Author Topic: New DT 2012 Pricing Structure (Read 38349 times)

luissantos84 · « **Reply #75 on:** April 27, 2012, 14:38 »

impossible to compete WITH WHAT? royalties?

I am missing something for sure.. aren´t they suppose to compete in PRICING??

I really hoped I haven´t read that paragraph, it wasn´t really needed..

borg · « **Reply #76 on:** April 27, 2012, 14:51 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on April 27, 2012, 12:08

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 won´t raise it, thats why employeers give bonus/prizes and all that crap, making sure they wont raise the fixed part..

Exactly!

Just one thing can change that...
A new agency completely in hands of us, stockers... As owners and as contributors...
Then we will get whole amount, usual royalties and also through "earnings per share" at the end of a year, after all costs.... Then rules can be changed...
For now, we can not have any impact on the distribution of earnings, or some real insight into the marketing costs which they justify usual destruction of our part of earnings, whole the time...
But, with our greed they hold our balls in their hands....

P.S.
Serban was right about the low cost agencies, if we are talking about pricing....

luissantos84 · « **Reply #77 on:** April 27, 2012, 15:00 »

there are many people doing stock that know very well SEO etc etc go ahead guys, we will support and help funding it, if there is anybody with that idea please create a topic and lets all dream and perhaps do something

Microstock Posts · « **Reply #78 on:** April 27, 2012, 15:05 »

Quote from: cthoman on April 27, 2012, 14:16

Quote from: WarrenPrice on April 27, 2012, 13:56
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?

Well done for getting on their forum and asking for a raise. I salute you, Lol!

Everyone, get on this forum and politely ask for a raise. No harm in asking is there?

http://www.dreamstime.com/forumm_31236_pg5

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #79 on:** April 27, 2012, 15:13 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on April 27, 2012, 13:56

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.
...
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. .[/i]..end quote

Lol, that's convenient.

Raise prices so buyers pay more and buy less, but you get less percent. So your income goes down on fewer sales.

But no need to worry about your royalties.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #80 on:** April 27, 2012, 15:18 »

Blaming contributors for DT taking a bigger share of the total is just lovely - it'd be funny if I weren't a contributor.

Why do we not hear anything about DT doing something to raise itself from the bottom of the top tier agencies, a position it has been very comfortably holding for years? Dicking around with the prices and royalties won't bring in more buyers or increase the amount current buyers spend. If they had something to say about growing the business overall, I'd be interested to hear it. Until then I await news of a new 37 level pricing system with 14 buyer discount programs and a iPhone/Android app to help buyers figure out what they're actually paying...

cthoman · « **Reply #81 on:** April 27, 2012, 15:57 »

Quote from: Microstock Posts on April 27, 2012, 15:05

Well done for getting on their forum and asking for a raise. I salute you, Lol!

Everyone, get on this forum and politely ask for a raise. No harm in asking is there?

http://www.dreamstime.com/forumm_31236_pg5

I thought it was pretty funny. In truth though, I agree with Serban, and I have been trying to give more support to the better paying agencies for the last year. The problem is there aren't many options. You're probably better off making your own than trying to find an equitable partner or getting an existing one to improve conditions.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #82 on:** April 27, 2012, 16:11 »

Especially for Serban ...
You see, I tried to be positive and nobody believes me.
Your reputation for expertise in "spinning" is far stronger than my reputation for being a DT misfit,.

sharpshot · « **Reply #83 on:** April 27, 2012, 16:12 »

Quote

If you worry about your royalties you should stop using agencies that provide low percentages....

That's what I'm doing. I'm spending a lot more time producing images for alamy, who pay 60% non-exclusive. I've had enough of working only with microstock, until sites realise that cutting my earnings demotivates me and lowers the amount of money I make for them.

heywoody · « **Reply #84 on:** April 27, 2012, 17:57 »

Sales may go down as a result of higher prices but the upside is that the company is still being run by the guy who had the vision to start it and companies like this tend to have more going for them than those that have been swallowed and now run by corporate bean counters - the fact that, uniquely among the big 4, DT is offering PNG, is likely to attract buyers.
On the royalty front, you have to look at this in the context of what is out there. Unless someone’s entire port is at the top level, this is an effective pay rise for most people. At the same time it increases the benefit of being exclusive which is good for the business. Again I have to compare a > $3 (40%) to a < $0.10 (15%) return for the same size image sale. Yeah, there’s an element of “taketh away” about this but there’s also an element of “giveth” and that does not seem to happen that often in this business.

grafix04 · « **Reply #85 on:** April 27, 2012, 19:55 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on April 27, 2012, 13:56

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. .[/i]..end quote

This comment from Serban is insulting our intelligence and it's very disappointing. He can't use the excuse of competing while at the same time raising prices for buyers. This level increase won't bring in more buyers and probably will deter them. This is a terrible and arrogant comment to make and it will lose him a lot of respect, both from buyers and contributors.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #86 on:** April 27, 2012, 20:02 »

Quote from: grafix04 on April 27, 2012, 19:55

Quote from: WarrenPrice on April 27, 2012, 13:56
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. .[/i]..end quote

This comment from Serban is insulting our intelligence and it's very disappointing. He can't use the excuse of competing while at the same time raising prices for buyers. This level increase won't bring in more buyers and probably will deter them. This is a terrible and arrogant comment to make and it will lose him a lot of respect, both from buyers and contributors.

it is absurd.. competing with other agencies? competing royalties? seriously thats not the agency job, their job is getting us buyers.. they can compete on the pricing but never lowering royalties because other have.. thats not a business strategy it is pure greed if done in that way

sharpshot · « **Reply #87 on:** April 28, 2012, 04:40 »

Perhaps he means he needs more money to compete with the other sites wealthy owners lifestyles

That's all I see this is for, to make a lot more money for the owners of DT by taking another slice from contributors. The costs of running sites looks like it has been coming down. Advertising is cheaper than it was a few years ago and they don't seem to be spending more on marketing. They seemed to spend more a few years ago, when lots of people didn't know about them. Most of the costs of running an internet site seem to of reduced over the years. It might cost more to host their huge libraries of images but those costs seem to reduce every year and a bigger library should bring more sales. I don't think they pay reviewers more than they used to.

It seems obvious where all the money from our commission cuts is going. I would have more respect if sites were honest with us and didn't try to make it look like they had no choice but to cut commissions. If they want to keep more of their profits, that's their choice but it doesn't make me want to work harder for them.

stockmarketer · « **Reply #88 on:** April 28, 2012, 05:32 »

Yesterday (the day the changes rolled out) my sales started out very strong, then I stopped seeing numbers in the early afternoon. On Saturday morning, I still see no sales since my early afternoon sales yesterday. Is this because reporting is down due to the changes being implemented, or has my impact from these changes meant I no longer get ANY sales?

Have you seen any sales reported since yesterday (Fri) afternoon?

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #89 on:** April 28, 2012, 06:38 »

Quote from: stockmarketer on April 28, 2012, 05:32

Have you seen any sales reported since yesterday (Fri) afternoon?

No.

As for the general issue of sites lining their pockets, I'm afraid we are very much in the position of farmers supplying the huge supermarket chains: the producer no longer has any clout and the distributor takes advantage of that. It's capitalism.

Mantis · « **Reply #90 on:** April 28, 2012, 08:13 »

Quote from: gbalex on April 27, 2012, 01:32

Quote from: wut on April 26, 2012, 19:47
Quote from: ShadySue on April 26, 2012, 19:19
Quote from: jsnover on April 26, 2012, 17:44
I think the complaining has been about the lack of a raise, not about taking a raise themselves and passing on only a little to contributors. The closest they came to that was when the introduced extended licenses. Initially you had to buy a large-ish quantity and the contributor payout was set on that basis. Then they later added the ability to buy a smaller quantity of extended licenses - at a higher price - but contributors got a flat amount regardless. In the beginning I think it was $20 per extended license.
Yeah, I think that was it.
Me too . No raises, but no cuts either. It doesn't make them the good guys, but competition's actions are making them (look good/the good guys)...SS is the best of what we've got (indies).

True, butt SS is still better than most because that same logis can be said of those agencies who have cut our commissions. So cut commissions + inflation = bend over and grab your ankles and say, "thank you sir may I have another"

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

cathyslife · « **Reply #91 on:** April 28, 2012, 08:40 »

Quote from: stockmarketer on April 28, 2012, 05:32

Yesterday (the day the changes rolled out) my sales started out very strong, then I stopped seeing numbers in the early afternoon. On Saturday morning, I still see no sales since my early afternoon sales yesterday. Is this because reporting is down due to the changes being implemented, or has my impact from these changes meant I no longer get ANY sales?

Have you seen any sales reported since yesterday (Fri) afternoon?

No. In fact, I didn't see any sales yesterday at all. Not typical and very disturbing.

stockmarketer · « **Reply #92 on:** April 28, 2012, 08:42 »

Quote from: stockmarketer on April 28, 2012, 05:32

Yesterday (the day the changes rolled out) my sales started out very strong, then I stopped seeing numbers in the early afternoon. On Saturday morning, I still see no sales since my early afternoon sales yesterday. Is this because reporting is down due to the changes being implemented, or has my impact from these changes meant I no longer get ANY sales?

Have you seen any sales reported since yesterday (Fri) afternoon?

UPDATE: I was hoping this was just a lag... that as today went on I would watch DT report a continuation of my sales from yesterday, with a bunch more being reported before today's numbers start showing up, but instead I have just seen a single sale reported for today. This suggests that I have had no downloads from mid-day yesterday to early this morning. That is a disastrous shift that I can only assume is due to the changes DT rolled out yesterday. Anyone else see virtually no sales on DT for the second half of yesterday?

lisafx · « **Reply #93 on:** April 28, 2012, 09:16 »

Quote from: stockmarketer on April 28, 2012, 05:32

Yesterday (the day the changes rolled out) my sales started out very strong, then I stopped seeing numbers in the early afternoon. On Saturday morning, I still see no sales since my early afternoon sales yesterday. Is this because reporting is down due to the changes being implemented, or has my impact from these changes meant I no longer get ANY sales?

Have you seen any sales reported since yesterday (Fri) afternoon?

I have all my numbers from yesterday, I think, because I have one from today, so I assume that means all of yesterday is in. Very low day though.

Less than half a typical weekday. Wonder if something has been done with the search engine? I would think it's too early to see buyer resistance to the pricing yet.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #94 on:** April 28, 2012, 10:07 »

I can't respond in the DT forum (I'm banned) so thought I would respond to this quote from the DT forum:

Keeping at level 0 just the 2 years unsold files is a smart thing. 2 years is half way through to 4 years when the files get deleted or even worse transfered to the free area. So now at the half way distance, DT is kind of creating a new category, let's call it half dead photos. So these half dead photos are offered at a discount. If there is a buyer, then the photo gets an infusion of new life, and is "saved" taking its rightful place between the living photos.

I like that.

I've just gone thru and deleted all my 2-year old images with no sales -- Level Zero. One of those Level Zero images just sold for $28 on Shutterstock.

Glad the buyer didn't find that Level Zero on DT.

ED: Of course, most of this ridiculous philosophy is coming from the DT Exclusives.

fotografer · « **Reply #95 on:** April 28, 2012, 10:11 »

Unusually slow day for me yesterday as well. About a third or less than a normal Friday and nothing at all today so far. My last dl was bought close to midnight so not much chance of anymore comning through for yesterday.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #96 on:** April 28, 2012, 10:29 »

My last sale at DT was just after noon on Friday - and Friday was a weak day (it's often the slowest weekday as Asia/Pacific is already having a weekend). Nada so far today.

On Tuesday, I thought things might be returning to "normal" after their search engine problems, but sales Wednesday were half of Tuesdays; Thursday had a grand total of 1 sale and Friday was just 4 subscription sales.

For the month so far, downloads are down 30% on last month and $$ are down 34% (by contrast, SS sales are so far down 15% over march and IS is (a) in first place this month and last and (b) April is up over a strong March).

So other than a bunch of happy DT exclusives (and I'm sorry, but anyone who is exclusive at DT just isn't interested in making money out of their stock portfolio) I can't see anything good about the recent changes at DT.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #97 on:** April 28, 2012, 11:01 »

Quote from: jsnover on April 28, 2012, 10:29

I'm sorry, but anyone who is exclusive at DT just isn't interested in making money out of their stock portfolio

so true..

Grandpa · « **Reply #98 on:** April 28, 2012, 11:58 »

Sometimes DT was the second best microstock site, today it is on 4-th place, really middle tier. Saving the site DT makes one mistake after another and are going down more and more. When it will be completely sunk, interesting, what will do all these ''happy exclusives'', begin from zero on other sites?

Equus · « **Reply #99 on:** April 28, 2012, 12:27 »

Quote from: jsnover on April 28, 2012, 10:29

My last sale at DT was just after noon on Friday - and Friday was a weak day (it's often the slowest weekday as Asia/Pacific is already having a weekend). Nada so far today.

Remember it's May Day in Europe - big holiday, lots of people taking time off. As I remember, DT always suffers more than the other sites at May Day.

For the month so far, downloads are down 30% on last month and $$ are down 34% (by contrast, SS sales are so far down 15% over march and IS is (a) in first place this month and last and (b) April is up over a strong March).

Interesting. I have April way down after a very poor March. Maybe it's time to go Indie

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: New DT 2012 Pricing Structure (Read 38349 times)

luissantos84

borg

luissantos84

Microstock Posts

Sean Locke Photography

Jo Ann Snover

cthoman

WarrenPrice

sharpshot

heywoody

grafix04

luissantos84

sharpshot

stockmarketer

BaldricksTrousers

Mantis

cathyslife

stockmarketer

lisafx

WarrenPrice

fotografer

Jo Ann Snover

luissantos84

Grandpa

Equus

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors