MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Premium Subscription  (Read 20657 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 07, 2009, 04:27 »
0
I just received a Fotolia newsletter from Fotolia Germany  that they will introduce Premium subscription.
That means buyers can download high res files, vector images and videos with this subscription.

For high res images the royalty will be:


White        0.35 Credits
Bronze        0.36 Credits
Silver        0.37 Credits
Gold                0.38 Credits
Emerald        0.39 Credits
Sapphire        0.40 Credits
Rubis         0.41 Credits
Diamond        0.42 Credits

For vector images 3x and videos 10x this royalty.

What do you think?


« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2009, 04:43 »
0
I hope this doesn't reduce PPD sales too much.  I don't like selling video clips that cheaply, so they wont be getting more of mine.

« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2009, 05:07 »
0
This could deprecate the value of stock footage from 75$ per dl to peanuts very soon. Will there be people in a year complaining how 4$ for a stock footage is unfair? They won't see any of mine.

« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2009, 05:07 »
0
can say about vectors or video as I dont do either, and I'd rather subs didnt exist at all, but I it is good to see higher amounts for subs, means I get $0.37 there and $0.38 at SS, thats 2 sites now that pay me about 50% more than $0.25 that some offer

« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2009, 06:09 »
0
Look closer, the "Premium" subs packages are about 25% more expensive than the regular subs.

The contributor commission is raised between 11,9% (highest ranking level) and 16,7% (newbies).

Looks like the standard Fotolia way.... >:(

« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2009, 06:26 »
0
Very sad news. Just got FT newsletter.
No more size limit for subscription. We will only get 0.05 more for XXXXL subs sale.
We will get 3.60$ for HD video sale!
Fotolia was a good earner for me. But it's too much. I don't want be exclusive with IS but probably there's no other choice.
I have not finished uploading of all my videos here (After weeks) and now I can start to delete them.
It's so stupid.

« Reply #6 on: July 07, 2009, 07:07 »
0
Whats next? we will be selling for 0.01$. :S



« Reply #7 on: July 07, 2009, 07:43 »
0
goings on FT, StockXpert and SS in the last few month have heavily steered me towards IS exclusivity. just waiting to ramp up enough dls and do my 6 months time on DT.... these agencies (with two exceptions) are so busy advertising sales at any prices (the lower the better) to buyers and whoring their contributors' work away in the mean time. Give 'em everything for free. Make us pay for hosting our accepted files. IS is a rare exception, with DT being close. This is the the moment to protect video pricing. If it goes through, noone will pay 75$ for HD resolution video in a years time. 3.5$-4.2$ is insulting and the market is nowhere near as saturated as photo market.

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #8 on: July 07, 2009, 07:51 »
0
it's not something to go ape and celebrate, it's 5 cents or a bit more across the board in commissions. I dig Fotolia as they sell fast, and their search engine is fair.I know it is because I get a mix of subs and PPD. and it's not like some other Big6 sites where new images get nada in views (yawn, enough already).
i am not a big fan of IS, but like rene said, with Vetta, getting to be IS exclusive is sure making a lot more sense today than it ever used to be, than being independent with the other sites playing games  ;)
but i will hang on to Fotolia, as i am sure they must be looking hard at Getty , IS, and Vetta, as well as the new kid in town Veer Marketplace which has caught the fancy of many of us here.
meanwhile, so long as Fotolia sell enough for me , i won't make too much of a scene here  :D

« Reply #9 on: July 07, 2009, 08:00 »
0
meanwhile, so long as Fotolia sell enough for me , i won't make too much of a scene here  :D

Fotolia monitors independent forums closely and some high-profile contributors have been deleted their port because they spitted out (justified) critique on them. They censor their own forums and they can't stand any critique outside of them. So better don't make a scene unless you're anonymous. Personally I don't have much to say against them. They sell OK but I would never upload video to them after this move.

« Reply #10 on: July 07, 2009, 08:01 »
0
No!

« Reply #11 on: July 07, 2009, 08:19 »
0
I thought with the addition of some well-known administrators that Fotolia would get better but their decisions are getting worse every month. Giving away hi-res in subs will probably drop the PPD revenues. And they still count only for 0.25 download for the ranks (which sucks). Like some people said here, Exclusivity is more and more tempting. Let's hope Veer will save the day.

« Reply #12 on: July 07, 2009, 08:51 »
0
meanwhile, so long as Fotolia sell enough for me , i won't make too much of a scene here  :D

Fotolia monitors independent forums closely and some high-profile contributors have been deleted their port because they spitted out (justified) critique on them. They censor their own forums and they can't stand any critique outside of them. So better don't make a scene unless you're anonymous. Personally I don't have much to say against them. They sell OK but I would never upload video to them after this move.

I have posted the same criticism on the Fotolia Forum (the German one). I have done so before and until now have not been banned from their forum (nor has my port been deleted).

If they are not willing to sell my work while I openly state my opinion, it is their choice. But that will never stop me from writing what I want.

« Reply #13 on: July 07, 2009, 09:34 »
0
meanwhile, so long as Fotolia sell enough for me , i won't make too much of a scene here  :D

Fotolia monitors independent forums closely and some high-profile contributors have been deleted their port because they spitted out (justified) critique on them. They censor their own forums and they can't stand any critique outside of them. So better don't make a scene unless you're anonymous. Personally I don't have much to say against them. They sell OK but I would never upload video to them after this move.

I have posted the same criticism on the Fotolia Forum (the German one). I have done so before and until now have not been banned from their forum (nor has my port been deleted).

If they are not willing to sell my work while I openly state my opinion, it is their choice. But that will never stop me from writing what I want.

I think dirkr is right. Fotolia is not some two bit stock agency with over-zealous moderators who will get furiously over-reactive simply because you voiced your opinion that may be not so agreeable to your own ideas. Constructive criticism is healthy. I would not want to associate with an agency which expects me to agree with everything they say. So long as we refrain from calling each other some filthy names, I think there is always a place for free speech and opinionated contributors. Oh, correction, I should say, there SHOULD be a place for ...   That's why we call it a forum. If not, you may as well change the word and replace it with something like, " Woo Hoo, I like everything you do !
 But if I only had a brain, I could surely give you my honest opinion"  8)
... or perchance, one word like ZOMBIE-ZONE  ;)
« Last Edit: July 07, 2009, 09:37 by Perseus »

« Reply #14 on: July 07, 2009, 09:48 »
0
Could someone please post a copy of the newsletter?  I didnt get it and if video is going to be that cheap, I need to start deleting.

Thanks,

Snaprender

KB

« Reply #15 on: July 07, 2009, 09:50 »
0
I think dirkr is right. Fotolia is not some two bit stock agency with over-zealous moderators who will get furiously over-reactive simply because you voiced your opinion that may be not so agreeable to your own ideas.
New here?  ;D  :D

The main reason I remain anonymous is because FT (and to a lesser extent, DT) is exactly like that. I've read enough of the horror stories to know.

But speaking of horror stories ... ! FT was the last major agency with a decent sub policy other than IS. Now they've ruined it. I'm glad I decided not to UL any video clips to them until I heard more about sales there. I certainly won't be doing so now.

Maybe those ex-IS execs are really double agents, trying to get contributors disgusted enough that we all decide to become IS exclusives? As others have said, this certainly makes FT less attractive as a contributor. About $0.35 - $0.40 for an XXL sub sale? Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't have my chart available), but weren't they already one of the lowest payouts already for this size at just about $2.25 commission for a PPD? THIS SUCKS BIG TIME!  >:(  >:(  >:(  >:(
« Last Edit: July 07, 2009, 09:51 by KB »

« Reply #16 on: July 07, 2009, 09:55 »
0
Could someone please post a copy of the newsletter?  I didnt get it and if video is going to be that cheap, I need to start deleting.

Here is the email that I received.  It was in HTML format, so it looks slightly different, but the content is the same:

PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION

Dear fotolians,

Our subscription customers asked and asked - and now, we're giving them what they want! Soon, we'll launch a new premium subscription plan allowing subscribers to download high-resolution images, vectors and video clips.

Here's the really good news - higher royalties are being paid under this new subscription plan. We anticipate this new service will quickly increase both your sales and revenues. In addition, new subscription plans will pay 3 downloads for a vector sale and 10 for video clip sale - more details follow below.

IMAGES, VECTORS AND VIDEO CLIPS

We're aggressively upping our game to go after the subscription market and generating a whole new wave of high volume, high value customers. We are positive this will mean more revenues for all contributors who sell their collections through Fotolia subscriptions

This new subscription will not only increase your sales, but your revenues through increased royalties. How? Fotolia will attract new customers with the premium subscription plans, and that will increase the number of downloads you have. Premium subscription plans also increase the credit value you receive per download, and gives additional credits for vectors and video clips.

NEW PRICING CHART FOR PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION

The new revenue ranges from 0.35 to 0.42 credit/download. This is an across the board royalty increase of 0.05 credit/download. Royalties will be multiplied by 3 for vector sales and by 10 for video clips sales.

For example, Bronze members will earn 0.36/credit per download for images, and 1.08 credits (0.36 x 3) for vectors, and 3.6 credits (0.36 x 10) for video clips under premium subscription plans. Similarly, because Gold members earn 0.38/credit, they will earn 1.14 credits (0.38 x 3) for every vector downloaded.

This exciting new service will bring increased sales and revenues, so we anticipate you'll be as enthusiastic about this as we are! Keep your eyes out for the launch the countdown is on!


Revenues / download
RankingPremium Subscription
White0.35 credit
Bronze0.36 credit
Argent0.37 credit
Gold0.38 credit
Emerald0.39 credit
Sapphire0.40 credit
Diamond0.41 credit

« Last Edit: July 07, 2009, 09:59 by GeoPappas »

« Reply #17 on: July 07, 2009, 09:56 »
0
These guys have no business plan, other than to continue mindlessly cutting prices to match the competition, until they hit a point at which new contributions drop off. And even if there is such a point, they'll probably just keep selling what they already have.  Eventually, 'microstock' will mean free, with the revenue coming from ads.


puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #18 on: July 07, 2009, 09:57 »
0
I think dirkr is right. Fotolia is not some two bit stock agency with over-zealous moderators who will get furiously over-reactive simply because you voiced your opinion that may be not so agreeable to your own ideas. Constructive criticism is healthy. I would not want to associate with an agency which expects me to agree with everything they say. So long as we refrain from calling each other some filthy names, I think there is always a place for free speech and opinionated contributors. Oh, correction, I should say, there SHOULD be a place for ...   That's why we call it a forum. If not, you may as well change the word and replace it with something like, " Woo Hoo, I like everything you do !
 But if I only had a brain, I could surely give you my honest opinion"  8)
... or perchance, one word like ZOMBIE-ZONE  ;)

WOWIE ZOWIE Perseus! I would not have said it any better. Jolly good show VampireSlayer  ;D

« Reply #19 on: July 07, 2009, 10:02 »
0
I think dirkr is right. Fotolia is not some two bit stock agency with over-zealous moderators who will get furiously over-reactive simply because you voiced your opinion that may be not so agreeable to your own ideas.
New here?  ;D  :D

The main reason I remain anonymous is because FT (and to a lesser extent, DT) is exactly like that. I've read enough of the horror stories to know.


I have heard these horror stories too - but always only one side, since there rarely has been any official communication by FT.

But I have my own experience: I always used to post criticism on the FT forum (and on independent forums), and never anything happened to me. Needless to say that I try to stay objective and stay away from insulting anyone (though I sometimes feel like that... ::)).

That's why I decide to continue that way. And if I'm wrong and they kick me out, so be it. I am in the lucky situation that I do not depend on my income from stock sites, I wouldn't like it, but it wouldn't hurt me enough to make me shut up.

« Reply #20 on: July 07, 2009, 10:12 »
0
Maybe those ex-IS execs are really double agents, trying to get contributors disgusted enough that we all decide to become IS exclusives?

rofl, KB you made  my day. Actually, I wouldn't mind if you're right. A back door pass to IStock Exclusive.
Seriously, hell will freeze over before that happens ROFL.

« Reply #21 on: July 07, 2009, 10:15 »
0
What can I say...?  Can they make things more outrageous?  I think subs already meant 50% of my dlds in June.

KB

« Reply #22 on: July 07, 2009, 10:17 »
0
Seriously, hell will freeze over before that happens ROFL.
2 words: Global Warming.

I mean, hey, the heat must be coming from someplace, right? Which just might mean ....   ;D

« Reply #23 on: July 07, 2009, 10:41 »
0
Thanks for posting the newsletter.  I personally wont be selling my HD or NTSC videos for $3.60.  What a pain...I just got them all uploaded, now I have to delete them - ugh.

Snaprender

« Reply #24 on: July 07, 2009, 10:47 »
0
Agencies with PPD sales on first place have the future...

Even "king of subscriptions" like SS knows that... "on demand" is a first step forward...

Will be big migration of contributors in future to PPD and midstocks...

Also IS knows that, Vetta is first step...

« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2009, 10:49 »
0
Deleted

« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2009, 11:00 »
0
Agencies with PPD sales on first place have the future...
Even "king of subscriptions" like SS knows that... "on demand" is a first step forward...
Will be big migration of contributors in future to PPD and midstocks...
Also IS knows that, Vetta is first step...

WHo was it that said "absence of risk" or "not being threatened", in once of the comments. Was it you, borg? Anyway, that poster is right in one sense.
If it eventually comes to us making next to nothing and 35 cents mostly. We really have no risk or no threat to losing too much if we decide to make that "big migration to PPD and midstocks.."
The odds to earn a lot more with another experience site like Veer or IS because of their Corbis or Getty enveloping influence far outweigh the necessity to stay with the micro sites choosing to sell more and more images at sub-level prices.
Not sure if I put it clear enough to show what I mean. I hope what I've written here made sense.

« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2009, 12:08 »
0
Look closer, the "Premium" subs packages are about 25% more expensive than the regular subs.

The contributor commission is raised between 11,9% (highest ranking level) and 16,7% (newbies).

Looks like the standard Fotolia way.... >:(

Oh, I was happy about it when I read their newsletter because of the raise in commission. 

 But after reading the % you posted it seems like kind of a rip off.   :(


« Reply #28 on: July 07, 2009, 13:23 »
0
I'm now so cynical that I don't even read announcements like this in detail. I let more knowledgeable people pick them apart, and the bottom line is always another cut in prices, and commissions, packaged in spin about expanding the market.

Mind you, I'm not saying these agencies are evil, it's just an evolving business.  What they're doing now is probing the resistance on supplier pricing, and so far, they haven't found any, so they keep going.  If we had hidden microphones in the conference rooms of these companies, we'd overhear new executives saying "look people, I know you find this hard to believe, but 95% of these contributors will GIVE us their photos. Seriously. And we don't need the other 5%"
« Last Edit: July 07, 2009, 13:26 by stockastic »

« Reply #29 on: July 07, 2009, 13:57 »
0
I'm now so cynical that I don't even read announcements like this in detail. I let more knowledgeable people pick them apart, and the bottom line is always another cut in prices, and commissions, packaged in spin about expanding the market.

Mind you, I'm not saying these agencies are evil, it's just an evolving business.  What they're doing now is probing the resistance on supplier pricing, and so far, they haven't found any, so they keep going.  If we had hidden microphones in the conference rooms of these companies, we'd overhear new executives saying "look people, I know you find this hard to believe, but 95% of these contributors will GIVE us their photos. Seriously. And we don't need the other 5%"

You're probably dead right, Stocktastic.  I am sure they say pretty much exactly that. 

I would disagree that they don't need the other 5% though.  I bet the 5% who want decent royalties for their work produce the majority of desirable product and generate the vast majority of sales. 

« Reply #30 on: July 07, 2009, 14:20 »
0
I would disagree that they don't need the other 5% though.  I bet the 5% who want decent royalties for their work produce the majority of desirable product and generate the vast majority of sales. 

I think you're right in a sense, but it will take time for this to play out.  I would like to think that eventually there will be new stock agencies focussed more on quality than quantity, and that buyers will tire of the same old stuff. 




« Reply #31 on: July 07, 2009, 14:28 »
0

« Reply #32 on: July 07, 2009, 17:18 »
0

I think you're right in a sense, but it will take time for this to play out.  I would like to think that eventually there will be new stock agencies focussed more on quality than quantity, and that buyers will tire of the same old stuff. 





Hope you are right about that.

BTW, my disagreement was with the hypothetical industry execs, not with you.  I think you hit the nail on the head with your comments :)

Squat

  • If you think you know, you know squat
« Reply #33 on: July 08, 2009, 08:14 »
0
I'm now so cynical that I don't even read announcements like this in detail. I let more knowledgeable people pick them apart, and the bottom line is always another cut in prices, and commissions, packaged in spin about expanding the market.

Well, I don't think you should sit and watch, as following closely with this forum you seem to me to possess  strong skills to articulate your opinion, as much as some of the best commentors here .  I may be naive to think that the CEOs of sites don't pass here to read what you are saying, but looking at the changes made by Getty , I feel part of it was due to the strong reaction and combined efforts of the exclusives, and non exclusives in a small part.

Open forum is a good instrument to move markets. Ignorance is bliss to monopolies , much like politics where the politicians love to see the growing population stay ignorance to their exploitation.

With your input and other knowledgeable people, CEOs of sites will know that there are not only excellent photographers in the grapevine, but also equally conscious negotiators to bring about a better deal for all involved. 

Nobody wants to be in a win-lose situation, this will only be temporary.
As someone once said to me, "to succeed in business , it has very little to do with trusting your clientele, associates,etc... or vice versa, it has more to finding a mutual interest. once there is mutual interest, the bond is impossible to break".
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 18:56 by tan510jomast »

« Reply #34 on: July 08, 2009, 10:47 »
0


Open forum is a good instrument to move markets. Ignorance is bliss to monopolies , much like politics where the politicians love to see the growing population stay ignorance to their exploitation.
 

Completely agree with this ^^. 

This forum is a great service both to contributors and to any web site that is smart enough to pay attention to it.

« Reply #35 on: July 08, 2009, 12:53 »
0
tan510jomast, I actually don't think there's anything that contributors could say or do at this point that would change things.  

Microstock has just gone through a 'boom' - bigger players with more money have rushed in - new sites showing up every week - and they've all been sucked into a mindless price war.  We will just have to wait for the 'bust' that inevitabley follows a 'boom'.  

There will be a shakeout, and maybe after that, new ways to sell images will emerge.  Until then, all we can really is put photos on the big existing sites and accept the trickle of money they generate.  Just pulling them all and not participating is an option too, of course, but it has no benefit, until we have somewhere else to sell them.  

I do think that we are at the point where skilled, experienced photographers are losing motivation and probably shooting and submitting less.  But no one at the agencies cares about that, yet.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 13:01 by stockastic »

Squat

  • If you think you know, you know squat
« Reply #36 on: July 08, 2009, 14:22 »
0
tan510jomast, I actually don't think there's anything that contributors could say or do at this point that would change things. 

Microstock has just gone through a 'boom' - bigger players with more money have rushed in - new sites showing up every week - and they've all been sucked into a mindless price war.  We will just have to wait for the 'bust' that inevitabley follows a 'boom'. 

There will be a shakeout, and maybe after that, new ways to sell images will emerge.  Until then, all we can really is put photos on the big existing sites and accept the trickle of money they generate.  Just pulling them all and not participating is an option too, of course, but it has no benefit, until we have somewhere else to sell them.   

I do think that we are at the point where skilled, experienced photographers are losing motivation and probably shooting and submitting less.  But no one at the agencies cares about that, yet.


stockastic  Your last para. reminds me of what a top gun in CBS once said re. record sales. viz: only Bruce Springstein & a handful actually mattered to  CBS. They make  $$$$ for the record co. All else was more or less window dressing. If the other 85%  faded away, CBS wouldn't give a rat's ass, as Bruce + the few cream on the top brought in the dough.
I think micro is the same. Only what the top slice say matters, at least that seems like it these days. Has it always  been this way?
« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 14:24 by tan510jomast »

« Reply #37 on: July 08, 2009, 14:30 »
0
I'm sure that's how a lot of people in the agencies feel. They sure don't need me and my 100 or so images.

Think of a hardware store. You go there because you know you can get that weird bolt or nut to repair the lawn mower. Once in a while, you buy a big ticket item that makes money for the store. But they need all those money-losing, oddball little parts that take up precious shelf space, to keep you coming in year after year.

« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 14:43 by stockastic »

« Reply #38 on: July 13, 2009, 16:10 »
0
Got my first premium subs sale today.  Extra cents are nice, but I can't say I am happy.

Squat

  • If you think you know, you know squat
« Reply #39 on: July 13, 2009, 18:24 »
0
I'm sure that's how a lot of people in the agencies feel. They sure don't need me and my 100 or so images.

Think of a hardware store. You go there because you know you can get that weird bolt or nut to repair the lawn mower. Once in a while, you buy a big ticket item that makes money for the store. But they need all those money-losing, oddball little parts that take up precious shelf space, to keep you coming in year after year.



I better explain myself in case Fotolia thinks I have been saying bad things against them. I don't want my comments  being misinterpreted. *touch wood !*

I was not pointing a finger at  Fotolia or any agencies .That ( not caring a hoot about the small ones) was the interpretation in reference to the music industry.
 What I mean is their bread and butter is the top layer that brought in revenue... .
Further to your analogy,  nuts and bolts maybe, but even in a hardware store, when the big ticket sales come in, the nuts and bolts are pushed away to make room, because "they are not selling enough".

Y'know, we find the same in our own business dealing as well eg. How your bank  manager gives you preferential treatment and someone else gets less.  It's the reality , that's what we call  pecking order .
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 19:14 by tan510jomast »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
36 Replies
24136 Views
Last post August 20, 2011, 01:18
by tubed
6 Replies
5241 Views
Last post July 19, 2009, 09:34
by willie
34 Replies
16099 Views
Last post July 30, 2009, 20:47
by a.k.a.-tom
19 Replies
14096 Views
Last post September 10, 2009, 15:34
by NitorPhoto
3 Replies
3347 Views
Last post November 16, 2009, 22:34
by cthoman

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle