I have been at this for about 5 weeks, have about 100 + images on the submit anything sites, about 25 on iStock and have made about $2 in sales.   A real newbie.

I am not a newbie when it comes to photography, having made a living from it ( on and off) for 10+ years.

Here are some thoughts ( if anyone cares.)



I see complaints on this forum about the sites not being interested in treating their contributors properly.  Thinking about this a bit, my answer is, Why should they? 

They get new contributors and images every minute.  I am sure some bean counter has pointed out that they make more money if the large experienced contributors don't get any payouts.  The newbies usually don't have a large enough or deep enough collection to get a payout for months or years, by which point they have moved on to something else and don't really care....what a great way to make a profit, the material you sell you get for free.

What I think has to happen is some way to make experienced contributors more valuable to the sites than newbies.

What do you think?  Am I talking out of my A$$ or am I close to being right.

Glenn

Welcome to MSG Glenn!

at least you know what you're getting into thus no Illusions of Grandeur.  Your learning curve will be short compared to many others with your photography background. The big question will be on understanding the needs of the buyers- my weak point.

Tom

<snip>Firstly, royalties earned but not paid out are never profit. They are liabilities and thus are listed on that side of the balance sheet. The money is not owned by the agency but is simply a debt yet to be paid.

<snip>

On a balance sheet it may be listed as a Liability, but in any business cash flow is king, and having a large liability helps you avoid having a profit.... on which you have to pay tax.  Not a bad situation at all.

I don't think iStock and the other biggies works on this model, but other sites?  I don't know.  This is just musing while I wait for uploads...

Glenn

<snip>The big question will be on understanding the needs of the buyers<snip>

Tom

Thanks for the welcome Tom

I was hoping that the review process would help me learn to focus on the buyers needs... getting my images critiqued by "professionals" would help me grow..... This fallacy lasted about a week......

Glenn

Quote from: gostwyck on January 10, 2013, 13:11

<snip>Firstly, royalties earned but not paid out are never profit. They are liabilities and thus are listed on that side of the balance sheet. The money is not owned by the agency but is simply a debt yet to be paid.

<snip>

On a balance sheet it may be listed as a Liability, but in any business cash flow is king, and having a large liability helps you avoid having a profit.... on which you have to pay tax.  Not a bad situation at all.

I don't think iStock and the other biggies works on this model, but other sites?  I don't know.  This is just musing while I wait for uploads...

Glenn

Not exactly true.  While I agree with your comment on the unpaid balances sitting in small contributors accounts improving cash flow (slightly) that has nothing to do with profit or paying taxes.

When a sale is made, and the contributors account credited, they record an income for the sale and an expense for the royalty paid.  The expense is accompanied by an entry in accounts payable on the balance sheet, and stays there until the contributor makes payout.  So there is no affect whatsoever on their profit or taxes.

I agree that large contributors are the bread and butter and the huge number of smaller ones is likely a burden to administer.  They most likely lose money on most of the smaller ones due to overhead to setup and maintain the account and for the higher cost of reviewing that will often result from a lower accepted percentage.  But they cannot stop taking on new talent because who knows which newbie is going to be the next superstar?

Quote from: tab62 on January 10, 2013, 13:07

<snip>The big question will be on understanding the needs of the buyers<snip>

Tom

Thanks for the welcome Tom

I was hoping that the review process would help me learn to focus on the buyers needs... getting my images critiqued by "professionals" would help me grow..... This fallacy lasted about a week......

Glenn

not following you mate, what went wrong? weren't you approved a few days ago?

Wonderful summary of how things work on a business balance sheet.

Quote from: gostwyck on January 10, 2013, 13:11

Oh dear __ not this old chestnut being trotted out again. Firstly, royalties earned but not paid out are never profit. They are liabilities and thus are listed on that side of the balance sheet. The money is not owned by the agency but is simply a debt yet to be paid.

Secondly the money involved is relatively small. Mathematically the average non-collected earnings should be about $50 __ the half-way point. Even if there were 20K such contributors then it still only amounts to $1M, a tiny sum within the context of Istock's total sales.

In truth the big contributors are the bread and butter of every agency. The agencies probably lose money administrating to tiny contributors who generate few sales.

Thanks __ but, if I remember correctly, the observation regarding the balance sheet originally came from you on one of the many other occasions when the same theory was previously expoused!