Author Topic: New Pay as you go initiative (more for less?) (Read 12397 times)

CD123 · « **on:** June 01, 2011, 14:09 »

Guess you have received this through the email from Bigstock:

"New Commission Chart
For new Pay As You Go purchases we pay contributors 30% of the US dollar price. For purchases made using credits we pay $0.50 USD for each credit spent, just like before. This also applies to Extended Licenses. Here is a detailed breakdown of how much you will earn with each type of purchase (all values in USD):
Pay as You Go Credits (just like before)
Small $0.90 $0.50
Medium $1.50 $1.00
Large $2.70 $2.00
X-Large $3.90 $3.00
Vector $3.90 $3.00
Extended License $29.70 $25.00 "

Another more for less scheme? What's your take on this?

helix7 · « **Reply #1 on:** June 01, 2011, 14:18 »

The video with Wyatt:

Nice dig at istock's pricing in there.

Anita Potter · « **Reply #2 on:** June 01, 2011, 14:19 »

I don't know what to make of it. I've not received an email from Big Stock about it at all.

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #3 on:** June 01, 2011, 14:22 »

Doesn't seem to be good news, but who knows but Bigstock.

With the current pricing the royalty percentage for a vector file (6 credits) bought with different credit packages is:

12 credits package = $2,41 / credit = 20,74 %
25 credits package = $1,96 / credit = 25,51 %
60 credits package = $1,65 / credit = 30,3 %
140 credits package = $1,35 / credit = 37,03 %
350 credits package = $1 / credit = 50 %
700 credits package = $0,9 / credit = 55,55 %

I'm guessing most credits spent are 140 credit bundles and up, so they chose a fixed royalty percentage in the low end of the scheme. It seems. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

CD123 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 01, 2011, 14:32 »

Seems like one is getting more for the pay as you go sales. More is always better, especially if it can include the number of sales made, as more $ for zero sales still comes up a zero.
Hope they are successful (for our sake). Go Bigstock go....!

sharpshot · « **Reply #5 on:** June 01, 2011, 14:53 »

30% is horrible, especially for a relatively low selling site. The problem is that they see other sites getting away with it, so then they make it look like a good thing.

What the sites don't seem to understand is that the lower our commissions go, the less we earn and then we are less motivated. Pay me a decent amount and I will work much harder. Keep cutting my commissions and paying me an unfair amount and I will end up doing something else for a living.

It's a bit like the tax system, governments usually make more revenue by cutting taxes, because it gives people an incentive to work and earn more. The higher taxes go, the less motivation there is to work hard.

I like the simple pricing system but I wish they would keep the royalties simple and fair as well. For a site like BS with low sales, anything under 50% feels wrong.

dirkr · « **Reply #6 on:** June 01, 2011, 14:59 »

Quote from: sharpshot on June 01, 2011, 14:53

I like the simple pricing system but I wish they would keep the royalties simple and fair as well. For a site like BS with low sales, anything under 50% feels wrong.

This change made me look at their actual credit prices. Here in Germany they are shown in Euro, starting from €2,40 per credit for the smallest pack and going down to €0,77 for the biggest pack. That is with current exchange rates (1€ = 1,43$) a royalty of 45% for the biggest pack, but only 14,5% for the smallest pack.
That's worse than Istock.

Phil · « **Reply #7 on:** June 01, 2011, 16:03 »

Quote from: ThomasAmby on June 01, 2011, 14:22

Doesn't seem to be good news, but who knows but Bigstock.

With the current pricing the royalty percentage for a vector file (6 credits) bought with different credit packages is:

12 credits package = $2,41 / credit = 20,74 %
25 credits package = $1,96 / credit = 25,51 %
60 credits package = $1,65 / credit = 30,3 %
140 credits package = $1,35 / credit = 37,03 %
350 credits package = $1 / credit = 50 %
700 credits package = $0,9 / credit = 55,55 %

I'm guessing most credits spent are 140 credit bundles and up, so they chose a fixed royalty percentage in the low end of the scheme. It seems. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

in Oz 12 credit packs is AU$3.40 / credit which is US$3.60 (no option to change currency, and you have to go back 2 years to get anywhere near that bad a rate) - anyway it is 13.8% commission

assuming they keep the same currency rates, 1 pay as u go = us$2.70 = au$4.05 = 22.2% commission so an improvement but not much

cthoman · « **Reply #8 on:** June 01, 2011, 16:51 »

This actually looks like a good thing. The prices in the video show $3 for a small image, so you'll get $.90 instead of $.50 for a one credit file. If that is the real pricing this looks like a huge boost. The old credit system looks like you could get as low as 16% and as good as 50%.

cthoman · « **Reply #9 on:** June 01, 2011, 17:07 »

OK, this is how I see it based on the pricing from the video.

New earnings for a Small image is $.90 instead of $.50. An 80% increase.
New earnings for a Med image is $1.5 instead of $1. A 50% increase.
New earnings for a Large image is $2.7 instead of $2. A 35% increase.
New earnings for a XL/Vector image is $3.9 instead of $3. A 30% increase.

I'm excited. I may have to open up the doors again to Bigstock.

Edit: Oops! I just reread the initial post and realized I just re-posted the same numbers. I guess I didn't understand what the numbers meant when I read them originally.

traveler1116 · « **Reply #10 on:** June 01, 2011, 17:22 »

Never mind.

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #11 on:** June 01, 2011, 17:28 »

Quote from: cthoman on June 01, 2011, 17:07

OK, this is how I see it based on the pricing from the video.

New earnings for a Small image is $.90 instead of $.50. An 80% increase.
New earnings for a Med image is $1.5 instead of $1. A 50% increase.
New earnings for a Large image is $2.7 instead of $2. A 35% increase.
New earnings for a XL/Vector image is $3.9 instead of $3. A 30% increase.

I'm excited. I may have to open up the doors again to Bigstock.

Yeah, but the price for a vector will be ($3.9 / 0.3) = $13 instead of 6 credits that start at just $5.4 - I'd actually rather have $3 of $5.4 than $3.9 of $13.
Not saying this new structure is completely bad, but I don't think it's something to get excited about really. It's a trick all the agencies use, like when iStock raised the prices of my images from $10 to $12 while reducing my royalty percentage. Now $3.12 sales are frequent while the highest amount I'd get for a sale prior to that would be somewhere around $2.9 - $3. According to them I should be excited about this, cause afterall I'm getting more right ?

It might be that most buyers are using small credit bundles at Bigstock, and so it would seem like a good deal and a raise for contributors, but I seriously doubt that. Only Bigstock has the numbers and so the ability to call this a raise or a cut. The fact that we get PAID more for the new sizes vs. the old makes Bigstock able to announce "bigger commissions" as they phrase it in the newsletter.

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #12 on:** June 01, 2011, 17:46 »

Quote from: ThomasAmby on June 01, 2011, 17:28

Quote from: cthoman on June 01, 2011, 17:07
OK, this is how I see it based on the pricing from the video.

New earnings for a Small image is $.90 instead of $.50. An 80% increase.
New earnings for a Med image is $1.5 instead of $1. A 50% increase.
New earnings for a Large image is $2.7 instead of $2. A 35% increase.
New earnings for a XL/Vector image is $3.9 instead of $3. A 30% increase.

I'm excited. I may have to open up the doors again to Bigstock.

Yeah, but the price for a vector will be ($3.9 / 0.3) = $13 instead of 6 credits that start at just $5.4 - I'd actually rather have $3 of $5.4 than $3.9 of $13.
Not saying this new structure is completely bad, but I don't think it's something to get excited about really. It's a trick all the agencies use, like when iStock raised the prices of my images from $10 to $12 while reducing my royalty percentage. Now $3.12 sales are frequent while the highest amount I'd get for a sale prior to that would be somewhere around $2.9 - $3. According to them I should be excited about this, cause afterall I'm getting more right ?

It might be that most buyers are using small credit bundles at Bigstock, and so it would seem like a good deal and a raise for contributors, but I seriously doubt that. Only Bigstock has the numbers and so the ability to call this a raise or a cut. The fact that we get PAID more for the new sizes vs. the old makes Bigstock able to announce "bigger commissions" as they phrase it in the newsletter.

I finally found a quote I remembered in this thread - goes back to May 2009

Quote from: Dawn Donahue

Hi Guys,

Most of the downloads are from $1 credits; therefore, you are getting 50% commission for almost every download.

So, if this was, and still is, true it means a drop in commission from 50% to 30%.

michaeldb · « **Reply #13 on:** June 01, 2011, 18:20 »

Quote from: cthoman on June 01, 2011, 16:51

This actually looks like a good thing. The prices in the video show $3 for a small image, so you'll get $.90 instead of $.50 for a one credit file. If that is the real pricing this looks like a huge boost. The old credit system looks like you could get as low as 16% and as good as 50%.

I agree. We should remember that BigStock's per-download cost will be higher for single transactions. And when sites require the purchase of credit-packs, some of the credits of which are never used, and are pure profit for the site. Single transactions will be expensive for BigStock.

And I believe that 30% is more than I get at IS for images purchased with credit packs.

cthoman · « **Reply #14 on:** June 01, 2011, 18:33 »

Are people really buying $350 worth of credits at once? The sales at BS don't seem to suggest that, but I suppose it's possible that most people buy large credit packs. Really with the old system the royalties were between 17%-55%.

5 credits - 17% royalty rate
12 credits - 20% royalty rate
25 credits - 25% royalty rate
60 credits - 30% royalty rate
140 credits - 37% royalty rate
350 credits - 50% royalty rate
700 credits - 55% royalty rate

Yeah, it would nice to get paid 50%, but I don't really feel cheated because I wasn't necessarily getting 50% before.

click_click · « **Reply #15 on:** June 01, 2011, 20:51 »

Quote from: ThomasAmby on June 01, 2011, 17:28

... I'd actually rather have $3 of $5.4 than $3.9 of $13....

Hmmm, I respectfully disagree here.

It sounds terribly bad that a buyer is paying almost 2.5 times as much for the same thing (considering the buyer ONLY needs that one image - instead of several images which would logically lead to a credit pack purchase).

But you get 30% more for that sale than selling the same thing through a credit package.

It's a new way to sell images that they didn't offer before. I think it's attractive to more buyers plus we get more money (despite the fact that the buyers will pay much more for an individual file).

But hey, look at the On-Demand offer at Shutterstock. It's also a much more expensive option for the buyers but as we know, there are plenty of buyers that take advantage of that.

Given that the calculations in the posts above above are correct, I don't see a problem (yet).

luissantos84 · « **Reply #16 on:** June 01, 2011, 21:07 »

I have really small sales from BigStock, so little that I found it very weird but I am sure they aren´t taking buyers away of my pictures..

beside this I never had a Pay as You Go so I am not that excited but I am sure for other might be good..

gwhitton · « **Reply #17 on:** June 02, 2011, 16:34 »

Quote from: sharpshot on June 01, 2011, 14:53

It's a bit like the tax system, governments usually make more revenue by cutting taxes, because it gives people an incentive to work and earn more. The higher taxes go, the less motivation there is to work hard.

Then as taxes approach zero I'm guessing you'll start seeing people racing around working so hard, their hair is on fire...and government's will be making 100s of trillions. ;o)

sharpshot · « **Reply #18 on:** June 02, 2011, 16:58 »

^^^It seems to work in Monaco, there's no tax there and they did have people racing around this weekend in the Grand Prix

gwhitton · « **Reply #19 on:** June 02, 2011, 19:40 »

Quote from: sharpshot on June 02, 2011, 16:58

^^^It seems to work in Monaco, there's no tax there and they did have people racing around this weekend in the Grand Prix

Monaco has that luxury, because its a tiny country surrounded by millions of potential tourists, and gamblers. And I am sure they collect taxes from someone, if not individuals. Cars can't run without gasoline, and governments can't run on hot air...forever. ;o)

It also doesn't have much in the way of expenses...when's the last time it had a to raise its own army?

sharpshot · « **Reply #20 on:** June 03, 2011, 01:15 »

^^^I was joking, see the smiley at the end of the sentence. Of course Monaco is a special case but lots of economists believe that high taxation cuts revenues and governments that cut taxes usually end up with more revenue. I remember seeing a programme about how Hong Kong turned its economy around by reducing taxation and incentivising its workforce.

I do think that when the sites reduce our commissions and lower the amount we can earn, they are disincentivising us and it leads to lower earnings for them. Perhaps it has nothing to do with the fall in share price of Getty and the apparent problems with istock but I really think it doesn't help them. Other businesses squeeze their suppliers but I think they get away with it because their suppliers can't easily move to other work, I don't think that's the case with microstock. If they cut commissions too much, lots of us can do other work.

gwhitton · « **Reply #21 on:** June 04, 2011, 15:41 »

Sharp,

I get your point, but the reducing taxes only holds up to a point, just like raising taxes beyond a certain point is detrimental. Its finding the happy medium that is important. Part of the reason I responded originally is because I think at least in the US, that the "reducing taxes will increase government revenue" has been taken way beyond where this holds true, into where its become detrimental. For much of America's recent history taxes were way higher, and we did just fine...and now they want to take it down to 25% with a 14 trillion debt...they are crazy.

cthoman · « **Reply #22 on:** June 08, 2011, 11:49 »

Has anyone gotten a new sale? Mine are all still at the old credit prices.

lisafx · « **Reply #23 on:** June 08, 2011, 13:54 »

Quote from: cthoman on June 08, 2011, 11:49

Has anyone gotten a new sale? Mine are all still at the old credit prices.

I got one $2.70 sale yesterday. So far that's the only one.

fotografer · « **Reply #24 on:** June 08, 2011, 15:34 »

I've had a 2.70$ sale and a few 90c ones over the last couple of days.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #25 on:** June 08, 2011, 15:46 »

sorry for the question but do you think that BigStock gives priority to older files? I have been with them for a little over 2 years and my earnings there are incredible ridiculous

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #26 on:** June 08, 2011, 15:52 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on June 08, 2011, 15:46

sorry for the question but do you think that BigStock gives priority to older files? I have been with them for a little over 2 years and my earnings there are incredible ridiculous

Luis ... I do think age is a large consideration in search result placement ... but not to the extreme. I've posted before that files seem to start selling after six month; or, more likely, nine months. Perhaps not an accurate assumption coming from my very small portfolio.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #27 on:** June 08, 2011, 16:27 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on June 08, 2011, 15:52

Quote from: luissantos84 on June 08, 2011, 15:46
sorry for the question but do you think that BigStock gives priority to older files? I have been with them for a little over 2 years and my earnings there are incredible ridiculous

Luis ... I do think age is a large consideration in search result placement ... but not to the extreme. I've posted before that files seem to start selling after six month; or, more likely, nine months. Perhaps not an accurate assumption coming from my very small portfolio.

yep it is weird there.. they approved almost everything I have almost 4k pictures there.. but sales are just bad bad, don´t understand why they keep low but heavily approving..

cathyslife · « **Reply #28 on:** June 08, 2011, 16:35 »

Quote from: fotografer on June 08, 2011, 15:34

I've had a 2.70$ sale and a few 90c ones over the last couple of days.

I've had 11 sales since June 1, two of which were at $.90.

So when I go to my image earnings page, the amounts listed in the Sale Amount column...that's what I get, right? How do I have sales with $--.29 in the end, when all of those numbers are $1.00, $.50 and $.90? I think I missed something.

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #29 on:** June 08, 2011, 18:27 »

I've had two of those $3.9 vector sales so far

madelaide · « **Reply #30 on:** June 08, 2011, 18:40 »

what is the difference between credits and "pay as you go"? Is the latter single image purchases?

madelaide · « **Reply #31 on:** June 08, 2011, 18:43 »

Quote from: ThomasAmby on June 01, 2011, 17:46

So, if this was, and still is, true it means a drop in commission from 50% to 30%.

I think BigStock commissions have not been 50% for a long time.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #32 on:** June 09, 2011, 19:20 »

Quote from: madelaide on June 08, 2011, 18:43

Quote from: ThomasAmby on June 01, 2011, 17:46
So, if this was, and still is, true it means a drop in commission from 50% to 30%.

I think BigStock commissions have not been 50% for a long time.

I hate to ruin a good guessing party but here's the link.

http://www.bigstockphoto.com/faq.html#HMWIEA

How much will I earn as a Bigstock contributor? When do I get paid?

For Pay As You Go purchases we pay contributors 30% of the US dollar price. For purchases made using credits we pay $0.50 USD for each credit spent. This also applies to Extended Licenses. You can request a payout when your earnings reach $30. Here is a detailed breakdown of how much you will earn with each type of purchase (all values in USD):

Search around January 2010 for the double talk. Prices up, commissions down, but we'll make more because of better sales. Back and forth.

lisafx · « **Reply #33 on:** June 10, 2011, 19:14 »

Royalties have picked up noticeably the last few days because of the new PAYG sales. I am getting around the same number of sales, but higher returns.

Anyone else noticing the same?

madelaide · « **Reply #34 on:** June 10, 2011, 19:44 »

This is an old thread that explains that 50c per credit is not 50% commission.
http://www.microstockgroup.com/bigstock-com/how-are-you-doing-at-bigstock/25/

Roadrunner · « **Reply #35 on:** June 11, 2011, 10:17 »

The Lord must have blessed me this week. I actually got 15 sales within a two hour period for $.50 each and two others today - one at $2.70 and one at $1.50. That much activity for me is very unusual as I have just over 300 images there.

So you sharp shooters with thousands of images should see some interesting activity soon.