MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Return to Start - Fotolia reserves right to put you back at white ranking.  (Read 79441 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #325 on: September 28, 2011, 19:13 »
0
For all those asking Chad to name names, don't expect a real answer
Chad is the person who, few months before Fotolia introduce subscriptions, explained us how subscription's model was destructive and bad for the stock industry. Later he became a big fan...


rinderart

« Reply #326 on: September 28, 2011, 20:29 »
0
"Increase commissions and contributors will spend less time searching elsewhere in order to compensate."

Seems simple to me.  Chad my Very old Friend, Doing this will force the Hands of many and It is fotolia who must take some of the blame for folks looking to fill the income gap.  Someday when a site comes along that shares the wealth and runs there business in a cost effective, Simple way That respects the people who do the work,Buy the gear and submit then that site will win hands down. That hasn't happened yet.  One can dream.

traveler1116

« Reply #327 on: September 28, 2011, 20:35 »
0
Didn't know about Fotolia's Photoxpress.  Interesting what it says on their website:
For smaller companies, a new source of photos for use in brochures and online activities is now available.

In direct competition to sites that require payments, Fotolia LLC, a New York-based worldwide provider of micro-price graphics, has launched what it describes as the worlds largest free, premier-quality image bank, offering royalty-free image licenses for personal and professional use.

http://blog.photoxpress.com/2009/05/fotolia-launches-photoxpress-as-free-source-of-graphics/

I'm not sure how much they pay contributors now, I see Yuri has over 30,000 images though so I assume it's something.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2011, 20:41 by traveler1116 »

« Reply #328 on: September 28, 2011, 21:15 »
0
the worlds largest free, premier-quality image bank,

It isn't free.  At least anymore, maybe.  It's just a sub site.

« Reply #329 on: September 28, 2011, 21:20 »
0


« Reply #331 on: September 28, 2011, 21:31 »
0

« Reply #332 on: September 28, 2011, 22:01 »
0
This issue is more about destructive retail pricing than it is about
commissions.

Chad

Oh, you mean things like selling most vectors for 4 and 6 credits. Now, which site does that? hmm... Oh yeah, it's Fotolia.

This policy is so hypocritical it's unbelievable. Look if you want to be the cheapest and lowest paying agency, that's fine. Then, just say that's what you want to do, but don't pretend like you're doing anybody any favors. Because FT is more a part of the problem than the solution. That's why I deleted my portfolio there and others have deleted their ports for the same reason.

It may be harder, but maybe, just maybe, you should try developing some actual customer and contributor loyalty. You could start by offering some incentives instead of punishments to be part of or shop at your site. I know it's a novel concept in this day and age, and it's a long road to gain back the trust, goodwill and reputation that you squandered away. But, think about it.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2011, 22:03 by cthoman »

« Reply #333 on: September 28, 2011, 22:09 »
0
How I understand it now it's with DepositPhotos, that is currently selling
images at up to 6x less than Fotolia. Not sure what is to be done over this.
Maybe they should fight this thing out together. This certainly is not my fault. :(
« Last Edit: September 28, 2011, 22:11 by Sandralise »

« Reply #334 on: September 28, 2011, 22:19 »
0
How I understand it now it's with DepositPhotos, that is currently selling
images at up to 6x less than Fotolia. Not sure what is to be done over this.
Maybe they should fight this thing out together. This certainly is not my fault. :(

how do we know it is DP?

« Reply #335 on: September 28, 2011, 22:32 »
0
How I understand it now it's with DepositPhotos, that is currently selling
images at up to 6x less than Fotolia. Not sure what is to be done over this.
Maybe they should fight this thing out together. This certainly is not my fault. :(

how do we know it is DP?


I won't go into detail more than that and Antonio has also heard it mentioned on an FT forum.
I have had an excellent relationship with FT and want to find a solution to this problem but I'm not sure what is the solution for me right now.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2011, 22:38 by Sandralise »

« Reply #336 on: September 28, 2011, 22:41 »
0
How I understand it now it's with DepositPhotos, that is currently selling
images at up to 6x less than Fotolia. Not sure what is to be done over this.
Maybe they should fight this thing out together. This certainly is not my fault. :(

how do we know it is DP?


I won't go into detail more than that and Antonio has also heard it mentioned on an FT forum.
I have had an excellent relationship with FT and want to find a solution to this problem but I'm not sure what is the solution for me right now.

I have read that post from Antonio, I was looking for more, I havent received the email but I am curious to see how this will go

« Reply #337 on: September 28, 2011, 22:47 »
0
How I understand it now it's with DepositPhotos, that is currently selling
images at up to 6x less than Fotolia. Not sure what is to be done over this.
Maybe they should fight this thing out together. This certainly is not my fault. :(

how do we know it is DP?


I won't go into detail more than that and Antonio has also heard it mentioned on an FT forum.
I have had an excellent relationship with FT and want to find a solution to this problem but I'm not sure what is the solution for me right now.

I have read that post from Antonio, I was looking for more, I havent received the email but I am curious to see how this will go



LOL, me too!

lagereek

« Reply #338 on: September 29, 2011, 01:03 »
0
Dont get it and what kind of people that are running these agencies nowdays. Isnt it bloody obvious that putting thumbscrews on something and with threats, etc, has NEVER worked, it didnt even prevent two worldwars, let alone little micros.

This has just the opposite effect and will ofcourse backfire something chronic. People will leave, errasing their ports, spread gossip all over the internet, etc. This is just a perfect way of serving Getty/TS, right smack into their lap,  might as well present it on a golden plate for them.

How stupid, I cant really believe it.

« Reply #339 on: September 29, 2011, 01:39 »
0
Dont get it and what kind of people that are running these agencies nowdays. Isnt it bloody obvious that putting thumbscrews on something and with threats, etc, has NEVER worked, it didnt even prevent two worldwars, let alone little micros.

This has just the opposite effect and will ofcourse backfire something chronic. People will leave, errasing their ports, spread gossip all over the internet, etc. This is just a perfect way of serving Getty/TS, right smack into their lap,  might as well present it on a golden plate for them.

How stupid, I cant really believe it.

+1

« Reply #340 on: September 29, 2011, 02:01 »
0
DP sell mostly subs at $0.30.  Pay per download are 40 to 60% commission, I wish FT could match that :)  They paid us to upload and are trying to build some market share in a highly competitive market.  I only uploaded a small part of my portfolio, to take advantage of the payments for uploading.

I might not be against FT lowering prices, as long as volume of sales improves significantly.  Microstock was all about low price high volume.  It now seems to be about raising prices until the buyer can't afford it and lowering commissions until the contributor can't carry on.

If FT put me back to white, that would be yet another commission cut, my portfolio would be removed immediately.  If they want to lower prices to stop buyers leaving for the cheaper sites, they need to increase commissions, not decrease them.

Our commission cuts were usually matched with a price rise, to soften the blow.  Have they forgotten that?  I haven't.

rubyroo

« Reply #341 on: September 29, 2011, 02:16 »
0
Dont get it and what kind of people that are running these agencies nowdays. Isnt it bloody obvious that putting thumbscrews on something and with threats, etc, has NEVER worked, it didnt even prevent two worldwars, let alone little micros.

This has just the opposite effect and will ofcourse backfire something chronic. People will leave, errasing their ports, spread gossip all over the internet, etc. This is just a perfect way of serving Getty/TS, right smack into their lap,  might as well present it on a golden plate for them.

How stupid, I cant really believe it.

+1 from me too.  I couldn't have put it better.

« Reply #342 on: September 29, 2011, 02:23 »
0
Dont get it and what kind of people that are running these agencies nowdays. Isnt it bloody obvious that putting thumbscrews on something and with threats, etc, has NEVER worked, it didnt even prevent two worldwars, let alone little micros.

This has just the opposite effect and will ofcourse backfire something chronic. People will leave, errasing their ports, spread gossip all over the internet, etc. This is just a perfect way of serving Getty/TS, right smack into their lap,  might as well present it on a golden plate for them.

How stupid, I cant really believe it.

+1 from me too.  I couldn't have put it better.

And me. I'd barely heard of these 'Depositphotos' Johnnies before, or whatever they're called, but I'm seriously thinking of uploading to them now. The cheek of it. Not to mention the almost comical level of hypocracy displayed by FT. Another for the "you couldn't make it up" file.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2011, 02:28 by gostwyck »

« Reply #343 on: September 29, 2011, 02:26 »
0
Oh, you mean things like selling most vectors for 4 and 6 credits. Now, which site does that? hmm... Oh yeah, it's Fotolia.

This policy is so hypocritical it's unbelievable. Look if you want to be the cheapest and lowest paying agency, that's fine. Then, just say that's what you want to do, but don't pretend like you're doing anybody any favors. Because FT is more a part of the problem than the solution. That's why I deleted my portfolio there and others have deleted their ports for the same reason.

It may be harder, but maybe, just maybe, you should try developing some actual customer and contributor loyalty. You could start by offering some incentives instead of punishments to be part of or shop at your site. I know it's a novel concept in this day and age, and it's a long road to gain back the trust, goodwill and reputation that you squandered away. But, think about it.

That word's not allowed apparently. You can expect to have your contribution removed for daring to answer back to one of our illustrious overlords to whom we should be respectful at all times no matter what greedy stunts they pull. Right Leaf?

rubyroo

« Reply #344 on: September 29, 2011, 02:34 »
0
@ Gostwyck

I'm not with DepositPhotos either, so this wouldn't affect me.  But the fact that others are being threatened in this way is enough for me to stop uploading to FT.

If SS's single download (SD?) system reaps the benefits I'm expecting, it will become very easy to pull my port at FT. 

Jim Barber put it well above, I thought.  That they are applying the constraints of exclusivity without the benefits. 

« Reply #345 on: September 29, 2011, 03:09 »
0

Our commission cuts were usually matched with a price rise, to soften the blow.  Have they forgotten that?  I haven't.

Not at fotolia, if I remember. The "credit" value remained the same while the credit package price increased, because the price of a buyer credit and  a seller credit bear no relationship to each other.

« Reply #346 on: September 29, 2011, 03:11 »
0
Oh, you mean things like selling most vectors for 4 and 6 credits. Now, which site does that? hmm... Oh yeah, it's Fotolia.

This policy is so hypocritical it's unbelievable. Look if you want to be the cheapest and lowest paying agency, that's fine. Then, just say that's what you want to do, but don't pretend like you're doing anybody any favors. Because FT is more a part of the problem than the solution. That's why I deleted my portfolio there and others have deleted their ports for the same reason.

It may be harder, but maybe, just maybe, you should try developing some actual customer and contributor loyalty. You could start by offering some incentives instead of punishments to be part of or shop at your site. I know it's a novel concept in this day and age, and it's a long road to gain back the trust, goodwill and reputation that you squandered away. But, think about it.

That word's not allowed apparently. You can expect to have your contribution removed for daring to answer back to one of our illustrious overlords to whom we should be respectful at all times no matter what greedy stunts they pull. Right Leaf?
I think Leaf does a great job here.  We can say what we want as long as it's not too insulting.  My only complaint would be that some people seem to have multiple accounts here or keep using different names.  They do get easy to spot after a while though.

jbarber873

« Reply #347 on: September 29, 2011, 03:27 »
0
Oh, you mean things like selling most vectors for 4 and 6 credits. Now, which site does that? hmm... Oh yeah, it's Fotolia.

This policy is so hypocritical it's unbelievable. Look if you want to be the cheapest and lowest paying agency, that's fine. Then, just say that's what you want to do, but don't pretend like you're doing anybody any favors. Because FT is more a part of the problem than the solution. That's why I deleted my portfolio there and others have deleted their ports for the same reason.

It may be harder, but maybe, just maybe, you should try developing some actual customer and contributor loyalty. You could start by offering some incentives instead of punishments to be part of or shop at your site. I know it's a novel concept in this day and age, and it's a long road to gain back the trust, goodwill and reputation that you squandered away. But, think about it.

That word's not allowed apparently. You can expect to have your contribution removed for daring to answer back to one of our illustrious overlords to whom we should be respectful at all times no matter what greedy stunts they pull. Right Leaf?
I think Leaf does a great job here.  We can say what we want as long as it's not too insulting.  My only complaint would be that some people seem to have multiple accounts here or keep using different names.  They do get easy to spot after a while though.

    Agreed.

XPTO

« Reply #348 on: September 29, 2011, 03:38 »
0
http://www.fotolia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=36247


Can't read their forums.


The forums at FL are regional so I cannot read the UK or US forums for example. It's just another dirty tactics, typical of FL, to control the contributors discontentment by making it hard to share ideas and to make it easier to scr*w the contributors in the most shameful ways they can imagine at a given time.

« Reply #349 on: September 29, 2011, 03:51 »
0
Oh, you mean things like selling most vectors for 4 and 6 credits. Now, which site does that? hmm... Oh yeah, it's Fotolia.

This policy is so hypocritical it's unbelievable. Look if you want to be the cheapest and lowest paying agency, that's fine. Then, just say that's what you want to do, but don't pretend like you're doing anybody any favors. Because FT is more a part of the problem than the solution. That's why I deleted my portfolio there and others have deleted their ports for the same reason.

It may be harder, but maybe, just maybe, you should try developing some actual customer and contributor loyalty. You could start by offering some incentives instead of punishments to be part of or shop at your site. I know it's a novel concept in this day and age, and it's a long road to gain back the trust, goodwill and reputation that you squandered away. But, think about it.

That word's not allowed apparently. You can expect to have your contribution removed for daring to answer back to one of our illustrious overlords to whom we should be respectful at all times no matter what greedy stunts they pull. Right Leaf?

the word hypocrite or any derivation thereof isn't a problem, it is the way a person uses it.

Your post appeared to be focused on insulting Chad, while Cthoman's post is very clearly directed towards commenting on Fotolia and their actions.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
7894 Views
Last post December 18, 2006, 02:23
by beisea
3 Replies
3817 Views
Last post April 11, 2011, 06:32
by Lizard
9 Replies
2515 Views
Last post May 21, 2012, 08:47
by lisafx
23 Replies
18585 Views
Last post December 09, 2012, 16:09
by fotografer
3 Replies
2081 Views
Last post April 08, 2016, 07:47
by Amaviael

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle