MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Pond5 "Good News"!  (Read 9948 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #125 on: March 23, 2019, 04:16 »
+2
I think I made fair move, increased prices so they are pricier then before when we got 50% but still cheaper from sites that gives us 30%.



« Reply #126 on: March 23, 2019, 04:33 »
0
What would be a suggested 4K price tag for an exclusive video? We should look it from the buyer's prespective. If a customer gives 170 to 200 for non exclusive to the other big ones, should a Pond 5 4K exclusive video be priced for example no less than 220, or maybe more? That should mean at least 132 cut for us creators, in a regular, not enhanced sale. (if the video sells, at least once!)

« Reply #127 on: March 23, 2019, 05:39 »
+1
Why don't they just tell us the lowest price they found across other sites, it'll also help us understand what sites are under pricing and where we can remove content from

Shutterstock: $179/4K & $79/HD
Adobe: $200/4K & $80/HD
Storyblocks: $199/4K & $79/HD
iStock" $50/4K & $50/HD

Bottom Line: Now is a smart time to delete your clips from iStock.
Way ahead, gave istock a go to hell the day they move away from stock submitter

The issue is that these rates do not capture the lowest the agency will go.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2019, 08:12 by izzikiorage »

« Reply #128 on: March 23, 2019, 07:13 »
+11
I am thrilled with this offer! I remember the days I was iStock Exclusive and loved it. I am so happy to have a place that pays fair for my hard work! I will be focusing my full energy on my new exclusive content now!

Think about it. You "were" iStock exclusive. You "loved" it. Why aren't you iStock exclusive today? I'm sure they pitched you well, even started you off with enticing royalties and marketing favorability. Did something change? Did iStock turn their backs on their contributors and start down the path of becoming the worst thing to happen to stock media? We all know the answers to those questions.

It's one thing to be naive and not repeat history because you didn't live through or study it. But quite another to be fully aware of how quickly things can change for the worse and still dive head-first into it. Pond5 is of course the most trustworthy of the companies to throw in with, but let's review the choices they've made recently:

They just lowered their standard royalty 20%.

They introduced and now have quietly taken away web sized options, a clunky and confusing-for-the-customers failed experiment.

They repriced a high percentage of clips (up to nearly 50%) without the consent of the artists (a direct example of a less-than-true promise from the Youtube presentation) for a "test" without any notice of a beginning or any sign of an end.

In response to backlash over that, they told contributors they can't bothered informing us of every little thing they do.

This is not the Pond5 of 2017 and the trend does not look good. They are only the best in a dying business. Exclusivity is a huge risk. Good luck.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2019, 07:15 by Daryl Ray »

« Reply #129 on: March 23, 2019, 08:13 »
+3
Think about it. You "were" iStock exclusive.

Let the guys who want to be exclusive be exclusive.

It means it will be less crowded for the rest of us.

I would encourage everyone to go exclusive!

swisschocolate

  • A girl from the Alps
« Reply #130 on: March 23, 2019, 08:59 »
+6
Is is always non-exclusives who benefit the most from the so-called "exclusivity" programs (since RF stock asset can never be exclusive).

Agencies use the word "exclusive" for marketing purposes, non-exclusive artists also benefit from new customers.

And it is only "exclusive artitsts" who are abused and used just as a marketing hook will lose again and again.

I left iStock exclusivity a couple of months ago after 9 years (don't even want to think of where would be my portfolio now in terms of search, positioning, etc.) and starting it from ground zero here again. Even 90% commision wouldn't lure me into that "exclusive" hoax ever again.

The story will repeat itself :) As it always did.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2019, 09:06 by swisschocolate »

« Reply #131 on: March 23, 2019, 12:32 »
+2
I am thrilled with this offer! I remember the days I was iStock Exclusive and loved it. I am so happy to have a place that pays fair for my hard work! I will be focusing my full energy on my new exclusive content now!

Jeff, respectfully, why don't you pause being thrilled long enough to realize you're actually being suckered? The key points are that exclusivity at 60% will never earn as much as using multiple sites, so it's an overall loss for you, but more importantly THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A 20% CUT IN ARTIST PROFIT SHARE. If exclusivity holds value for Pond5, they could have simply announced a 60/40 deal for exclusive contributors - period. Few would take such a deal, but fine. Instead they used it as a smokescreen to cut all non-exclusive content rates from 50% to 40% - including yours - and you're whistling about how thrilled you are. Do you not realize you're making things actively worse by encouraging them as they take more money from us?

Any time a stock footage company decides it wants more profit and the way to get it is to grab it from the artists, it's wrong and needs to be pushed back against. If they want more profit they can look to other areas of their business model, but to think they can just take from our pockets is bs.

We pushed back against Storyblocks with good success because people spoke up. I hope people will do it again by emailing Pond5 at support@pond5.com and cc CEO Jason Teichman at jteichman@pond5.com. I've also started a petition here, please sign and share it: https://www.change.org/p/jason-teichman-pond5-don-t-cut-the-already-low-compensation-for-stock-artists

« Reply #132 on: March 23, 2019, 20:24 »
+2
I understand what you are saying but from my own experience in the stock world I am comfortable with my decision. The market is now at a tipping point now I don't expect anyone to agree with me and that is fine but I need to this for myself. 

« Reply #133 on: March 24, 2019, 00:38 »
0
I'm now exclusive with P5.. it wasn't a hard choice for me because already about 35% of my port was exclusive with high prices and most of my income is coming from those files, so instead of losing 20% of my income I'll get 20% more, I'll raise the prices of the files that were on other stocks from 78$ to whatever I believe is fair.. for those files that doing well on SS, I'll delete those from my exclusive account at P5 and create another account for non exclusive footage. I'll lose the ranking for those files at P5, but I believe I'll be the winner in the long run.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2019, 00:44 by alijaber »

« Reply #134 on: March 24, 2019, 04:36 »
+2
For those thinking of going "exclusive" to P5 and maintaining a non-exclusive account with the same clips that are found on other agencies, keep in mind that:

  • According to their new agreement, P5 has the right to adjust your pricing DOWN if you raise the price of a non-exclusive clip on P5 if that same clip is found to be at a lower price elsewhere (i.e., if priced at $79 elsewhere), and
  • Your exclusive clips cannot of be SIMILAR to your other non-exclusive clips.  As an example, if you have two shots from two different angles of the SAME concept that you shot at the SAME shooting session, you cannot make one exclusive and the other non-exclusive.

I think a lot of people aren't getting these two concepts.

Point #1 also applies to those who AREN'T going exclusive to P5: If you're thinking of raising the price on your non-exclusive clips to make-up for the new 40% commissions AND those same clips are on SS and AS at $79, you have to price them on P5 at $79 (or lower, if you want).

Of course, it's up to P5 to police and enforce these new regulations, which I think is a whole other conversation.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2019, 04:45 by ODesigns »

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #135 on: March 24, 2019, 04:58 »
0
I am thrilled with this offer! I remember the days I was iStock Exclusive and loved it. I am so happy to have a place that pays fair for my hard work! I will be focusing my full energy on my new exclusive content now!

Jeff, respectfully, why don't you pause being thrilled long enough to realize you're actually being suckered? The key points are that exclusivity at 60% will never earn as much as using multiple sites, so it's an overall loss for you, but more importantly THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A 20% CUT IN ARTIST PROFIT SHARE. If exclusivity holds value for Pond5, they could have simply announced a 60/40 deal for exclusive contributors - period. Few would take such a deal, but fine. Instead they used it as a smokescreen to cut all non-exclusive content rates from 50% to 40% - including yours - and you're whistling about how thrilled you are. Do you not realize you're making things actively worse by encouraging them as they take more money from us?

Any time a stock footage company decides it wants more profit and the way to get it is to grab it from the artists, it's wrong and needs to be pushed back against. If they want more profit they can look to other areas of their business model, but to think they can just take from our pockets is bs.

We pushed back against Storyblocks with good success because people spoke up. I hope people will do it again by emailing Pond5 at support@pond5.com and cc CEO Jason Teichman at jteichman@pond5.com. I've also started a petition here, please sign and share it: https://www.change.org/p/jason-teichman-pond5-don-t-cut-the-already-low-compensation-for-stock-artists


"Storyblocks.com is a great stock footage and image site that has a 50/50 deal with artists."

Errrr...Storyblocks cut our commission as well (by 50%!), yet you actively promote them in your petition? Why? It makes me not want to sign your petition, even though I agree with the rest.

« Reply #136 on: March 24, 2019, 05:08 »
+1
For those thinking of going "exclusive" to P5 and maintaining a non-exclusive account with the same clips that are found on other agencies, keep in mind that:

  • According to their new agreement, P5 has the right to adjust your pricing DOWN if you raise the price of a non-exclusive clip on P5 if that same clip is found to be at a lower price elsewhere (i.e., if priced at $79 elsewhere), and
  • Your exclusive clips cannot of be SIMILAR to your other non-exclusive clips.  As an example, if you have two shots from two different angles of the SAME concept that you shot at the SAME shooting session, you cannot make one exclusive and the other non-exclusive.

I think a lot of people aren't getting these two concepts.

Point #1 also applies to those who AREN'T going exclusive to P5: If you're thinking of raising the price on your non-exclusive clips to make-up for the new 40% commissions AND those same clips are on SS and AS at $79, you have to price them on P5 at $79 (or lower, if you want).

Of course, it's up to P5 to police and enforce these new regulations, which I think is a whole other conversation.

I'm very aware of that.. I've  priced all my non exclusive at 78$ long ago at P5 and now I'm going to raise prices of those that sell well there and remove those that sell better elswhere
« Last Edit: March 24, 2019, 05:11 by alijaber »

« Reply #137 on: March 25, 2019, 10:32 »
+3
Just emailed this to Pond5 support and cc'd CEO Jason Teichman at jteichman@pond5.com

Pond5 decision-makers,

As a long-time contributor to Pond5, I am writing in anger that you are cutting our profit share of non-exclusive sales by a massive 20%. Pond5 attracted artists in large part because it offered a fair 50/50 split, and now youre lightly dropping that as not competitive. Let me ask, is management also taking a pay cut to stay competitive? Do you hire employees and tell them, Work hard, do great, and maybe in a few years well cut your pay by 20%? You chose to take a huge amount of earnings away from the content creators in an effort to squeeze them into working for you exclusively. That is an incredible betrayal. On a basic human level you should be ashamed of your actions and greed.

Pond5 has repeatedly spoken against a race to the bottom in pricing. But by cutting artist pay, youre pushing a race to the bottom in how much artists are compensated for their own work. Did you really think it would be more acceptable because you simultaneously launched the 60/40 exclusivity offer? We see the earnings cut for what it is - a profit-grab out of the pockets of artists and an attempt to push contributors into exclusivity by making non-exclusivity less profitable. But for most contributors exclusivity would not cover the loss from leaving other sites, and so your greed is just part of a slow, inevitable disincentive for artists to create good work. Why would I sign exclusively with a company that betrays its contributors on the very day it launches the exclusivity program? You've just proven that contributors can't trust you to maintain commissions.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #138 on: March 25, 2019, 10:56 »
+1
Just emailed this to Pond5 support and cc'd CEO Jason Teichman at jteichman@pond5.com

Pond5 decision-makers,

As a long-time contributor to Pond5, I am writing in anger that you are cutting our profit share of non-exclusive sales by a massive 20%. Pond5 attracted artists in large part because it offered a fair 50/50 split, and now youre lightly dropping that as not competitive. Let me ask, is management also taking a pay cut to stay competitive? Do you hire employees and tell them, Work hard, do great, and maybe in a few years well cut your pay by 20%? You chose to take a huge amount of earnings away from the content creators in an effort to squeeze them into working for you exclusively. That is an incredible betrayal. On a basic human level you should be ashamed of your actions and greed.

Pond5 has repeatedly spoken against a race to the bottom in pricing. But by cutting artist pay, youre pushing a race to the bottom in how much artists are compensated for their own work. Did you really think it would be more acceptable because you simultaneously launched the 60/40 exclusivity offer? We see the earnings cut for what it is - a profit-grab out of the pockets of artists and an attempt to push contributors into exclusivity by making non-exclusivity less profitable. But for most contributors exclusivity would not cover the loss from leaving other sites, and so your greed is just part of a slow, inevitable disincentive for artists to create good work. Why would I sign exclusively with a company that betrays its contributors on the very day it launches the exclusivity program? You've just proven that contributors can't trust you to maintain commissions.

And Pond5 says:

Dear Artist,

Wed like to thank everyone who took the time to contact us and share their thoughts. We truly value your feedback and will continue to look to our artist community for input on how we can best accomplish our mission to help you earn more.

Weve had a lot of feedback over the last few days. Our goal with the Video Exclusivity Program is to accomplish one thing: maximizing the value of your work by making it harder for buyers to shop around to negotiate the lowest price.

Two clear themes have emerged from your feedback:

    I agree the industry is heading for a race to the bottom, but some portion of my income comes from other sites and I dont want to lose it.
    I'd be willing to go exclusive for my future video content if I could still list my older footage on competitive marketplaces.

We hear you loud and clear. While the best way for you to preserve the value of your work and receive the most benefit is to become a Pond5 Exclusive Video Artist, if you wish to have only selected content (especially new content) listed exclusively with Pond5, you can do so by creating a new, separate account.

The new Exclusive account will benefit from the higher royalty rate (starting April 8th), as well as the additional promotion, sales, and marketing associated with our Exclusivity Program. Please note that once you create your new account, you will need to enroll it in the Video Exclusivity Program by going to the Exclusive Program page.

In the meantime, please continue to reach out to us with any additional feedback or questions about this program at exclusive@pond5.com.

All the best,

The Pond5 Team


Does this look like an answer? Second exclusive only account?


« Reply #139 on: March 25, 2019, 11:36 »
+1
Just emailed this to Pond5 support and cc'd CEO Jason Teichman at jteichman@pond5.com

Pond5 decision-makers,

As a long-time contributor to Pond5, I am writing in anger that you are cutting our profit share of non-exclusive sales by a massive 20%. Pond5 attracted artists in large part because it offered a fair 50/50 split, and now youre lightly dropping that as not competitive. Let me ask, is management also taking a pay cut to stay competitive? Do you hire employees and tell them, Work hard, do great, and maybe in a few years well cut your pay by 20%? You chose to take a huge amount of earnings away from the content creators in an effort to squeeze them into working for you exclusively. That is an incredible betrayal. On a basic human level you should be ashamed of your actions and greed.

Pond5 has repeatedly spoken against a race to the bottom in pricing. But by cutting artist pay, youre pushing a race to the bottom in how much artists are compensated for their own work. Did you really think it would be more acceptable because you simultaneously launched the 60/40 exclusivity offer? We see the earnings cut for what it is - a profit-grab out of the pockets of artists and an attempt to push contributors into exclusivity by making non-exclusivity less profitable. But for most contributors exclusivity would not cover the loss from leaving other sites, and so your greed is just part of a slow, inevitable disincentive for artists to create good work. Why would I sign exclusively with a company that betrays its contributors on the very day it launches the exclusivity program? You've just proven that contributors can't trust you to maintain commissions.

I received a personal response from CEO Jason Teichman, and we will have a phone conversation soon to discuss the matter. If you would like me to ask certain questions to him or make a certain point beyond what I've expressed above, please let me know.

« Reply #140 on: March 25, 2019, 11:39 »
+2
Just emailed this to Pond5 support and cc'd CEO Jason Teichman at jteichman@pond5.com

Pond5 decision-makers,

As a long-time contributor to Pond5, I am writing in anger that you are cutting our profit share of non-exclusive sales by a massive 20%. Pond5 attracted artists in large part because it offered a fair 50/50 split, and now youre lightly dropping that as not competitive. Let me ask, is management also taking a pay cut to stay competitive? Do you hire employees and tell them, Work hard, do great, and maybe in a few years well cut your pay by 20%? You chose to take a huge amount of earnings away from the content creators in an effort to squeeze them into working for you exclusively. That is an incredible betrayal. On a basic human level you should be ashamed of your actions and greed.

Pond5 has repeatedly spoken against a race to the bottom in pricing. But by cutting artist pay, youre pushing a race to the bottom in how much artists are compensated for their own work. Did you really think it would be more acceptable because you simultaneously launched the 60/40 exclusivity offer? We see the earnings cut for what it is - a profit-grab out of the pockets of artists and an attempt to push contributors into exclusivity by making non-exclusivity less profitable. But for most contributors exclusivity would not cover the loss from leaving other sites, and so your greed is just part of a slow, inevitable disincentive for artists to create good work. Why would I sign exclusively with a company that betrays its contributors on the very day it launches the exclusivity program? You've just proven that contributors can't trust you to maintain commissions.

I received a personal response from CEO Jason Teichman, and we will have a phone conversation soon to discuss the matter. If you would like me to ask certain questions to him or make a certain point beyond what I've expressed above, please let me know.

Question 01: Why would I sign exclusively with a company that betrays its contributors with a 20% revenue cut on the very day it launches the exclusivity program?

swisschocolate

  • A girl from the Alps
« Reply #141 on: March 25, 2019, 11:57 »
0
How are they going to promote Exclusive collection and making sure their exclusive artists make enough income (because of course, they care so much about artists)... So how will they promote them except their newsletter?


« Reply #142 on: March 25, 2019, 12:21 »
0
How are they going to promote Exclusive collection and making sure their exclusive artists make enough income (because of course, they care so much about artists)... So how will they promote them except their newsletter?

No idea, but they'd better do some serious promotion to make it worth it.

You could monitor the sales of some of the top names that are going exclusive if you have the time (and interest), like VIAFilms and hotelfoxtrot.

I might do it, if I feel I have some downtime, but better if more do it. :)

swisschocolate

  • A girl from the Alps
« Reply #143 on: March 25, 2019, 12:32 »
+3
How are they going to promote Exclusive collection and making sure their exclusive artists make enough income (because of course, they care so much about artists)... So how will they promote them except their newsletter?

No idea, but they'd better do some serious promotion to make it worth it.

You could monitor the sales of some of the top names that are going exclusive if you have the time (and interest), like VIAFilms and hotelfoxtrot.

I might do it, if I feel I have some downtime, but better if more do it. :)

As I remember correctly that "story" (which sounded so fake, btw) told during the Live Town Hall, like buyers are calling them asking where is the button on Pond5 to sort for exclusive content... ::)

There is no buyers who are looking for that, because every person with some brain understands that it's NOT exclusive! :D

But I'm afraid that their imaginary line of buyers that are waiting for it will be their main "promotion".

« Reply #144 on: March 25, 2019, 12:36 »
+1
How are they going to promote Exclusive collection and making sure their exclusive artists make enough income (because of course, they care so much about artists)... So how will they promote them except their newsletter?

No idea, but they'd better do some serious promotion to make it worth it.

You could monitor the sales of some of the top names that are going exclusive if you have the time (and interest), like VIAFilms and hotelfoxtrot.

I might do it, if I feel I have some downtime, but better if more do it. :)

As I remember correctly that "story" (which sounded so fake, btw) told during the Live Town Hall, like buyers are calling them asking where is the button on Pond5 to sort for exclusive content... ::)

There is no buyers who are looking for that, because every person with some brain understands that it's NOT exclusive! :D

But I'm afraid that their imaginary line of buyers that are waiting for it will be their main "promotion".
If my go to was SS and I couldn't find what I wanted so I went to P5 it would be useful to just search through content that was only on P5 instead of looking through content I've already seen on other sites and couldn't use.  If I need a video of oranges but SS only has apples I'll go to P5 looking for them, it's not that exclusive is worth more in itself it's that I can't get it somewhere else.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2019, 12:42 by tickstock »

swisschocolate

  • A girl from the Alps
« Reply #145 on: March 25, 2019, 12:44 »
0
If my go to was SS and I couldn't find what I wanted so I went to P5 it would be useful to just search through content that was only on P5 instead of looking through content I've already seen on other sites and couldn't use.

So it seems that SS is a main promotion to Pond5 then.
Because every your example is about it.

So he will find it and maybe buy for high price once and tomorrow will go back to SS if he needs some generic stuff again. 

Is it a working marketing strategy?

swisschocolate

  • A girl from the Alps
« Reply #146 on: March 25, 2019, 12:44 »
0
If I need a video of oranges but SS only has apples I'll go to P5 looking for them, it's not that exclusive is worth more in itself it's that I can't get it somewhere else.

Do we hear some news from Stocksy exclusive video for example? Have you tried them already? Or they are somehow worse than Pond5 in sales?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2019, 12:49 by swisschocolate »

« Reply #147 on: March 25, 2019, 12:46 »
+1
When sites have more stringent (or random) acceptance policies there is a quite a bit of difference in what assets are at what sites and a lot of it is still not exclusive. This is probably less true for very good quality stuff, but best sellers at one place were rejected by others for me. If they push exclusive in the search it would make going exclusive more attractive, but make the site as a whole less attractive for buyers especially as a first choice place to search. 

My feeling is that stock buyers really just want to find material that will work for their project asap. at a price that is low enough. The thing that will separate out the winning stock site is having enough material and a very good easy to use search.

« Reply #148 on: March 25, 2019, 12:48 »
0
If my go to was SS and I couldn't find what I wanted so I went to P5 it would be useful to just search through content that was only on P5 instead of looking through content I've already seen on other sites and couldn't use.

So it seems that SS is a main promotion to Pond5 then.
Because every your example is about it.

So he will find it and maybe buy for high price once and tomorrow will go back to SS if he needs some generic stuff again. 

Is it a working marketing strategy?
Obviously you can trade in Adobe or whatever, nonexclusive content is all over the place.  I would imagine yes, the strategy is to get people going over there from other sites.  If they can find the nonexclusive stuff at the same price or lower and other things they can't find elsewhere that makes it easier.

« Reply #149 on: March 25, 2019, 12:48 »
+1
Kevin, it's great that you can give them our feedback.

I suggest that we ask to set a term (duration) of the exclusive agreement during which all terms and conditions (in particular the % of our respective shares) cannot be changed.

Just emailed this to Pond5 support and cc'd CEO Jason Teichman at jteichman@pond5.com

Pond5 decision-makers,

As a long-time contributor to Pond5, I am writing in anger that you are cutting our profit share of non-exclusive sales by a massive 20%. Pond5 attracted artists in large part because it offered a fair 50/50 split, and now youre lightly dropping that as not competitive. Let me ask, is management also taking a pay cut to stay competitive? Do you hire employees and tell them, Work hard, do great, and maybe in a few years well cut your pay by 20%? You chose to take a huge amount of earnings away from the content creators in an effort to squeeze them into working for you exclusively. That is an incredible betrayal. On a basic human level you should be ashamed of your actions and greed.

Pond5 has repeatedly spoken against a race to the bottom in pricing. But by cutting artist pay, youre pushing a race to the bottom in how much artists are compensated for their own work. Did you really think it would be more acceptable because you simultaneously launched the 60/40 exclusivity offer? We see the earnings cut for what it is - a profit-grab out of the pockets of artists and an attempt to push contributors into exclusivity by making non-exclusivity less profitable. But for most contributors exclusivity would not cover the loss from leaving other sites, and so your greed is just part of a slow, inevitable disincentive for artists to create good work. Why would I sign exclusively with a company that betrays its contributors on the very day it launches the exclusivity program? You've just proven that contributors can't trust you to maintain commissions.

I received a personal response from CEO Jason Teichman, and we will have a phone conversation soon to discuss the matter. If you would like me to ask certain questions to him or make a certain point beyond what I've expressed above, please let me know.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
21 Replies
5182 Views
Last post May 19, 2019, 01:27
by Mir
14 Replies
4309 Views
Last post December 12, 2018, 10:54
by skysense
89 Replies
8735 Views
Last post December 07, 2018, 02:37
by ravens
16 Replies
1330 Views
Last post March 25, 2019, 13:07
by swisschocolate
8 Replies
1138 Views
Last post April 06, 2019, 01:20
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results