Post by: eyewave on February 15, 2019, 03:12
Anyone else?
Post by: pictureman75 on February 15, 2019, 03:13
Post by: boggy on February 15, 2019, 03:23
Dear #firstname #lastname,
We regret to inform you that a subset of the royalties paid out on Feb 12 were calculated incorrectly. We have now removed the incorrect amount from your account, which could result in a negative balance if you already submitted a payout request. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused. If you have any questions, you can contact us here https://contributor.stock.adobe.com/contact
Regards,
Adobe Stock team
But they took me more than I earned that day, and without any closer explanation. Problem is that in statistics still exist full mount that I earned, and there is no any information which image was refunded (or whatever they do with my money). I can't see any explanation to clear my whole earning for a day (at least in respectable company like Adobe claim it is).
Post by: veerizon on February 15, 2019, 03:30
and I only can see it on fotolia (dashboard/credit) where can I find it on adobe stock??? why is it so hard to program a normal good contributor portal :-\
Post by: jackboy on February 15, 2019, 03:31
Post by: hansenn on February 15, 2019, 03:33
Now my balance shows a -, but I cannot see how much negative.
Post by: Deyan Georgiev Photography on February 15, 2019, 03:37
Post by: fotorob on February 15, 2019, 03:38
I am also affected, BUT I cannot see the deductions in my Adobe Stock backend. Only on the Fotolia backend, but even there I cannot see the images affected.
I need to share revenues with my team, so this is terrible.
Post by: Sandeel on February 15, 2019, 03:45
All that remains are the under 1€ sales, almost all the time.
I was doing great on Fotolia, the "upgrade" to Adobe Stock is a total downgrade for me, and not just the performance, the website is utterly unprofessional too.
But if they go on like this, I'm going to be really angry at them. There is not even transparency in the sense that I can have correct stats. They took back a lot of money but the stats still show the higher royalties that they don't pay. Come on. Be more professional.
Post by: bestravelvideo on February 15, 2019, 03:47
I also see the deduction in Fotolia only, not Adobe.
When i click on Invoice for details, I get the message
"Sorry, the page cannot be displayed for the moment"
but the file in dispute is now updated in Fotolia with a lower sale price.
Could this be a mistake, or we just hope it is?
Post by: Fairplay on February 15, 2019, 03:48
It was too good to be true.
I hate when such s*its happen!
Post by: Minsc on February 15, 2019, 03:50
I don't mind them taking back some money if it's fraud related, but they need to be more transparent about it and let us know which sales are affected.
Post by: leremy on February 15, 2019, 03:58
Post by: HalfFull on February 15, 2019, 04:02
Is ok you are telling me there's some accounting problem and deduct some of the wrong earnings. But at least tell me how much was deducted, and which files.
I only had a small correction but it would have been nice to know the exact amount and which files in the email. Also, plain text with a link instantly screams Phising email to me. It didn't look official and I was ready to write it off.
Post by: LayerAce.com on February 15, 2019, 04:13
Like its gonna do any difference :D
This doesnt look professional at all, no proof, nothing.
Post by: hansenn on February 15, 2019, 04:20
Is ok you are telling me there's some accounting problem and deduct some of the wrong earnings. But at least tell me how much was deducted, and which files.
I only had a small correction but it would have been nice to know the exact amount and which files in the email. Also, plain text with a link instantly screams Phising email to me. It didn't look official and I was ready to write it off.
possibly phishing. I hope so. Looks like the mails are send en masse. Not personally addressed, but a simple "Dear #firstname #lastname,".
Maybe Adobe got hacked. Last week also got some phishing mails from EyeEm and 500px.
Post by: Deyan Georgiev Photography on February 15, 2019, 04:23
Is ok you are telling me there's some accounting problem and deduct some of the wrong earnings. But at least tell me how much was deducted, and which files.
I only had a small correction but it would have been nice to know the exact amount and which files in the email. Also, plain text with a link instantly screams Phising email to me. It didn't look official and I was ready to write it off.
possibly phishing. I hope so. Looks like the mails are send en masse. Not personally addressed, but a simple "Dear #firstname #lastname,".
Maybe Adobe got hacked. Last week also got some phishing mails from EyeEm and 500px.
Agree, but when this reflect the account balance become serious.
Post by: AnS on February 15, 2019, 04:24
The "Dear #firstname #lastname" parts sound very strange nonetheless.
Post by: eyewave on February 15, 2019, 04:57
possibly phishing. I hope so. Looks like the mails are send en masse. Not personally addressed, but a simple "Dear #firstname #lastname,".
Maybe Adobe got hacked. Last week also got some phishing mails from EyeEm and 500px.
No phishing. The account balance is real and indeed, 500px got hacked and asked all users to change their passwords. Read the news.
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 05:31
Were just an error or don’t know what to think. Without those sales the new adobe erA is a big hiant crap..... give me back fltolia please
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 05:35
I complain about ss but is still by110000 mileas ahead any other company. Point
Post by: Mcrstckfllw on February 15, 2019, 05:39
How could this happened to so many contributors at once, adobe?
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 05:48
Wow! I thought it was just me when i noticed that and received the email!crap company do this... earning are falling down contriboutor portal is appalling... they had a good company managed to destroy it... same canva after getty deal... same as ss when they change alglrithm... microstock is not a serious industry. Wish all this will fail soon and we back just to a bunch of rm or high end rf .
How could this happened to so many contributors at once, adobe?
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 05:51
4 subs only and then this.... they have no clue what they are doing. They had a great brand fotolia who worked great and change to this black hole
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 05:54
possibly phishing. I hope so. Looks like the mails are send en masse. Not personally addressed, but a simple "Dear #firstname #lastname,".
Maybe Adobe got hacked. Last week also got some phishing mails from EyeEm and 500px.
No phishing. The account balance is real and indeed, 500px got hacked and asked all users to change their passwords. Read the news.
Well to be objective the images i sold for 99 were too basic and i was surprised, in my opinion is everything for real, they had fake sales and got money back. The problem
Is that this adds to a falling level of earnings. Zero sales since the adobe take the controls of all operations.
Post by: gnirtS on February 15, 2019, 05:57
I hadn't requested any sort of payout on the 12th and for all days i got my usual average numbers of sales and nothing out of the ordinary.
I shouldn't be negative if its just the 12th affected as i had a good positive balance and hadnt requested any form of payout since that date.
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 06:15
Were 99 dollar 360 dollar and 550 dollar, read the thread in this forum. Probably somebody messed up their payment syatem.
Post by: pictureman75 on February 15, 2019, 06:48
Post by: Sean Locke Photography on February 15, 2019, 06:53
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 06:58
I have a very hard time believing $50 of sales were "calculated incorrectly" on February 12th, when that's more than I make in a day. Someone has screwed up royally here.
what is strange is that in 12 i had zero sales, i requested the payout in 10 so thought it was referred to that...but for me those 99 360 550 dollar are referred to 0,99 0,36 0,55...it happened also to amazon to sell item at very low prices due to a comma error. but is strange reading of deduction from people who didn't have any special sale last week. cross fingers it
Post by: Stu99 on February 15, 2019, 07:16
Post by: Deyan Georgiev Photography on February 15, 2019, 07:52
Post by: fotorob on February 15, 2019, 08:19
This means it was running eight days without anybody noticing?
Post by: VisitorQ on February 15, 2019, 08:51
Post by: RAW on February 15, 2019, 08:53
Why must we pay for their mistakes?
They can't even supply the details.
I tried to download the invoice and: "Sorry, the page cannot be displayed for the moment"
The crap never ends.
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 09:36
Post by: PhotoBomb on February 15, 2019, 09:41
We need a true accounting of this fiasco and more transparency as to the cause.
Post by: Zero Talent on February 15, 2019, 09:46
in addiction...nothing is in payoneer account but i have a big red in fotolia...where is that guy of adobe stock always ready to write about the glory of his company? he should have already wrote something...we deserved this because we accept 10 years ago this crap...lThat's true!
The last big multi hundreds of dollars payment was not triggered AND I'm about $300 in red.
Post by: C.B. on February 15, 2019, 10:00
Post by: RAW on February 15, 2019, 10:02
Why do we have to pay for their "accounting error"?
An airline sells a ticket at the wrong price. They still honor that ticket.
We are just bailing out Adobe.
Post by: Pauws99 on February 15, 2019, 10:11
It's disgraceful that Adobe do not give any details they just take our money.Not always.....the reason is simply that airlines face competition. In the end who is actually going to walk away from probably the second best selling agency?
Why do we have to pay for their "accounting error"?
An airline sells a ticket at the wrong price. They still honor that ticket.
We are just bailing out Adobe.
Post by: RAW on February 15, 2019, 10:15
Post by: Deyan Georgiev Photography on February 15, 2019, 10:18
It's disgraceful that Adobe do not give any details they just take our money.Not always.....the reason is simply that airlines face competition. In the end who is actually going to walk away from probably the second best selling agency?
Why do we have to pay for their "accounting error"?
An airline sells a ticket at the wrong price. They still honor that ticket.
We are just bailing out Adobe.
This problem will be solved if non-exclusive way of contributing disappear and we have to choice agency to which will upload exclusively and at every new shot to decide where, where and why there...
Post by: HalfFull on February 15, 2019, 10:25
Post by: jonbull on February 15, 2019, 10:29
It'll pay off for Adobe Stock the way it pays off for us. This isn't about why, people make mistakes. It's more about how. To write such a lapidary email, to know exactly that you deduct credits from people, just doesn't work. Hardly dubious and somehow a bad joke that reminds me of an air-dried clay brick!
i made the account again and really cannot understand what they are referring to...the sum is less than those big sale together by nearly 20%...the 12 i didn't have any sale...not even a requested payout...for me they have been hankered heavily.....in addiction i can see the sum in fotolia but in adobe nothing.
addidng to a situation of practically 3 sales in a week for 0,36 cent since adobe portal took the scene....adobe the new canva?
Post by: Pauws99 on February 15, 2019, 10:33
Be careful what you wish for if that happened there would be only two or three viable agencies who would hold the whip hand.It's disgraceful that Adobe do not give any details they just take our money.Not always.....the reason is simply that airlines face competition. In the end who is actually going to walk away from probably the second best selling agency?
Why do we have to pay for their "accounting error"?
An airline sells a ticket at the wrong price. They still honor that ticket.
We are just bailing out Adobe.
This problem will be solved if non-exclusive way of contributing disappear and we have to choice agency to which will upload exclusively and at every new shot to decide where, where and why there...
Post by: RAW on February 15, 2019, 10:37
It's disgraceful that Adobe do not give any details they just take our money.Not always.....the reason is simply that airlines face competition. In the end who is actually going to walk away from probably the second best selling agency?
Why do we have to pay for their "accounting error"?
An airline sells a ticket at the wrong price. They still honor that ticket.
We are just bailing out Adobe.
I think the airline honor's the ticket because it's good PR and the right thing to do.
#adobebailout
Post by: Pauws99 on February 15, 2019, 10:40
Good PR yep....because its the "right thing to do" I very much doubt its just a hard headed business decision.It's disgraceful that Adobe do not give any details they just take our money.Not always.....the reason is simply that airlines face competition. In the end who is actually going to walk away from probably the second best selling agency?
Why do we have to pay for their "accounting error"?
An airline sells a ticket at the wrong price. They still honor that ticket.
We are just bailing out Adobe.
I think the airline honor's the ticket because it's good PR and the right thing to do.
#adobebailout
Post by: Deyan Georgiev Photography on February 15, 2019, 10:46
Be careful what you wish for if that happened there would be only two or three viable agencies who would hold the whip hand.It's disgraceful that Adobe do not give any details they just take our money.Not always.....the reason is simply that airlines face competition. In the end who is actually going to walk away from probably the second best selling agency?
Why do we have to pay for their "accounting error"?
An airline sells a ticket at the wrong price. They still honor that ticket.
We are just bailing out Adobe.
This problem will be solved if non-exclusive way of contributing disappear and we have to choice agency to which will upload exclusively and at every new shot to decide where, where and why there...
How? They will need images, but there is one image for one agency and i hold the image.
Post by: Pauws99 on February 15, 2019, 12:06
Who is going to go exclusive with anyone but the biggest 2-3 agencies? What happens when you close your account and you have to wait months for them to withdraw images from the site.Be careful what you wish for if that happened there would be only two or three viable agencies who would hold the whip hand.It's disgraceful that Adobe do not give any details they just take our money.Not always.....the reason is simply that airlines face competition. In the end who is actually going to walk away from probably the second best selling agency?
Why do we have to pay for their "accounting error"?
An airline sells a ticket at the wrong price. They still honor that ticket.
We are just bailing out Adobe.
This problem will be solved if non-exclusive way of contributing disappear and we have to choice agency to which will upload exclusively and at every new shot to decide where, where and why there...
How? They will need images, but there is one image for one agency and i hold the image.
Post by: jamiehooper on February 15, 2019, 12:47
I'm looking at this philosophically: I never actually had those big sales, so they didn't actually subtract anything.
Nope. Didn't work. I'm still pissed.
Post by: RAW on February 15, 2019, 13:18
Post by: MatHayward on February 15, 2019, 14:41
We are actively working on addressing the Adobe Stock contributor portal to reflect any negative adjustments in the earnings details.
As soon as we have updated information we will share it with you.
Post by: HalfFull on February 15, 2019, 17:43
Some contributors received higher royalties than they were entitled to due to a technical error. Many of you received an email stating that the issue affected sales on February 12, but the correct time period was February 6 - 13. We have adjusted the royalties of the affected contributors and the current balance of available payout for all contributors is accurate on Adobe Stock and Fotolia. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this has caused.
We are actively working on addressing the Adobe Stock contributor portal to reflect any negative adjustments in the earnings details.
As soon as we have updated information we will share it with you.
Thanks for getting in touch Mat... appreciated the update!
Post by: Uncle Pete on February 15, 2019, 18:05
Some people report that they got reply from Adobe Stock support who says the problem was active during February 6th-13th.
This means it was running eight days without anybody noticing?
True we probably got full credit instead of the percentage. I see mine was adjusted down -$20
But yes, running wrong numbers for a week and no one at home noticed?
Thanks Mat you are always appreciated for being a reliable source for facts.
Post by: Minsc on February 15, 2019, 20:45
What looks like a new BME turned out to be a disappointment.
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on February 15, 2019, 22:01
My balance dropped by about $70. That's one mistake? Two? Ten??
Why is it OK to rush to remove money you can't account for properly to contributors you can't address by name?
Adobe could have handled a technical error much, much better than this
And with respect.
Thanks Mat for relaying the corporate message, but I'm sure you're no happier about this than we are.
Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Post by: pictureman75 on February 16, 2019, 02:17
And since your software cannot be trusted (at the moment) ... please give us the names of the buyers of these incorrectly calculated downloads, so that we can double-check this ourselves.
This is the only way you can regain lost trust!
All of us know, it was not the first time, AS calculates wrong ...
Post by: cruiser on February 16, 2019, 05:52
Many of you received an email stating that the issue affected sales on February 12, but the correct time period was February 6 - 13.
As soon as we have updated information we will share it with you.
I had 5 deductions. And because, its always more, then on weekend-days at all, it must have been under the week then.
On the other Hand, the "real" earnings on at least two of this days, are now much to low in average.
It doesn't make Sense to me...
Post by: jonbull on February 16, 2019, 10:10
Post by: Minsc on February 17, 2019, 15:28
in addiction payment are on hold but deduction are already active....what a great company.....really sometimes i hope we will be back to communism.......workers contributor are crap...while most of these companies pour money down the trash for ads and testimonials forgetting the importance of us. as i said we deserved all of this for accepting 10 years ago to sell photos for penny...luckily thing s will change soon cause free photos will destroy completely this business
Please don't. The last thing you want is the equally-shared miseries of communism.
If Adobe made a mistake, they have the right to correct it. For that whole week, my earnings were abnormally high. I'm sure everyone was happy to see nice sales days, but it was too good to be true. That doesn't mean Adobe should pay the price for it. I can understand why people are upset, but principal is principal.
Post by: Anja_Kaiser on February 18, 2019, 07:39
Doesn't seem to be that simple. In my case it was about one single sale only and I remembered the strange amount, therefore it was easy to find it again. It was labeled as a vector sub (not an extended) for 115,24. If I go to "show details" by clicking the file ID (within the sales overview on FT), those read "earned credits: 14,4" and they deducted exactly the difference of 100,84. This isn't the percentage of 33% we should get for a negotiated deal/license, though, but equals 12,5% instead.Some people report that they got reply from Adobe Stock support who says the problem was active during February 6th-13th.
This means it was running eight days without anybody noticing?
True we probably got full credit instead of the percentage.
Post by: pictureman75 on February 18, 2019, 08:00
I had three commission-reductions (28,04 -> 3,50 … 16 -> 2 … 26,4 -> 3,3) … always exactly 12,5% … if it’s true that the error was that they paid us mistakenly the total sales price first, then we got really 12,5 % for these sales!!!
I did screen shots …
Post by: jonbull on February 18, 2019, 08:55
they are also selling nothing compared to fotolia times.
Post by: jonbull on February 18, 2019, 09:00
I checked it again - and here it's completely the same!!!
I had three commission-reductions (28,04 -> 3,50 … 16 -> 2 … 26,4 -> 3,3) … always exactly 12,5% … if it’s true that the error was that they paid us mistakenly the total sales price first, then we got really 12,5 % for these sales!!!
I did screen shots …
yes here too....99 dollar become 13 dollar in the royalty page of the sold images....with a refund for each image of 85 dollar near...totally obscure way.
Post by: Shelma1 on February 18, 2019, 10:03
Post by: pictureman75 on February 18, 2019, 10:38
They reduced an AS Extended License (26,4 -> 3,3 ... 12,5%) ... first I thought, it was reduced by the buyer to a normal AS Credit Sale - but now I heard about 2 other contributors, that they had the same reduction (of AS Extended Licenses) with that batch on friday (and - from very different sales times!).
So, I cannot believe, that many buyers of AS Extended Licences reduce their purchase at the same time!
Are more of this out there ?
I really want to know, what's going on there!
Post by: HalfFull on February 18, 2019, 10:45
I have also sent this concern directly to them... hopefully they'll confirm what they are up to!
Post by: Zero Talent on February 18, 2019, 11:06
I checked it again - and here it's completely the same!!!
I had three commission-reductions (28,04 -> 3,50 … 16 -> 2 … 26,4 -> 3,3) … always exactly 12,5% … if it’s true that the error was that they paid us mistakenly the total sales price first, then we got really 12,5 % for these sales!!!
I did screen shots …
Where do you see these adjustments?
In my case, I can still see those high sales (over $300, over $130, etc), both on AS and FT sites....
Post by: pictureman75 on February 18, 2019, 11:08
Post by: Anja_Kaiser on February 18, 2019, 11:20
Where do you see these adjustments?Go to "credits" on Fotolia, then search for the respective sale. The image ID left besides the high/original amount is click-able and gets you to the sale's details. There you should see what's left.
In my case, I can still see those high sales (over $300, over $130, etc), both on AS and FT sites....
Post by: HalfFull on February 18, 2019, 11:52
This makes no sense what so ever. It's like they've just decided on an amount to deduct and taken it off a random day! That will certainly look odd on my accounts... It will look like I'm fiddling the tax man >:(
Post by: jonbull on February 18, 2019, 12:06
Post by: Fairplay on February 18, 2019, 12:22
I expect from Adobe to explain what exactly is happening here.
I'm putting my trust on pause!
Post by: Zero Talent on February 18, 2019, 12:31
Where do you see these adjustments?Go to "credits" on Fotolia, then search for the respective sale. The image ID left besides the high/original amount is click-able and gets you to the sale's details. There you should see what's left.
In my case, I can still see those high sales (over $300, over $130, etc), both on AS and FT sites....
Thanks. I found the info.
I can also confirm that the percentage I was left with is only 12.5% (for each sale in the bunch, exactly the same 12.5%)
Mat, this is very disappointing. What's going on?
Royalties overview
The royalty rate for photo, illustrations, and vector content licensed on Adobe Stock is 33% of the amount paid by the customer for the content. For video, the royalty rate is 35% of the amount. This amount depends on the customer’s subscription plan and the type of content licensed. For payment on downloads made under subscription plans, a minimum guarantee applies that may replace the royalty rate calculation. We also license content through custom agreements not reflected in the royalty table. Payment pursuant to custom agreements is always based on royalty rates of 33% for photo, illustrations, and vector content and 35% for videos. Terms for Adobe Stock and Fotolia differ. See our Royalty table for details.
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html
Post by: oocoskun on February 18, 2019, 13:18
Post by: HalfFull on February 18, 2019, 13:23
Where do you see these adjustments?Go to "credits" on Fotolia, then search for the respective sale. The image ID left besides the high/original amount is click-able and gets you to the sale's details. There you should see what's left.
In my case, I can still see those high sales (over $300, over $130, etc), both on AS and FT sites....
Thanks for this. Sadly, it still doesn't explain which sales were affected for me. They show an amount that was deducted with a link "Invoice". This link is broken, just displays "Sorry, the page cannot be displayed for the moment". The deductions have also been taken off the 15th Feb, which is outside the 6h-13th time frame and there are no sales on the 15th that the deductions correspond to. This has resulted in my stats showing 30+ sales for a grand total of £1.49.
This just looks like they've attempted to correct the initial error with another error. Doesn't inspire confidence in the accounting systems. They shouldn't have taken anything off until they were confident they could correct it properly so contributors could clearly see what licences had been corrected and on the day it occurred. Now I just have stats that are going to look false in my accounting software.
Post by: pictureman75 on February 18, 2019, 13:44
Post by: HalfFull on February 18, 2019, 15:10
Look only to the sales between 06.-13.02.2019 (no sale from 15.02. was affected!) ... and there only to the bigger ones (no standard credit sales) ... then click on the picture-ID - and voilà: you see the real commission ... that's not really difficult!
It should be a little more obvious, I don't really want to click on several hundreds images just to find the ones affected. Some of the refunds for me were also only $2 or so it wouldn't be a case of just looking at the big sales.
Post by: Microstockphoto on February 18, 2019, 17:01
Post by: cathyslife on February 18, 2019, 20:12
love it how matt jumps on every thread with positive news, but when the crap hits the fan the replies become far and between., the 12.5% is worrying though, wonder how they are going to spin that.
Read post #52. I don’t think Mat works in the accounting dept., either. Since he is a photographer himself, I am sure when he knows something, he will share it here. Don’t shoot the messenger. Complain to Adobe support.
Post by: Anja_Kaiser on February 19, 2019, 00:17
Delivering the "corporate" answer's simply his job. Not his fault for sure, but this doesn't help clarify things, either.love it how matt jumps on every thread with positive news, but when the crap hits the fan the replies become far and between., the 12.5% is worrying though, wonder how they are going to spin that.
Read post #52. I don’t think Mat works in the accounting dept., either. Since he is a photographer himself, I am sure when he knows something, he will share it here. Don’t shoot the messenger. Complain to Adobe support.
Post by: r2d2 on February 19, 2019, 05:47
Post by: Sean Locke Photography on February 19, 2019, 07:20
The adjustments were made for 80745923 and the negative adjustment was 2.75, which is reflected in your available payout balance on Adobe Stock and Fotolia.
Please note, if you requested a payout which is still pending, we are cancelling the request and credit the amount back to your account.
We are aware that the negative adjustment is not yet shown in your sales activity history or your total earnings and and thank you for your patience while we address the problem."
So, I got two of these, which equaled my $50 or so missing. I find it odd that out of hundreds of sales during that week that just two sales were "overpaid".
Post by: cathyslife on February 19, 2019, 07:56
Delivering the "corporate" answer's simply his job. Not his fault for sure, but this doesn't help clarify things, either.love it how matt jumps on every thread with positive news, but when the crap hits the fan the replies become far and between., the 12.5% is worrying though, wonder how they are going to spin that.
Read post #52. I don’t think Mat works in the accounting dept., either. Since he is a photographer himself, I am sure when he knows something, he will share it here. Don’t shoot the messenger. Complain to Adobe support.
It doesn’t even sound like accounting has a grasp on what went wrong, why would you expect Mat to be able to clarify things. At least he checks in. More than I can say for some of the others. Images being stolen massively on SS, not a peep from them.
Post by: HalfFull on February 19, 2019, 08:38
Delivering the "corporate" answer's simply his job. Not his fault for sure, but this doesn't help clarify things, either.love it how matt jumps on every thread with positive news, but when the crap hits the fan the replies become far and between., the 12.5% is worrying though, wonder how they are going to spin that.
Read post #52. I don’t think Mat works in the accounting dept., either. Since he is a photographer himself, I am sure when he knows something, he will share it here. Don’t shoot the messenger. Complain to Adobe support.
It doesn’t even sound like accounting has a grasp on what went wrong, why would you expect Mat to be able to clarify things. At least he checks in. More than I can say for some of the others. Images being stolen massively on SS, not a peep from them.
I don't think anyone is having a go at Mat for this, we know he doesn't work for the accounting side of things. But, as a contributor representative he will be able to contact those that do know and, hopefully, he'll come back to us with what he finds out. This can take a bit of time. Maybe Mat will confirm he is waiting on additional information and will pass it on when he has it.
Post by: leaf on February 19, 2019, 09:06
However, the times when I've reported someone who has stolen my images (and had sales with those images), I haven't ever seen the royalties from those sales. The pirate accounts are closed but it appears that the royalties are simply 'absorbed' into the agency (not only Adobe stock.. all sites seem to do it this way). Shouldn't those earnings be passed onto the photographers account?
Post by: increasingdifficulty on February 19, 2019, 09:11
I haven't ever seen the royalties from those sales. The pirate accounts are closed but it appears that the royalties are simply 'absorbed' into the agency (not only Adobe stock.. all sites seem to do it this way). Shouldn't those earnings be passed onto the photographers account?
I couldn't agree more. This has happened to me too and I SHOULD be owed several hundred dollars (that I know of).
The thief didn't get the payout, the customer didn't get the money back, and I didn't get it. So... Basically the agency stole it. Quite low.
Post by: eyewave on February 19, 2019, 09:14
Post by: Deyan Georgiev Photography on February 19, 2019, 09:37
While we are on the conversation of mistaken royalties - I find it curious that when mistakes are made, royalties are scrapped back seemingly quite quickly.
However, the times when I've reported someone who has stolen my images (and had sales with those images), I haven't ever seen the royalties from those sales. The pirate accounts are closed but it appears that the royalties are simply 'absorbed' into the agency (not only Adobe stock.. all sites seem to do it this way). Shouldn't those earnings be passed onto the photographers account?
A couple of years ago i was pleasantly surprised from istock. I found one of my images stolen in another portfolio and i contacted istock about this, on the next day(after their response) this account was suspended and after a week or two all royalties were transferred to my account, there were hundreds of sales as far as i remember.
Post by: rene on February 19, 2019, 09:40
I don't think he is 'shooting' messenger. Mat is a nice person for sure but he is Adobe PR guy and it's a part of his job.love it how matt jumps on every thread with positive news, but when the crap hits the fan the replies become far and between., the 12.5% is worrying though, wonder how they are going to spin that.
Read post #52. I don’t think Mat works in the accounting dept., either. Since he is a photographer himself, I am sure when he knows something, he will share it here. Don’t shoot the messenger. Complain to Adobe support.
I am curious how Adobe will deal with this problem. So far they are very amateurish. Or maybe it on purpose to hide something sleazy.
Post by: cathyslife on February 19, 2019, 10:21
love it how matt jumps on every thread with positive news, but when the crap hits the fan the replies become far and between., the 12.5% is worrying though, wonder how they are going to spin that.
This above is shooting the messenger. In post #52 Mat already said when he knows more, he will report. But I agree, it’s unprofessional as to how Adobe is handling it. And if they are only paying 12.5%, that’s really wrong. It doesn’t seem to matter how big a company is, they just don’t seem to be able to handle $$ transactions accurately and consistently. I don’t think anyone here can be blamed for thinking something nefarious is going on, if they are thinking that. Makes me wonder how many billions Amazon might make on “transaction mistakes.”
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on February 19, 2019, 11:05
...I can also confirm that the percentage I was left with is only 12.5% (for each sale in the bunch, exactly the same 12.5%)
Assuming the amount originally credited to me was the buyer's cost, I have two different percentages and neither of them are round numbers. One is close to 12.5 percent (12.5018603958922%) - a $67.19 "royalty" that was fixed to $8.40
The other one was originally credited as $2.64 but "fixed" to a 38 cent subscription royalty. That was 14.3939393939394%
I thought that the 38 cent subscription royalty was a floor when a highly discounted package for a large buyer would have resulted in a small royalty at the 33% rate. I'd prefer 87.12 cents/credits, which is 33% of what the buyer paid.
I will note that both the above percentages are worse than the industry "leading" 15% iStock pays.
I appreciate that neither SS nor AS wants to disclose the details of the terms offered to their large corporate customers, but if we're not getting 33% on all sales through AS, with a 38 cent floor on subscriptions if the royalty would otherwise fall below that, then those details need to be spelled out for us.
It's not right that contributors don't know and can't find out what the royalty structure is when deciding whether or not to supply images to an agency.
Post by: Anja_Kaiser on February 19, 2019, 11:36
Jo Ann, I think those 12,5% still apply in your case as they round up on whole cents. 12,5% of 67,19 make 8,398. And 12,5% of 2,64 would have been 0,33, so less than the minimum granted at your rank, that's why it's 0,38 now. Fact, though, is that we actually don't know whether or not the higher amounts shown in the overview are the buyers' cost. AS might as well have made a mistake while correcting mistakenly accounted amounts, *before* the deductions were made (by changing the information within the details, but not within the overview). On the other hand, in my case this would mean that the respective buyer originally was charged about 345,- (if those 115,- were 33% of what he was charged) instead of 43,-. I guess it would take me far less than a week to notice, if I were charged more than 300,- too much for a single image license....I can also confirm that the percentage I was left with is only 12.5% (for each sale in the bunch, exactly the same 12.5%)
Assuming the amount originally credited to me was the buyer's cost, I have two different percentages and neither of them are round numbers. One is close to 12.5 percent (12.5018603958922%) - a $67.19 "royalty" that was fixed to $8.40
The other one was originally credited as $2.64 but "fixed" to a 38 cent subscription royalty. That was 14.3939393939394%
I thought that the 38 cent subscription royalty was a floor when a highly discounted package for a large buyer would have resulted in a small royalty at the 33% rate. I'd prefer 87.12 cents/credits, which is 33% of what the buyer paid.
I will note that both the above percentages are worse than the industry "leading" 15% iStock pays.
I appreciate that neither SS nor AS wants to disclose the details of the terms offered to their large corporate customers, but if we're not getting 33% on all sales through AS, with a 38 cent floor on subscriptions if the royalty would otherwise fall below that, then those details need to be spelled out for us.
It's not right that contributors don't know and can't find out what the royalty structure is when deciding whether or not to supply images to an agency.
Post by: Uncle Pete on February 19, 2019, 12:06
It's not right that contributors don't know and can't find out what the royalty structure is when deciding whether or not to supply images to an agency.
I apologize for cutting up your post but that was a brilliant point that stands out.
Post by: dirkr on February 19, 2019, 12:33
It's not right that contributors don't know and can't find out what the royalty structure is when deciding whether or not to supply images to an agency.
All I can find on the Adobe Stock website (https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html) is the statement: "The royalty rate for photo, illustrations, and vector content licensed on Adobe Stock is 33% of the amount paid by the customer for the content. "
There is no mention of any special deals where this rate is not honored.
So if (big if, we don't know yet what exactly was happening there) AS does indeed pay a lower rate, they would be breaking the contract.
Post by: ShadySue on February 19, 2019, 12:46
Doesn't that leave wiggle room for something like a Premium Access system, whereby the buyer pays a premium to buy images at a low rate, and suppliers only get their percentage of the per image rate?It's not right that contributors don't know and can't find out what the royalty structure is when deciding whether or not to supply images to an agency.All I can find on the Adobe Stock website (https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html) is the statement: "The royalty rate for photo, illustrations, and vector content licensed on Adobe Stock is 33% of the amount paid by the customer for the content. "
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on February 19, 2019, 12:57
....I think those 12,5% still apply in your case as they round up on whole cents. ...
That's certainly a plausible hypothesis :) I would note that if what we receive on the Enterprise customer contracts is 12.5%, then the $94.05 royalties I received back in November (and I checked that those were legit via support as I'd not seen that sort of sum from AS before) would have meant the buyer spent an eye-watering $752.40! That's more than Getty (for an RF sale).
Which all comes back to our need to know what sorts of royalties we're getting - in writing; with updates if things change...
Post by: Dodie on February 19, 2019, 13:00
So if (big if, we don't know yet what exactly was happening there) AS does indeed pay a lower rate, they would be breaking the contract.What contract? There is no contract with any agency, it is just the TOS where they tell us their requirements and we accept what we get.
Post by: Dumc on February 19, 2019, 13:53
Post by: pictureman75 on February 19, 2019, 14:02
Post by: Zero Talent on February 19, 2019, 16:29
It's not right that contributors don't know and can't find out what the royalty structure is when deciding whether or not to supply images to an agency.
All I can find on the Adobe Stock website (https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html) is the statement: "The royalty rate for photo, illustrations, and vector content licensed on Adobe Stock is 33% of the amount paid by the customer for the content. "
There is no mention of any special deals where this rate is not honored.
So if (big if, we don't know yet what exactly was happening there) AS does indeed pay a lower rate, they would be breaking the contract.
Not only that, but they even mention that 33% will always be honored, even in the case of "custom agreements" = "special deals"
"Payment pursuant to custom agreements is always based on royalty rates of 33% for photo, illustrations, and vector content and 35% for videos"
Post by: Zero Talent on February 19, 2019, 17:35
The requested amount has been credited back and my balance turned positive again.....
Post by: DallasP on February 19, 2019, 21:03
I cannot believe that a software sometimes calculates wrong and sometimes right ... why does this mistake affect only a few sales (and most of all the bigger ones!) ??? Please give us a conclusive explanation of this!
And since your software cannot be trusted (at the moment) ... please give us the names of the buyers of these incorrectly calculated downloads, so that we can double-check this ourselves.
This is the only way you can regain lost trust!
All of us know, it was not the first time, AS calculates wrong ...
I don't know if you've ever coded before or not but, when you start working with thousands of functions, thousands of people and millions of lines of code. Stuff has a way of doing things that you don't expect when building it. lol.
Post by: MatHayward on February 19, 2019, 21:44
A follow up email has been sent to the affected contributor accounts with more specific details of the adjustments. The earnings statistics in the Adobe Stock Contributor Portal now show the adjusted amount for impacted contributors.
Again, thank you for your patience. If any new information becomes available I will share it with you.
-Mat Hayward
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on February 19, 2019, 23:37
Also, I do not see adjusted amounts in the Adobe Stock contributor interface. The original sales show with their higher (unadjusted) royalties and there is no entry for an adjustment amount. The adjustments do show up in the Fotolia contributor interface.
Post by: pictureman75 on February 20, 2019, 01:53
Post by: Pauws99 on February 20, 2019, 02:45
Mat, that can be right, I hope ... but in this case adobe should give us more than just a statement. If your statement is correct , then adobe should have no problem giving us the buyer's data as an exception - maybe just a sample we selected to be checked by some contributors.I'm not sure buyers would take the same view to be honest or even under various privacy laws Adobe could do that legally.
Post by: Mir on February 20, 2019, 04:07
" if you requested a payout which is still pending, we are cancelling the request and credit the amount back to your account."
But my request is still showing as pending and the money are not showing in my current balance.
Will the request be cancelled or will I receive the royalties?
Post by: veerizon on February 20, 2019, 04:48
Post by: eyewave on February 20, 2019, 05:40
Hello Mat, I received a letter stating this:
" if you requested a payout which is still pending, we are cancelling the request and credit the amount back to your account."
But my request is still showing as pending and the money are not showing in my current balance.
Will the request be cancelled or will I receive the royalties?
I got the payment requested on 12th today.
Post by: Brasilnut on February 20, 2019, 06:33
Post by: MatHayward on February 20, 2019, 10:07
Mat, this evening I was credited with a subscription sale at $66. Is that a recurrence of the error or a valid royalty amount?
Also, I do not see adjusted amounts in the Adobe Stock contributor interface. The original sales show with their higher (unadjusted) royalties and there is no entry for an adjustment amount. The adjustments do show up in the Fotolia contributor interface.
That is a valid royalty amount Jo Ann.
-Mat
Post by: fotorob on February 20, 2019, 10:20
Mat, this evening I was credited with a subscription sale at $66. Is that a recurrence of the error or a valid royalty amount?
Also, I do not see adjusted amounts in the Adobe Stock contributor interface. The original sales show with their higher (unadjusted) royalties and there is no entry for an adjustment amount. The adjustments do show up in the Fotolia contributor interface.
That is a valid royalty amount Jo Ann.
-Mat
Mat, when will the deductions be shown in the acitivity statistics in the Adobe Stock backend?
Post by: UIcomments on February 20, 2019, 10:30
"And I said, I don't care if they lay me off either, because I told, I told Bill that if they move my desk one more time, then, then I'm quitting, I'm going to quit."
"The ratio of people to cake is too big."
"I could set the building on fire"
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on February 20, 2019, 11:04
Mat, this evening I was credited with a subscription sale at $66. Is that a recurrence of the error or a valid royalty amount?
Also, I do not see adjusted amounts in the Adobe Stock contributor interface. The original sales show with their higher (unadjusted) royalties and there is no entry for an adjustment amount. The adjustments do show up in the Fotolia contributor interface.
That is a valid royalty amount Jo Ann.
-Mat
Thanks for checking. You can close the support request I sent in with the same question :)
Post by: davidbautista on February 21, 2019, 10:48
I was thinking the same...I haven't ever seen the royalties from those sales. The pirate accounts are closed but it appears that the royalties are simply 'absorbed' into the agency (not only Adobe stock.. all sites seem to do it this way). Shouldn't those earnings be passed onto the photographers account?
I couldn't agree more. This has happened to me too and I SHOULD be owed several hundred dollars (that I know of).
The thief didn't get the payout, the customer didn't get the money back, and I didn't get it. So... Basically the agency stole it. Quite low.
Post by: Julietphotography on February 21, 2019, 14:51
This is an accounting nightmare.
I am also affected, BUT I cannot see the deductions in my Adobe Stock backend. Only on the Fotolia backend, but even there I cannot see the images affected.
I need to share revenues with my team, so this is terrible.
Do you still have access to your Fotolia account? Since I did what Adobe asked with signing in to their website, even if they promised my account with Fotolia would be still there, I cannot access it anymore. And the dashboard on Adobe is horrible, very hard to find any info at all. Not to mention royalties down of course. I want my Fotolia account back. Very disappointed.
Post by: Julietphotography on February 21, 2019, 15:43
Mat, this evening I was credited with a subscription sale at $66. Is that a recurrence of the error or a valid royalty amount?
Also, I do not see adjusted amounts in the Adobe Stock contributor interface. The original sales show with their higher (unadjusted) royalties and there is no entry for an adjustment amount. The adjustments do show up in the Fotolia contributor interface.
That is a valid royalty amount Jo Ann.
-Mat
That is a valid royalty amount Jo Ann.
Hello Mat, I also got similar royalties, could you tell us what kind of license is that? Is it from new customers? It's very unusual, looks great but unreal. Is this extended license? I am not able to see anything there, on my Adobe dashboard. Are we going to be getting such royalties more often now?
Also, is there still any chance to access my Fotolia account after joining Adobe? I miss my old dashboard really much but cannot go there anymore even if it was promised it would be possible.