The powerconsumption cost from the computer while uploading/cathegorizing with Bs is about the same as the earnings.   But 30-50$ who cares...

Iv'e just learned that BigStock has raised their payout to $50.
Well, at the moment that is a bit of a backstep for me as my sales there are not all that great.
What do you think?

I think Adeptris covered it, without quoting the whole program. They have many people who will never reach $50, but some that may reach or are approaching $30. This keeps a large sum of operating capitol for the agency. They wouldn't be doing it if there wasn't some financial trouble threatening their business. (opinion)

This will just accelerate my exit from one more agency. I'm sure it won't break their hearts.   The more people that leave and leave them with the unpaid earnings, the better it is for BS.

Funny how we got into this at one level and in the last year a number of agencies are changing the rules, raising payout levels, lowering commissions, adding cheap subscriptions, raising levels for bonuses and in general when there needs to be a cutback, it comes from the photographers. The comparison to an abusive relation is perfect. Anyone who reads the forums can see the constant flow of new threads describing how one agency or another has just pulled some new trick to screw contributors.

Ok cheerleaders keep telling us how great it is selling microstock.  

I can sympathize with those who are upset about having to wait longer for a payout. 

At least Bigstock pays out quickly.  I would rather have them require a bit more for payout then to start holding back on paying contributors altogether, as StockXpert seems to be doing.

Does this announcement not worry anyone, the problem seems to be just as I thought it was, due to the high volume of $30 requests, does that mean they do not have the revenue for the payout, revenue that they should have accrued, or the payment administration costs have become to high?

As much as we are the stocksites Supplier they are our Customer, try contacting any of your service providers and say "Hello I have a lot of small payments to pay out and they are a pain, as I do not owe you much this month I will just pay you out when I owe you another 40% more, ok"

As a developer it is not hard to create a paypal payments file, and most accounting systems have check (cheque) calculating and printing facilities, if it is administration costs then an option would be to propose an administration fee or percentage for payments between $30 and $50.


David  

BigStock issued this announcement on Aug 19th. (Wed)

Minimum commission request amount being raised to $50 next week

Contributors:
We are raising the minimum commission payout to $50 next week. We have held ours at $30 for a long time but the industry standard is much higher and due to the high volume of $30 requests, we need to raise it to $50.

Thank you for understanding, we sincerely hope that this doesn't affect anyone appreciably.

BigStockPhoto

I still don't think this is something anyone should be losing sleep over.  I might lose $30 of commissions that are owed to me if BigStockPhotos goes under?  It's the end of the world!  I won't be able to treat my family to McDonald's tomorrow.

Seriously, consider the silver lining if BigStock does call it quits (even if they fly to Bermuda with all the $30 payouts they owe us)... the few people who regularly bought from them would have to switch to another service, say SS or IS or StockXpert or DT or FT, etc... sites I'm much more fond of than BigStock.

But if this happens and everyone wants to start a class-action lawsuit against the owners of a defunct BigStock, count me in... though my portion of the legal fees would probably eat up my entire $30!

I really don't understand why this is a big deal.  AFAIK all the other sites have a minimum payout of $50.  BigStock is just doing the same. 

Anyone to whom the extra $20 makes the difference between getting paid and not getting paid (ever) has not put any work into building their portfolio there anyway.  And they sure aren't relying on BigStock to pay their bills.

And as for taking this as some signal of BigStock's demise, that seems totally out of left field.  They are not on the top tier of earners, but sales seem steady.  I see no indication they are in any kind of trouble.

Maybe they need to pay for review expenses due to the hordes of submitter applicants precipitated by (web version of the print article) http://www.allyou.com/budget-home/money-shopping/convert-skills-into-cash-00400000052026/page6.html. We have not had much fun as a result of that dubious magazine piece (Wal-mart exclusive apparently).

Oh joy, yet another of these articles.  I can't believe those articles turn up many people with the equipment or skill to produce images of the quality that will sell in microstock these days.  Haven't most pro photogs and serious amateurs known about micro for a couple of years now?

Where do those writers go to get their information about the microstock industry - the year 2001



 

(4 more applicants based on that article since my last post) - I just feel poorly that there are not so many intermediate ways to help absolute beginners get into the game. There is a lot of people with creative potential locked down by life choices that keep them from fulfilling their potential (primarily, producing offspring).  As long as their is a spark there to progress, I can't see it as a total dud situation. 

Crowd sourcing vs professionalism is a funny balancing act, we often see huge improvements from lackluster submitters in a short period of time. Zymmetrical is not microstock but crowdsourcing is still an important part - microstock has paved the way for anyone to excel, if they have the drive.

Just think.. planet earth will be at 7 billion people by 2010, with the fastest growing sector being the economically disadvantaged and youth - I think in many industries there needs to be so much attention paid to learning and accessibility.. or it's just going to continue on with this top-heavy corporate crap. Standards and professionalism need to continue to be refined but there still has to be an open door to people who want to move up.

.. in the meantime, until we have our revelation, the editorial hammer will continue pounding away like we are in the pits of Mordor.

I really don't understand why this is a big deal.  AFAIK all the other sites have a minimum payout of $50.  BigStock is just doing the same.  

Anyone to whom the extra $20 makes the difference between getting paid and not getting paid (ever) has not put any work into building their portfolio there anyway.  And they sure aren't relying on BigStock to pay their bills.

And as for taking this as some signal of BigStock's demise, that seems totally out of left field.  They are not on the top tier of earners, but sales seem steady.  I see no indication they are in any kind of trouble.

I think I go off in too many directs which can cause things to get muddled.

Sites change payout levels. Sites change commissions. Sites add new lower prices and subscriptions. Sites change sellers status levels, which are supposed to increase pay percentages. Sites change the rules and their distribution, any time they want. There's more but the part that gets me is, they sign people up with a contract and hold photographers to a hard line, throw out anyone who doesn't follow the rules exactly. But with a couple weeks notice, change the contract to their benefit and the detriment of photographers.

It seems like poor business practice. Agencies are inflexible in dealing with suppliers, but change anything they please when it looks like a new way to save money or make more profit with the already uploaded photos, sent in under an existing contract.

My answer would have been, people who joined at the $30 level, could cash out once at $30 and after that, would have to reach $50. Everyone wins! Anyone who joined after Aug. 1st, 2009 would have to reach $50 to cash out. Same as sites that didn't ask before opting in everyone for subscriptions, which changed to allow contributors to decide if they wanted in or not. Same as SV or LO paying everyone when they closed.

You go to the store and pick up a box of food. It's marked $1.98, the shelf is marked $1.98 but when you get to the checkout, it's $2.98. You ask and they say "we decided to change the price." You would say... "Anyone to whom the extra $1 makes the difference..."    People who will never reach payout and quit will be losing their earnings. It could be $19 or $40. Not a small one dollar.

I still like the other way. Close the account, pay the persons earnings and everyone goes away happy. Or at the end of the year, everyone gets paid whatever they earned in the year.

$60 is a significant amount of money. Because of the special circumstances it seems like they could go ahead and pay you even though you won't ever reach their regular "payout level".  

In that SS thread, $60 is a big number, for someone who doesn't work for the site and quit. But in this thread someone losing $30 isn't working hard enough so they should just let it pass.

Not picking on you, because we've always had fun, but it seems that you find BS's change OK for $30-$40, but SS is wrong for $50?

Edit: seems the panic post about not getting paid, was a six hour deal, and he did get paid. Funny how that happens. SS has integrity and pays people who earned money, even if they left the agency months ago. I won't be redundant about other agencies that change the rules and hold earned money, under a previous contract.