Author Topic: Fotolia: New Subscription Commissions (Read 68184 times)

Smithore · « **Reply #175 on:** August 22, 2011, 10:55 »

I have very few sales now, just one regular and 5 or 6 ridiculous sales, i decide to stop uploading, for sure.

sam100 · « **Reply #176 on:** August 22, 2011, 11:36 »

Quote from: Xalanx on August 22, 2011, 08:46

Does anybody have an avalanche of maximum size sub sales since they started this v3? I can hardly spot a regular sale these days and they're mostly small size.

Yup,
98 % is subs sales at L, XL, XXL
Very disappointing

Patrick.

Xalanx · « **Reply #177 on:** August 22, 2011, 11:50 »

these are my latest 20:

Xalanx · « **Reply #178 on:** August 22, 2011, 12:00 »

This is an extras from their newsletter:

"Take up to one month to download the images of your choice with no daily limits. Any unused downloads will carry over into the next month when you renew."

To me it appears to be a direct hit at SS model. Now, why would I want to get payed $0.29 instead of $0.38? Why would anyone want this, in fact? If this strategy works as intended, and buyers will rush in masses over ft's "cheapest subscription on the market", where is our gain?

Smithore · « **Reply #179 on:** August 22, 2011, 16:16 »

Maybe it's not worth to close our accounts immediately, but we must stop uploading new pictures now, stop feeding the thief.

Smithore · « **Reply #180 on:** August 22, 2011, 16:25 »

here are my stats on my fotolia accounts:
3 regulars sales and 18 subs

fotolia Fr:

fotolia US:

madelaide · « **Reply #181 on:** August 22, 2011, 16:26 »

I am not having an avalanche of sales, but all are subs however. Wonderful 29c each. Ooooh, I love FT, yeah!

Xalanx · « **Reply #182 on:** August 22, 2011, 16:31 »

Quote from: Smithore on August 22, 2011, 16:16

Maybe it's not worth to close our accounts immediately, but we must stop uploading new pictures now, stop feeding the thief.

Yes, I am definitely stopping uploads to them. I will monitor what's happening during this month before I take other measures. Anyway, at this rate even if I stay there I will hit gold level in a few years perhaps, with the vast majority of sales being subs.

Blammo · « **Reply #183 on:** August 22, 2011, 16:33 »

2828 files so far

Smithore · « **Reply #184 on:** August 22, 2011, 17:34 »

Quote

Yes, I am definitely stopping uploads to them. I will monitor what's happening during this month before I take other measures. Anyway, at this rate even if I stay there I will hit gold level in a few years perhaps, with the vast majority of sales being subs.

In my US account, I've not uploaded new files since 2 years and the sales stay at the same level. Keeping account open without sending new files, is a good alternative, in return, fotolia going to lack of new images and be surpassed by the others sites in few months...but only if many of us are acting like that...
If the sales drop deeply next months, no regrets to close the account...

helix7 · « **Reply #185 on:** August 22, 2011, 23:47 »

I'm getting $0.87 per vector subscription sale. I could swear the charts I looked at put vector sub sales at the same $0.29 as photos.

It's still not great, and no where near as good as the $1.11 premium vector sub sales I used to get. But I don't remember seeing $0.87 in the charts.

toots · « **Reply #186 on:** August 23, 2011, 04:49 »

Quote from: helix7 on August 22, 2011, 23:47

I'm getting $0.87 per vector subscription sale. I could swear the charts I looked at put vector sub sales at the same $0.29 as photos.

It's still not great, and no where near as good as the $1.11 premium vector sub sales I used to get. But I don't remember seeing $0.87 in the charts.

Probably from existing subscription plans purchased before the new subscriptions came into effect. Not sure if they lowered the overall percentage which would account for the sales being 0.87 instead of 1.11. Although that seems like quite a drop anyways.

lagereek · « **Reply #187 on:** August 23, 2011, 06:13 »

Not here! Im having big and small sales, even some ELs. I can actually see a very positive improvement from earlier. Just hopes it stays that way.

Anita Potter · « **Reply #188 on:** August 23, 2011, 13:55 »

Been discussing this ad nauseum with the boyfriend for the last week. I told him what was going on and said that I'm thinking of closing my account there. With our discussions (and taking into account what we're financially going through right now) I've decided not to close my account there. I do get payouts there 2-3 months but will monitor how long it will take to reach the next one. I am, however, stopping uploads for the time being. New stuff really isn't selling there for me at all and until that changes no new content from me is going up there.

Now if I had my other sites sustain me with regular payouts then yeah I'd be outta there in a heartbeat. Or if I made a target amount each month then I would be outta there. But right now I can't quit until we get our financial things under control. So yeah no feeding the theif for me either.

Smithore · « **Reply #189 on:** August 23, 2011, 16:27 »

Quote

Not here! Im having big and small sales, even some ELs. I can actually see a very positive improvement from earlier. Just hopes it stays that way.

Good for you, are you the niece of fotolia boss?

lisafx · « **Reply #190 on:** August 23, 2011, 17:20 »

Quote from: Smithore on August 23, 2011, 16:27

Quote
Not here! Im having big and small sales, even some ELs. I can actually see a very positive improvement from earlier. Just hopes it stays that way.
Good for you, are you the niece of fotolia boss?

No, I don't think HE'S the niece of anyone at Fotolia. Or anyone else for that matter

OM · « **Reply #191 on:** August 23, 2011, 17:44 »

Well, seein' as how I'm still totally exclusive at FT (out of pure laziness), I have the option of withdrawing from subs entirely. Tried that once before but went back in, due to an increasingly poor position in the search. New work wasn't being seen and I believed at the time that appearing in subs also did bring in some buyers of dl's.

My ratio of dl's to subs has now crept up to 7:4 but those dl's bring in 9X the amount of money that the subs do. A couple of years ago, I had looked at stock as a method of subsidising my State pension in 5 years time. Haven't got many images and I'm not a big uploader but I was considering putting in more effort to more uploads as my monthly income was increasing steadily and was around €80/month in February 2011 when FT messed with the search engine and reduced commissions in March. Now I'm lucky if I earn half that and the income trend is down, not up.

Fortunately for me FT is just pocket money compared to paid commissions so I'm going to say 'eff'em'......if they want my stock material, they can pay for a dl They're cheap enough anyway as the majority are rated at one basis credit, although I'm allowed to charge 2. If buyers won't pay for a dl, well, too bad for me. The amounts involved are so small that it's really not worth worrying about.

As an aside, there's little point in getting above bronze or silver at FT now because although the commission percentage rises, the basic credit multiple is now is maximised at 3 (same as Silver). It also strikes me that some potential buyers are OK with a 2 basic credit but when it's 3 and you need an XL size........24 credits is a lot to fork out! (Thinks to self, maybe that's why FT encourages subs by making them so cheap........get 750 XL's for less than it costs to buy 10......download only the 10 you need for $200.........FT gives the contributor their $3+ and kachingo......$197 earned. Everyone is delirious.........'cept the creator)!

monti · « **Reply #192 on:** August 25, 2011, 08:06 »

stockmarketer · « **Reply #193 on:** August 25, 2011, 10:52 »

Quote from: monti on August 25, 2011, 08:06

Big companies get used to the fact that the photography in these days is FOR FREE. Another words Photographers have been cheated and they have been humiliated by big business and by Microstock companies who flooded the market with the free images and the problem is now that we are now surrounded by images that we dont appreciate anymore (and it doeas not work anymore)... and the next goal will be to transofrm the static picture into the moving picture (footage) and thats why about 3 months ago Shutterstock was calling all its contributors to change their activities into shooting movies. The age of static picture is going to the end and its price is going to drop drasticly in the following years since it has smaller and smaller value in commercial activities. Corporate marketing requires another form of imagery (particualrly in internet) to chase their commercial goals.

Two facts of business at work here: 1) natural evolution of business and technology, and 2) supply and demand. We can complain until we're blue in the face, but it's pointless. You adapt, and you make yourself unique instead of a commodity, or you die.

Those who are quick to embrace point 1 and on the cutting edge of figuring out what customers want before they want it will always prosper. That's because there are very few of them at the beginning of any movement and the supply and demand ratio works in their favor.

Yes, video will be more and more in demand as everything you pick up will have moving images on it. But we're not quite there yet.

The answer won't be to simply shoot video of the things you're currently shooting photos of. If your photos aren't selling today, chances are your videos won't sell well tomorrow. Those with a true understanding of what customers demand, and what needs aren't already being met (probably people with skills better than your own), will prosper no matter what the format. I've said it over and over here... there are niches that are undercovered and in great demand, and if you are one of the few artists creating photos or illustrations covering these areas, you will do well, even when the agencies each have a billion images. Get out there and figure it out.

helix7 · « **Reply #194 on:** August 25, 2011, 10:57 »

Quote from: monti on August 25, 2011, 08:06

It is clear that sooner or later each of those big-micro-stocks will cut royalties for contributors unless contributors are going to find a way to defend against it...

Well let's be fair here to the companies that don't cut rates. This isn't a microstock industry-wide epidemic. We're talking about a few companies out of many. To my knowledge, Fotolia and istock are the only ones to cut royalty rates. On the other end of the spectrum, SS has been the only company (as far as I know) to raise rates. Although they haven't done it in a while.

In between, there are 11 other companies I work with, none of whom have cut rates. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong and another well-known company has indeed cut rates).

These are a few bad apples out of the large bunch, and the larger part of the group haven't crossed over to the dark side yet. Will they? Maybe. But I doubt it in most cases.

gostwyck · « **Reply #195 on:** August 25, 2011, 11:52 »

It does appear to me however that when an agency gets too greedy ... it can blow up fairly spectacularly in their face. Istock being a prime example and FT losing ground too.

lisafx · « **Reply #196 on:** August 25, 2011, 13:47 »

Quote from: helix7 on August 25, 2011, 10:57

To my knowledge, Fotolia and istock are the only ones to cut royalty rates. On the other end of the spectrum, SS has been the only company (as far as I know) to raise rates. Although they haven't done it in a while.

In between, there are 11 other companies I work with, none of whom have cut rates. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong and another well-known company has indeed cut rates).

I agree with your larger point, but DT has cut rates too. They did throw in some sweeteners to cushion the blow though.

TheSmilingAssassin · « **Reply #197 on:** August 25, 2011, 20:46 »

Quote from: helix7 on August 25, 2011, 10:57

In between, there are 11 other companies I work with, none of whom have cut rates. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong and another well-known company has indeed cut rates).

These are a few bad apples out of the large bunch, and the larger part of the group haven't crossed over to the dark side yet. Will they? Maybe. But I doubt it in most cases.

Eventually they will have to in order to survive. FT is not IS. IS is expensive so it's a bit easier to get buyers to switch to another site. FT is one of the cheapest out there so not only will buyers stay, but more will flock there. Not many contributors will leave.... most, as shown in this thread will only stop uploading but that won't slow FT down. Other contributors will see it as an opportunity to move up the ranks and will upload more. The other companies will lose buyers and will be forced to reduce prices and commissions to stay in the game.

It's a become a virus and we just have to let it run it's course now. It'll kill off a lot of talent and the only ones who'll remain in the industry are the ones who are immune... the ones that are in it as a hobby and the ones who live in third world countries who can still live off low commissions.

It's unfortunate but that's just the way it is.

grp_photo · « **Reply #198 on:** August 26, 2011, 09:46 »

Quote from: lisafx on August 25, 2011, 13:47

Quote from: helix7 on August 25, 2011, 10:57
To my knowledge, Fotolia and istock are the only ones to cut royalty rates. On the other end of the spectrum, SS has been the only company (as far as I know) to raise rates. Although they haven't done it in a while.

In between, there are 11 other companies I work with, none of whom have cut rates. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong and another well-known company has indeed cut rates).

I agree with your larger point, but DT has cut rates too. They did throw in some sweeteners to cushion the blow though.

And Canstock too they had 70% or 75% commission (can't remember exactly) for the photographer at the time I started with them a long time ago!

CD123 · « **Reply #199 on:** August 27, 2011, 17:08 »

The "stop uploading new images" drive seems like a great way to suffocate a greedy website slowly but surely. Their customers will pick the lack of new content up and move to other sites. BUT, how many contributors are represented on this website who will actively participate in such a drive, compare to the total number of contributors. If the drive is only from us here, it might not even dent their new uploads that much. How to get a large proportion of their contributors to participate, I think, is the challenge......

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Fotolia: New Subscription Commissions (Read 68184 times)

Smithore

sam100

Xalanx

Xalanx

Smithore

Smithore

madelaide

Xalanx

Blammo

Smithore

helix7

toots

lagereek

Anita Potter

Smithore

lisafx

OM

monti

stockmarketer

helix7

gostwyck

lisafx

TheSmilingAssassin

grp_photo

CD123

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors