MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Guess I'll reupload to Fotolia  (Read 28451 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: October 12, 2014, 08:26 »
0
Maybe. I'm not sure what you're expecting me to say. I'm just trying to answer a question.


« Reply #26 on: October 12, 2014, 08:43 »
+20
To be perfectly honest, I get a better return for my sales at FT / DPC than I do at IS where we are getting raped on both pricing and commission but I suggest the decline there is more to do with the ineptness of the folks in control than any external factors.  SS are holding up, DT is coming back nicely after a few bad months mostly due to good RPD and the only place I see a downturn is 123.  There is a sense of running faster to stay in the same place generally that can be totally explained by the vast increase in supply over the last while.

Well, yes, you're getting a better return at FT/DPC...because your fellow artists boycotted, which pressured them into offering higher commissions to hold onto the content. Just sayin'.

This is perfectly stated. If we would have never caught or addressed DPC the way we did FOTOLIA could have raped us blind and laughed all the way to the bank.  ANY positive changes came at the pressure of contributors, NOT because FOTOLIA felt that it was the right thing to do. They will get away with anything they want until it hurts them, like pulling millions of images and, unfortunately, with some collateral damage of contributors being targeted for their opinions and accounts closed. Who WANTS to be associated with a company like that? Not me. Yes, I lost $50-$75 a month. Big deal. I am much happier without them and their rape the contributor business mentality.

ANGER CHECK: I am no longer angry. Was over that in June when we separated.  But I will continue to participate in forum discussions about FOTOLIA to share the facts around their behaviors and business decisions and, what I believe, an intent to price competitors out of the market. This is expressly why I believe that if you support DPC you support a new, lower tier business model.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2014, 08:55 by Mantis »

« Reply #27 on: October 12, 2014, 10:34 »
+9
AFTER I requested all my video clips be deleted and my account closed, I got an email from FT trying to explain how there was a bug error that made clips available to be bought for pennies through a subscription scheme. Like a perpetually wayward spouse, they have a way of falling back on bad habits. It's your heart baby.

« Reply #28 on: October 12, 2014, 10:42 »
0
To be perfectly honest, I get a better return for my sales at FT / DPC than I do at IS where we are getting raped on both pricing and commission but I suggest the decline there is more to do with the ineptness of the folks in control than any external factors.  SS are holding up, DT is coming back nicely after a few bad months mostly due to good RPD and the only place I see a downturn is 123.  There is a sense of running faster to stay in the same place generally that can be totally explained by the vast increase in supply over the last while.

Well, yes, you're getting a better return at FT/DPC...because your fellow artists boycotted, which pressured them into offering higher commissions to hold onto the content. Just sayin'.

This is perfectly stated. If we would have never caught or addressed DPC the way we did FOTOLIA could have raped us blind and laughed all the way to the bank.  ANY positive changes came at the pressure of contributors, NOT because FOTOLIA felt that it was the right thing to do. They will get away with anything they want until it hurts them, like pulling millions of images and, unfortunately, with some collateral damage of contributors being targeted for their opinions and accounts closed. Who WANTS to be associated with a company like that? Not me. Yes, I lost $50-$75 a month. Big deal. I am much happier without them and their rape the contributor business mentality.

ANGER CHECK: I am no longer angry. Was over that in June when we separated.  But I will continue to participate in forum discussions about FOTOLIA to share the facts around their behaviors and business decisions and, what I believe, an intent to price competitors out of the market. This is expressly why I believe that if you support DPC you support a new, lower tier business model.

I fully understand why you don't want to work with them. I don't like them either, though I still have my portfolio with them.

But what I don't understand: why are you still with IS? Their attitude towards contributors is no better, and they have been - for the longest time - the role model for all other agencies to keep commissions down. They had the lowest percentage in the business since they started. And when they decided that 80% is too much, I left them.
I don't think that decision had any positive effect for me. Since then I'm a bit more cautious with deleting portfolios, even at agencies that screw contributors like FT and 123RF.

And by the way, my sales at FT have been up last month, although I am opted out of DPC. Must have some other reason.

« Reply #29 on: October 12, 2014, 11:37 »
+1
I'm not opted.in to DPC, but my earnings at Fotolia continue to grow month after month.

So I don't think there's necessarily a causation between being opted in or out and your normal fotolia sales. If there is, I'm not aware of it.

« Reply #30 on: October 12, 2014, 12:07 »
+2
I'm not opted.in to DPC, but my earnings at Fotolia continue to grow month after month.

So I don't think there's necessarily a causation between being opted in or out and your normal fotolia sales. If there is, I'm not aware of it.

Realistically I don't see how those who have opted-out of DPC can be deliberately 'punished' with fewer sales at FT. It could only be achieved via modifications to the default sort-order and I can't see FT investing money to achieve that end. Let's face it, FT have the least sophisticated sort-order of any of the main agencies which indicates how little they do invest in such things. For example they seem to be the only agency that don't even give any weighting whatsoever to keywords. The likelihood that FT have actually spent money just to make their search even worse for buyers is highly improbable.

Apart from anything else they appear to already have 80-90% of the content at FT mirrored at DPC. Try a search on any particular subject on each site and there's not much difference in the quantity.

« Reply #31 on: October 12, 2014, 12:31 »
-1

 I fully understand why you don't want to work with them. I don't like them either, though I still have my portfolio with them.

 
 But what I don't understand: why are you still with IS? Their attitude towards contributors is no better, and they have been - for the longest time - the role model for all other agencies to keep commissions down. They had the lowest percentage in the business since they started. And when they decided that 80% is too much, I left them.
 I don't think that decision had any positive effect for me. Since then I'm a bit more cautious with deleting portfolios, even at agencies that screw contributors like FT and 123RF.
 
 And by the way, my sales at FT have been up last month, although I am opted out of DPC. Must have some other reason.
 
Took the words right out of my mouth.  If FT is showing an earnings increase with no knock on impact elsewhere, how are they any worse than the sites Dirkr mentioned?

« Reply #32 on: October 12, 2014, 12:32 »
+8
To be perfectly honest, I get a better return for my sales at FT / DPC than I do at IS where we are getting raped on both pricing and commission but I suggest the decline there is more to do with the ineptness of the folks in control than any external factors.  SS are holding up, DT is coming back nicely after a few bad months mostly due to good RPD and the only place I see a downturn is 123.  There is a sense of running faster to stay in the same place generally that can be totally explained by the vast increase in supply over the last while.

Well, yes, you're getting a better return at FT/DPC...because your fellow artists boycotted, which pressured them into offering higher commissions to hold onto the content. Just sayin'.

This is perfectly stated. If we would have never caught or addressed DPC the way we did FOTOLIA could have raped us blind and laughed all the way to the bank.  ANY positive changes came at the pressure of contributors, NOT because FOTOLIA felt that it was the right thing to do. They will get away with anything they want until it hurts them, like pulling millions of images and, unfortunately, with some collateral damage of contributors being targeted for their opinions and accounts closed. Who WANTS to be associated with a company like that? Not me. Yes, I lost $50-$75 a month. Big deal. I am much happier without them and their rape the contributor business mentality.

ANGER CHECK: I am no longer angry. Was over that in June when we separated.  But I will continue to participate in forum discussions about FOTOLIA to share the facts around their behaviors and business decisions and, what I believe, an intent to price competitors out of the market. This is expressly why I believe that if you support DPC you support a new, lower tier business model.

Totally agree.

Personally I'm not going to re-upload my vector portfolio back to the agency who thinks that raping those who provide the blood for its business is the way to go.

« Reply #33 on: October 12, 2014, 12:54 »
0
I'm not opted.in to DPC, but my earnings at Fotolia continue to grow month after month.

So I don't think there's necessarily a causation between being opted in or out and your normal fotolia sales. If there is, I'm not aware of it.

Realistically I don't see how those who have opted-out of DPC can be deliberately 'punished' with fewer sales at FT. It could only be achieved via modifications to the default sort-order and I can't see FT investing money to achieve that end. Let's face it, FT have the least sophisticated sort-order of any of the main agencies which indicates how little they do invest in such things. For example they seem to be the only agency that don't even give any weighting whatsoever to keywords. The likelihood that FT have actually spent money just to make their search even worse for buyers is highly improbable.

Apart from anything else they appear to already have 80-90% of the content at FT mirrored at DPC. Try a search on any particular subject on each site and there's not much difference in the quantity.

Interesting side-track here.
They do such things, but for a different cause.
I do have an image that shows up pretty high (now top thirty in a search leading to over 3000 results, was top 5 a few weeks ago) in their relevant search order.
But only if I search in German on the German FT site.
If I switch to English (US) the same (translated) search term shows a bit more than 5000 results, and my file can't be found in the first 500 (stopped looking after that).
Interestingly enough, if I switch to English (UK) my image is number two (of over 5000).

I suspect this is because I get paid in Euros. Somebody from the US buying in US-$ and them having to pay me in Euros is their worst case. And they know how to avoid that.

Proof: FT shows you a statistic how many files were bought from US buyers. From beginning of 2011 on until today, in my case that is about 1,5% of all sales.


« Reply #34 on: October 12, 2014, 14:06 »
+1
I suspect this is because I get paid in Euros. Somebody from the US buying in US-$ and them having to pay me in Euros is their worst case. And they know how to avoid that.

Proof: FT shows you a statistic how many files were bought from US buyers. From beginning of 2011 on until today, in my case that is about 1,5% of all sales.

I'm being paid in euros as well. In my case, about 18% of my total revenue is from US sales.

« Reply #35 on: October 12, 2014, 14:26 »
0
I'm not opted.in to DPC, but my earnings at Fotolia continue to grow month after month.

So I don't think there's necessarily a causation between being opted in or out and your normal fotolia sales. If there is, I'm not aware of it.

Realistically I don't see how those who have opted-out of DPC can be deliberately 'punished' with fewer sales at FT. It could only be achieved via modifications to the default sort-order and I can't see FT investing money to achieve that end. Let's face it, FT have the least sophisticated sort-order of any of the main agencies which indicates how little they do invest in such things. For example they seem to be the only agency that don't even give any weighting whatsoever to keywords. The likelihood that FT have actually spent money just to make their search even worse for buyers is highly improbable.

Apart from anything else they appear to already have 80-90% of the content at FT mirrored at DPC. Try a search on any particular subject on each site and there's not much difference in the quantity.

Interesting side-track here.
They do such things, but for a different cause.
I do have an image that shows up pretty high (now top thirty in a search leading to over 3000 results, was top 5 a few weeks ago) in their relevant search order.
But only if I search in German on the German FT site.
If I switch to English (US) the same (translated) search term shows a bit more than 5000 results, and my file can't be found in the first 500 (stopped looking after that).
Interestingly enough, if I switch to English (UK) my image is number two (of over 5000).

I suspect this is because I get paid in Euros. Somebody from the US buying in US-$ and them having to pay me in Euros is their worst case. And they know how to avoid that.

Proof: FT shows you a statistic how many files were bought from US buyers. From beginning of 2011 on until today, in my case that is about 1,5% of all sales.

Now, this is quite interesting.

I'm an EU contributor, but I made a mistake while opening my account, so I get paid in US$. So I suppose for them it would be the best if buyers paid in euro, while they pay me in dollars.
Where can I see this statistic?

« Reply #36 on: October 12, 2014, 15:36 »
0

Where can I see this statistic?

In your account click on "see statistics", there in the first drop-down field the last entry ("How many credits have I earned from US buyers?").

« Reply #37 on: October 12, 2014, 16:18 »
-18
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?

Dook

« Reply #38 on: October 13, 2014, 02:06 »
+4
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?
In virtual world of anonimity on forums- yes, you are right. But, in real world, in your town, in your neighborhood, among your friends and people you live with - do you really live this way? Not caring about anybody, just going for money?
I know you don't. It's just that these internet world made us tell stupidities.

stocked

« Reply #39 on: October 13, 2014, 03:47 »
-1
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?
Lagereek in Troll-mode again........  ::)

Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #40 on: October 13, 2014, 04:44 »
+9

I fully understand why you don't want to work with them. I don't like them either, though I still have my portfolio with them.

But what I don't understand: why are you still with IS? Their attitude towards contributors is no better, and they have been - for the longest time - the role model for all other agencies to keep commissions down. They had the lowest percentage in the business since they started. And when they decided that 80% is too much, I left them.
I don't think that decision had any positive effect for me. Since then I'm a bit more cautious with deleting portfolios, even at agencies that screw contributors like FT and 123RF.

And by the way, my sales at FT have been up last month, although I am opted out of DPC. Must have some other reason.

I agree with what you are saying, but each agency is different.

IStock milks its contributors for everything it can get, but it's incompetence and high prices mean that it isn't really a threat to the other agencies. In fact it's mostly cutting its own throat by taking such a high percentage (as already discussed).

They also haven't been caught out misleading contributors in the same way as FL (using generous language). FL's hypocrisy is also hard to swallow, throwing their toys out of the pram when DP came along and threatening their contributors then coming up with DPC that is much worse.

Also before evaluating whether leaving IS had any positive effects for you think about all the time and frustration you have avoided by not uploading to them. Then think about all the subsequent (and future) shenanigans you don't have to worry about. Then factor in that their market share is ever decreasing. Seems like you could have made the right decision, no?

stocked

« Reply #41 on: October 13, 2014, 05:15 »
+7

I fully understand why you don't want to work with them. I don't like them either, though I still have my portfolio with them.

But what I don't understand: why are you still with IS? Their attitude towards contributors is no better, and they have been - for the longest time - the role model for all other agencies to keep commissions down. They had the lowest percentage in the business since they started. And when they decided that 80% is too much, I left them.
I don't think that decision had any positive effect for me. Since then I'm a bit more cautious with deleting portfolios, even at agencies that screw contributors like FT and 123RF.

And by the way, my sales at FT have been up last month, although I am opted out of DPC. Must have some other reason.

I agree with what you are saying, but each agency is different.

IStock milks its contributors for everything it can get, but it's incompetence and high prices mean that it isn't really a threat to the other agencies. In fact it's mostly cutting its own throat by taking such a high percentage (as already discussed).

They also haven't been caught out misleading contributors in the same way as FL (using generous language). FL's hypocrisy is also hard to swallow, throwing their toys out of the pram when DP came along and threatening their contributors then coming up with DPC that is much worse.

Also before evaluating whether leaving IS had any positive effects for you think about all the time and frustration you have avoided by not uploading to them. Then think about all the subsequent (and future) shenanigans you don't have to worry about. Then factor in that their market share is ever decreasing. Seems like you could have made the right decision, no?
I agree with this iStock is 'just' greedy and sometimes stupid while Fotolia and Deposhit are really malicious.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2014, 05:18 by stocked »

« Reply #42 on: October 13, 2014, 11:29 »
-1
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?
In virtual world of anonimity on forums- yes, you are right. But, in real world, in your town, in your neighborhood, among your friends and people you live with - do you really live this way? Not caring about anybody, just going for money?
I know you don't. It's just that these internet world made us tell stupidities.

I'm not going to give up income just because my neighbor says it would br good for him. And I'm not anonymous. I would tell you the same thing to your face.

Nic99

« Reply #43 on: October 13, 2014, 12:05 »
-1
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?
Lagereek in Troll-mode again........  ::)
Its not Lagereek.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2014, 12:28 by Nic99 »

stocked

« Reply #44 on: October 13, 2014, 13:39 »
0
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?
Lagereek in Troll-mode again........  ::)
Its not Lagereek.
I'm pretty sure he is, so are you! Doesn't this get boring you could create a lot of stock-photos in the time you are managing all these MSG-accounts.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2014, 14:37 by stocked »

« Reply #45 on: October 13, 2014, 14:36 »
+6
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?
In virtual world of anonimity on forums- yes, you are right. But, in real world, in your town, in your neighborhood, among your friends and people you live with - do you really live this way? Not caring about anybody, just going for money?
I know you don't. It's just that these internet world made us tell stupidities.

I'm not going to give up income just because my neighbor says it would br good for him. And I'm not anonymous. I would tell you the same thing to your face.

Effect of many contributors sharing this way of doing business with barrel scraping agencies -

 - Possible short term gain for yourself (since many contributors have chosen to opt out)

- Long term eroding of our collective business, aided by desperate contributors taking whatever they can get from barrel scraping agencies


« Reply #46 on: October 13, 2014, 14:53 »
+16
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?
In virtual world of anonimity on forums- yes, you are right. But, in real world, in your town, in your neighborhood, among your friends and people you live with - do you really live this way? Not caring about anybody, just going for money?
I know you don't. It's just that these internet world made us tell stupidities.

I'm not going to give up income just because my neighbor says it would br good for him. And I'm not anonymous. I would tell you the same thing to your face.

How much does DPC add to your microstock income, as a percentage of the total?

Do you even know how much you gain from DPC as I'm not aware that you can separate out DPC earnings from ordinary FT sales?

You appear to be quite keen on microstock and working quite hard to build your income. Do you not realise that in trying to chase an extra percent or two from DPC then you are endangering the other 98-99%?

DPC was started by FT only when they realised they had lost the 'microstock war' to SS. When they proudly describe DPC as a 'disruptive model' then they mean exactly that. They want to disrupt or destroy microstock itself. Having lost the microstock war they are keen to be first to the party for the 'nanostock war'.

If DPC is successful then the agency has almost cut the contributor out of the equation. A good proportion of their revenue will be coming from the $10 per month or $99 per year subscriptions ... of which the contributor gets absolutely nothing.

I'm surprised Rob that, in supporting DPC, you can't see you are cutting your own throat for a few $'s per month. Unfortunately you are also cutting our throats at the same time.

« Reply #47 on: October 13, 2014, 15:10 »
+1
Great advice Gostwyck. 

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #48 on: October 13, 2014, 16:06 »
+15
Dallas, the only thing that counts is whether u make money there . if u do, what others say is not important. also, if everyone hates fotolia...means less ppl submit their work to them. if that means u earn more there, who cares?
In virtual world of anonimity on forums- yes, you are right. But, in real world, in your town, in your neighborhood, among your friends and people you live with - do you really live this way? Not caring about anybody, just going for money?
I know you don't. It's just that these internet world made us tell stupidities.

I'm not going to give up income just because my neighbor says it would br good for him. And I'm not anonymous. I would tell you the same thing to your face.

Nobody's asked you, or anyone, to give up income only because it's good for them. We've boycotted DPC because it's good for everyone. You included.

« Reply #49 on: October 13, 2014, 16:54 »
0

I fully understand why you don't want to work with them. I don't like them either, though I still have my portfolio with them.

But what I don't understand: why are you still with IS? Their attitude towards contributors is no better, and they have been - for the longest time - the role model for all other agencies to keep commissions down. They had the lowest percentage in the business since they started. And when they decided that 80% is too much, I left them.
I don't think that decision had any positive effect for me. Since then I'm a bit more cautious with deleting portfolios, even at agencies that screw contributors like FT and 123RF.

And by the way, my sales at FT have been up last month, although I am opted out of DPC. Must have some other reason.

I agree with what you are saying, but each agency is different.

IStock milks its contributors for everything it can get, but it's incompetence and high prices mean that it isn't really a threat to the other agencies. In fact it's mostly cutting its own throat by taking such a high percentage (as already discussed).

They also haven't been caught out misleading contributors in the same way as FL (using generous language). FL's hypocrisy is also hard to swallow, throwing their toys out of the pram when DP came along and threatening their contributors then coming up with DPC that is much worse.

Also before evaluating whether leaving IS had any positive effects for you think about all the time and frustration you have avoided by not uploading to them. Then think about all the subsequent (and future) shenanigans you don't have to worry about. Then factor in that their market share is ever decreasing. Seems like you could have made the right decision, no?


Sorry, IS - high prices???  That was then, this is now - at least for non-exclusives..


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
5747 Views
Last post September 04, 2008, 01:17
by stozka
4 Replies
2556 Views
Last post September 27, 2011, 04:20
by Paulo M. F. Pires
3 Replies
3311 Views
Last post January 16, 2012, 23:20
by mtilghma
0 Replies
3035 Views
Last post February 19, 2018, 10:51
by josephjacobs
11 Replies
3709 Views
Last post October 04, 2023, 10:30
by JustAnImage

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors