MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: "Confidential" email from Dreamstime  (Read 61536 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #250 on: May 30, 2014, 12:37 »
+7
I have nothing against Dreamstime, in fact I made my first sale with them (and a credit one at that), so I quite like this agency. They are not my biggest earner but they're all right.

It's just that we're all quite touchy at the moment, what with DPC and other bad news. If only we had more information about this possible deal. If only there was a way of knowing it's not gonna hurt us more than benefit us.


« Reply #251 on: May 30, 2014, 12:38 »
+4
I think one could take an educated guess giving the industry's track record.

« Reply #252 on: May 30, 2014, 12:50 »
+19
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.

True enough.  And when the test is over and it is ready to go live, we will need to evaluate the terms and decide whether or not to participate.  That's separate from deciding whether or not to support the test.  I've decided to let them use my handful of images for the test.  Most are not big sellers, so my financial risk is low.  And Dreamstime hasn't abused me like some other agencies, so I'm a little more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, especially now that we have a little more information.

« Reply #253 on: May 30, 2014, 12:56 »
+1
is there anything in this world for free except breathing?

why would our work be? as simple as that!

« Reply #254 on: May 30, 2014, 13:05 »
+3
Let's say this big buyer needs thousands of images a month. May be today he's buying this images from agency which pays me more than the possible DT future deal.

Of course this is just speculation, but when DT can't give me more info I don't have other choice than to opt out! They choose most of my best sellers for the test and I can't risk to give them for free to this BIG BUYER (who needs free images to decide if he wants to make a deal)!

« Reply #255 on: May 30, 2014, 13:22 »
+3
is there anything in this world for free except breathing?

I'm sorry but I must disappoint you. Here, where I live you have to pay some kind of climatic fee. For example you travel to Tatra Mountains (to take some new photos for micros) and you pay for room or any other tourist service and you have that extra fee in it. Why? Because you breathe the fresh air, really. I was in huge shock when I heard that lately ;) Oh, and I will have to make new calculations for future trip. Is it worth uploding new images to... anywhere ;)

Sorry for OT, I'm out :)
« Last Edit: May 30, 2014, 13:26 by Ariene »

« Reply #256 on: May 30, 2014, 13:37 »
+1
is there anything in this world for free except breathing?

I'm sorry but I must disappoint you. Here, where I live you have to pay some kind of climatic fee. For example you travel to Tatra Mountains (to take some new photos for micros) and you pay for room or any other tourist service and you have that extra fee in it. Why? Because you breathe the fresh air, really. I was in huge shock when I heard that lately ;) Oh, and I will have to make new calculations for future trip. Is it worth uploding new images to... anywhere ;)

Sorry for OT, I'm out :)

ooh that is just perfect haha anyway that is your fee not agencies so it doesn't really matter ;D

this reminds of restaurants and hotels where when we feel we had a nice meal/service we tip but many places it is already included as you know

what I am saying is that photographers/contributors never get any tips but DT wants us to give our work for free and there isn't even a small gratification, next time I go to my favourite sushi restaurant I won't pay for the meal and no tip as well :P

they won't call the police because I will say it is a test and that I will potentially bring tons of friends later!

« Reply #257 on: May 30, 2014, 13:44 »
+10
One thing is for sure-I know some agencies that would have never asked us. Sure, you know what agencies I'm talking about

« Reply #258 on: May 30, 2014, 13:46 »
+9
One thing is for sure-I know some agencies that would have never asked us. Sure, you know what agencies I'm talking about
And right now such agencies are reaping what they sowed.

« Reply #259 on: May 30, 2014, 13:50 »
+5
next time I go to my favourite sushi restaurant I won't pay for the meal and no tip as well :P

they won't call the police because I will say it is a test and that I will potentially bring tons of friends later!

Well, OK, but let's be fair. To make it a perfect match you do have to ask the restaurant before you start the meal if they mind you not paying for it since it might create a wonderful opportunity for them later on, and give them the right to refuse your business.   There's no need to crucify DT over this, I just wish they would/could let us know what they want us to get involved with.
If they can come back later and tell us what they are doing l will be happy to consider the deal on its merits and join in if it makes sense for me to do so.


« Reply #260 on: May 30, 2014, 14:11 »
+6
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.

My experience is that DT has experimented with pricing so much they have a tangle more complicated than any agency out there. They came up with a levels system; sold us subscriptions on the basis that higher level images earned higher royalties and then took that back.

They have cut royalty rates and while raising RPD have managed to cut monthly income. Shutterstock has increased both RPD and monthly income to the point that comparing November 2006 to November 2013, DT went from neck and neck with Shutterstock to about 1/4 of Shutterstock earnings for me.

My experience with DT experiments is that they haven't done anything to date to boost my earnings from them (and they have roughly the same files to sell as the other agencies).

They say that the best predictor of future performance is past performance.

« Reply #261 on: May 30, 2014, 14:16 »
+1
They say that the best predictor of future performance is past performance.

No. The disclaimer on almost every investment instrument will say exactly the opposite. For good reason: Because it is not.

« Reply #262 on: May 30, 2014, 14:44 »
+3
They say that the best predictor of future performance is past performance.

No. The disclaimer on almost every investment instrument will say exactly the opposite. For good reason: Because it is not.

I'lll rephrase. When looking at hiring people, they say the best predictor...

This discussion is about the abilities, choices and performance of the people running the agency, not a financial investment analysis

« Reply #263 on: May 30, 2014, 14:56 »
+2
Soon there will be no big 4 agencies left which the MSG has not fallen out with. And then what ?

« Reply #264 on: May 30, 2014, 15:16 »
+9
Soon there will be no big 4 agencies left which the MSG has not fallen out with. And then what ?

Then, you become me.  ;D

« Reply #265 on: May 30, 2014, 16:13 »
+3
Soon there will be no big 4 agencies left which the MSG has not fallen out with. And then what ?

Then we all meet in places like Pond5 - exclusive, unique files with self-fair pricing? :) Can you imagine how the world turns upside down?  :o  :D

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #266 on: May 30, 2014, 17:08 »
+5
Soon there will be no big 4 agencies left which the MSG has not fallen out with.
Otherwise, "soon, all of the main agencies will have pushed contributors over the edge".

mlwinphoto

« Reply #267 on: May 30, 2014, 19:03 »
+3
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.

Exactly the way I'm seeing this now.  The recent giveaways and price slashing by a number of agencies reeks of desperation, IMO.  We are at a crossroads.  I'm just not sure which direction to go from here.....agencies don't seem to either.

As for specialty stock, I would like nothing more than to see that become the norm.  However, my recent experience with that concept hasn't been real positive....main complaint from potential buyers was that it wasn't 'one-stop shopping'.....can't win, I guess.


« Reply #268 on: May 30, 2014, 20:05 »
+14
My main complaint about this is that we have to opt out of all Alliances, if we don't want to participate.  That feels more coercive than an e-mail saying 'let us know if you don't want to participate'.  By being one of the 'lucky' chosen ones, we have to give up existing sales to not participate - in effect punishing those with the images they want to use for the trial by imposing a financial penalty if we don't participate...

Sort of like if my boss came to me and said "Hey, we have an exciting new opportunity that could really help our company take off.  We need a few volunteers to help out with a few extra hours - don't worry: nothing out of pocket for you.  We can't pay you for your time but if things work out you could be in for a raise (or not!).  If you aren't interested, that is not a problem, but we'll dock your pay by <whatever portion of sales I get from the partner program>."

Tryingmybest

  • Stand up for what is right
« Reply #269 on: May 30, 2014, 20:20 »
+2
Agreed. Coercive is an appropriate word in this instance.

My main complaint about this is that we have to opt out of all Alliances, if we don't want to participate.  That feels more coercive than an e-mail saying 'let us know if you don't want to participate'.  By being one of the 'lucky' chosen ones, we have to give up existing sales to not participate - in effect punishing those with the images they want to use for the trial by imposing a financial penalty if we don't participate...

Sort of like if my boss came to me and said "Hey, we have an exciting new opportunity that could really help our company take off.  We need a few volunteers to help out with a few extra hours - don't worry: nothing out of pocket for you.  We can't pay you for your time but if things work out you could be in for a raise (or not!).  If you aren't interested, that is not a problem, but we'll dock your pay by <whatever portion of sales I get from the partner program>."

« Reply #270 on: May 30, 2014, 21:02 »
+2
Stepping back from my initial go-stuff-yourself attitude when I saw the words non-compensation (or similar)... I wonder if I having a difficult time seeing over the wreckage of the Getty Google + deal. 

When they say "beta test" do you suppose they are building a site, throwing some photos on it, having testers download, upload, buying credits, one time visa's, paypal, and so on.... actually trying to break/improve the thing before moving public.... while maybe signing something that states they will destroy the photos in the end?

Or is my first reaction the right one... ain't givin 'nottin away fo 'nottin.. 

« Reply #271 on: May 30, 2014, 21:47 »
+12
If it was just for testing they could use the freebie collection.

They went to the trouble to pick out images from some group of contributors - I assume to dangle enticing content in front of the other party to this "big deal" that they hope to land. The effort to curate the images shown suggests that DT believes the images have value in closing the deal.

I think that being treated like pawns in someone else's game doesn't ever feel good, but certainly feels worse after several rounds of it - you wonder just how weak or stupid people think you are that they'd keep treating you this way. Google-Getty, Veer-Alamy, Deposit Photos - ShotShop - the list is fairly long...

« Reply #272 on: May 31, 2014, 00:53 »
+8
Most of the photos they chose out of my portfolio were old photos with few if any sales.  None of them were high value photos.

I was on the fence about this before but the vitriol I've seen on this forum in the last few days has made me decide to stay in. 

DT has been one of the few relatively honest agencies.  They told us about this up front and didn't keep it secret.  They offered an opt out.  Then, they came here to give as much detail as they said they could given their agreements with the partner they are pursuing.  They told us if all goes well, there will be retroactive royalties and future sales opportunities.

I don't think this deal deserves the violent reaction it's gotten in this forum.  I think it's unfortunate that this came on the heels of the DPC thing and the other nefarious, secret deals that other agencies have forced on us recently and I know people are angry.  So am I.  But that is not DT's fault.  In my opinion, this forum has been unfair to DT.

So, I'm in.  I don't see that I have much to lose and I still trust DT.  I'm willing to support them in this and then I'll see how it goes.


Ron

« Reply #273 on: May 31, 2014, 01:27 »
+4
So the only reason to opt in is to spite your fellow contributors? Good bases for a business decision.

« Reply #274 on: May 31, 2014, 03:50 »
+14
I opted out and thank DT for giving me the opportunity to do so beforehand.

However, I think agencies generally should take note: the time that we get excited about having our images used in deals with no compensation to us - just for the extra exposure and the potential-maybe-maybe-not-future revenue-streams (or dribbles) - that time is over.  That is not exciting anymore.

Imagine how my day was I received the mail from DT. I had come home to my stock stats to see that I had had an Extented license sale at Stocksy. And then open my mailbox and found the exciting news from DT. Can you guess which of the two events I found more exciting?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
125 Replies
38856 Views
Last post June 07, 2008, 02:48
by Microbius
96 Replies
36666 Views
Last post July 12, 2008, 11:31
by Pixel-Pizzazz
6 Replies
6063 Views
Last post November 24, 2011, 04:51
by StockCube
13 Replies
4269 Views
Last post July 14, 2016, 04:18
by SpaceStockFootage
2 Replies
7644 Views
Last post July 14, 2016, 00:42
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors