it, but mine just show the file size, and nothing about the use size?


So today's new Alamy experience was an Alamy iQ sale. Royalty free, listed like this "Royalty-free  Usage: iQ sale: Corporate Package Use Internal use and external non-advertising use". The gross was $76.72 & alamy took their 40%

So with an iQ sale, I apparently don't see any information about what size was purchased, so it's hard to say if this was a huge discount on a $365 sale or a small discount on a $95 sale. Has anyone else had an iQ sale on a royalty free image? I tried searching Alamy's forums but got a "runtime error" page. Is there any way (other than writing to support) to find out what size they got for $76.72?

ShadySue

« Reply #27 on: December 21, 2012, 11:30 »
0
Didn't notice this was new in Nov 2012, I must not be getting the news feed or I just missed it? Thanks!

http://www.alamy.com/Blog/contributor/archive/2012/11/15/5260.aspx

It appears that the buyers can see where something has been used or licensed before. I don't see where we can or ever did for RF?


Watching the video again, I don't think it means that they can see any previous uses or licenses, only where it's been licensed and used within the same organisation, also that would be my interpretation of:
"Alamy iQ offers a highly customised experience for our clients instant visibility of images purchased across the whole organisation, discounts on re-use for colleagues in other divisions and options to upload and sell owned assets."

Does the red bit - my highlighting - mean a quick way for them (customers) to upload their own images to be sold by Alamy? Or ... ?

« Reply #28 on: December 21, 2012, 11:42 »
-1
I watched that video yesterday too - that's all I know about iQ other than a largely uninformative video for contributors on the subject. View it here if you have time to kill.

For RF, I can see that it would be useful to know that your company had already bought that item, so even if you don't have to pay for new uses, knowing that you already own it is helpful if the site wouldn't already tell you that. As far as keeping track of things you owned via other means, it sounds a bit like iTunes and building a cloud library that includes physical CDs you own. In that case you don't upload anything; they just note ownership. In the Alamy case, I can't see uploading images from my company to their site so that other divisions can download and use them, but perhaps that's what they're offering?

On the size question, what I see for a typical (not Novel Use) RF sale is the size the customer purchased as well as the price they paid. I've been looking to see how those prices matched up - or didn't - to the prices shown on the site. For the iQ sale, that size information was missing.

And on a different subject entirely, I had a sale yesterday where the price paid was higher than the list price for the size - $55.78 for a 450 x 300 pixel sale that "lists" for $49. If they'd like to do that with a $365 sale, that'd be fine with me :)

But I shouldn't complain too much - for December, Alamy comes in above BigStock and CanStock in the middle tier (unless there's another sale, 123rf is above them)

RacePhoto

« Reply #29 on: December 23, 2012, 13:01 »
-1
Yes I also read that to be an In House feature for buyers, not for us. It's supposed to keep them from using the same image in another division or maybe keep them from paying full price, twice for the same use. It's interesting and we don't make more sales because of it. It's just expanding the use for a download. Buyers Feature.

Thanks, I have so few RF on Alamy that all have been sold at full size, so I assumed it was a bit of irrelevant data. I didn't even know that they offered sizes, just thought it was downloads. Shows that I wasn't paying attention.

As for pricing. Just from comparing mine and others and the Alamy forums, the price list has nothing to do with reality. They make all kinds of deals and offer special discounts, so it's kind of like bartering at the street market. Of course the downside is, we only see the results, not the negotiations that took place, to get there.

I've never gotten a Novel Use and I'm not going to complain about that!

« Reply #30 on: February 20, 2013, 11:52 »
0
What is an iQ sale?

I got one today, RM, very wide usage and even any size, for just US$73.

ShadySue

« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2013, 12:01 »
+1
What is an iQ sale?

I got one today, RM, very wide usage and even any size, for just US$73.

http://www.alamy.com/customer/help/alamy-iQ.asp

« Reply #32 on: February 20, 2013, 12:12 »
0
What is an iQ sale?

I got one today, RM, very wide usage and even any size, for just US$73.

I got one too today. For $ 75.62

« Reply #33 on: February 20, 2013, 20:11 »
0
What is an iQ sale?

I got one today, RM, very wide usage and even any size, for just US$73.

http://www.alamy.com/customer/help/alamy-iQ.asp


Thank you, but if I understand it right, it's a service that is just about managing licenses for a client, right?

This sale I had allows a very wide usage, and this looks more like a discount price - does iQ include that?
----
Country: Worldwide
Usage: iQ sale: Text book, editorial print + digital use, any placement, any size, multiple reuse for a single client.
Industry sector: Banking & Finance & Insurance
Start: 19 February 2013
End: 19 February 2023

ShadySue

« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2013, 20:24 »
0
AIUI, though I could be wrong, an iQ sale would be a repeat use for a company so it would be discounted.
Though I've had very wide use and timescale qute a bit lower than that price, not IQ.

« Reply #35 on: February 27, 2013, 21:16 »
0
To round out the month, I received a distributor sale today - $26.46 for a 1580 x 1053 that "lists" for $190.

$26.46 was the gross. The distributor gets 40% off the top - $10.58 - and then Alamy and I split the rest, leaving me with $7.94

It doesn't list the distributor, so I have no way of knowing if this is just some Alamy subsidiary - which would then allow them to keep 70% of the total. If you ask Alamy will they tell you which distributor sold this image?

I want to like Alamy, but they take forever for sales to clear, their payout is $250 even though they're selling more and more cheaply, the discounting is massive and they can't even be bothered to tell you how much you made on a sale (you need to substract their commission from the total; I assume they're hoping you won't notice the actual money in your pocket and focus on the gross number.

« Reply #36 on: February 28, 2013, 00:56 »
0
It's bad, but still better than having to join hundreds of small local agencies or distributors worldwide not to mention it would be impossible and time consuming and that it could take forever and that they could ask keywording in their own language.

As bad as it looks, it's still better than nothing.

Prices are going down everywhere for editorial because there's a real crisis in the print business.
Last i've heard yesterday was the Herald Tribune changing name and being soon sold as "NYT International Edition", this is a very bad sign of the times, it smell of last straw of desperation before closing the HT altogether and it's just a matter of time.

ShadySue

« Reply #37 on: February 28, 2013, 05:31 »
0

I want to like Alamy, but they take forever for sales to clear, their payout is $250 even though they're selling more and more cheaply, the discounting is massive and they can't even be bothered to tell you how much you made on a sale (you need to substract their commission from the total; I assume they're hoping you won't notice the actual money in your pocket and focus on the gross number.
Payout has been at $175 for a while now, generally taken as an admission that discounting is massive and they're having to drop prices to stay competitive.
That said, I had a sale under $2 to me from Getty, and as I'm not in NU, I haven't had that low from Alamy - yet.  ::)

ShadySue

« Reply #38 on: February 28, 2013, 05:56 »
0
...they can't even be bothered to tell you how much you made on a sale (you need to substract their commission from the total; I assume they're hoping you won't notice the actual money in your pocket and focus on the gross number.
Only just now (literally, I was looking to see if I was over $175 to get a payment due tomorrow) I noticed a Net Revenue link in My Alamy, which has a 'due' column which tells you what you got - only for cleared sales.
As I just noticed it, I don't know how long that link has been there - I always subtracted the commissions from the total; though when it's a direct sale, nowadays it's the same as their split.

« Reply #39 on: February 28, 2013, 08:42 »
0
So today's gem is a sale of a small size - 758 x 505 pixels - royalty free (i.e. not Novel Use) for $7.83 - of which my 60% is $4.70. Not a horrible return for a regular license (i.e. not EL) but the "list" price on that size is $95! They're selling it at a 92% discount...

It beats the 31 cent royalty from Pocketstock, but that's really damning with faint praise.

I am with you, joAnne. My sales are mostly all a rush of 5-10 $27 non distributor sales then a paltry few $8 to $15 sales of which usually 1 or 2 are distributor sales and you know how much we get hosed on those. Alamy is slowly migrating to a true MS model which indicates to me that price is everything.

« Reply #40 on: March 04, 2013, 04:52 »
+5
To round out the month, I received a distributor sale today - $26.46 for a 1580 x 1053 that "lists" for $190.

$26.46 was the gross. The distributor gets 40% off the top - $10.58 - and then Alamy and I split the rest, leaving me with $7.94

It doesn't list the distributor, so I have no way of knowing if this is just some Alamy subsidiary - which would then allow them to keep 70% of the total. If you ask Alamy will they tell you which distributor sold this image?

I want to like Alamy, but they take forever for sales to clear, their payout is $250 even though they're selling more and more cheaply, the discounting is massive and they can't even be bothered to tell you how much you made on a sale (you need to substract their commission from the total; I assume they're hoping you won't notice the actual money in your pocket and focus on the gross number.

Hi there,

Sorry to read about your frustration with Alamy - I'd just like to clarify a few points raised:

>> "I have no way of knowing if this is just some Alamy subsidiary - which would then allow them to keep 70% of the total"

All distributor sales are third party, meaning that the split goes 40% to distributor, 30% to Alamy, 30% to photographer. There are no exceptions to this with distributor sales.

>> "they take forever for sales to clear"

Unlike other agencies/portals, we report sales in real time. This means that you can see exactly when the sale was made and an invoice raised to the customer. A sale will clear when we have received payment from the customer and 45 days has passed since the time of invoice. A sale will take 45 days as this gives us a chance to offer a refund period to the customer, but also protect us against credit card fraud. Some invoices take longer than 45 days to clear if a customer doesn't pay on time. If this happens, our credit control team work around the clock to secure payment. Most other agencies only report the sale to you when the money is in their hands, making it appear as though their sales clear much quicker. The reality is that the timescales will be very similar to ours.

>>"their payout is $250"

Our payout threshold has been $175 for quite some time now.

>> " they can't even be bothered to tell you how much you made on a sale"

I can only presume that you are looking at the "summary of images sold" only. There are two sections of the site within "My Alamy" (that have always been available) that give you the full breakdown of your sales: Balance of Account and Net Revenue. If you look in Net Revenue, you can produce a report that breaks down everything from the image ref (Alamy ref and your ref), to the commission split, the price, the date of invoice and the date cleared etc. You can export all this and download to excel if you wish for your records.

Many thanks

James Allsworth
Content Executive

Alamy
« Last Edit: March 05, 2013, 03:56 by Alamy »

« Reply #41 on: March 04, 2013, 19:05 »
0
My $ bookmark for agency is set to Balance of account page with  statement period of 3 months selected.
(I'm guessing New Revenue page is the go to one particularly for contributors with high volume sales.)


Only just now (literally, I was looking to see if I was over $175 to get a payment due tomorrow) I noticed a Net Revenue link in My Alamy, which has a 'due' column which tells you what you got - only for cleared sales.
As I just noticed it, I don't know how long that link has been there - I always subtracted the commissions from the total; though when it's a direct sale, nowadays it's the same as their split.

Poncke

« Reply #42 on: March 05, 2013, 13:27 »
+1
To round out the month, I received a distributor sale today - $26.46 for a 1580 x 1053 that "lists" for $190.

$26.46 was the gross. The distributor gets 40% off the top - $10.58 - and then Alamy and I split the rest, leaving me with $7.94

It doesn't list the distributor, so I have no way of knowing if this is just some Alamy subsidiary - which would then allow them to keep 70% of the total. If you ask Alamy will they tell you which distributor sold this image?

...

Hi there,

Sorry to read about your frustration with Alamy - I'd just like to clarify a few points raised:

>> "I have no way of knowing if this is just some Alamy subsidiary - which would then allow them to keep 70% of the total"

All distributor sales are third party, meaning that the split goes 40% to distributor, 30% to Alamy, 30% to photographer. There are no exceptions to this with distributor sales.

......

Many thanks

James Allsworth
Content Executive

Alamy
Why does the third party distributor get a bigger cut than the artist?

« Reply #43 on: March 05, 2013, 13:56 »
0
To round out the month, I received a distributor sale today - $26.46 for a 1580 x 1053 that "lists" for $190.

$26.46 was the gross. The distributor gets 40% off the top - $10.58 - and then Alamy and I split the rest, leaving me with $7.94

It doesn't list the distributor, so I have no way of knowing if this is just some Alamy subsidiary - which would then allow them to keep 70% of the total. If you ask Alamy will they tell you which distributor sold this image?

...

Hi there,

Sorry to read about your frustration with Alamy - I'd just like to clarify a few points raised:

>> "I have no way of knowing if this is just some Alamy subsidiary - which would then allow them to keep 70% of the total"

All distributor sales are third party, meaning that the split goes 40% to distributor, 30% to Alamy, 30% to photographer. There are no exceptions to this with distributor sales.

......

Many thanks

James Allsworth
Content Executive

Alamy
Why does the third party distributor get a bigger cut than the artist?
I was thinking the same.  I got my lowest ever sale with them yesterday
Sale price - 7.50$
Alamy Distribution Commission - 2.25    
Distributor Commission - 3.00
I was left with 2.25
Quite dissapointing when I have had commissions of over 200$ from them.!!

« Reply #44 on: March 05, 2013, 15:46 »
0
[Why does the third party distributor get a bigger cut than the artist?

Good point! I can imagine (putting words into Alamy's mouth) that they'd say this is the contract they have with distributors. Fair enough, but over the last several years, Alamy's commission has changed from 30% to 40% to (now) 50% and all of the change has come out of the contributor's hide.

Alamy revised the contract with contributors, with notice, and they can do the same with distributors. I think that the distributor should get a maximum of 25% of the gross - and if they want more money, sell more licenses.

I just went back to check and my first Alamy sale in 2007 had a commission for Alamy of 30% - I'm not making up numbers for rhetorical effect...

« Reply #45 on: March 06, 2013, 04:29 »
+1
[Why does the third party distributor get a bigger cut than the artist?

Good point! I can imagine (putting words into Alamy's mouth) that they'd say this is the contract they have with distributors. Fair enough, but over the last several years, Alamy's commission has changed from 30% to 40% to (now) 50% and all of the change has come out of the contributor's hide.

Alamy revised the contract with contributors, with notice, and they can do the same with distributors. I think that the distributor should get a maximum of 25% of the gross - and if they want more money, sell more licenses.

I just went back to check and my first Alamy sale in 2007 had a commission for Alamy of 30% - I'm not making up numbers for rhetorical effect...

The commission on your first sale was actually 35% to Alamy in total. Our commission split back then (2007) was 65% to the photographer. It will be seen in your balance of account as 30% to Alamy then you will also see an account fee that is an additional 5% that takes the total to 35.

In order to be able to work with third party distributors, we have to negotiate the best deals possible and 40% is standard across the industry. Yes, it could be viewed as unfortunate that the distributor gets more than the artist but again, this is not an unusual trend in the industry. Indeed, I could mention many agencies that take more than the artist for direct sales, not even third party.

The pricing can be lower in these markets than what you would see in your primary markets but we also see very high value sales also.

It's also worth baring in mind that if you are not comfortable with the third party additional revenue opportunities you can opt out during the month of April.

Best wishes

James
« Last Edit: March 06, 2013, 04:45 by Alamy »

« Reply #46 on: March 06, 2013, 08:10 »
-1
[Why does the third party distributor get a bigger cut than the artist?

Good point! I can imagine (putting words into Alamy's mouth) that they'd say this is the contract they have with distributors. Fair enough, but over the last several years, Alamy's commission has changed from 30% to 40% to (now) 50% and all of the change has come out of the contributor's hide.

Alamy revised the contract with contributors, with notice, and they can do the same with distributors. I think that the distributor should get a maximum of 25% of the gross - and if they want more money, sell more licenses.

I just went back to check and my first Alamy sale in 2007 had a commission for Alamy of 30% - I'm not making up numbers for rhetorical effect...

The commission on your first sale was actually 35% to Alamy in total. Our commission split back then (2007) was 65% to the photographer. It will be seen in your balance of account as 30% to Alamy then you will also see an account fee that is an additional 5% that takes the total to 35.

In order to be able to work with third party distributors, we have to negotiate the best deals possible and 40% is standard across the industry. Yes, it could be viewed as unfortunate that the distributor gets more than the artist but again, this is not an unusual trend in the industry. Indeed, I could mention many agencies that take more than the artist for direct sales, not even third party.

The pricing can be lower in these markets than what you would see in your primary markets but we also see very high value sales also.

It's also worth baring in mind that if you are not comfortable with the third party additional revenue opportunities you can opt out during the month of April.

Best wishes

James

And I will be doing this in a HEARTBEAT!!

« Reply #47 on: March 06, 2013, 11:48 »
0
...Yes, it could be viewed as unfortunate that the distributor gets more than the artist but again, this is not an unusual trend in the industry. Indeed, I could mention many agencies that take more than the artist for direct sales, not even third party.
...

Thanks for the response. Regarding the other agencies taking more than 50% of direct sales, that's true, although some of us are slowly shedding them unless there's some really good reason to keep the agency. The big "bribe" to contributors for lousy splits is such a high volume of sales that the monthly total from our portfolios is high. When the volume of sales is low, as it is in Alamy's case, it makes it really hard to justify. Shutterstock and (before I left them) iStock make much more per month from my portfolio than Alamy does.

I guess I'll go see about opting out of third party deals and Novel Use (got one of those the other day and I thought they were going away/gone).

« Reply #48 on: March 14, 2013, 06:42 »
+1
...Yes, it could be viewed as unfortunate that the distributor gets more than the artist but again, this is not an unusual trend in the industry. Indeed, I could mention many agencies that take more than the artist for direct sales, not even third party.
...

Thanks for the response. Regarding the other agencies taking more than 50% of direct sales, that's true, although some of us are slowly shedding them unless there's some really good reason to keep the agency. The big "bribe" to contributors for lousy splits is such a high volume of sales that the monthly total from our portfolios is high. When the volume of sales is low, as it is in Alamy's case, it makes it really hard to justify. Shutterstock and (before I left them) iStock make much more per month from my portfolio than Alamy does.

I guess I'll go see about opting out of third party deals and Novel Use (got one of those the other day and I thought they were going away/gone).

Your volume of sales on Alamy is dependent on your competition, style of content and keywording. It's true that for your style of content, volume of sales will likely be lower than what you would expect on high volume/subscription based micro sites but high volume is still possible on Alamy and of course our average price will be much higher. Ultimately Alamy will work better for some photographers rather than others, but it's part of the reason we remain committed to being non-exclusive and not tying our contributors into lengthy, restrictive contracts. Alamy won't be for *everyone* but most photographers should at least be using Alamy as an additional source of income, part of a wider network of distributors for their work.

Thinking specifically of the distribution scheme, although you will sometimes see lower value sales compared to that of your primary territories, it does account for around 20% of Alamy's total sales and we will often see 4 figure, sometimes 5 figure, individual sales come in via distribution. If you want your images to reach clients in countries Alamy doesn't currently target directly then we would always recommend opting in. Of course we understand though that this will not be for everyone, which is why you have the option to opt out should you wish.

Best wishes

James
« Last Edit: March 14, 2013, 06:46 by Alamy »

Poncke

« Reply #49 on: March 14, 2013, 12:43 »
0
James, in regards to the lower prices and 50 cent royalties on Novel Scheme images and what not, can you lower the payout threshold? 175 dollar on 50 cent sales is taking really long if not forever. I know you can blow 175 dollar out of the water with one sale, but I and many others dont have 80.000 photos online like some do. And with the heavily discounted pricing and giving away hi res images for a re-calculated royalty of 12%, I think its only fair to lower the payout threshold to match your new low pricing and reduced royalties.


« Reply #50 on: March 25, 2013, 09:59 »
0
James, in regards to the lower prices and 50 cent royalties on Novel Scheme images and what not, can you lower the payout threshold? 175 dollar on 50 cent sales is taking really long if not forever. I know you can blow 175 dollar out of the water with one sale, but I and many others dont have 80.000 photos online like some do. And with the heavily discounted pricing and giving away hi res images for a re-calculated royalty of 12%, I think its only fair to lower the payout threshold to match your new low pricing and reduced royalties.

We are always looking at the numbers and ensuring that our payout threshold is suitable for the majority of contributors. We recently reduced the threshold from $250 down to $175.

I can understand your point, but equally we hear from a number of contributors who have asked us to raise the threshold.

The alternative would be a system where contributors "cash out" and request to be paid when it suits them. We may be able to offer something like this in the future, but the resource and development time required to put something like this in place would best be diverted elsewhere for now. We've got a complete overhaul of the site starting very soon, with further developments for contributor facing features on the horizon for later this year.

Thanks,

James

rubyroo

« Reply #51 on: March 25, 2013, 10:35 »
+3
Hi James,

Are there any plans in the upcoming overhaul to make uploading simpler?  For other sites we don't have to sit with each file deciding how to prioritise keywords into subsets after upload - they just populate a single form field with the keywords from our IPTC data.  Because this is consistent across other sites, it's easy to just upload everything to them all in one sitting. 

OTOH, if I want to upload to Alamy, I have to carve out time for a separate sitting and enter a different headspace to deal with the unique post-upload work required.  I would have sent a lot of images to Alamy if it weren't for the extra time required to jump that hurdle.

Could you not just advise uploaders to prioritise keywords the way you want them within the IPTC data and cut out the post-upload requirements?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2013, 12:01 by rubyroo »

« Reply #52 on: March 25, 2013, 12:02 »
+1
Hi James,

Are there any plans in the upcoming overhaul to make uploading simpler?  For other sites we don't have to sit with each file deciding how to prioritise keywords into subsets after upload - they just populate a single form field with the keywords from our IPTC data.  Because this is consistent across other sites, it's easy to just upload everything to them all in one sitting. 

OTOH, if I want to upload to Alamy, I have to carve out time for a separate sitting and enter a different headspace to deal with the unique post-upload work required.  I would have sent a lot of images to Alamy if it weren't for the extra time required to jump that hurdle.

Could you not just advise uploaders to prioritise keywords the way you want them within the IPTC data and cut out the post-upload requirements?

(ETA:  This is assuming, of course, that the system hasn't been changed since I last uploaded!)

Hi there,

Although our multi-tier keyword system does have numerous benefits, we are well aware that the post upload workload imposed on our contributors can be an off-putting and at times a laborious task.

With this in mind, we are currently working on some fresh ideas that we hope to have in place at some point in the not too distant future. There are a few updates we need to make first, but it is very much in our thoughts.

In the meantime, if you have a high volume of images (eg, several hundred) you need to apply metadata to, if you email memberservices@alamy.com there are a few things we can do to help, particularly in the way of offering an excel metadata template you can populate and email us which we will then apply to your images. This can often work out to be a quicker method than using the online Manage Images tools.

Best wishes

James Allsworth

rubyroo

« Reply #53 on: March 25, 2013, 12:31 »
0
Thanks James, I'm glad some ideas are in place to ease the upload burden on contributors.  I'm not sure about the excel thing though.  Like most of us, I embed keywords, title and description data when I save the image prior to uploading as the other agencies simply utilise that 'as is'.  It sounds as though I'd have to open every image I want to upload and copy paste the metadata across to a spreadsheet, is that right?  If so that would also be a very long-winded task for anyone with anything between several hundred and several thousand images.

« Reply #54 on: March 26, 2013, 04:33 »
0
Thanks James, I'm glad some ideas are in place to ease the upload burden on contributors.  I'm not sure about the excel thing though.  Like most of us, I embed keywords, title and description data when I save the image prior to uploading as the other agencies simply utilise that 'as is'.  It sounds as though I'd have to open every image I want to upload and copy paste the metadata across to a spreadsheet, is that right?  If so that would also be a very long-winded task for anyone with anything between several hundred and several thousand images.

I can't speak for your specific workflow, but many contributors keep a database of their metadata and send this out to agencies via excel templates. I'm no expert on database management, but I would assume that it would be relatively simple to export your data from your images into a spreadsheet format - if something doesn't exist that makes this simple, then there is a gap in the market!

Best wishes

James

rubyroo

« Reply #55 on: March 26, 2013, 04:38 »
0
Really?  I've never heard of that method being used before.

Thanks for the information.  I have a live-in database developer right here, so I'll be having a word with him tonight.  :)

« Reply #56 on: March 26, 2013, 07:16 »
0
Hi James,

While we're pinging ideas off of you, can you redesign the stats summary page? It is time consuming and cumbersome to figure out your monthly, quarterly and annual sales in a summary format.  For example:

March 2013:

$2150 Gross sales
$1000 Contributor commissions

Breakdown
$36 Novel Use Gross Sales   
$18 Novel use Contributor commission

$400 Distributor Gross Sales
$160 Distributor commission (40%)
$120 Alamy Commission (30%)
$120 Contibutor Commission

Alamy Sales
$1714 Gross
$857 Contributor commission

Even your CSV file requires you to manipulate it in Excel.  Would be REALLY nice if you had a nice, succinct financial summary by month, quarter and calendar year and also specified date range summaries.

« Reply #57 on: March 26, 2013, 07:52 »
+2
Would be REALLY nice if you had a nice, succinct financial summary by month, quarter and calendar year and also specified date range summaries.


Again, it's something we are aware is cumbersome and not very user friendly - even though it does technically work and is functional. Have you looked at the Net Revenue pages? You can set specific date ranges to suit you...

We've launched phase one of the new site today with some great features (http://www.alamy.com/whatsnew.asp) - the next phase is to improve some contributor facing pages. I can't say for sure when the financial summary pages will get a re-work, but I can assure you that it is on our road-map of improvements to be made. We are already working on the next version of "My Alamy" and a great looking contributor dashboard that will help you get to the important information much quicker - and it will look a darn sight nicer than it does currently.

All in all, many more improvements are on the way and it's always good for us to get this kind of feedback, so thank you.

Cheers

James

« Reply #58 on: March 26, 2013, 09:02 »
0
Would be REALLY nice if you had a nice, succinct financial summary by month, quarter and calendar year and also specified date range summaries.


Again, it's something we are aware is cumbersome and not very user friendly - even though it does technically work and is functional. Have you looked at the Net Revenue pages? You can set specific date ranges to suit you...

We've launched phase one of the new site today with some great features (http://www.alamy.com/whatsnew.asp) - the next phase is to improve some contributor facing pages. I can't say for sure when the financial summary pages will get a re-work, but I can assure you that it is on our road-map of improvements to be made. We are already working on the next version of "My Alamy" and a great looking contributor dashboard that will help you get to the important information much quicker - and it will look a darn sight nicer than it does currently.

All in all, many more improvements are on the way and it's always good for us to get this kind of feedback, so thank you.

Cheers

James


Thanks a bunch. Glad it's on your to do list.

« Reply #59 on: April 15, 2013, 11:21 »
0
...It's also worth baring in mind that if you are not comfortable with the third party additional revenue opportunities you can opt out during the month of April.

I just opted out of Novel Use and the UK Newspaper scheme. I think I opted out of distributor sales (I unchecked all territories and clicked Save; there's no opt in or opt out button I could find)

If anyone else wants to opt out, April is the month to do so

« Reply #60 on: April 26, 2013, 19:53 »
0
Just logged in and noticed I got my first sale on April 24. Finally.

Selling is great, however, the sale was for $20.64. I was surprised at how low the price was so I checked out the licensing. Below are the specifics:

Country: United Kingdom
Usage: Editorial
Media: Newspaper - national
Print run: up to 2 million
Placement: Inside and online
Image Size: 1/4 page
Start: 01 March 2013
End: 02 March 2013
One use in a single editorial or advertorial article used within print and /or web versions, with re-use of the article in other titles or web versions within the same newspaper group. Digital use includes archive rights for the lifetime of the article.

This said, several things surprise me. The start run date is March 1 and yet the sale shows as April 24. Anyone know why this might be?

Second, I did a price check for the exact specifications shown above - $245. How does a rights managed image go from $245 to $20.64? Whatever the reason, I'm not too happy as this "subtle "pricing difference cost me $115. Apparently there is a UK newspaper scheme? It seems I might have to opt out of this because for a paper to use my image in a run of up to 2 million AND online for $20.64 is ridiculous. And that's leaving out the expletives.

Alamy seems to be taking liberties with the pricing or giving huge discounts with what is effectively my money...If I wanted to make $10 a photo I'd do nothing but sell on Microstock sites.

If anyone can help me understand this I'd appreciate it. Thanks.



ShadySue

« Reply #61 on: April 26, 2013, 20:06 »
0
Sales can take six months or more to show up, so two months is pretty good. Apparently that's normal in RMland.

The pricing shown on a file's page bears little resemblance to that which might actually be paid. Think of it as the hotel night you got online for $23 when the rack rate is $125. Bulk buyers negotiate low-price deals. You can opt out of the UK newspaper scheme, but I've had lower sales than that not to UK newspapers. I've also had higher values to a UK newspaper, presumably not in the scheme.

I'm sure you know this, but just in case you don't, the rate which shows on your sales page is gross. Your cash will be 50% of that, presumably as it's a UK newspaper, or 30% if it was a distributor sale. (You can opt out of distributor sales too, but that can only be done in April each year, like a football transfer window.)

This has been gone over manys the time and oft in the Alamy forums. There are a couple of real PITAs over there, but you do get information in between the bickering.

BTW: this has been discussed in this very thread, and here's one of Alamy's posts on the very questions you raise:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/alamy-com/why-are-prices-not-what%27s-shown-on-the-site/msg302245/#msg302245
« Last Edit: April 26, 2013, 20:08 by ShadySue »

« Reply #62 on: April 26, 2013, 20:26 »
0
Thanks Sue. I get 50% of the whopping $20.64 sale. I guess $10.32 is better than nothing but frankly, it's rubbish. When I saw I had a sale I was happy, of course, but then I saw how much it was for and compared to 50% of a $200-$300 sale, $20.64 is rather disheartening. Seriously, selling to a Microstock could make as much or more.

ShadySue

« Reply #63 on: April 26, 2013, 20:37 »
+1
Seriously, selling to a Microstock could make as much or more.
Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.
Usually I find when I get a low value sale, I wouldn't have got an EL on iS (fewer than 1/2 million print run, don't know what the threshold is on other micros). There are sales even lower than the one you reported. I had one at sub-$10, but with the way it worked out I got an identical sale the week after.
You have to remember that a lot of UK newspapers won't buy from micros, because of the way they are taxed (it's complicated, but it's why the lapse in reporting/paying time is useful to them), so you wouldn't necessarily pick up the sales on any of them.

ShadySue

« Reply #64 on: April 27, 2013, 06:46 »
0
Seriously, selling to a Microstock could make as much or more.

Remember also that a bulk-buyer will be able to negotiate favourable terms on the micros too, see the recent SS thread ('Do I have to worry?').
Directly from SS on that thread:
"High "single image" royalties are often the result of a prenegotiated agreement with volume buyers such as large publishers and advertising agencies.  These volume buyers may require additional license or workflow features, such as the option for sensitive use, indemnification, multi-user accounts, prenegotiated pricing, and special billing and workflow features. "
http://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/do-i-have-to-worry/msg313575/#msg313575

There are huge unadvertised discounts on really large credit bundles from iS which are negotiated directly.
Need Larger Credit Packs?
For larger or on-going projects, we also offer credit packs of 6,000, 10,000, 20,000 or 30,000 credits. For more information, please contact our Customer Sales team toll-free at 1 866 478 6251.

http://www.istockphoto.com/buy-stock-prepaid-credits.php
and presumably the other micros have similar arrangements.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2013, 06:51 by ShadySue »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3811 Views
Last post June 21, 2007, 07:31
by fintastique
2 Replies
2923 Views
Last post July 26, 2007, 11:09
by stokfoto
2 Replies
2826 Views
Last post November 22, 2010, 09:09
by leaf
2 Replies
2864 Views
Last post February 02, 2012, 05:49
by BaldricksTrousers
2 Replies
3004 Views
Last post June 08, 2012, 06:48
by Paulo M. F. Pires

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results