...Btw. I'm curious -  is there any active contributor from some really rich and expensive country like Norway or Switzerland?

Tyler Olson, who runs MSG, is from Norway (and I think still lives and works from there)

Reading through forums I noticed some positive comments about Alamy, so I thought I would give Alamy a try. I started uploading to them about a year ago, and so far I have a portfolio of about 650 of my best commercial images on that site, and keep uploading selected images on a regular basis. So far I have zero sales. Not even 1 small sale. I will give Alamy three more months hoping I will see my first sale on that agency. If the $$ balance is still zero then, I will delete my portfolio and my account with them. Too much effort for no income. 

Alamy is a privately owned company
Look at how many shares the directors have and they huge profits they end up with each year, and growing btw.
Now they are going to screw all their contributors, and in another few years will screw they again.
They will do this indefinitely or as long as contributors are willing to upload or leave their images there.
This was one of a couple agencies I thought stood apart in treating their contributors fairly.
They have taken the piss

I added a financial analysis of Alamy inside my TSPE article yesterday.

http://thestockphotoeditor.com/index.php/2018/12/04/alamy-announces-reduction-of-royalty/

Alamy is oblidged by the law to provide public statement reports. Finding this online and looking at their cash flow, one can see the contributor payout clearly in the cost of sales.  But also very high are, the administrative costs and distribution costs. After taxes, their profit margins were 6.4% for 2016 and it was 3.2% in 2016. From a management perspective, Alamy�s expenses are too high and they do not allow enough profit for the company to secure enough growth. A healthy growing tech company should not be working under 10% and in order to stay in the game, it�s oblidged to constantly invest. Alamy could have been passing on investment opportunities for years.

If we apply the royalty payout reduction from 50% to 40% to the current statement, the final profits would turn up higher, at 14%. The ideal profit margin for a healthy growing tech company of Alamy�s size would be 15-20%. Alamy with this move is only trying to secure company health and growth. Growth means to have an ability to invest and expand and find more customers. Shutterstock in 2017 resulted on a 3% profit margin, undergoing a heavy on investment year (but they are 20 times bigger than Alamy).

Obviously not happy with the cut, no other cuts have resulted in more sales for me and increase earning.
For the record fotolia have also cut royalities before, pay less percentage than alamy and had the dollar photo club before.

I my opinion the biggest heist the agencies pull on us is the 5 photo "subscription" models etc converting credit sales into small amount of subscription sales.  (I'm sure there's lots of other heists)

Are there any readily accessible agencies still with 50% ?

Quote from: ThomasAndreas on December 06, 2018, 02:35

I added a financial analysis of Alamy inside my TSPE article yesterday.

http://thestockphotoeditor.com/index.php/2018/12/04/alamy-announces-reduction-of-royalty/

Quote

Alamy is oblidged by the law to provide public statement reports. Finding this online and looking at their cash flow, one can see the contributor payout clearly in the cost of sales.  But also very high are, the administrative costs and distribution costs. After taxes, their profit margins were 6.4% for 2016 and it was 3.2% in 2016. From a management perspective, Alamy�s expenses are too high and they do not allow enough profit for the company to secure enough growth. A healthy growing tech company should not be working under 10% and in order to stay in the game, it�s oblidged to constantly invest. Alamy could have been passing on investment opportunities for years.

If we apply the royalty payout reduction from 50% to 40% to the current statement, the final profits would turn up higher, at 14%. The ideal profit margin for a healthy growing tech company of Alamy�s size would be 15-20%. Alamy with this move is only trying to secure company health and growth. Growth means to have an ability to invest and expand and find more customers. Shutterstock in 2017 resulted on a 3% profit margin, undergoing a heavy on investment year (but they are 20 times bigger than Alamy).

Interesting, but profits are what's left over after costs and expenses, including investments for growth (for example Amazon doesn't have much profit because they reinvest in growth). This doesn't tell us anything about "enough profit for the company to secure enough growth".

That was true in the past when Amazon was an immature company in its early stages no so much now. https://yourstory.com/2018/04/amazon-q1-2018-report/. They don't necessarily pay out these profits to investors though choosing to reinvest in the business if they consider they will achieve better returns.

Quote from: Pauws99 on December 06, 2018, 05:19

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on December 06, 2018, 04:39

Interesting, but profits are what's left over after costs and expenses, including investments for growth (for example Amazon doesn't have much profit because they reinvest in growth). This doesn't tell us anything about "enough profit for the company to secure enough growth".

That was true in the past when Amazon was an immature company in its early stages no so much now. https://yourstory.com/2018/04/amazon-q1-2018-report/. They don't necessarily pay out these profits to investors though choosing to reinvest in the business if they consider they will achieve better returns.

Thanks I haven't been keeping up. I was just using it as an example of how profit works in relation to investing for growth (i.e. that investment doesn't show as profit because it is subtracted from revenue before profit is calculated)

Yes in the early days the likes of amazon traded at a loss while building infrastructure now they can reinvest operating profit. I believe its only recently that SS actually gave money to shareholders.

Alamy is not a microstock site and it should never be transformed into one. Yes James West should not think in terms of cheap and "customer experience" either . There are many Alamy contributors who have been along for decades, selling only via Alamy, and licensing their work as Rights Managed. To this group slashing the iconic 50-50 cut is a massacre. It destroys their work and income. For a microstock contributor who submits to 20 agencies, this is probably not that big deal. If you haven't already, email James and tell him  what you think!