MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime  (Read 49922 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #225 on: May 30, 2014, 08:25 »
+6
Justanotherphotographer, no, it looks like we need to stay opted OUT for the duration of the testing period. It starts in 3 days and will go... "for a few weeks", according to private reply to me from Support.

Oh well... I will run my own experiment. To check how much Dreamstime sells direct, and how much comes from the third-party sales.  8)


« Reply #226 on: May 30, 2014, 08:25 »
+19
There is nothing more to be said in public about the possible deal. That's how business works, that's how negotiations are made in the real world.

In the real world, a business doesn't expect other businesses to sign blank sheets of paper so that it can write a contract without the signatories knowing the terms they are agreeing to. That is what you are asking us to do.

It's somewhat insulting to be lectured on "real world business" as if we're all just playing games with our images.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2014, 08:31 by BaldricksTrousers »

« Reply #227 on: May 30, 2014, 08:26 »
+15
For all we know the deal could undercut our sales elsewhere.

« Reply #228 on: May 30, 2014, 08:54 »
+13
haven't SS made the deal with FB without giving our work for free?

perhaps DT needs to learn how to make deals on the real world (because we are all fake and know nothing!)

« Reply #229 on: May 30, 2014, 09:02 »
+7
The reaction of the DT representatives here is just disappointing. I didnt have any negative experience with DT until now and maybe I would have participated in this test if things had been handled in a different way.

They basically didnt give me any other option but to opt out of all alliances because among the few images which they chose from my portfolio, there is one which is my bestselller at SS.. And I dont want to offer my bestseller for free under ANY conditions. So I had to opt out my whole port. They could have let us choose which of the files we want to put in the test but for some reason it was all or nothing. So it will be nothing then.

« Reply #230 on: May 30, 2014, 09:15 »
+3
Businesses love to hide behind this "confidential" bit.  Like "We can't tell you how much you're going to make, because we have a confidential deal with Getty".

When business is equitable you do not need to hide the details. The question is why does the partner feel the need for secrecy?

I also wonder if another agency is involved in this deal.

« Reply #231 on: May 30, 2014, 09:16 »
+3
Businesses love to hide behind this "confidential" bit.  Like "We can't tell you how much you're going to make, because we have a confidential deal with Getty".

When business is equitable you do not need to hide the details. The question is why does the partner feel the need for secrecy?

I also wonder if another agency is involved in this deal.

Could be that or they don't want some other agency coming in to snake the deal.

Ron

« Reply #232 on: May 30, 2014, 09:21 »
+3
haven't SS made the deal with FB without giving our work for free?

perhaps DT needs to learn how to make deals on the real world (because we are all fake and know nothing!)
I think SS pays subs when they use images for testing. I recall Scott mentioning that.

« Reply #233 on: May 30, 2014, 09:22 »
+1
Justanotherphotographer, no, it looks like we need to stay opted OUT for the duration of the testing period. It starts in 3 days and will go... "for a few weeks", according to private reply to me from Support.

Oh well... I will run my own experiment. To check how much Dreamstime sells direct, and how much comes from the third-party sales.  8)
Thank you for clearing that up for me, saved me some irritation!

« Reply #234 on: May 30, 2014, 09:32 »
+1
Come on guys, you know I didn't mean any disrespect to nobody. I only have a small portfolio online, but I know how hard it was to produce it. In the end, you own your images so it's your decision if you want to participate. That's why, naturally, you have the right to choose.

Cheers!

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #235 on: May 30, 2014, 09:36 »
+3
Let's all take a breath...

The email said "small scale beta test program."

When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses.  And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it. 

This is an evaluation period.  Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart.  The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste.  The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.

I believe in DT.  They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.)  If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this. 

DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us.  Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.

As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.

The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.



Your logic is wrong.

Let me get this straight
DT = the ice cream supplier
Walmart food buyer = the big fish partner

Now, you're forgetting that we contributors are the factory that supplies the spoons for the ice cream supplier's taster spoons. Would an ice cream supplier ask for free spoons from the factory to pitch his ice cream to the food buyer? With a vague promise of spending more on spoons once the food buyers agrees to a big deal? Of course not. However DT is. The ice cream supplier should invest the money for spoons because he's the only who should bear this financial risk.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2014, 10:19 by Noedelhap »

« Reply #236 on: May 30, 2014, 09:38 »
+8
Anyway we should thank DT for this deal. If there were not DPC from FT and this "super deal" from DT - many stockers continued to work without paying attention to all this "Megaprojects".
Now all spend much more time to know about all nuances of work with microstocks. Now stockers really understanding that he has his own voice. It's great thing for all of us.

But DT employees, are you still can't understand one simple thing? Be honest with your contributors. You've made big work - you've made enviroment for this project, you've selected works from contributors portfolio. So you have information about selected works in your database in separate table, right? So i think this database have minimum 2 fields like  Contributor Login and Image ID. And are you want to say to us that simple button which will send one request to your database and will erase selected image ID's of specified contributor it's so hard for you? It will take 2 hours maximum including programmer's breakfast, smoking time and many other. Why do you not to do this?

« Reply #237 on: May 30, 2014, 09:50 »
+16
These exchanges between contributors and agency employees are always entertaining. For the agencies, I'm looking for the same thing everyday. Around 50% royalties and an RPI in the $5-$10 range. Wake me up when you get there, otherwise don't bother me with your deals.

Dook

« Reply #238 on: May 30, 2014, 09:54 »
+6
These exchanges between contributors and agency employees are always entertaining. For the agencies, I'm looking for the same thing everyday. Around 50% royalties and an RPI in the $5-$10 range. Wake me up when you get there, otherwise don't bother me with your deals.
If you continue sleeping they can only lower it even more.

« Reply #239 on: May 30, 2014, 10:00 »
+5
These exchanges between contributors and agency employees are always entertaining. For the agencies, I'm looking for the same thing everyday. Around 50% royalties and an RPI in the $5-$10 range. Wake me up when you get there, otherwise don't bother me with your deals.
If you continue sleeping they can only lower it even more.

LOL. That wouldn't be any different than when I was awake and participating.

« Reply #240 on: May 30, 2014, 10:04 »
+6
These exchanges between contributors and agency employees are always entertaining. For the agencies, I'm looking for the same thing everyday. Around 50% royalties and an RPI in the $5-$10 range. Wake me up when you get there, otherwise don't bother me with your deals.
If you continue sleeping they can only lower it even more.

Completely agree, though it is encouraging to see that many of micros slow cooked frogs do seem to be jumping out of the pot.

« Reply #241 on: May 30, 2014, 11:03 »
+9
How can you trace sales from partner programs at DT?

I would like to know how much that "invitation" to the test will cost me.

« Reply #242 on: May 30, 2014, 11:17 »
+1
How can you trace sales from partner programs at DT?

I would like to know how much that "invitation" to the test will cost me.

you can't and the same goes for most agencies, I believe that contributors developed a lot of trust, not in agencies but deep inside!

« Reply #243 on: May 30, 2014, 11:45 »
+4

Let's face it, the free images are good, but not good enough to impress a partner or a customer.
WHAT????

What will you invent next?
Do we have to pay if your customer uses our images??

Oooh yes, every time i dream of some horrible stockmarket inventions it comes true a few days later.
"Exciting news from DT - we have to pay for the exposure DT generates"

« Reply #244 on: May 30, 2014, 11:50 »
+8
I think these agencies are at a crossroads.  Price has been driven down to the point of extinction.  They have to have good exclusive quality in order to survive but can't attract it with low commission rates.

Agencies without a good portion of quality exclusive content have nothing to offer the market other than price and have to compete with well funded SS (who doesn't even use exclusivity in their business plan). The only other option is to offer exclusive content which requires paying out a higher commission rate.

Maybe we'll look back at this moment of turmoil with a smile.  Some of these players will simply die out and we'll see a resurgence of specialty stock.  Who wouldn't want to put their various images (food, people, urban scenes etc) with agencies who specially market those categories to specific buyers.  This one stop shopping model just dilutes all images to the same rate regardless of there real value.


« Reply #245 on: May 30, 2014, 12:07 »
0
I think these agencies are at a crossroads.  Price has been driven down to the point of extinction. 

Right!  And who has driven the price so low?  WE have, by supporting every low-balling new agency that comes along.  And when the bigger agencies have to remain competitive by dropping their prices, sure there's some whining here in the forums, but backed with no real action.  In fact, we keep uploading more.

So what's an agency to do if it wants to survive, and maybe drive more downloads of our images?  One way is to create deals with partners to position our content in unique ways.  That's exactly what DT is doing with this potential deal, and what do contributors say?   We want to kill the deal because the beta test period won't pay us for images that the testers use for a few weeks.  Are we really that short-sighted?!? (insert your tired arguments about who should pay for the beta test here... I'm looking at the big picture, and my "losses" during the beta test will be tiny drops compared to the big revenue that could be possible with the deal if it goes well.) 

Fact is, DT is one of the more fair-paying agencies out there.  We should give them some credit on this, and once the deal is finalized let them present the commission scenario to us.  If we don't like it, we can bail.  But for god's sake, let's give them the chance. 

« Reply #246 on: May 30, 2014, 12:20 »
+6
I'm not interested in more downloads.  I'm interested in raising my revenue.

We have no idea what this deal is other than a giveaway during the test.  For all we know it could be a sucker deal like Vlasic/Walmart.

« Reply #247 on: May 30, 2014, 12:26 »
+9
I think these agencies are at a crossroads.  Price has been driven down to the point of extinction.  They have to have good exclusive quality in order to survive but can't attract it with low commission rates.

Actually, DT has some pretty nice commissions at the higher levels. I'm pretty happy when I get a $5 or $10 royalty. I just wish they'd move closer to that end on a regular basis. I'd love to see them say to heck with it. We aren't going to compete with these other agencies for the lower prices. They already do it partially now, so why not do it all the time?

« Reply #248 on: May 30, 2014, 12:30 »
+9
what do contributors say?   We want to kill the deal because the beta test period won't pay us for images that the testers use for a few weeks.  Are we really that short-sighted?!? (insert your tired arguments about who should pay for the beta test here... I'm looking at the big picture, and my "losses" during the beta test will be tiny drops compared to the big revenue that could be possible with the deal if it goes well.) 

Fact is, DT is one of the more fair-paying agencies out there.  We should give them some credit on this, and once the deal is finalized let them present the commission scenario to us.  If we don't like it, we can bail.  But for god's sake, let's give them the chance.

I am sorry, did I miss something? I am not seeing anyone say they want to "kill the deal". People just want to get paid. Its normal.

If the potential partner thinks this is such a great opportunity, then what is the problem with paying us?

And if it is such a short test and only few images would probably be downloaded...well...even more reason to just pay us normally,right?

As has been said before, i dont think the employees of dreamstime will accept not being paid for a few weeks. So why should we?

But the reaction from DT admins gives the impression that a majority of the artists have already opted out, right?

So why not come back with an offer that makes it interesting for the artists as well?

Negotiations have to be done in all directions with all business partners. You donttake one party for granted,especially if they own the product that is going to be sold.

At least this is the way business works in the real world that I know.

« Last Edit: May 30, 2014, 13:08 by cobalt »

« Reply #249 on: May 30, 2014, 12:35 »
+6
Says Walmart to Vlasic:

Here is the deal.  We'll take your product, sell it to our customers for a really, really low price.  Our customers will be ecstatic to get your product as such a low price.  And think of all the exposure your company will get!

Oh and by the way, if you don't take the deal, there are two other companies lined up to take it.  And next year we'll be offering you even less of a profit margin because our customers expect "falling prices".  Sign here.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
125 Replies
33875 Views
Last post June 07, 2008, 02:48
by Microbius
96 Replies
31799 Views
Last post July 12, 2008, 11:31
by Pixel-Pizzazz
6 Replies
4775 Views
Last post November 24, 2011, 04:51
by StockCube
13 Replies
3162 Views
Last post July 14, 2016, 04:18
by SpaceStockFootage
2 Replies
6408 Views
Last post July 14, 2016, 00:42
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle