pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: New DT 2012 Pricing Structure  (Read 27271 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: April 27, 2012, 07:09 »
0
I think Achilles is right.  The average contributor is a small contributor and I think most of us should gain if download numbers don't fall.  I now have virtually no level 0 files, so for a recent upload with no sales will get a smaller % of 3 times the price, the bar for level 5 is lowered and am struggling to see a downside unless sales totally tank.  Personally, I tend to look at the $ gained rather than the %.


« Reply #51 on: April 27, 2012, 07:37 »
0
when all is said and done - they are all the same
looking out for the companys bottom line, at the expense of those who are the foundation that the company is making money from

« Reply #52 on: April 27, 2012, 09:27 »
0
when all is said and done - they are all the same
looking out for the companys bottom line, at the expense of those who are the foundation that the company is making money from

Yup. That's exactly right.

« Reply #53 on: April 27, 2012, 09:34 »
0

When royalties do not keep up with annual inflation, it is a calculated cut. No raise since 2008 ='s a 10% pay cut.

But they haven't raised prices during that time either.

So the buyer gets a price cut (if you wish to call stable prices in an era of low inflation a price cut) and we take a share of that along with SS. The issue is that in SS's case, by and large, the agency and contributor are rising and falling together. At all the other agencies, their pricing changes bring up the agency income the most by taking more from the buyer and giving a smaller share to the contributor.

« Reply #54 on: April 27, 2012, 09:49 »
0
Just got $3.10 for an extra small on DT which is exactly $3.01 more than for a recent sale at IS.  The same sale would fetch $1.07 on SS, $0.23 on FT and around $0.50 on 123.  Still not seeing much grounds for complaint  ???

wut

« Reply #55 on: April 27, 2012, 09:54 »
0
Just got $3.10 for an extra small on DT which is exactly $3.01 more than for a recent sale at IS.  The same sale would fetch $1.07 on SS, $0.23 on FT and around $0.50 on 123.  Still not seeing much grounds for complaint  ???

Great, give them some more ideas ::)

Microbius

« Reply #56 on: April 27, 2012, 10:11 »
0
I'm seeing my RPD increasing, so I think I may have gone off on the wrong track with my original post (now deleted). This could actually make a positive difference for me.

« Reply #57 on: April 27, 2012, 10:19 »
0
So what is conclusion?
Better or worse?

wut

« Reply #58 on: April 27, 2012, 10:25 »
0
My calculations were wrong.
My apologies to DT.

There is no lowering of our share
for example if you had image of level 1. It got 30%. Now this image become Level 2.
You are getting 30% for level 2 under new system.

The only share cut is for images that haven't sold for 24 months. and images with over 25 downloads




You should edit it again, all old commission percentages are wrong. They were all +5% (L1 was 30%, L5 was 50% etc)

grafix04

« Reply #59 on: April 27, 2012, 11:30 »
0
His figures are correct and line up with mine, however they are incomplete.  He has left out details for the split change in level 0 and the change for level 5.  The change is positive for the most part as we get an increase in revenue for most levels.   However I am concerned that the massive increase in price will either drive buyers away or push them to switch to purchasing subscription plans.  We'll have to wait and see I guess. 

Wut, you're only considering the change in commissions per level without taking into account that our images have been bumped up a level.  Although the commissions have changed for each level, it evens out because of the bump up.  For instance, an image with 4-9 downloads in the old structure was a level 2 and we received 35% commission for it.  Now it has been bumped up to a level 3 which still gives us 35% commission.

« Reply #60 on: April 27, 2012, 11:42 »
0
However I am concerned that the massive increase in price will either drive buyers away or push them to switch to purchasing subscription plans.  We'll have to wait and see I guess.

Looking at my March vs April. My RPD is about double, my downloads are about half and my earnings are about the same. So, it will be interesting to see if that is common or not.

grafix04

« Reply #61 on: April 27, 2012, 11:50 »
0
Looking at my March vs April. My RPD is about double, my downloads are about half and my earnings are about the same. So, it will be interesting to see if that is common or not.

April's not over yet but it's close enough.  FYI, here are my March vs April stats:

Revenue: -48%
Downloads: -54%
RPD: +13%

Would be great if others chimed in with their stats.

« Reply #62 on: April 27, 2012, 11:53 »
0
So what is conclusion?
Better or worse?
For me, worse. I can't predict the effect of the pricing changes, but the decision and changes to favor newer images and smaller ports hurts me. I have an old and, for vectors, a relatively large port. I see my DT sales falling significantly.

I guess I should submit a lot of new images, but DT's bizarre and unfair rejections of images which are accepted and sell well everywhere else make that unlikely.

wut

« Reply #63 on: April 27, 2012, 12:00 »
0
Wut, you're only considering the change in commissions per level without taking into account that our images have been bumped up a level.  Although the commissions have changed for each level, it evens out because of the bump up.  For instance, an image with 4-9 downloads in the old structure was a level 2 and we received 35% commission for it.  Now it has been bumped up to a level 3 which still gives us 35% commission.

I don't have to account for anything. Level percentage is fixed. And L1 is not 30% anymore, it's 25%. But yes, your images get bumped up a level and the chart states that. The charts should state clear facts. Commission change is calculated anyway, so there's no need to artifically bump up the percentages. That's all I wanted to say.  The correct percentages should be included, or else it doesn't make any sense and also, more importantly, cut calculations are wrong if you use the wrong commission percentage. I see you corrected his mistake, so your chart looks right (but I didn't check it)
« Last Edit: April 27, 2012, 12:05 by wut »

« Reply #64 on: April 27, 2012, 12:08 »
0
we have no idea if this is going to be good or bad but one thing we know for sure, royalties will never be over 20% again.. once your boss cuts your salary he wont raise it, thats why employeers give bonus/prizes and all that crap, making sure they wont raise the fixed part..

« Reply #65 on: April 27, 2012, 12:10 »
0
April's not over yet but it's close enough.  FYI, here are my March vs April stats:

Revenue: -48%
Downloads: -54%
RPD: +13%

Would be great if others chimed in with their stats.
My sales at DT, projected total for April, 2012:
down 11% from March 2012
down 14% from February, 2012
RPD +30% above my lifetime average at DT

« Reply #66 on: April 27, 2012, 12:24 »
0
Given that the last couple of weeks had a searching issue for relevancy (defaulted to best seller for a while) and they were playing with the new methods, presumably by doing some of each and comparing, I think that comparing March to April will be totally useless.  Add to that the fact that buyers were likely unaware of pricing changes and I think we'll need a few months to really assess this change in pricing.

One thing no one is mentioning is that subscriptions have remained 'unchanged' - but given the level boost it means that a lot more images will hit the 2x or 3x pricing, which should provide a boost to RPD from subs.

« Reply #67 on: April 27, 2012, 12:31 »
0
Comparing Mar 1 - 26 to Apr 1 - 26:

Sales: Down about 10%
RPD: Up about 30%
Earnings: Up about 10%

« Reply #68 on: April 27, 2012, 13:50 »
0
Given that the last couple of weeks had a searching issue for relevancy (defaulted to best seller for a while) and they were playing with the new methods, presumably by doing some of each and comparing, I think that comparing March to April will be totally useless.  Add to that the fact that buyers were likely unaware of pricing changes and I think we'll need a few months to really assess this change in pricing.

One thing no one is mentioning is that subscriptions have remained 'unchanged' - but given the level boost it means that a lot more images will hit the 2x or 3x pricing, which should provide a boost to RPD from subs.

It will be interesting to observe the long term changes that will occur over time because of the not so apparent adaptations they have made to the search!  Those changes would have been easier to observe without the concurrent pricing changes.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #69 on: April 27, 2012, 13:56 »
0
Serban (Achilles) makes a good point.

...   Quote ...   The discrepancies you may have seen in the past days were due to the previous tests we did. Those customers continued to use the new system of pricing.

This is not that complicated, almost everything that was already selling is now selling at a higher price (difference is bigger for small files and almost inexistent for higher ones) AND royalties are split the same.

Let me try again, it seems my first post wasn't clear enough.

Old level 0 is now split into:
- level 0 - gives you 5% less but these are files that didn't sell in 2 years. And if they sell it's only for the first download that you take a cut (price is the same). Note that after first download they jump straight at level 2.
- level 1 - these were level 0 before and same royalties (25%) are awarded now, at higher price

Old level 1 is now level 2 - same royalties as before, higher price
Old level 2 is now level 3 - same royalties as before, higher price
Old level 3 is now level 4 - same royalties as before, higher price
Old level 4 is now level 5 - same royalties as before, higher price

Old level 5 remains level 5 but has lower royalties (5% less), for the same price.

The only exceptions are the past level 5 and part of the past level 0. As you can see the vast majority of files still have the same royalties but sell at higher price. The revenue for almost all of them is split as before.

Dreamstime still rewards 60% for its exclusive contributors, 8 years after its inception. They never took a hit, even though the margin for marketing is lower and it's difficult to compete. But at least we know we have exclusive content and commited contributors. If you worry about your royalties you should stop using agencies that provide low percentages or ask them to raise them for you. As long as you contribute there don't expect us to keep royalties more than theirs because it would be impossible to compete.   .
..end quote
« Last Edit: April 27, 2012, 13:58 by WarrenPrice »

« Reply #70 on: April 27, 2012, 14:08 »
0
Serban (Achilles) makes a good point.

If you worry about your royalties you should stop using agencies that provide low percentages or ask them to raise them for you. As long as you contribute there don't expect us to keep royalties more than theirs because it would be impossible to compete.

You could probably make the same argument about pricing and subs too.

« Reply #71 on: April 27, 2012, 14:10 »
0
Serban (Achilles) makes a good point.

...   Quote ...   If you worry about your royalties you should stop using agencies that provide low percentages or ask them to raise them for you. As long as you contribute there don't expect us to keep royalties more than theirs because it would be impossible to compete.  ...end quote

That's a convenient excuse isn't it. So the continual grab goes to helping make DT number 1. I don't think so some how. I'm sure they don't put nearly enough of their cut into expanding their business.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2012, 14:13 by Microstock Posts »

« Reply #72 on: April 27, 2012, 14:16 »
0
Serban (Achilles) makes a good point.

If you worry about your royalties you should stop using agencies that provide low percentages or ask them to raise them for you. As long as you contribute there don't expect us to keep royalties more than theirs because it would be impossible to compete.

Does that mean I can ask Serban to raise my royalty rates?

WarrenPrice

« Reply #73 on: April 27, 2012, 14:22 »
0
Serban (Achilles) makes a good point.

If you worry about your royalties you should stop using agencies that provide low percentages or ask them to raise them for you. As long as you contribute there don't expect us to keep royalties more than theirs because it would be impossible to compete.

Does that mean I can ask Serban to raise my royalty rates?

 ;D ;D
Of course you can. 
Maybe a mass mail in (I can't post in the forum) for a raise?
 ;D

« Reply #74 on: April 27, 2012, 14:34 »
0
I don't see any valid reason to drop the level 0 and level 5 commission %. In fact the 10% drop to level 5 is going to have a larger and larger effect over time as more images reach that level. Also when they next drop percentages it won't look like such a big drop (2 small drops doesn't seem so bad). (hopefully this won't happen, but following the trends there it is only a matter of time).

My RPD is up a lot, but my sales numbers are down. I agree that this month is too much of a mess to make valid comparisons.  With DT's first big commission drop it took about a year before my income got back to where it was before the drop.

I'll have to ask Serban to up my rates, since I think that 20% is the lowest of all the sites I actually contribute to now.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
138 Replies
41883 Views
Last post April 26, 2011, 14:39
by WarrenPrice
22 Replies
8910 Views
Last post January 31, 2014, 09:15
by JPSDK
1 Replies
3764 Views
Last post December 31, 2014, 08:05
by klsbear
0 Replies
1695 Views
Last post March 26, 2017, 21:53
by pixel8
65 Replies
17611 Views
Last post April 19, 2017, 16:19
by increasingdifficulty

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle