pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fotolia changes to Exclusivity and other News  (Read 38586 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: February 18, 2009, 14:37 »
0
my reply at the FT forums :

Quote
About the increase in total commissions.  I took my last 100 sales which were distributed as followed :

sub : 42
XS : 13
S : 6
M : 16
L : 13
XL : 10

Those generated me 78.19 credits at current prices and commissions rate.

With the new prices AND the old commissions rate of 37% they would earned me 92.62 credits which is a 14% increase (not the 20% you said in the newsletter, but close)

With the new prices AND new commission rate of 34% they would earned me 86.2 credits.  Still a 8% increase in total earnings.

I don't know if the X license was a typo or that they felt the heat.  Doesn't matter imho.  X license stays the same, that's the most important.


« Reply #51 on: February 18, 2009, 14:47 »
0
2.10 12 cents more

I actually checked the last 100 DLs at FT to see what the proportion of XS, S, M, L etc was. I was pleasantly surprised ;D for that sample. I had almost as many M as XS so calculating for a newbie I would have earnt more with the new price structure than the current. Obviously if you have a very high proportion of XS and S sales then your earnings will go down  :'(

Just checked the next 100 and I would have earnt more with the new structure.

Hopefully in March I will see the same trend

The thing is you would have earned more under the  old percentage structure and the new increase; as you would have earned more under the old ranking scheme.


It's very easy for FT to later roll back the increase without changing the percentage rate.




« Reply #52 on: February 18, 2009, 14:52 »
0
Do you read the form at FT?

The moderator MAT, just wrote this...:


QUOTE!
Fotolia is reducing commissions by 5-10% not 3%.Hi guys,

Wow, did I pick the wrong day to sleep in or what?     Maybe the right day? 

As soon as I read the announcement I anticipated a lot of passion in the forum and was right. 

Now I would suggest you look at if from a point of logic....

For the sake of argument I looked at the commission for a silver ranked photographer either totally non-exclusive or totally exclusive and in both cases, the photographer is making more money.  Unfortunately, the photographer with partial exclusivity will take a hit.  I understand why that has people worked up.  For me, it is motivation to pull my photo's from the other sites I have tried as the exclusive commission here really does make it worth my while.

What I found doing some basic math if you are a non-exclusive, silver ranked photographer...

current commissions:

37%...                                                            34%...

Medium:  $3.00 .....$1.11                                        $4.00.....$1.36
Large:  $4.00 ........$1.48                                        $5.00 ....$1.85
X-Large:  $5.00......$1.85                                        $6.00 ....$2.04


Total Exclusive Photographer....

54%                                                                51%

Medium:  $9.00 ..........$4.86                                       $12.00 ....$6.12
Large:      $12.00 .......$6.68                                       $15.00 ....$7.65
X-Large:  $15.00 ........$8.10                                       $18.00 .....$9.18


It is more money for the photographers.

As far as the partial exclusive photographer is concerned, my personal belief has always been that it is in both the agencies and photographers best interest to submit exclusively.  With photographers dumping their images everywhere anyone will accept them, the prices are driven down because the sites are competing to sell the exact same images.  With exclusivity, the prices can go up and the demand for photographers amongst sites goes up as well.  In order to recruit the best photographers, the benefits need to be the best.  I don't see that happening overnight anywhere anytime soon but...to me, the benefits of submitting my work exclusively here far outweigh not doing so.

END QUOTE

... So guys... You're gonna get rich on this, not poor
 ;D

funny he says about being exclusive yet he was on here a few weeks back asking about agencies and what to do with his rejections and from memory saying he may have made a mistake by not submitting the rejected images at least to other agencies.


« Reply #53 on: February 18, 2009, 14:54 »
0
I noticed that the images they want us to DONATE unsold images for the amount of 0.5 cent per image to the free section. This allows them to distribute the images via thair partneres s as well... Not "just"  offer them for free on fotolia....

Just what is the point in doing that?

All those FREE images will ultimately be an unfair competition to all the images that are generating profil / sales.....

Would'nt be much more beneficial to the industry if the large agencies took a stand and denied to participate in this stupid thing called FREE IMAGES?

I for one, would prefer to DELETE all images that are unsaleable... Rather than giving them away to attract unnessesary attention from mine and your saleable images...

rgds
Flemming

this is my concern, too many images being given away, I would be interested to see how many images this would be 10% of 5 million is 500k free images, why buy it if there is a similar image for free?

Phil

« Reply #54 on: February 18, 2009, 14:55 »
0
Not much of a positive side, but at least they told us about it before implementing it. I guess that's  a step in the right direction.

that was one of my first thoughts too

« Reply #55 on: February 18, 2009, 15:03 »
0
Do you read the form at FT?

The moderator MAT, just wrote this...:


QUOTE!
Fotolia is reducing commissions by 5-10% not 3%.Hi guys,

Wow, did I pick the wrong day to sleep in or what?     Maybe the right day? 

As soon as I read the announcement I anticipated a lot of passion in the forum and was right. 

Now I would suggest you look at if from a point of logic....

For the sake of argument I looked at the commission for a silver ranked photographer either totally non-exclusive or totally exclusive and in both cases, the photographer is making more money.  Unfortunately, the photographer with partial exclusivity will take a hit.  I understand why that has people worked up.  For me, it is motivation to pull my photo's from the other sites I have tried as the exclusive commission here really does make it worth my while.

What I found doing some basic math if you are a non-exclusive, silver ranked photographer...

current commissions:

37%...                                                            34%...

Medium:  $3.00 .....$1.11                                        $4.00.....$1.36
Large:  $4.00 ........$1.48                                        $5.00 ....$1.85
X-Large:  $5.00......$1.85                                        $6.00 ....$2.04


Total Exclusive Photographer....

54%                                                                51%

Medium:  $9.00 ..........$4.86                                       $12.00 ....$6.12
Large:      $12.00 .......$6.68                                       $15.00 ....$7.65
X-Large:  $15.00 ........$8.10                                       $18.00 .....$9.18


It is more money for the photographers.

As far as the partial exclusive photographer is concerned, my personal belief has always been that it is in both the agencies and photographers best interest to submit exclusively.  With photographers dumping their images everywhere anyone will accept them, the prices are driven down because the sites are competing to sell the exact same images.  With exclusivity, the prices can go up and the demand for photographers amongst sites goes up as well.  In order to recruit the best photographers, the benefits need to be the best.  I don't see that happening overnight anywhere anytime soon but...to me, the benefits of submitting my work exclusively here far outweigh not doing so.

END QUOTE

... So guys... You're gonna get rich on this, not poor
 ;D

wooyay wooyay, sadly if this happened at IS there would be dozens of people making these sorts of comments.


« Reply #56 on: February 18, 2009, 15:04 »
0
deleted
« Last Edit: February 18, 2009, 15:19 by Phil »

« Reply #57 on: February 18, 2009, 15:07 »
0
I noticed that the images they want us to DONATE unsold images for the amount of 0.5 cent per image to the free section. This allows them to distribute the images via thair partneres s as well... Not "just"  offer them for free on fotolia....

Just what is the point in doing that?

All those FREE images will ultimately be an unfair competition to all the images that are generating profil / sales.....

Would'nt be much more beneficial to the industry if the large agencies took a stand and denied to participate in this stupid thing called FREE IMAGES?

I for one, would prefer to DELETE all images that are unsaleable... Rather than giving them away to attract unnessesary attention from mine and your saleable images...

rgds
Flemming


this is my concern, too many images being given away, I would be interested to see how many images this would be 10% of 5 million is 500k free images, why buy it if there is a similar image for free?

Phil



There's currently a very active dialogue about this on FT...  http://eu.fotolia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=17498&p=3

I'm currently trying to get any one of two moderators to explain the overall UPSIDE here...  They seems to think that it's a golden offer - these 0.50 credits...  They seems to avoid ansvwering the questions about the effect on normal sales and stuff like that ....

Please do join in  ;D

« Reply #58 on: February 18, 2009, 15:17 »
0
Nevertheless, Fotolia will remain the best paying microstock site with commissions between 30% and 61% depending on the level of exclusivity. (see charts below).

seems a funny thing to say, when the 61% is diamond full exclusive, a level that is essentially unattainable (Yuri is newly rewarded rubis - 250000k so a quarter of the way to diamond) (and of course fp offers 70%)

DanP68

« Reply #59 on: February 18, 2009, 15:30 »
0
Can anyone explain what "our commissions go down 3% means"?  We all get 3% less than we are getting now?  So if you are at 34% it will now be 31% , etc.?


That's absolutely the case.  And they will also let you give away files which aren't selling well.  Isn't Fotolia the best?

First Guarantee - Fotolia will continue to screw over its contributors
Second Guarantee - Contributors will scream about it, and threaten to do this or that
Third Guarantee - Contributors will end up accepting whatever Fotolia wants, because everyone wants every last dollar

Leave them.  Send a real message.

« Reply #60 on: February 18, 2009, 15:31 »
0
Do you read the form at FT?

The moderator MAT, just wrote this...:


QUOTE!
Fotolia is reducing commissions by 5-10% not 3%.Hi guys,

Wow, did I pick the wrong day to sleep in or what?     Maybe the right day? 

As soon as I read the announcement I anticipated a lot of passion in the forum and was right. 

Now I would suggest you look at if from a point of logic....

For the sake of argument I looked at the commission for a silver ranked photographer either totally non-exclusive or totally exclusive and in both cases, the photographer is making more money.  Unfortunately, the photographer with partial exclusivity will take a hit.  I understand why that has people worked up.  For me, it is motivation to pull my photo's from the other sites I have tried as the exclusive commission here really does make it worth my while.

What I found doing some basic math if you are a non-exclusive, silver ranked photographer...

current commissions:

37%...                                                            34%...

Medium:  $3.00 .....$1.11                                        $4.00.....$1.36
Large:  $4.00 ........$1.48                                        $5.00 ....$1.85
X-Large:  $5.00......$1.85                                        $6.00 ....$2.04


Total Exclusive Photographer....

54%                                                                51%

Medium:  $9.00 ..........$4.86                                       $12.00 ....$6.12
Large:      $12.00 .......$6.68                                       $15.00 ....$7.65
X-Large:  $15.00 ........$8.10                                       $18.00 .....$9.18


It is more money for the photographers.

As far as the partial exclusive photographer is concerned, my personal belief has always been that it is in both the agencies and photographers best interest to submit exclusively.  With photographers dumping their images everywhere anyone will accept them, the prices are driven down because the sites are competing to sell the exact same images.  With exclusivity, the prices can go up and the demand for photographers amongst sites goes up as well.  In order to recruit the best photographers, the benefits need to be the best.  I don't see that happening overnight anywhere anytime soon but...to me, the benefits of submitting my work exclusively here far outweigh not doing so.

END QUOTE

... So guys... You're gonna get rich on this, not poor
 ;D

funny he says about being exclusive yet he was on here a few weeks back asking about agencies and what to do with his rejections and from memory saying he may have made a mistake by not submitting the rejected images at least to other agencies.



It has always been a question for me.  I have a few images at other sites...Snapvillage and Media Magnet that had very limited success.  Shutterstock closed my account without warning because I moderate the Fotolia forum so that was out.  I've always made a decent chunk of change at Fotolia.  At least 4 figures per month for the past couple of years so I have chosen not to fix something not broken.  Now, there is more incentive for me to submit only to Fotolia.  I've already got the bulk of my time invested there so why not.  The commission % is very high and now the $ amount will be higher with the increased price.  I have always believed, and believe now more than ever with the popularity of micro increasing that photographers are shooting themselves in the foot in the big picture here but uploading all their images everywhere they can.  That drives prices down.  If you were to submit exclusively anywhere, that would increase the competition amongst sites to create better incentive for you to go there which would include higher prices and commissions.  I stand by everything I have said.  I've sent my letters to Snapvillage and Mediamagnet asking them to close my accounts and I look forward to an increase in pay.  

I realize this isn't the popular approach.  Call me what you want, but loyalty is not something I will apologize to anyone for.

All the best,

Mat Hayward

RT


« Reply #61 on: February 18, 2009, 15:33 »
0
funny he says about being exclusive yet he was on here a few weeks back asking about agencies and what to do with his rejections and from memory saying he may have made a mistake by not submitting the rejected images at least to other agencies.

I wonder if he gets paid by Fotolia for * up so much.

« Reply #62 on: February 18, 2009, 15:34 »
0
I have just been warned to stop persuing the issue about the free image garbage...  So if any of you would like to take over, please do so  ;D

It's right here...: http://eu.fotolia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=181271#p181271

« Reply #63 on: February 18, 2009, 15:37 »
0
I have just been warned to stop persuing the issue about the free image garbage...  So if any of you would like to take over, please do so  ;D

It's right here...: http://eu.fotolia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=181271#p181271


I now know who you are.  I didn't put two and two together.  While I appreciate the vested interest you have in the site with a grand total of 42 images uploaded, I do think you had gone a bit overboard with your posts and simply asked you to move on.  You had received answers several times and felt compelled to continue with the rants.  Not the most productive approach.

Have a spectacular day!

Mat

« Reply #64 on: February 18, 2009, 15:51 »
0
I have just been warned to stop persuing the issue about the free image garbage...  So if any of you would like to take over, please do so  ;D

It's right here...: http://eu.fotolia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=181271#p181271


I now know who you are.  I didn't put two and two together.  While I appreciate the vested interest you have in the site with a grand total of 42 images uploaded, I do think you had gone a bit overboard with your posts and simply asked you to move on.  You had received answers several times and felt compelled to continue with the rants.  Not the most productive approach.

Have a spectacular day!

Mat


Hi Mat,
I strongly protest on this!

The number of imagages has nothing to do with the question's about WHY giving away images.

And no.  You have not answered my most improtant question's..

The 0.50 credit part is answered yes... We don't agree, and that's very fine by me... You're still neglecting to tell us all what's the gain for fotola?  - And what's the downside for the overall number of payed downloads?

If you can't - or if you're not allowed to answer this, it's fine... Just say so...

I have nothing against you, and I really feel that yoy're reacting far too strongly here... I think that we decerve some ansvers and if you have misunderstod some underlying tone or mood, I deeply apologize...  Please understand that I'm not a native english speeker and this might be refelcted in the way you "read between the lines"  ?


So if you feel that I have offended you, I deeply apologize


........
I now know who you are.  I didn't put two and two together.   Please explain this sentence...   And please read the posts again... I have not threttened you, nor have I sad anything bad about you, only questioned the concept of giving away images for free....

My very best regards
Flemming


« Reply #65 on: February 18, 2009, 16:02 »
0
- our commission goes down by 3%

Wow.  How exciting.  Should we thank them?   :-\

« Reply #66 on: February 18, 2009, 16:10 »
0

I have nothing against you, and I really feel that yoy're reacting far too strongly here... I think that we decerve some ansvers and if you have misunderstod some underlying tone or mood, I deeply apologize...  Please understand that I'm not a native english speeker and this might be refelcted in the way you "read between the lines"  ?


So if you feel that I have offended you, I deeply apologize


........
I now know who you are.  I didn't put two and two together.   Please explain this sentence...   And please read the posts again... I have not threttened you, nor have I sad anything bad about you, only questioned the concept of giving away images for free....

My very best regards
Flemming



"Ugh __ Hayward is such a disgusting little corporate creep."

I accept your apology Flemming.  I have been down this road many times in the past.  I also understand English is not your first language though I can't help but think calling someone a "disgusting little corporate creep" in any language is not considered a compliment.  That being said, I've certainly been called worse and do appreciate your passion for the topic.

I don't think free photo's are going to have much of an impact one way or another.  While there are undoubtedly some gems hidden in the unsold category, as I mentioned in the FT forum, looking through my files that haven't sold in two years I found quite a few stinkers.  The acceptance criteria two years ago was greatly different than it is today.  I don't see it as a threat.

Mat

« Reply #67 on: February 18, 2009, 16:13 »
0
- our commission goes down by 3%

Wow.  How exciting.  Should we thank them?   :-\

Yes, the commission is lower, but the cash in pocket is higher because they have raised the prices.  Here is my math again.  Someone else posted in the FT forum they did the math on their past 100 sales and found with the new rates they would come out on top.  Can you dispute this math for a silver photographer?...

37%...                                                            34%...

Medium:  $3.00 .....$1.11                                        $4.00.....$1.36
Large:  $4.00 ........$1.48                                        $5.00 ....$1.85
X-Large:  $5.00......$1.85                                        $6.00 ....$2.04


Total Exclusive Photographer....

54%                                                                51%

Medium:  $9.00 ..........$4.86                                       $12.00 ....$6.12
Large:      $12.00 .......$6.68                                       $15.00 ....$7.65
X-Large:  $15.00 ........$8.10                                       $18.00 .....$9.18

grp_photo

« Reply #68 on: February 18, 2009, 16:14 »
0
I noticed that the images they want us to DONATE unsold images for the amount of 0.5 cent per image to the free section. This allows them to distribute the images via thair partneres s as well... Not "just"  offer them for free on fotolia....

Just what is the point in doing that?

All those FREE images will ultimately be an unfair competition to all the images that are generating profil / sales.....

Would'nt be much more beneficial to the industry if the large agencies took a stand and denied to participate in this stupid thing called FREE IMAGES?

I for one, would prefer to DELETE all images that are unsaleable... Rather than giving them away to attract unnessesary attention from mine and your saleable images...

rgds
Flemming

this is my concern, too many images being given away, I would be interested to see how many images this would be 10% of 5 million is 500k free images, why buy it if there is a similar image for free?

Phil
Free Images are very popular i have only a dozen at sxc.hu and after about two years i'm pretty close to my 200.000 Download :-)

« Reply #69 on: February 18, 2009, 16:18 »
0

I have nothing against you, and I really feel that yoy're reacting far too strongly here... I think that we decerve some ansvers and if you have misunderstod some underlying tone or mood, I deeply apologize...  Please understand that I'm not a native english speeker and this might be refelcted in the way you "read between the lines"  ?


So if you feel that I have offended you, I deeply apologize


........
I now know who you are.  I didn't put two and two together.   Please explain this sentence...   And please read the posts again... I have not threttened you, nor have I sad anything bad about you, only questioned the concept of giving away images for free....

My very best regards
Flemming



"Ugh __ Hayward is such a disgusting little corporate creep."

I accept your apology Flemming.  I have been down this road many times in the past.  I also understand English is not your first language though I can't help but think calling someone a "disgusting little corporate creep" in any language is not considered a compliment.  That being said, I've certainly been called worse and do appreciate your passion for the topic.

I don't think free photo's are going to have much of an impact one way or another.  While there are undoubtedly some gems hidden in the unsold category, as I mentioned in the FT forum, looking through my files that haven't sold in two years I found quite a few stinkers.  The acceptance criteria two years ago was greatly different than it is today.  I don't see it as a threat.

Mat

Hi Mat,

So this is the mistake...

The sentence in question is NOT posted by me... I'm not even able to use such "refined" language... Sorry...

If you go to the previous page and look for #55 you'll find that this particular sentence was posted by gostwych or what ever his or her name is...?

Thanks
Flemming



« Reply #70 on: February 18, 2009, 16:24 »
0
I now know who you are.

That sounds like a threat

I didn't put two and two together. 

Clearly not because if you had you could have just clicked on his portfolio link which is under his comments here.

I never visit the Fotolia forum because of the way you moderate, you are a moderator and you are there to make sure people behave in a proper and respectful way, that does not mean you should lock threads because you don't like peoples opinions.

I also feel that as you've taken the role of being a moderator on Fotolia albeit for little or no pay that you should not take part in any topics there concerning contributor relations, your view of the matter is clearly biased.

There's a huge difference between being a moderator and acting like a corporate whipping boy, and no you don't know who I am but rest assured I'm no newbie.

« Reply #71 on: February 18, 2009, 16:40 »
0
This is a serious question...Why is it that the most negative, angry...borderline mean people not just here, but on all online forums have usernames that are anonymous and refuse to sign their posts? 

To me, that screams cowardice.  I doubt very much that when most people write angry, aggressive posts in forums that they have the courage or lack of character to do the same thing when talking to a person face to face.  It's always been that way, always will.  It does bug me though.  I can guarantee you one thing.  You might think I am a corporate kiss-ass, a yes man, or you may think I am a prick.  One thing is for sure, anything I write in here, on the FT forum, my blog or any other form of communication from me you can expect me to have the balls to say it to your face, good or bad. 

I am not an employee of Fotolia.  I am a contributor with as much a vested interest in the success of that site as anyone else in this forum.  I was reluctant for a long time to contribute to this forum.  It is filled with some of the most talented, intelligent and articulate people in our industry and has a great deal to offer.  I feel at times I can contribute to some of the posts as well.  I don't want to pee in anyones fruitloops by any means but if you feel compelled to attack me personally, do not expect me to cower in a corner and shut up about it.  Do not expect me to take you seriously either if you don't have the courage to even sign your name.

Mat Hayward


I now know who you are.

That sounds like a threat

I didn't put two and two together. 

Clearly not because if you had you could have just clicked on his portfolio link which is under his comments here.

I never visit the Fotolia forum because of the way you moderate, you are a moderator and you are there to make sure people behave in a proper and respectful way, that does not mean you should lock threads because you don't like peoples opinions.

I also feel that as you've taken the role of being a moderator on Fotolia albeit for little or no pay that you should not take part in any topics there concerning contributor relations, your view of the matter is clearly biased.

There's a huge difference between being a moderator and acting like a corporate whipping boy, and no you don't know who I am but rest assured I'm no newbie.


« Reply #72 on: February 18, 2009, 16:49 »
0

So this is the mistake...

The sentence in question is NOT posted by me... I'm not even able to use such "refined" language... Sorry...

If you go to the previous page and look for #55 you'll find that this particular sentence was posted by gostwych or what ever his or her name is...?

Thanks
Flemming




That was a mistake and I am very sorry Flemming!  All those posts were coming at the same time I and I misread.  Sorry.

Mat

« Reply #73 on: February 18, 2009, 16:54 »
0

So this is the mistake...

The sentence in question is NOT posted by me... I'm not even able to use such "refined" language... Sorry...

If you go to the previous page and look for #55 you'll find that this particular sentence was posted by gostwych or what ever his or her name is...?

Thanks
Flemming




That was a mistake and I am very sorry Flemming!  All those posts were coming at the same time I and I misread.  Sorry.

Mat

And to make matters worse (in regards to a crazy conversation), I have deleted the original post by Gostwychs since it was nothing other than insult slinging.

« Reply #74 on: February 18, 2009, 16:59 »
0
Can you dispute this math for a silver photographer?...

I think I can, given that most of my sales are either subs, XS or S.  I will do my own real-world math for the past months sales and post it here.

Regards,
Adelaide


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3609 Views
Last post February 24, 2009, 11:17
by digiology
0 Replies
9057 Views
Last post September 14, 2009, 12:00
by News Feed
0 Replies
2404 Views
Last post October 01, 2009, 16:45
by News Feed
4 Replies
3243 Views
Last post November 19, 2009, 02:06
by qwerty
13 Replies
4843 Views
Last post August 25, 2015, 13:08
by tickstock

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle