Author Topic: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime (Read 62125 times)

luissantos84 · « **Reply #200 on:** May 30, 2014, 05:58 »

Quote from: Ploink on May 30, 2014, 05:35

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 30, 2014, 05:29
a small group of 184k contributors, ain't that a little too much for a simple test? and for sure over 1M files? is there a company who needs that much? use the free images!

He wrote: "...a small group out of 184k contributors..."

oops, my bad! anyway if I had over 10 files I am sure there must be Millions of pictures, would needs all that for a test?

Ron · « **Reply #201 on:** May 30, 2014, 06:04 »

DT almost sounds like we are paid too much for our own work, like they feel sorry for themselves. To me its comes across as DT is Calimero. Fund the beta test out of your own pocket. You've got millions, we've got pennies.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #202 on:** May 30, 2014, 06:10 »

Viorel, thanks for coming here and trying to clarify things. My problem remains the complete lack of information about what the deal represents (the beta test is, of itself, a deal, you know, otherwise you wouldn't have both parties' lawyers preparing the emails).

All we know is that it involves embedding images in online adverts, apparently hotlinking from DT as they won't be permanently available. We don't know how that would be paid for or what the rate of pay would be. My guess is that this "limited" access would be at prices lower than the ordinary RF price - after all, they are getting less in return aren't they? - but adverts are only expected to run for a limited time, so it might involve selling usage rights for a three-month ad campaign at one tenth the price of a standard RF sale which would have been bought for the full price normally. That would lead to further industry-wide devaluation of the value of our work.

Or maybe payment is per click on the advert ..... same devaluation effect.

Right now, I can't think of any temporary hotlink online advertising usage that won't involve a drop in the sales value of our files.

If it's a bigger company than DT you are trying to link up with, it could mean flooding the internet with cut-price temporary image licensing. Maybe it's better for me if you never make the hoped-for deal. I have no way of knowing.

As an independent, it is not in my interests to support schemes that may strip 38c sales from other sites and turn them into 5c sales on DT. What's good for DT may or may not be good for me. When you refuse to tell me what you want to do, except for outlining a temporary advertising usage, how can I have any expectation that it will be beneficial for independents and not just another plunge towards the bottom in pricing?

You know the treatment we've had to put up with from site owners over recent years, you can't be surprised that many people are very suspicious about being invited to "trust the management" and head, blindfolded, into a new deal.

Dook · « **Reply #203 on:** May 30, 2014, 06:30 »

viorel_dudau, a simple question - why don't you let us opt out only this beta test, without opting out all the other programs?

stealthmode · « **Reply #204 on:** May 30, 2014, 06:37 »

Quote from: viorel_dudau on May 30, 2014, 05:42

DT doesn't take 70% of the profits, not even of the sales. The 70% out of independents' sales must cover also the referrals, partners, human resources, technical resources, advertising, taxes and so on. And let's not forget that exclusives get 60% out of any sales. Even more, you can compare our subs with other agencies' subs and decide for yourself who pays more on a sub from the day one a contributor joins the agency.

You don't fund the beta test alone, Dreamstime pays for the people and technical resources required as well. And we're not getting the 70% either. While you don't have to do anything more than you already did (uploading the images), we have to pay more for the resources involved in the test.

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

While our 30% is net revenue, right? We don't have expenses and we don't pay taxes...
Thanks for calling us tax evaders

Shelma1 · « **Reply #205 on:** May 30, 2014, 06:40 »

Quote from: viorel_dudau on May 30, 2014, 05:16

As I am an employee of Dreamstime, I can confirm that stockmarketer is not.

You keep talking about the deal, let me clarify that: there is no deal. Yet.

There will be some tests for a possible, future deal. The success of this deal pretty much depends on your enrollment in the tests, cause, like Rinderart said, you guys own everything. If you want the deal to be successful and earn more in the near future, you should opt in for the tests. I think it's a fair agreement: you provide the content (which costed money to produce), Dreamstime provides human and technical resources (which costs money), know how and the ability to do business with big companies, for free, during the tests. All for a possibility to earn more, both from your perspective and ours.

We all want to earn more, but that doesn't come that easy. You must be able to give something in order to get something back. It's pretty much what we're all doing (I'm also a contributor) from the first step into a stock agency: we upload our images without knowing if we'll ever going to sell anything. The agency has the same risk: it provides the human and technical resources without knowing if there will be a positive return in the end.

Businesswise, if Dreamstime wanted to make a shady deal, you wouldn't have been asked in the first place, just like the other recent happenings in other places. We don't have such a record and we're not interested in getting any. Fair and square, a small group out of 184,000 contributors have been invited to participate. You can either participate or opt out. It's your choice, but bear in mind that participating means higher chances for getting the deal done and earning more in the future. Dreamstime has always been about the community. If you want to earn more as much as we do, join the tests and let's make it happen for both sides of this business.

Are the Dreamstime employees who are working on the deal still receiving their paychecks, or have they volunteered to work pro bono?

Ploink · « **Reply #206 on:** May 30, 2014, 06:51 »

I can understand the scepticism towards the "deal" - I, too, cringe everytime an agency sends me an email stating that they are excited about something...

What I cannot understand is the downright hostility towards representatives of that agency, trying to explain what little they obviously are allowed to...

Dook · « **Reply #207 on:** May 30, 2014, 06:57 »

Quote from: Ploink on May 30, 2014, 06:51

What I cannot understand is the downright hostility towards representatives of that agency, trying to explain what little they obviously are allowed to...

Lack of proper communication for years - leads to such an extreme reaction.

stealthmode · « **Reply #208 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:02 »

Quote from: Ploink on May 30, 2014, 06:51

I can understand the scepticism towards the "deal" - I, too, cringe everytime an agency sends me an email stating that they are excited about something...

What I cannot understand is the downright hostility towards representatives of that agency, trying to explain what little they obviously are allowed to...

Exactly because they are "representatives". Hostility is not at all towards them as persons, but towards their lies that they are probably asked to tell us.

Ariene · « **Reply #209 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:21 »

Quote from: viorel_dudau on May 30, 2014, 05:42

DT doesn't take 70% of the profits, not even of the sales. The 70% out of independents' sales must cover also the ...

No? DT doesn't take 70%? SO where it goes? Lets see - we have 100% income, where 70% goes to DT and the rest 30% for author, right? Still saying DT doesn't take 70%? It's easy like 2+2
But wait, you say DT has cost? Hm, did I get my gear for free? Nikon, would you give me full new system stuff, please? My old is to old to work anymore. No? buu... And I need to pay for my computer as well, post processing isn't for free, taxes (grrr, it's to big!), my tax men isn't working for free (bad men!), travel, tickets or session costs, food isn't coming from the sky, for free... Some of us have people working on images that we take, they're not just 1 person. If we have registered business (we usually have to, depends on country) the cost is HUGE!
ETC...

So tell me please, how is it - I get 30% and need to pay my bills (all th.above) and who gets more?
Btw. I can count only on myself, my few hundreds/ thousands images and agency has milions ... streams of income. Can you feel the difference?

Edit.
I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry that I get this 30% or 0,30$ for image... We crossed the reasonable line long time ago. Time to wake up and say no in some cases.

topol · « **Reply #210 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:30 »

Quote from: viorel_dudau on May 30, 2014, 05:42

DT doesn't take 70% of the profits, not even of the sales. The 70% out of independents' sales must cover also the referrals, partners, human resources, technical resources, advertising, taxes and so on. And let's not forget that exclusives get 60% out of any sales. Even more, you can compare our subs with other agencies' subs and decide for yourself who pays more on a sub from the day one a contributor joins the agency.

You don't fund the beta test alone, Dreamstime pays for the people and technical resources required as well. And we're not getting the 70% either. While you don't have to do anything more than you already did (uploading the images), we have to pay more for the resources involved in the test.

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

Since a plenty of successful businesses run on a lot lower percentage cut, your whine about expenses is instantly rejected. This has been cleared years ago with plenty of live running examples, again, and again, and again, and again.... why would anyone even bring up? It's an insult to everyone's intelligence. I personally don't EVER want to hear again how the majority of income coming from the thousands of my tediously prepared images is hard to get by on, after I trust them to your ppl without almost ever asking even a question about trustworthiness... untill now.

Ron · « **Reply #211 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:34 »

Sorry, but for an employee of DT he understands little of the cost involved for a photographer to produce images. And the tone of the replies from Achilles and Virol comes across as disdain.

fivedmarkthree · « **Reply #212 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:34 »

In business there are such things as Non Disclosure Agreements. DT could send out an email with minimal details with a link to log in to DT and accept an NDA where they would see the details.

Start the Beta with exclusives only that have a significant investment in DT (hopefully ensuring the NDA will be adhered to and severe consequences if not). If you treat your contributors as professionals and understand we are in business together and we both need to make profits for such things as equipment, bills, and taxes then professionalism is what you will get back. If there is no interest in opting-in into the beta opportunity then DT knows there is going to be a problem and the Contributor knows what he is getting into and can make an appropriate decision.

Once the Beta is completed advertise (with details) the opportunity to all contributors as an opt-in option to make more revenue. Advertise how the Beta program went and the results seen in increased revenue during the Beta.

Just my two cents and that seems to be the way professionals work.

viorel_dudau · « **Reply #213 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:36 »

When some 35 million images have been offered to bloggers, for free, as embeds, we came up with a Wordpress plugin that made it easier for the same bloggers to buy images from Dreamstime. That should tell you something about our intentions and our long term strategy.

You can turn my words upside down as much as you like, bottom line is: when there is an opportunity to have a clear, legitimate deal which could bring all of us more income, we should at least try to get it done.

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. Sure, we can pray for better income, but it won't rain with dollars anytime soon. Different opinions are actually good, they help everybody somehow. All you have to do now is to act on your own judgement.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #214 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:40 »

shame on you contributors, getting "30%" and still complaining and not willing to give a few thousands of images for a test that will make you so much richer

now its time to count some cents, Millions must be boring!

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #215 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:42 »

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".

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #216 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:43 »

Quote from: viorel_dudau on May 30, 2014, 05:16

....... If you want the deal to be successful.....you should opt in for the tests....

This is it in a nut shell. I have no idea if I want the deal to be successful. All I know is that it is a deal with a big company. It could be terrible, it could be great. The track record for these deals is not good, one out three decent vs terrible so far.

I am not in a panic, but I am neutral to skeptical at this time. I understand that you perhaps can't tell us more but you have to understand that it makes no sense for anyone to contribute their work under these circumstances.

What if we opt in and help the scheme succeed then it turns out it's another c****y pay-per-click-fraction-of-a-cent-deal that sees our work splattered all over social media?

Ron · « **Reply #217 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:43 »

Quote from: viorel_dudau on May 30, 2014, 07:36

You can turn my words upside down as much as you like, bottom line is: when there is an opportunity to have a clear, legitimate deal which could bring all of us more income, we should at least try to get it done.

The exact same words were used by Fotolia and one of its employers. Turned out it wasnt a great deal after all and in fact cost us more then we bargained for. When do you guys start to understand you have been milking us for years and asking for free images touches a nerve.

And your precious deal doesnt sound to exciting after all, its a copy of SS Facebook model and it hasnt shifted bucket loads of money either.

Mantis · « **Reply #218 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:49 »

Quote from: Dook on May 30, 2014, 06:30

viorel_dudau, a simple question - why don't you let us opt out only this beta test, without opting out all the other programs?

Right. It's currently all or nothing, so if we want to opt out of the beta we have to opt out of all partner opportunities. Since partner sales drive up downloads which drive up revenue for us, this particular partner set up with DT is more lucrative for us contributors that with other agencies. So they "force us to feel the pain" if we opt out of the free beta test. That's not very professional.

Dook · « **Reply #219 on:** May 30, 2014, 07:53 »

Quote from: Mantis on May 30, 2014, 07:49

Quote from: Dook on May 30, 2014, 06:30
viorel_dudau, a simple question - why don't you let us opt out only this beta test, without opting out all the other programs?

Right. It's currently all or nothing, so if we want to opt out of the beta we have to opt out of all partner opportunities. Since partner sales drive up downloads which drive up revenue for us, this particular partner set up with DT is more lucrative for us contributors that with other agencies. So they "force us to feel the pain" if we opt out of the free beta test. That's not very professional.

And he can't even answer this question.
Honestly, I don't even care. It's not like DPC thing. Dreamstime makes only around 3% of my income.

cobalt · « **Reply #220 on:** May 30, 2014, 08:03 »

Quote from: viorel_dudau on May 30, 2014, 07:36

when there is an opportunity to have a clear, legitimate deal which could bring all of us more income, we should at least try to get it done.

Nobody is stopping you from getting the deal done. All you have to do is work professionally with your business partners.

Inform artists about an upcoming beta test. Invite people with a specific opt in to this beta test. Offer a financial incentive for those who do.

Why is that so difficult?

You have 1 million free images, you have exclusive artists that might be more ready than others to opt in their whole portfolio. Surely that is not a lack of images.

Dreamstime has been around for many years and you must be following what is going on in he industry. It is not difficult to work with the community.

The Opt in works really well. So why not use it?

The only reason to take peoples files with minimal warning and an opt out for everything is because you know we would not agree to let you take it.

Imagine the content on your system was like a supermarket. And we the suppliers have sent you all the bread loafs,vegetables, cans of baked beans and toilet paper. If you asked us to supply all of these items for free while you are doing a test with an unknown third party - would you think the suppliers of the supermarket would agree?

It costs money to produce stock. Is what we produce in your opinion and that of your prospective client really so worthless?

This year in particular has seen a rise of agencies doing "deals" - moving our content out to other platforms where the rules of what they pay us are drastically changed (if we get paid at all).

So I am sorry, you should have known that we would have preferred an opt in.

markrhiggins · « **Reply #221 on:** May 30, 2014, 08:06 »

I did not see an opt out clause. So I just deleted the identified files from their database. I have these files on other sites why do I want a trial of giving them away for free on DT??? Let them do it with exclusive files? Future royalties? I see the future as free version of your images floating around when you still try to sell them at other sites. Confidential?? Really?? Words put together by lawyers do not win me over.

Anchan · « **Reply #222 on:** May 30, 2014, 08:16 »

You know what?... I have exchanged 3 letters with one of the people from Support. As the result, a different picture emerges. A large number of images thrown in the pool. Only a few probably picked up by the end-buyers. The whole testing would take a few weeks, let's say, couple of months. And that the test run is done on already constructed interface with something like 0.1% of full capacity.

If they would send me a normal letter, with working links, explaining all that and kindly asking to participate in "subbotnik", mentioning that they also work for free... and mentioning that many contributors are invited, instead of all that "secrecy" and "you are outstanding" crap...

...I would have probably participated.

Because I do understand that the "opt-in" mode is easier to do, than the "opt-out". It can be done with existing button. No need to create a special one.

If such second letter would come within the next 3 days, I would be tempted to reconsider.

Tryingmybest · « **Reply #223 on:** May 30, 2014, 08:17 »

An excellent and reasonable suggestion of which DT should consider...(in a future program, that is)

Quote from: fivedmarkthree on May 30, 2014, 07:34

In business there are such things as Non Disclosure Agreements. DT could send out an email with minimal details with a link to log in to DT and accept an NDA where they would see the details.

Start the Beta with exclusives only that have a significant investment in DT (hopefully ensuring the NDA will be adhered to and severe consequences if not). If you treat your contributors as professionals and understand we are in business together and we both need to make profits for such things as equipment, bills, and taxes then professionalism is what you will get back. If there is no interest in opting-in into the beta opportunity then DT knows there is going to be a problem and the Contributor knows what he is getting into and can make an appropriate decision.

Once the Beta is completed advertise (with details) the opportunity to all contributors as an opt-in option to make more revenue. Advertise how the Beta program went and the results seen in increased revenue during the Beta.

Just my two cents and that seems to be the way professionals work.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #224 on:** May 30, 2014, 08:20 »

Quote from: Mantis on May 30, 2014, 07:49

Quote from: Dook on May 30, 2014, 06:30
viorel_dudau, a simple question - why don't you let us opt out only this beta test, without opting out all the other programs?

Right. It's currently all or nothing, so if we want to opt out of the beta we have to opt out of all partner opportunities. Since partner sales drive up downloads which drive up revenue for us, this particular partner set up with DT is more lucrative for us contributors that with other agencies. So they "force us to feel the pain" if we opt out of the free beta test. That's not very professional.

I assumed that I could opt back in in five days time after the deadline to avoid the giveaway. Definitely need some clarification here. I will not be happy if the images end up being given away.

One more thought re. confidentiality. How confidential can it be if the advertisers are getting told about it so they can use the images. Why are we contributors the only ones involved not privy to the information. Surely the buyers in the test are just as likely to talk about it!? We are supposed to be the copyright holders here.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime (Read 62125 times)

luissantos84

Ron

BaldricksTrousers

Dook

stealthmode

Shelma1

Ploink

Dook

stealthmode

Ariene

topol

Ron

fivedmarkthree

viorel_dudau

luissantos84

Sean Locke Photography

Justanotherphotographer

Ron

Mantis

Dook

cobalt

markrhiggins

Anchan

Tryingmybest

Justanotherphotographer

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors