MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime  (Read 39665 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ed

« Reply #75 on: May 28, 2014, 14:43 »
+2
This business plan sounds no different than what Getty is doing offering a hyperlink for no charge in order to be able to mine data and possibly push out ads in the meantime through websites (ideally bloggers) that need images.

According to the Getty model, photographers would have opportunities to generate 'click through' revenue no different than Google Ads.

I'm not fond of the business model, but I'd be interested to see how it goes.


« Reply #76 on: May 28, 2014, 14:43 »
+1
@all

How can you be sure that you really have opted out??
Screenshots, Screencasts, tons of people who wittness that you really opted-out??
I mean - if they just say that you did not opt-out - what can you do?

If an agency acts like gangsters (automatically opt-in is in germany illegal) i can imagine that they try to betray you with even more dirty tricks.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 14:46 by Axel Lauer »

« Reply #77 on: May 28, 2014, 14:45 »
+6
immediately opted out..

the problem is I am pretty sure I had opted out of alliances before.. (like years ago)

how did I end up "in" again?

that's the real puzzle!..

« Reply #78 on: May 28, 2014, 14:47 »
0
that's right, we can opt out and still be in once it is a top secret project that will turn the microstock industry upside down ;D

too bad it took so long...

« Reply #79 on: May 28, 2014, 14:53 »
0
 :(I was beginning to have doubts about DT when they abolished the default option for deleting old files with no sales.
They altered my pre-set default without even informing me so now I have to manually delete them individually or pay to have them re-keyworded.
It will be interesting to see how opting out of their alliances affects my meagre sales.

« Reply #80 on: May 28, 2014, 14:55 »
+4
I think the word "exposure" is used these days like a magician would use something like "Abacadabra" - misdirection. 

« Reply #81 on: May 28, 2014, 14:57 »
0
Does someone knows a Grease-Monkey-script which makes it possible to delete all my images which are hold like hostages by this dubious website without spending my half lifetime?

« Reply #82 on: May 28, 2014, 15:13 »
+1
:(I was beginning to have doubts about DT when they abolished the default option for deleting old files with no sales.
They altered my pre-set default without even informing me so now I have to manually delete them individually or pay to have them re-keyworded.
It will be interesting to see how opting out of their alliances affects my meagre sales.

Really? I have the option to leave online with out rekeywording.

« Reply #83 on: May 28, 2014, 15:31 »
0
Maybe I made the wrong assumption when I noticed that the options had changed been reduced to leave online or donate to free section.
Do you know when they made the change from having the three options.
To delete images or have them re-keyworded or donate to the free section.
If you are right it would have been nice of them to inform me of the changes before they altered my default setting.

« Reply #84 on: May 28, 2014, 15:34 »
+2
:(I was beginning to have doubts about DT when they abolished the default option for deleting old files with no sales.
They altered my pre-set default without even informing me so now I have to manually delete them individually or pay to have them re-keyworded.
It will be interesting to see how opting out of their alliances affects my meagre sales.

Really? I have the option to leave online with out rekeywording.

Yes, I just looked and I see that my default, which was "delete" has now changed to "keep online", delete is no longer an option - which makes rather a farce of the whole notification process. I was unaware that they had changed the options. I assume everybody is offered the same choices.

As for talk about them going behind your back and secretly keeping you in the programme .... well, each and every agency could pull stunts like that. Either you trust them and keep working with them or you pull out as quickly as you can.

« Reply #85 on: May 28, 2014, 15:37 »
+2
When I contacted support about the changes the reply just said that I could delete manually.

« Reply #86 on: May 28, 2014, 15:47 »
+17
Yes it's a "beta test" and the purpose of the test is to find out what percentage of contributors would go along with a Getty-style giveaway that creates revenue without looking like a "sale", so royalties aren't paid.

I imagine many - maybe most - contributors just glance at an email like this and say "fine, whatever".  They don't read MSG and are satisfied with whatever an agency decides to pay.   

If a deal like this was actually announced ahead of time, with an opt-out, what percentage of contributors would say 'no'?   That's the data this test will produce.

« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 15:50 by stockastic »

« Reply #87 on: May 28, 2014, 16:07 »
+3
It is getting to the point I am afraid of what I will find here when I sign in. DT has always treated me well. But hell no you can not give my images away for free.

I opted out!

« Reply #88 on: May 28, 2014, 16:17 »
0
It is getting to the point I am afraid of what I will find here when I sign in. DT has always treated me well. But hell no you can not give my images away for free.

I opted out!

I think what so many people are failing to understand is that DT's endgame is NOT out to give our images away for free!

They are conducting a small, limited-time test with the "big fish" partner to make sure the partner is satisfied with how it will work.  If partner is indeed satisfied, a deal that could be quite lucrative will be entered, and we could benefit greatly. 

DT has said they would try to retroactively pay us for those images downloaded in the test period, but I'm guessing those will be pennies compared to the many dollars that will come once the full deal is in place.

Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!

« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 16:20 by stockmarketer »

« Reply #89 on: May 28, 2014, 16:26 »
+3
Who's talking about "many dollars"? 
Large deals usually result in "many dollarcents".

« Reply #90 on: May 28, 2014, 16:28 »
0
The 12 in the email are mostly low performers that have been online forever although 3 of them do ok across the 5 sites in general - does look like linked to the new "keep them even if not sold" change.

« Reply #91 on: May 28, 2014, 16:33 »
-1
DT gives me a hard time becoming excl on IS, since I cannot delete my port entirely...

« Reply #92 on: May 28, 2014, 16:37 »
+4
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
Can't we opt back in, once the testing is over and the "big dollars" start flowing in? The way you say it only those of us who remain opted in during the testing will be able to participate later. But surely it does not make much of a business sense?
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 16:41 by Svetlana »

« Reply #93 on: May 28, 2014, 16:52 »
0
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
Can't we opt back in, once the testing is over and the "big dollars" start flowing in? The way you say it only those of us who remain opted in during the testing will be able to participate later. But surely it does not make much of a business sense?

If I were DT I wouldn't be thrilled with this approach.  If many or most of the contributors whose work they selected for this beta chose to sit on the sidelines, there's less likelihood the potential partner would be impressed by the offering.  DT would have to keep finding replacement images to fill in for the ones you yanked out.  Then if the test goes well and a lucrative deal is implemented, you want to hop back in? 

To me, fairness means those who are willing to support an initiative like this should be the first (maybe even only) contributors to benefit from it. 
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 16:55 by stockmarketer »

« Reply #94 on: May 28, 2014, 16:53 »
+1
DT gives me a hard time becoming excl on IS, since I cannot delete my port entirely...

Jaysus!! 

« Reply #95 on: May 28, 2014, 17:10 »
+17
the expense of doing trial run should lie with them - our job is to offfer our content - their job is to market, promote, and look after the transactions of sales.

every business has to 'invest' if they want to grow - thats the chance you take when you think the payoff will be worth it. if this is one of the most significant deals ever done, the potential payoff for dt will be enormous, so  they should bear the burden of the expenses of doing this trial run

it shouldn't be on the backs of the little people

MxR

« Reply #96 on: May 28, 2014, 17:14 »
+4
They selected some of my worst images...

I like dreamstime... but deals without money are bad deals...

« Reply #97 on: May 28, 2014, 17:19 »
+5
After deleting the images they identified I sent them an email "Thank you for telling me which of my images you intended to give away for free. It was tedious but I have now deleted them from the database. Other images you intend to give away for free could you please delete them from your database for me?"

« Reply #98 on: May 28, 2014, 17:21 »
0
Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!
Can't we opt back in, once the testing is over and the "big dollars" start flowing in? The way you say it only those of us who remain opted in during the testing will be able to participate later. But surely it does not make much of a business sense?

If I were DT I wouldn't be thrilled with this approach.  If many or most of the contributors whose work they selected for this beta chose to sit on the sidelines, there's less likelihood the potential partner would be impressed by the offering.  DT would have to keep finding replacement images to fill in for the ones you yanked out.  Then if the test goes well and a lucrative deal is implemented, you want to hop back in? 

To me, fairness means those who are willing to support an initiative like this should be the first (maybe even only) contributors to benefit from it.
Wouldn't it be their loss or the loss of their new partner, if they limit the number of contributors (and works) participating in the program?
« Last Edit: May 29, 2014, 00:33 by Svetlana »

« Reply #99 on: May 28, 2014, 17:38 »
+4
It is getting to the point I am afraid of what I will find here when I sign in. DT has always treated me well. But hell no you can not give my images away for free.

I opted out!

I think what so many people are failing to understand is that DT's endgame is NOT out to give our images away for free!

They are conducting a small, limited-time test with the "big fish" partner to make sure the partner is satisfied with how it will work.  If partner is indeed satisfied, a deal that could be quite lucrative will be entered, and we could benefit greatly. 

DT has said they would try to retroactively pay us for those images downloaded in the test period, but I'm guessing those will be pennies compared to the many dollars that will come once the full deal is in place.

Once again... the images are free only during the initial beta test (and perhaps not free at all, if we are indeed retroactively paid)... don't throw away future dollars worrying about a few pennies you may drop along the way!

how do you know that? which agency have done any good for you/us in the latest years? IS? DP? FT? DT?

your statement shows how we are in the verge of accepting anything from agencies, guess you are forgetting that hope doesn't pay bills

how can you be so sure that this deal will get us many dollars in the future? and so many that you are willing to give them away for free now

sorry to say but I have never expected such thought from you, I know I cannot make decisions for you but staying happy with FREE thinking of a wonderful wealthy future isn't going to help contributors and agencies as well once the buyers left will be ready to pay zero

maybe you know something we don't once I see no reason to believe this will be positive
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 17:41 by luissantos84 »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
125 Replies
27874 Views
Last post June 07, 2008, 02:48
by Microbius
96 Replies
25737 Views
Last post July 12, 2008, 11:31
by Pixel-Pizzazz
6 Replies
3783 Views
Last post November 24, 2011, 04:51
by StockCube
13 Replies
2108 Views
Last post July 14, 2016, 04:18
by SpaceStockFootage
2 Replies
2014 Views
Last post July 14, 2016, 00:42
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results