pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Why encourage me to upload again?  (Read 3730 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 04, 2014, 12:22 »
+4
I received e-mail from Alamy this morning titled "Remember us?" and noting that I haven't uploaded for a while. It goes on to say "Come and see what we've been up to and make 2014 the year you start submitting to Alamy again. We've got some exciting things up our sleeves for this year so don't miss out."

The only thing I'm missing of late at Alamy are sales. I stopped uploading when sales just slowed to a trickle. Their uploading process is a pain in the butt and without any reason to expect sales in the future they're at the bottom of my To-Do list.

But what puzzles me is that Alamy is awash in content - why would they care about getting new uploads? Especially from a relatively small contributor like me?


« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2014, 12:37 »
0
agree 100% Jo Ann

I believe the main reason is that email is very easy/fast/cheap, pretty much they have nothing to lose, we do remember their pain in the butt procedure so it won't paint a better picture of them anyway

Ron

« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2014, 12:44 »
+2
I think those are automated emails. As soon as you hit a time trigger you will get an email.

Alamy sales have died since July 2013. James changed my mind to call it quits, but this time there is no stopping me. I am still waiting/hoping for when things pick, but seeing the threads on their own forum, I think Alamy has reached the point of implosion. Too many files and they sell nothing.

I have said this a few times before, SS sells their total library 3 times over per year (300%). Alamy only sells 0.87% (!) of their library, and mainly from the live news feed and editorial images that are present in massive over abundance due the spray and pray type of photography.

Jeff Greenberg added 10k files in the last year or so, and his sales graph is still dropping.

« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2014, 14:06 »
+1

]Well, comparing what percent of its total library a subscription site sells over a year to what percent a non-subscription site sells is certainly worth noting, but is also missing significant relevant info, such as what commission is earned from typical sale for each....

But, more importantly, if a contributor determines an agency is not working out for him, acting on that makes sense, of course.

I can certainly relate, since I now have active files on just 2 images agencies - the other ones were either a waste of time and/or didn't treat contributors in a satisfactory way and/or were no longer a fit for where my photography's going.

(As an aside - Except for those already successful at stock, I no longer see it as something worth working harder and longer and smarter at, in hopes of becoming more successful. Unless one's geography, health, family, skills, time... limit options, better to find less speculative ways to increase one's photography income.)

I think those are automated emails. As soon as you hit a time trigger you will get an email.

Alamy sales have died since July 2013. James changed my mind to call it quits, but this time there is no stopping me. I am still waiting/hoping for when things pick, but seeing the threads on their own forum, I think Alamy has reached the point of implosion. Too many files and they sell nothing.

I have said this a few times before, SS sells their total library 3 times over per year (300%). Alamy only sells 0.87% (!) of their library, and mainly from the live news feed and editorial images that are present in massive over abundance due the spray and pray type of photography.

Jeff Greenberg added 10k files in the last year or so, and his sales graph is still dropping.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2014, 14:17 by ann »

Goofy

« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2014, 14:08 »
+3
"Why encourage me to upload again? "

I am not  ;)  at this point I wouldn't encourage anyone...



« Reply #5 on: February 04, 2014, 14:16 »
0
Nice of them to ask. I wonder if they send out a similar shot to buyers who haven't spent any money for some time....if so it is probably the full extent of Alamy's marketing campaign.

« Reply #6 on: February 04, 2014, 15:31 »
+2
I got the same email.... I expanded from SS to many many other sites (8 months ago) to test the waters and Alamy was the worst of the lot. Zero sales and zero activity to date... I stopped uploading after a few months of wasted time.

Ron

« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2014, 15:41 »
0

]Well, comparing what percent of its total library a subscription site sells over a year to what percent a non-subscription site sells is certainly worth noting, but is also missing significant relevant info, such as what commission is earned from typical sale for each....

But, more importantly, if a contributor determines an agency is not working out for him, acting on that makes sense, of course.

I can certainly relate, since I now have active files on just 2 images agencies - the other ones were either a waste of time and/or didn't treat contributors in a satisfactory way and/or were no longer a fit for where my photography's going.

(As an aside - Except for those already successful at stock, I no longer see it as something worth working harder and longer and smarter at, in hopes of becoming more successful. Unless one's geography, health, family, skills, time... limit options, better to find less speculative ways to increase one's photography income.)

I think those are automated emails. As soon as you hit a time trigger you will get an email.

Alamy sales have died since July 2013. James changed my mind to call it quits, but this time there is no stopping me. I am still waiting/hoping for when things pick, but seeing the threads on their own forum, I think Alamy has reached the point of implosion. Too many files and they sell nothing.

I have said this a few times before, SS sells their total library 3 times over per year (300%). Alamy only sells 0.87% (!) of their library, and mainly from the live news feed and editorial images that are present in massive over abundance due the spray and pray type of photography.

Jeff Greenberg added 10k files in the last year or so, and his sales graph is still dropping.

Most sales are between 4 and 20 dollar net. That 0.87% is not nearly enough to keep up with sales on SS.

Also, my return per image is 3 times higher on SS. So it makes a ton more sense to submit to SS then to submit to Alamy.

In fact, once I pull of all my RM from Alamy and submit to SS illustrative editorial, it will make more money guaranteed. SS actually sells images, Alamy does nothing for me.

ShadySue

« Reply #8 on: February 04, 2014, 15:48 »
0
Alamy themselves have said  (here on msg) that standard Micro strong-sellers don't sell well there.

If someone who got one of these emails had the time and inclination, it would be interesting to see what they'd say if you asked them why!

« Reply #9 on: February 04, 2014, 16:44 »
+2
Alamy and microstock are completely different models. Cheap subscription works for content which gets lots of sales. Editorial microstock makes sense for product pack-shots.

If all of Alamy was available at SS it would not sell more - but it would make much less money. It's the fact that it is not edited which results in it being possible to find very obscure editorial content at Alamy.

KB

« Reply #10 on: February 04, 2014, 18:25 »
+4
I received e-mail from Alamy this morning titled "Remember us?" and noting that I haven't uploaded for a while. It goes on to say "Come and see what we've been up to and make 2014 the year you start submitting to Alamy again. We've got some exciting things up our sleeves for this year so don't miss out."

But what puzzles me is that Alamy is awash in content - why would they care about getting new uploads? Especially from a relatively small contributor like me?
I can't answer your question, and I have yet to receive such an email from Alamy. But I do have a somewhat related anecdote to report:

Back in Dec I emailed support to ask about a year-old sale that had yet to clear. After saying they were sorry but it was unlikely I would ever be paid for that (distributor) sale, they wrote:
On another note, it would be great to get some more of your images online.

 ::)

« Reply #11 on: February 04, 2014, 18:44 »
+2

Back in Dec I emailed support to ask about a year-old sale that had yet to clear. After saying they were sorry but it was unlikely I would ever be paid for that (distributor) sale, they wrote:
On another note, it would be great to get some more of your images online.

 ::)

Unbelievable! I haven't had that situation (although I did opt out of distributor sales last April as I was unhappy with the deal) but did you push back on that? Unless the distributor had gone bankrupt, I think if Alamy continued to do business with a distributor that didn't pay their bills, they are complicit in a very shady business deal. The end user has your image and never paid for it - and instead of going after them, the agency is throwing up their hands and saying - in best Rick Perry style - "Oops".


fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #12 on: February 04, 2014, 18:50 »
+6
Guess still worth upload there. Here is my statement for January. As you see there are two sales each for 165$ and one for 48.49$. Still much better than FT,DT,123,BS,DP,CAN....


« Reply #13 on: February 04, 2014, 20:45 »
+3
That's great - that you're selling. But then I assume you're uploading and thus wouldn't have received the letter encouraging you to resume?

My puzzlement was at why they'd bother encouraging a "lapsed contributor" to upload - clearly someone is selling at Alamy or they'd have shut their doors. Probably the best explanation is that there's some automatic e-mail after a certain period of no uploading.

I hear the "alamy is different" argument, but I'm not different and what used to sell there doesn't any more, so either Alamy's appealing to different markets now, or they moved away from their core business of supplying UK newspapers for a while but that has dried up.

Whatever the explanation, sales are what motivate continued uploads, so those who are getting sales will continue and I won't :)

KB

« Reply #14 on: February 05, 2014, 00:43 »
0

Back in Dec I emailed support to ask about a year-old sale that had yet to clear. After saying they were sorry but it was unlikely I would ever be paid for that (distributor) sale, they wrote:
On another note, it would be great to get some more of your images online.

 ::)

Unbelievable! I haven't had that situation (although I did opt out of distributor sales last April as I was unhappy with the deal) but did you push back on that? Unless the distributor had gone bankrupt, I think if Alamy continued to do business with a distributor that didn't pay their bills, they are complicit in a very shady business deal. The end user has your image and never paid for it - and instead of going after them, the agency is throwing up their hands and saying - in best Rick Perry style - "Oops".
No, I didn't reply, as I didn't see there was much I could say. They did say that the account had been placed on hold and "For the time being Alamys images are no longer available through this distributor." That was really all I could expect to hear, as they presumably lost a lot more money than I did (assuming mine wasn't the only one that never got paid).

Ron

« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2014, 02:39 »
0
Alamy and microstock are completely different models. Cheap subscription works for content which gets lots of sales. Editorial microstock makes sense for product pack-shots.

If all of Alamy was available at SS it would not sell more - but it would make much less money. It's the fact that it is not edited which results in it being possible to find very obscure editorial content at Alamy.
I accept that, but still doesnt explain why this guy who added 10k images, and is now at 100k images, shows a downward earnings graph!

ShadySue

« Reply #16 on: February 05, 2014, 06:13 »
+1
Alamy and microstock are completely different models. Cheap subscription works for content which gets lots of sales. Editorial microstock makes sense for product pack-shots.

If all of Alamy was available at SS it would not sell more - but it would make much less money. It's the fact that it is not edited which results in it being possible to find very obscure editorial content at Alamy.
I accept that, but still doesnt explain why this guy who added 10k images, and is now at 100k images, shows a downward earnings graph!
If it's his earnings, rather than sales numbers, it's because prices there are constantly going down, allegedly because buyers are saying they can 'get it on micros cheaper'. In some cases, that's true, but the real trouble IMO is that if a provider has a very special or very unusual image, there still is no control over the price it sells for - if the buyer has a huge discount, it applies whether it's an isolated apple or a real photo of Nessie.

OTOH, as things stand just now, there's probably at least as good a chance that a file will sell from Alamy as a new file will sell on iStock.

On the third hand, I've just had a $37:50 (net) sale from Alamy since bedtime, and it took three iStock sales in the same timescale to earn $34.24. (of course I know that sales on both platforms can earn considerably more or less).

« Reply #17 on: February 05, 2014, 10:55 »
+1
I got the same email.  Cute, but my sales there are still not exactly stellar.  There is more money to made uploading fresh images elsewhere.  When you only have a limited amount of time in the day as an independent, you need to prioritize.  If they want more images, how about some incentive?  A bonus program would be nice, or maybe even a bulk-submit option by mailing a disk.  Their upload process is the biggest pain in the gonads, and I save them for last always... I have to use alamy size checker app then use their ridiculous upload tools.  Getting images approved is cake, but pushing them through is ridiculously cumbersome with their million and one things that need to be checked off and selected.  They make the big 6's  submission process a walk in the park.

Companies that streamline the upload process to simple pull metadata and not require anything further, will always be my favorite.  Setups like GraphicLeftovers.com will never lack supply, because let's face it... stock contributors get tired of mouse clicking after a while.

ultimagina

« Reply #18 on: February 05, 2014, 12:16 »
0
Guess still worth upload there. Here is my statement for January. As you see there are two sales each for 165$ and one for 48.49$. Still much better than FT,DT,123,BS,DP,CAN....

It is indeed, somehow discouraging to see only a few sales/month, but when it happens, these are big hits, some of them making-up for a full month of SS micro-sales.
I got 2x $125 commission in January (same photo sold twice for $250 each time)


« Reply #19 on: February 05, 2014, 15:06 »
+1
I still like alamy.  I think it makes sense for them to encourage people to upload more, as the huge collection is their USP.  They sell my microstock images and ones that I'm sure would make almost nothing on the microstock sites.  It would be nice if they sold more but January was quite good and hopefully that will continue for the rest of the year.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2600 Views
Last post May 20, 2008, 01:30
by khwi
6 Replies
7753 Views
Last post March 08, 2011, 11:50
by Niakris
5 Replies
3325 Views
Last post March 21, 2011, 21:46
by lola
1 Replies
3097 Views
Last post September 06, 2011, 14:51
by CD123
1 Replies
2329 Views
Last post March 21, 2013, 21:36
by Noedelhap

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results