pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 500px Prime - commercial licensing marketplace  (Read 40011 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

stocked

« Reply #75 on: March 12, 2014, 09:10 »
+3
Hey everyone! My name's Alex, I work at 500px. I'm here to answer any questions you've got. I'll start with a few of the common ones I saw in this thread.

How can we afford to switch from 70% to 30% so quickly?
It definitely takes a cut out of our profits, to give the photographers 70%! There's no denying that. But we think it's better to tighten our margins and attract world class photographers. We'll make up the difference in volume, because we have the best photographers in the world selling their work.

How can you contribute your photos?
Just keep uploading to 500px.com, and ensure your Store is enabled. Go to 500px.com/store to do that. Saleable photos must be at least 3000px on their longest edge. We're constantly scraping the site for saleable photos, and sending out invites. We have about 50k photos in our backlog right now, so as soon as we get through those, we'll send more invites. You can email primephotographers@500px.com to get more info and step by step instructions too. It's an automated response, but has lots of info.

Watermarks?!
You can put watermarks on your 500px.com displayed photos. Simply upload a watermarked photo first. Then go to 500px.com/store to upload a non-watermarked copy, which will be used for sales. We display the non-watermarked photo as the preview in Prime, but our developers are working to add our own watermarks to those photos, which should be ready before the grand opening of Prime. The watermark will have the 500px logo, and the URL to purchase the photo on Prime.

Let me know if there's anything else I can answer for you guys! Thanks!
Hi Alexs great to have you here! Welcome! :)
I think 500px should us guarantee the 70% for a minimum of three years in the contract. Personally I think it would have been better to start with 50% and leave it at that forever, now it looks as soon you have some success you will switch it back. The whole thing 30/70 and then 70/30 doesn't build trust in a long-term relationship.


« Reply #76 on: March 12, 2014, 09:35 »
0
Hi Alexs great to have you here! Welcome! :)
I think 500px should us guarantee the 70% for a minimum of three years in the contract. Personally I think it would have been better to start with 50% and leave it at that forever, now it looks as soon you have some success you will switch it back. The whole thing 30/70 and then 70/30 doesn't build trust in a long-term relationship.

We have no intention of lowering the 70% royalty fee. The contributor agreement is not a contract with time restrictions, but an ongoing agreement that we will honour throughout the relationship. We're going to do all we can to build and maintain your trust in every aspect of Prime, including fair compensation. Thanks!

stocked

« Reply #77 on: March 12, 2014, 09:51 »
0
Hi Alexs great to have you here! Welcome! :)
I think 500px should us guarantee the 70% for a minimum of three years in the contract. Personally I think it would have been better to start with 50% and leave it at that forever, now it looks as soon you have some success you will switch it back. The whole thing 30/70 and then 70/30 doesn't build trust in a long-term relationship.

We have no intention of lowering the 70% royalty fee. The contributor agreement is not a contract with time restrictions, but an ongoing agreement that we will honour throughout the relationship. We're going to do all we can to build and maintain your trust in every aspect of Prime, including fair compensation. Thanks!
Thank you!

« Reply #78 on: March 12, 2014, 09:56 »
0
... We are handpicking and sending requests for the photos we'd like to include in the Prime marketplace. To make sure your photo is eligible to be requested, make sure it's enabled for sale in 500px.com/store. ...

Is it ok if I enabled prints only in my store?
No digital DL for 2,99 (2) $...

« Reply #79 on: March 12, 2014, 10:04 »
0
... We are handpicking and sending requests for the photos we'd like to include in the Prime marketplace. To make sure your photo is eligible to be requested, make sure it's enabled for sale in 500px.com/store. ...

Is it ok if I enabled prints only in my store?
No digital DL for 2,99 (2) $...

Yes! As long as the photo is enabled for some type of sale on 500px, it'll be eligible to be requested for Prime.

EmberMike

« Reply #80 on: March 12, 2014, 10:06 »
+11
Every company can pay 70%. It's just that few choose to do so.
But you would make less money if they paid you more.

...

Jon Oringer - Founder, CEO & Chairman

Yes, as far as our contributors go, we've had 30% of them and we've seen competitors come in and try to play with that number. What happens is if they payout more to contributors, they leave less room for marketing spend and that causes less sales in the long run and less payout to their contributors. So with this we really found the sweet spot over the past 10 years with the subscription plan, with the 30% payout, and competitors have come and gone and tried different things but we haven't seen much change...

Competitors have come and gone for a variety of reasons. Some have come and gone while trying to pay less than 30%, so the percentage often is not the problem.

I also don't understand Jon's comment that 30% is the "sweet spot". As far as I know, Shutterstock never experimented with other percentages.

This is possibly one of the only businesses in the world where you'll hear companies say that they need to keep 70% of every sale on a digital product that costs them very little to acquire and sell. And yet other businesses dealing in physical goods that need to be warehoused and shipped do well on smaller percentages. Or even on other digital goods. How can Apple survive by only keeping 30% of each iTunes sale? They probably have more marketing spend than Shutterstock or any other stock agency. They put physical gift cards in stores around the world, they run tv ads, magazine ads, etc.

The only problem with contributor percentages is that we've been conditioned to believe that no one can pay us more than 30% and have enough left over to promote the business and pay employees.


« Reply #81 on: March 12, 2014, 10:27 »
+5
What am I missing here, 500px is giving a higher royalty % than Shutterstock (and iStock for nonexclusives), it's what Offset is paying too and that has been lauded as a great opportunity.  The royalty % doesn't seem to be that bad comparatively does it?

This has also always perplexed me. Shutterstock pays next to nothing per image yet they are always great on these forums and every other agency is complained about. It seems odd.

mlwinphoto

« Reply #82 on: March 12, 2014, 11:26 »
+2
What am I missing here, 500px is giving a higher royalty % than Shutterstock (and iStock for nonexclusives), it's what Offset is paying too and that has been lauded as a great opportunity.  The royalty % doesn't seem to be that bad comparatively does it?

This has also always perplexed me. Shutterstock pays next to nothing per image yet they are always great on these forums and every other agency is complained about. It seems odd.

I think it lies in the fact that SS has a proven track record. You know you can and will make sales/money there whereas many of these others are unproven and therefore people are skeptical.  Or not.

« Reply #83 on: March 12, 2014, 11:37 »
+14
Every company can pay 70%. It's just that few choose to do so.
But you would make less money if they paid you more.

...

Jon Oringer - Founder, CEO & Chairman

Yes, as far as our contributors go, we've had 30% of them and we've seen competitors come in and try to play with that number. What happens is if they payout more to contributors, they leave less room for marketing spend and that causes less sales in the long run and less payout to their contributors. So with this we really found the sweet spot over the past 10 years with the subscription plan, with the 30% payout, and competitors have come and gone and tried different things but we haven't seen much change...

Competitors have come and gone for a variety of reasons. Some have come and gone while trying to pay less than 30%, so the percentage often is not the problem.

I also don't understand Jon's comment that 30% is the "sweet spot". As far as I know, Shutterstock never experimented with other percentages.

This is possibly one of the only businesses in the world where you'll hear companies say that they need to keep 70% of every sale on a digital product that costs them very little to acquire and sell. And yet other businesses dealing in physical goods that need to be warehoused and shipped do well on smaller percentages. Or even on other digital goods. How can Apple survive by only keeping 30% of each iTunes sale? They probably have more marketing spend than Shutterstock or any other stock agency. They put physical gift cards in stores around the world, they run tv ads, magazine ads, etc.

The only problem with contributor percentages is that we've been conditioned to believe that no one can pay us more than 30% and have enough left over to promote the business and pay employees.

I concur with your assessment.

30% is a very "sweet spot" for agencies - at least stock photo agencies.  My guess - because it allows them to throw off large profits.  Amazon and Apple - two pretty darn well run companies - pay out the content providers (the authors, the music artists, etc.) 70% and seem to still be able to survive handsomely.

Car dealers make 5 to 20% - and they have to have a large lot and stock hundreds of cars.  And then they spend tons on ads.  Grocery stores make 5 to 50% and they have to have tons of employees and large stores stocked with goods that are shelved, priced and marketed aggressively.

Clothing stores make 20 to 70% - but again they have to often have large retail outlets staffed with personnel.  And they have to advertise and have sales all the time.

A stock agency?  Sure they host the photo and collect and disburse the money - but the truth is that they can "keep" 70% because that's what Getty and others have conditioned us - the photographers - to believe.

One of the reasons I'm so pumped about 500px and their PRIME offering is because they have a big name (and presence) on the web for top notch photography - and perhaps they can prove that Getty and all the other 70% agencies are simply taking advantage of the photographers who provide them EVERYTHING they sell.

The photo buyers?  They don't care whether the photographers get a nickel or a dime or 70% of the sale.  They just want good images that suit their purposes.  And if 500px PRIME can do that with fresh, new imagery - then I believe they'll buy from them just like they have from the other guys.

I'm personally tired of being taken advantage of by the 70% "sweet spot" agencies.  That's why 500px and their PRIME offering is getting exclusivity on all my new stuff.  I'm voting with my images because I've had enough grief from agencies who care VERY little about the photographers.  And make no mistake - we are their suppliers - they aren't doing us a "favor" by hosting our images.



« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 11:40 by jeffclow »

EmberMike

« Reply #84 on: March 12, 2014, 11:48 »
+11
...I'm personally tired of being taken advantage of by the 70% "sweet spot" agencies.  That's why 500px and their PRIME offering is getting exclusivity on all my new stuff.  I'm voting with my images because I've had enough grief from agencies who care VERY little about the photographers.  And make no mistake - we are their suppliers - they aren't doing us a "favor" by hosting our images.

Right on. Personally, I'm done with listening to any new companies that pay less than 50%. I don't care what their pricing looks like, they could be selling images for $1 or $1,000 a piece but if they expect me to believe that they need more than half of each sale to survive, I'm not buying it.

Shutterstock seems to get a pass, but only because they're at the top and they make up about half of everyone's microstock income. But even that could change. I saw my Shutterstock earnings go from 55% of my total in 2012 to 49% in 2013. I attribute some of that change to signing on with companies that pay more. Who knows, in a few years maybe Shutterstock will have a harder time maintaining that 30% standard if some of these other companies do get a good foothold in the market and start to chip away at the misconception that 30% is the best we can ever hope for.

Any new companies reading this thread, for me, it's 50% or don't bother. 70% is you really want to get my attention and full portfolio.

« Reply #85 on: March 12, 2014, 11:57 »
+1
Hi Alexs great to have you here! Welcome! :)
I think 500px should us guarantee the 70% for a minimum of three years in the contract. Personally I think it would have been better to start with 50% and leave it at that forever, now it looks as soon you have some success you will switch it back. The whole thing 30/70 and then 70/30 doesn't build trust in a long-term relationship.

We have no intention of lowering the 70% royalty fee. The contributor agreement is not a contract with time restrictions, but an ongoing agreement that we will honour throughout the relationship. We're going to do all we can to build and maintain your trust in every aspect of Prime, including fair compensation. Thanks!

Well, there was probably no intention of raising the 30% either... ;)

stocked

« Reply #86 on: March 12, 2014, 12:33 »
+2
A stock agency?  Sure they host the photo and collect and disburse the money - but the truth is that they can "keep" 70% because that's what Getty and others have conditioned us - the photographers - to believe.
Love that one!

BD

« Reply #87 on: March 12, 2014, 14:35 »
0
Is there a line anywhere in the 500px license that states images with models cannot be used in pornographic or defamatory ways? I looked, but I wasnt seeing it. This is pretty standard on most model releases.

« Reply #88 on: March 12, 2014, 14:37 »
0
Is there a line anywhere in the 500px license that states images with models cannot be used in pornographic or defamatory ways? I looked, but I wasnt seeing it. This is pretty standard on most model releases.


Yep, the agreement is found here: http://static.500px.net/docs/commercial_licensing_agreement.pdf. Check under section 3. Restrictions on Image Use. It states that they may not "Use any Image in a pornographic, defamatory, libellous or otherwise illegal manner, whether directly or in context or juxtaposition with other subject matter and materials." Thanks for asking!

BD

« Reply #89 on: March 12, 2014, 14:40 »
0
Thank you!  :)

Ron

« Reply #90 on: March 12, 2014, 14:43 »
+2
Ok, I am convinced, I am all in. Uploading all my images to 500PX. Lets see what 1500 images can do for me. Come on little marbles, do you work !!! Eh eh eh  :)

« Reply #91 on: March 12, 2014, 14:48 »
+8
Any new companies reading this thread, for me, it's 50% or don't bother. 70% is you really want to get my attention and full portfolio.

And I'm in!
Lately I've lost my hopes that anybody else can think this way (seeing what's going on here around)... Glad to read some of you, guys :)


stocked

« Reply #92 on: March 12, 2014, 14:53 »
+1
Any new companies reading this thread, for me, it's 50% or don't bother. 70% is you really want to get my attention and full portfolio.

And I'm in!
Lately I've lost my hopes that anybody else can think this way (seeing what's going on here around)... Glad to read some of you, guys :)
Congrats!

EmberMike

« Reply #93 on: March 12, 2014, 16:36 »
+4
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Arlene. :)

I want to get a hashtag going. #50percentordontbother

;)

Ron

« Reply #94 on: March 12, 2014, 16:44 »
+7

I want to get a hashtag going. #50percentordontbother

;)

 :)

EmberMike

« Reply #95 on: March 12, 2014, 17:38 »
+3

I love it! Thanks, Ron!

« Reply #96 on: March 12, 2014, 17:52 »
-3
Every company can pay 70%. It's just that few choose to do so.
But you would make less money if they paid you more.

...

Jon Oringer - Founder, CEO & Chairman

Yes, as far as our contributors go, we've had 30% of them and we've seen competitors come in and try to play with that number. What happens is if they payout more to contributors, they leave less room for marketing spend and that causes less sales in the long run and less payout to their contributors. So with this we really found the sweet spot over the past 10 years with the subscription plan, with the 30% payout, and competitors have come and gone and tried different things but we haven't seen much change...

Competitors have come and gone for a variety of reasons. Some have come and gone while trying to pay less than 30%, so the percentage often is not the problem.

I also don't understand Jon's comment that 30% is the "sweet spot". As far as I know, Shutterstock never experimented with other percentages.

This is possibly one of the only businesses in the world where you'll hear companies say that they need to keep 70% of every sale on a digital product that costs them very little to acquire and sell.

And yet other businesses dealing in physical goods that need to be warehoused and shipped do well on smaller percentages. Or even on other digital goods. How can Apple survive by only keeping 30% of each iTunes sale? They probably have more marketing spend than Shutterstock or any other stock agency. They put physical gift cards in stores around the world, they run tv ads, magazine ads, etc.

The only problem with contributor percentages is that we've been conditioned to believe that no one can pay us more than 30% and have enough left over to promote the business and pay employees.

I agree.  We forget that Jon was speaking to a group of analyst at the time and his job is to sell his company to those analyst. His intent was to convince them that shutterstock is now the market leader and will remain the market leader. Shutterstocks stock prices depend on key shutterstock insiders making a good sell and of course they are going to down play the downside.

What Jon fails to mention is that if his competitors do not spend millions going public, 11 plus million for tenant improvements, 3 million on annual office rent etc. The competitors will have plenty to spend on sales and marketing as well as raises for their contributors. And I am certain that this was not lost on the analyst.

« Reply #97 on: March 12, 2014, 18:03 »
+5
500px thread is now another bash SS thread.

« Reply #98 on: March 12, 2014, 21:11 »
+1
How can you contribute your photos?
Just keep uploading to 500px.com, and ensure your Store is enabled. Go to 500px.com/store to do that. Saleable photos must be at least 3000px on their longest edge. We're constantly scraping the site for saleable photos, and sending out invites. We have about 50k photos in our backlog right now, so as soon as we get through those, we'll send more invites. You can email primephotographers@500px.com to get more info and step by step instructions too. It's an automated response, but has lots of info.
I don't get it. For example, this photo: https://prime.500px.com/photos/7953347

It's nor 3000px, but 1024px on its longest side. And it's for sale.

Could you explain the criteria once again?

« Reply #99 on: March 12, 2014, 21:27 »
+3

I want to get a hashtag going. #50percentordontbother

;)

 :)

Love it! Retweeted!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
4314 Views
Last post January 14, 2014, 02:30
by Hobostocker
500px Prime

Started by mlwinphoto General Stock Discussion

2 Replies
2311 Views
Last post May 07, 2014, 02:18
by Neo_
2 Replies
2299 Views
Last post July 04, 2014, 17:59
by Anja02
3 Replies
2158 Views
Last post September 14, 2014, 09:15
by SLStudios
7 Replies
2593 Views
Last post April 15, 2017, 15:37
by Mantis

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results