Same here, I was only opted in for partner sites at DT, but have now opted out there also. It is good they give us the opportunity, maybe they learned something from the DPC thing.

I also got that mail from DT last year, they wanted to use a couple I my images for the beta test program and I agreed to it. It was not a problem for me with those two images. But I have not heard anything more about those images. Guess I will never know if they have been sold and used within the program, because I should not get paid in the beta program. Now I regret i agreed.

Quote from: Elenathewise on January 21, 2015, 16:23

A while ago I was directly contacted by DT asking my permission to use a certain number of my images in their beta test program. Their email was considerate and polite, and I was given an easy way to opt out - which I did since I didn't particularly like the deal. I understand that the agency might be looking for new sources of revenue and trying new things out, and I also don't have to like everything they are doing, but if they are properly informing me and giving me an easy opt out - I don't see a problem with that. In fact, I don't see a problem with that at all. This is how it should be.

Very good point here.  I'm opted out and don't particularly like the deal, but a big applause to Dreamstime for making an easy opt-out before the deal launches.

Not really. It would have been much better if we could opt out only from that deal.

Not really. It would have been much better if we could opt out only from that deal.

I agree completely. We had to opt out from all partners just because of this deal. I'm still not sure what will be the impact on our DT income but it will not be good considering the free-fall on the income in all agencies. Another hit is not good at all.

I can't be bothered with these penny pinching carpet baggers I opted out

They only made round $16 maximum per month with over 1,000 images any way why should even raise my pulse thinking about their BS "exciting deals" when they know and I know it means jack to me in terms of income. 

Still, I have to wonder� could it be (as Justanotherphotographer's experience suggests) that opting out of partner deals on DT actually might make the old-fashioned credit sales come back???

I don't think so, I've had 12 of them in the last 10 days, both before and after I opted back into the scheme so it doesn't seem to make any difference either way.

So let's say that Google decides offering an opt-out doesn't make sense for their deal with DT and removes the option to opt-out. What then?

Either Google walks away or they negotiate a fair rate for the artists.  (EDIT - when I said "They" I meant DT would have to come up with something better for their artists or they won't have any in the deal)

Don't forget - if everyone opts out DT will have no content to sell via their OTHER partners, so they lose more than the Google revenue.

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 22, 2015, 08:06

So let's say that Google decides offering an opt-out doesn't make sense for their deal with DT and removes the option to opt-out. What then?

Either Google walks away or they negotiate a fair rate for the artists.

Don't forget - if everyone opts out DT will have no content to sell via their OTHER partners, so they lose more than the Google revenue.

This seems both pointless speculation and rather confused. Google can't remove the opt-out, only DT can do that. And if they do, it means you are either fully in or you have to leave the agency - iStock did something similar and even the most ferocious critics of Thinkstock quietly knuckled under and accepted their files being sent there.

When I said "They" I meant DT would have to come up with something better for their artists or they won't have any left in the deal - not Google.  This was likely some kindof contra deal where Google exchanged a certain value of advertising credits and DT gave them the sweet redistribution license.  So when they (DT) say they pay $2 per image, they likely received 10 times that.

Even the DPC campaign only got about 25% of images opted out so you can pretty much guarantee that whatever happens, DT would have 80+% of the collection opted in.  Look at how many (or few) people have shown an interest in this thread.
As for what their deal is - I've no idea, though I can't imagine DT agreeing to pay out the cash if it's not receiving cash from Google. If it were an advertising contra deal, then everybody would gain if it generated extra business, the cash would only be a part of the benefit. I doubt if it will be that good for us.

Quote from: Pixart on January 22, 2015, 10:51

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 22, 2015, 08:06

So let's say that Google decides offering an opt-out doesn't make sense for their deal with DT and removes the option to opt-out. What then?

Either Google walks away or they negotiate a fair rate for the artists.

Don't forget - if everyone opts out DT will have no content to sell via their OTHER partners, so they lose more than the Google revenue.

This seems both pointless speculation and rather confused. Google can't remove the opt-out, only DT can do that. And if they do, it means you are either fully in or you have to leave the agency - iStock did something similar and even the most ferocious critics of Thinkstock quietly knuckled under and accepted their files being sent there.

I wouldn't call it pointless speculation. More like preemptive planning.

Google is a giant used to getting their way. DT is a small fish. This joint deal clearly is lining someone's pockets at both Google and DT regardless of how negatively it affects contributors. So if Google doesn't like all of the opt-outs what do you think is going to happen? Right. They'll tell DT either to disable the opt-out or the money faucet gets turned off for DT.

Still, I have to wonder� could it be (as Justanotherphotographer's experience suggests) that opting out of partner deals on DT actually might make the old-fashioned credit sales come back???

I don't think so. I've been opted out of partner sales at DT for about a year. I have had these lurches between subs sales dominating (most was 19/20 on one sales page) and bursts of credit sales (where it's more like 50/50 for a bit). I can't explain the lurches - no other agency that sells both subs and credit sales has patterns like these - but I don't think it's different from what I saw before dumping the partner deals.

So if Google doesn't like all of the opt-outs what do you think is going to happen? Right. They'll tell DT either to disable the opt-out or the money faucet gets turned off for DT.

Yes, of course there might be a possibility of Google threatening to cancel the deal if there was not sufficient material available, in which case DT might decide to make participation a condition of continued representation on their site (but it's still DT's decision, not Google's). So what would you do then, close your account at DT or agree to the changed terms? That's the only contingency planning needed.
In any case, as at least 80% of the collection is almost certain to remain available given previous experience of opt out campaigns, it seems very unlikely that Google would feel there was insufficient choice.

YUCK! Glad I've opted out long time ago. 

This is why I started two years ago opting out of entire agencies that were doing things like so called partner programs. They didn't tell us who or how much and tried to hide the truth. I felt I would lose control of my work and have no way of knowing who was using it.

It only got worse with the DP back door deals last year, where we got a sub commission for some reseller charging high prices, close to EL levels. (potentially it was the same people who ran DP?) Then the deals upon deals, like this?

I know some people actually depend on this income and can't break away from the abusive relationships. But most have seen the trend and are making other provisions for making money from their work and getting away from Microstock.

I'm happy at two agencies now, SS and IS, and this type of deal is why. The invisible and unaccountable partners are another. The trend for agencies to come up with new ways to screw contributors is another.

I wonder where the bottom is. The more announcements I see like this the more I think we're not even close.

You covered it just fine.