MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fotolia cuts commissions again  (Read 56383 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: January 20, 2011, 15:06 »
0
My fellow Aussies will know what I mean when I say "Not happy JAN !"


« Reply #101 on: January 20, 2011, 15:09 »
0
Remember Fotolia advertising as the fair treatment agency when iS announced their rate cut. They didn't mention cutting rates two weeks after iS did back then. What effing hypocrisy!  Not that it surprises me. Fotolia was where the pay cutting all began.

I remember it well.  In fact it was the first thing I thought of when I heard FT cut commissions.  Isn't this the point where May Hayward shows up to tell us about how great FT is, and how we should be exclusive with them?

« Reply #102 on: January 20, 2011, 15:15 »
0
Remember Fotolia advertising as the fair treatment agency when iS announced their rate cut. They didn't mention cutting rates two weeks after iS did back then. What effing hypocrisy!  Not that it surprises me. Fotolia was where the pay cutting all began.

I remember it well.  In fact it was the first thing I thought of when I heard FT cut commissions.  Isn't this the point where May Hayward shows up to tell us about how great FT is, and how we should be exclusive with them?

^^^ Hahaha..

 I was thinking the same thing.. He's pretty quiet.. As well as in the FT forum.. Gues he's at a loss for words at this point, there's only so far you can go to try to play people for stupid, and try to sugar coat sh&%$..

« Reply #103 on: January 20, 2011, 15:20 »
0
Im erasing over 1300 images over the weekend, so is another 5 to 8 Golds in Scandinavia, England and Germany. We will join up with IS.  Why??  well for starters, why set the bar at Emeralds? cheaper then Gold on the stock-market, also, you cant trust the game any more. FT, made that an infamnia, which means an impossibillity to remain.

We had time over for IS, given the fact they were the first ones, this however? no! no way, its upstart mentality.

It's a perfect domino effect for IS. IS cuts commissions, then others do the same and in the end more exclusive content falls into IS hands like ripe apples from a tree.


I think of it as if I had intended to stay an honest woman, but as I find myself on the streets and beaten by various pimps, the best option seems to be to find the biggest, ugliest, strongest pimp and hope he beats me the least :)

« Reply #104 on: January 20, 2011, 16:50 »
0
Just went and registered thevectorshop.com and vektorgrafik.dk

Looking forward to buying and setting up a ktools webshop and selling the images I created on my own premises. Even if it's just one sale a year, it's going to feel G-O-O-D whenever that happens.

What I once found fascinating and relieving about the microstock industry was the fact that I could earn money whenever I wanted, proportionally to my own performance. This dream of financial security in microstock is long gone, and with every sneaky commission cut I'm getting I feel more cautious and bitter. How is this going to keep me motivated to continue? I'm already struggling to keep up my own performance and feeling completely uninspired compared to a year ago, this won't help me.

At this point having a boss yell in my face and stressing me to perform better sounds attractive, because at least he won't cut my commission every month and make me CONSTANTLY worry about the future. Add to that my blood pressure would stabilize and I'd live 10 years longer. This is business, some might say, well it hurts me personally. They don't give a crap.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2011, 16:54 by ThomasAmby »

« Reply #105 on: January 20, 2011, 16:59 »
0
I'm here, I just don't think it's appropriate for me to chime in as I am still receiving a 54% commission on my sales.  I can and do totally understand your frustration however as the cut in maximum prices for me in December had a significant impact on my income.  I honestly would have considered going non-exclusive had IS not made the changes they did, I cannot comprehend receiving 15% at IS though, no matter how many more buyers they have.  The timing of this FT change is a head-scratcher but I can honestly say I personally feel I've been treated very fair by FT.  Sadly, there is just no perfect scenario anywhere for anyone in this industry that I can see right now. 

Mat


Remember Fotolia advertising as the fair treatment agency when iS announced their rate cut. They didn't mention cutting rates two weeks after iS did back then. What effing hypocrisy!  Not that it surprises me. Fotolia was where the pay cutting all began.

I remember it well.  In fact it was the first thing I thought of when I heard FT cut commissions.  Isn't this the point where May Hayward shows up to tell us about how great FT is, and how we should be exclusive with them?

^^^ Hahaha..

 I was thinking the same thing.. He's pretty quiet.. As well as in the FT forum.. Gues he's at a loss for words at this point, there's only so far you can go to try to play people for stupid, and try to sugar coat sh&%$..

« Reply #106 on: January 20, 2011, 17:35 »
0
I appreciate your candor Mat.  You are right about declining options in this industry, which is why I feel it is imperative we look beyond this industry and leave it behind eventually.

« Reply #107 on: January 20, 2011, 17:55 »
0
Deleted post
« Last Edit: January 20, 2011, 19:38 by borg »

« Reply #108 on: January 20, 2011, 18:14 »
0
They have been going down hill just the direction of Istock, I deleted my files from Istock years ago and today the last of my Fotolia files are gone. With their recent deal Deviantart there was just no point in leaving my files up there. My files haven't sold well there for over two years, no extended licenses lower prices all I sold were subs for less than SS.
Good luck to those who stay.

« Reply #109 on: January 20, 2011, 20:23 »
0
For example if you are going from 25% to 20%  that is 25/20=1.25  so a 5 point drop in your overall commission really translates to 25% less earnings!

Erm - are you serious with your math? 25 % of 25 is 5? :D

jbarber873

« Reply #110 on: January 20, 2011, 20:33 »
0
I'm here, I just don't think it's appropriate for me to chime in as I am still receiving a 54% commission on my sales.  I can and do totally understand your frustration however as the cut in maximum prices for me in December had a significant impact on my income.  I honestly would have considered going non-exclusive had IS not made the changes they did, I cannot comprehend receiving 15% at IS though, no matter how many more buyers they have.  The timing of this FT change is a head-scratcher but I can honestly say I personally feel I've been treated very fair by FT.  Sadly, there is just no perfect scenario anywhere for anyone in this industry that I can see right now. 

Mat

  First of all, the best month I've ever had at Fotolia doesn't equal the worst week i've ever had at Istock. Fotolia is fast becoming a cut rate subs site anyway, so it's not that big a deal for the price cut to me. And second, isn't it nice to be able to mention other sites and really say what you think, in this forum at least. Unlike the soviet era forums at fotolia, for example.

« Reply #111 on: January 20, 2011, 21:05 »
0
And second, isn't it nice to be able to mention other sites and really say what you think, in this forum at least. Unlike the soviet era forums at fotolia, for example.

 Haha good one.. all kinds of posts censored and deleted over there.. Kinda like Iran and China..

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #112 on: January 20, 2011, 21:29 »
0
I think the only thing we can do short of forming an artists guild/union with price standards, would be to publicly thank and support those companies that have not made cuts. Could you imagine if in the wake of all these cuts if some company (DT or SS) had the nerve to actually raise commissions, you would see every single microstocker flock to their site immediately, its such a no brainer business decision you would have every single microstock photographer flocking to that site.  You would instantly become the number one microstock site overnight.

The number one microstock site of what? The most contributors?

Here's the problem with this approach. Every site already has too many microstockers and images and adding more isn't the top priority for any of the top sites. It's only a priority for new sites that don't have any images and need contributors and images in order to attract buyers.

It's clear the agencies' top priorities are to A) increase revenue by attracting buyers, which is a struggle in today's economy, and B) increase profitability as quickly as possible which is easily done by reducing commissions. Money/sales/revenue/profitability drives their every decision. Make more sales, pay contributors less.

The more quickly contributors start thinking like an agency owner and less like a contributor the better off you'll be.

« Reply #113 on: January 20, 2011, 21:57 »
0
I think the only thing we can do short of forming an artists guild/union with price standards, would be to publicly thank and support those companies that have not made cuts. Could you imagine if in the wake of all these cuts if some company (DT or SS) had the nerve to actually raise commissions, you would see every single microstocker flock to their site immediately, its such a no brainer business decision you would have every single microstock photographer flocking to that site.  You would instantly become the number one microstock site overnight.

The number one microstock site of what? The most contributors?

Here's the problem with this approach. Every site already has too many microstockers and images and adding more isn't the top priority for any of the top sites. It's only a priority for new sites that don't have any images and need contributors and images in order to attract buyers.

It's clear the agencies' top priorities are to A) increase revenue by attracting buyers, which is a struggle in today's economy, and B) increase profitability as quickly as possible which is easily done by reducing commissions. Money/sales/revenue/profitability drives their every decision. Make more sales, pay contributors less.

The more quickly contributors start thinking like an agency owner and less like a contributor the better off you'll be.

didnt get what you are saying.. everybody should stop and leave so "gold/whatever" stay good?

I am not saying I dont agree but I dont see how that will be good current "low" contributors (I guess not that low once Gold are going down 6%) honestly I just think that will be nice to top earners but actually if only top contributors stay.. royalties would go up? most certaintly no

yep a lot of images etc this is not a problem for contributors, if they are approving nothing there.. contributors arent guilty of what is happening.. it is pure greed
« Last Edit: January 20, 2011, 22:13 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #114 on: January 20, 2011, 22:50 »
0
Sadly, there is just no perfect scenario anywhere for anyone in this industry that I can see right now. 

Definitely true. I think that is the reality that many of us are facing as the goalposts keep moving farther away. You have to make the best decisions for your own business.

« Reply #115 on: January 20, 2011, 22:59 »
0
Okay that's just extremely confusing.  Is there a way to tell if we have a 4, 6 or 8 vector?  I'm gonna have to go look. *edit* I see it a lot of 4s and one 6 so far in my looking.

Which leads me to another question...is this effective now or at a later date?

They price them according to complexity. Most EPS files get priced at 4 or 6 and very few are priced at 8. My point was that in 2008, they were all priced at 8 credits (now that is the top tier). In 2009, they switched from SVG files to EPS files and made that tiered pricing change. I stopped uploading for several months after the switch, then realized there was a loophole. If you upload an SVG file (no jpeg required), they will still be priced at 8 credits. I figured I'd share my secret since the majority of my portfolio went in the dumpster there today.  ;D

« Reply #116 on: January 20, 2011, 23:08 »
0
For example if you are going from 25% to 20%  that is 25/20=1.25  so a 5 point drop in your overall commission really translates to 25% less earnings!

Erm - are you serious with your math? 25 % of 25 is 5? :D

Wow! :-[ Holy crap, what was I thinking....I am really bad at math....it should have been 20/25 = .80 or 20% less in earnings 20% is still an enormous cut to my earnings.... warranting an exclamation point!

« Reply #117 on: January 21, 2011, 00:08 »
0
Reminded me of the investigative journalism by Amos in October last year...
Fotolia Interview auf der Buchmesse ber Honorarvernderungen, Polylooks und Stock Footage
I was watching this thinking: I bet this guy is lying...

For those that don't understand the German... @ about 2:30 mins: "We're looking at the situation at the moment.... but we don't have any ambitions to change things in the near future" (in response to Amos' questions about the IS royalty cuts).

Despite the words, you watch this interview and how shifty the answers are (watch the guy's eyes when he answers the question) and get the impression that the real answer is "we'll continue to make whatever cuts to commissions that we think we can get away with." I didn't believe they'd do it quite this quickly, but doubt its the last round there - more like an annual event. Stay tuned for an announcement of annual targets there soon...

Sorry to the independents who are getting hurt by this. Even though this time round I'm not affected directly, I think its bad news for everyone in microstock.

« Reply #118 on: January 21, 2011, 01:28 »
0
I appreciate your candor Mat.  You are right about declining options in this industry, which is why I feel it is imperative we look beyond this industry and leave it behind eventually.

My thoughts exactly... .

RacePhoto

« Reply #119 on: January 21, 2011, 02:22 »
0
This move was actually very clever from Fotolia.
They upset mainly those with smaller portfolios and who produce lower quality images, while keeping the succesfull contributors which mostly have high quality images happy.
If those smaller contributors stop uploading out of protest or occassionaly delete their portfolios, Fotolia probably really does not care much about it.

Pretty much the way I think they are headed. This is the second time they have shafted the lower jewels and nipped percentages when people are about ready to move up to the next level.

Had anyone ever call this a donkey with a carrot? Oh yes, that was me. LOL :D

I think this is where I start handing out some i-told-ya-so's.

Please Do!

I think of it as if I had intended to stay an honest woman, but as I find myself on the streets and beaten by various pimps, the best option seems to be to find the biggest, ugliest, strongest pimp and hope he beats me the least :)

Nice analogy which leads to the only conclusion I could come up with. So you're staying with Getty now? LOL :D

Personally I'm still holding out for SS / BS to introduce an exclusive program and be done with all of this drama and change. Otherwise, I really feel like the serious IS exclusives are getting the best overall deal.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2011, 02:49 by RacePhoto »

« Reply #120 on: January 21, 2011, 02:47 »
0
This move was actually very clever from Fotolia.
They upset mainly those with smaller portfolios and who produce lower quality images, while keeping the succesfull contributors which mostly have high quality images happy.
If those smaller contributors stop uploading out of protest or occassionaly delete their portfolios, Fotolia probably really does not care much about it.

The probably p*ssed off the upper-level contributors when they lowered possible maximum prices for higher level contributors - had they cut commissions from these contributors now, they would have risked loosing those contributors (at least several of them). So they slashed at the lower level ones. And I am afraid it is a general trend - to boot out small contributors/ hobbyists.

lagereek

« Reply #121 on: January 21, 2011, 03:48 »
0
This move was actually very clever from Fotolia.
They upset mainly those with smaller portfolios and who produce lower quality images, while keeping the succesfull contributors which mostly have high quality images happy.
If those smaller contributors stop uploading out of protest or occassionaly delete their portfolios, Fotolia probably really does not care much about it.

The probably p*ssed off the upper-level contributors when they lowered possible maximum prices for higher level contributors - had they cut commissions from these contributors now, they would have risked loosing those contributors (at least several of them). So they slashed at the lower level ones. And I am afraid it is a general trend - to boot out small contributors/ hobbyists.

No its the opposite! contributors with thousands of shots in their ports doesnt at all automatically mean great images? it could be thousands of just generic, mediocre stuff. means nothing,  quantity does no mean quality at all.
However, quanttity means the contributor is going to think very, very carefully before deleting or erazing images.
Friend of mine has got a port in the Getty-RM, just 250 shots, thats all but extremly unique material and selling for incredible amouts of money. Quantity means nothing, in that respect but its a safeguard that the contributor will probably stay on.

« Reply #122 on: January 21, 2011, 03:59 »
0
What did you expect? It's january - any january FT cuts comissions...and/or raise levels. That's their normal behavior.

« Reply #123 on: January 21, 2011, 05:21 »
0
Quote
No its the opposite! contributors with thousands of shots in their ports doesnt at all automatically mean great images? it could be thousands of just generic, mediocre stuff. means nothing,  quantity does no mean quality at all.
However, quanttity means the contributor is going to think very, very carefully before deleting or erazing images.
Friend of mine has got a port in the Getty-RM, just 250 shots, thats all but extremly unique material and selling for incredible amouts of money. Quantity means nothing, in that respect but its a safeguard that the contributor will probably stay on.

I dare to disagree to some extend. Because other changes FT made are counterproductive to get more unique images. FT also introduced a filter that helps customers looking for newer images. What does that say to contributors? If I want to sell images for popular themes and I want mine to be found, I need to produce these kind of images on a very regular base. That doesn't mean these images will get better, no, more of the same will be flooding in that way. At least there is a big incentive to go back to work on themes that are popular, just to get images sold - and maybe also my older ones seen (because they may show up in "similar images by this artist"). So I am afraid this will be quantity raiser, but not neccessarily a quality raiser move. The only thing that may change is that hobbyists/ newbies won't join anymore - or at FT and Istock last, because they will first try where percentages for commissions are higher and FT and Istock are not attractive enough for these new talents.

OM

« Reply #124 on: January 21, 2011, 06:51 »
0
Remember Fotolia advertising as the fair treatment agency when iS announced their rate cut. They didn't mention cutting rates two weeks after iS did back then. What effing hypocrisy!  Not that it surprises me. Fotolia was where the pay cutting all began.


I remember it well.  In fact it was the first thing I thought of when I heard FT cut commissions.  Isn't this the point where May Hayward shows up to tell us about how great FT is, and how we should be exclusive with them?


Little changed from September for emeralds...........except that perhaps min. credit has been revised from 5 to 3.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/why-i-love-fotolia!/


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
4374 Views
Last post June 07, 2008, 06:30
by sharpshot
35 Replies
15367 Views
Last post February 03, 2010, 10:31
by leaf
21 Replies
5463 Views
Last post January 30, 2011, 02:49
by microstockphoto.co.uk
208 Replies
49375 Views
Last post August 30, 2011, 02:17
by monti
39 Replies
13359 Views
Last post September 04, 2015, 09:33
by marthamarks

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle