I've removed my "like" of their fanpage and removed them also from the favourites of my  fanpage.

Quote from: Pixart on December 20, 2012, 16:17
Well, here is their facebook page.  Why don't we all go and post how we feel on a forum that is to attract buyers. 

https://www.facebook.com/search/results.php?q=123rf&init=quick&tas=0.8522308480236096#!/123rffans

It worked against Instagram this week and Cheerios a couple weeks ago.

Looks like lots of people will be going on Santa's naughty list

They removed several of my posts this morning - and now they have blocked me from their site. No loss.

Quote from: Monty-m-gue on December 21, 2012, 11:01
They removed several of my posts this morning - and now they have blocked me from their site. No loss.

They've blocked you from the 123rf facebook page or do you mean they've blocked you from their micro site? 

Just posted the following on 123RF facebook page, probably wont stay their long, based on the removal of yesterdays posts, but sure feels better after writing it.

My dreams fo the future are that 123RF reconsider their massive royalty cuts for the majority of contributors in 2013. Based on 123Rf's DREAM statment thsi is how I feel:

D for Dedication - completely lacking now I am facing a 30% commission cut.

R for Responsibility - what 123RF is lacking for treating its loyal contributors so badly by slashing their royalty commisions.

E fo Education - hoping that this post will educate buyers as to how badly 123RF is treating its image contributors.

A for Attitude - Extremely bad attitude of 123RF for treating contributors in this way.

M for Motivation - complete lack of motivation for me to continue supplying 123RF with images due to their massive commission cuts.

Quote from: grafix04 on December 21, 2012, 12:23

Quote from: Monty-m-gue on December 21, 2012, 11:01
They removed several of my posts this morning - and now they have blocked me from their site. No loss.

They've blocked you from the 123rf facebook page or do you mean they've blocked you from their micro site?

From the Facebook page.

Alex,

Would I be right in guessing that the  Past 12 Month Credits Total doesn't update daily, but monthly? As mine haven't budged since the first day, despite sales.

Also, under the FAQ page and the question "3. What's the royalty structure at 123rf?" - How come there is no relevant information, only information on REFERRAL earnings?

Finally, where are you listing the credit levels now, as they have gone from the Earnings captcha page?

Thanks Alex.

From the 123RF Credit Targets thread:

Quote from: alex123rf on December 21, 2012, 13:16
Hi Everyone,

It has been moved to here: http://www.123rf.com/contrib_structure.php

Thank you,

Alex.

Quote from: CD123 on December 22, 2012, 05:44
From the 123RF Credit Targets thread:

Quote from: alex123rf on December 21, 2012, 13:16
Hi Everyone,

It has been moved to here: http://www.123rf.com/contrib_structure.php

Thank you,

Alex.

Thanks CD123 - is there a logical way to get to that page from the 123RF website?

Quote from: Microstock Man on December 22, 2012, 06:04

Thanks CD123 - is there a logical way to get to that page from the 123RF website?

Pleasure.  I could not find an internal link to it. Maybe there is, but it is not anywhere obvious.

Quote from: Microstock Man on December 22, 2012, 06:04
Thanks CD123 - is there a logical way to get to that page from the 123RF website?

A bookmark in your browser

If they had their act together this would all have been in place months ago and have a link from the "More" page that has downloads, earnings, etc. And there would be a total credits each month in the earnings chart along with the total $$ and DLs (I just checked and there's nothing new there)

I would hazard a guess that lowering the royalty percentage for the contributors who don't sell much is a deliberate attempt by 123RF to get those contributors to leave by their own freewill, I've often said that if I were to ever start an agency I would only feature the work of the top 500 and market it as such.
Maybe that's what 123RF is trying to create, who knows, but I doubt threats of leaving by those who are dropping is going to have the effect you want it to, if anything it may be exactly what they want.

Course if that was the intent we wouldn't be there in the first place with approval ratios in the high 90s 

If thats the case, why would they accept everything you throw at them? They can easily hit the LCV button on small timers and only accept high quality pro stuff

Quote from: Poncke on December 22, 2012, 13:22
If thats the case, why would they accept everything you throw at them? They can easily hit the LCV button on small timers and only accept high quality pro stuff

exactly, they aren´t trying to build anything

Quote from: Microstock Man on December 22, 2012, 06:04

Quote from: CD123 on December 22, 2012, 05:44
From the 123RF Credit Targets thread:

Quote from: alex123rf on December 21, 2012, 13:16
Hi Everyone,

It has been moved to here: http://www.123rf.com/contrib_structure.php

Thank you,

Alex.

Thanks CD123 - is there a logical way to get to that page from the 123RF website?

I bet it was moved deliberately so there's no logical way to get to that page

Quote from: RT on December 22, 2012, 10:15
I would hazard a guess that lowering the royalty percentage for the contributors who don't sell much is a deliberate attempt by 123RF to get those contributors to leave by their own freewill, I've often said that if I were to ever start an agency I would only feature the work of the top 500 and market it as such.
Maybe that's what 123RF is trying to create, who knows, but I doubt threats of leaving by those who are dropping is going to have the effect you want it to, if anything it may be exactly what they want.

123rf has more crap than other site and now you're saying they've suddenly decided to get rid of anyone with 4999 and below yearly downloads?  That's a lot of sales to let go don't you think? 

And you're correct, 'threats' of leaving won't have much effect on them.  Actually leaving might though.

Quote from: grafix04 on December 22, 2012, 14:31
123rf has more crap than other site and now you're saying they've suddenly decided to get rid of anyone with 4999 and below yearly downloads?  That's a lot of sales to let go don't you think? 

And you're correct, 'threats' of leaving won't have much effect on them.  Actually leaving might though.

I'd have thought SS has the most "crap" as you call it, as more people submit there than anywhere else. And if you read what I wrote you'll see I said they may be trying to get rid of those contributors who's work doesn't sell (therefore no they won't be losing much), there's some mid tier contributors who may take a 5% drop, will they leave - I doubt it very much, and I expect 123RF know this as the royalties they pay are still higher than most.

As I said I'm only guessing, they are many contributors I know of who produce stunning work albeit in low quantity, those are the folks I feel sorry for because they're taking a drop purely because they can't produce enough, anybody that's got a substantial portfolio and yet is getting dropped to 30% really need to look at why there stuff isn't selling - or is that the "crap" you're referring to?

Quote from: RT on December 22, 2012, 17:00

Quote from: grafix04 on December 22, 2012, 14:31
123rf has more crap than other site and now you're saying they've suddenly decided to get rid of anyone with 4999 and below yearly downloads?  That's a lot of sales to let go don't you think? 

And you're correct, 'threats' of leaving won't have much effect on them.  Actually leaving might though.

I'd have thought SS has the most "crap" as you call it, as more people submit there than anywhere else. And if you read what I wrote you'll see I said they may be trying to get rid of those contributors who's work doesn't sell (therefore no they won't be losing much), there's some mid tier contributors who may take a 5% drop, will they leave - I doubt it very much, and I expect 123RF know this as the royalties they pay are still higher than most.

As I said I'm only guessing, they are many contributors I know of who produce stunning work albeit in low quantity, those are the folks I feel sorry for because they're taking a drop purely because they can't produce enough, anybody that's got a substantial portfolio and yet is getting dropped to 30% really need to look at why there stuff isn't selling - or is that the "crap" you're referring to?

35 percent of nothing is still nothing. Their 21 cents is the lowest in the industry apart from IS. I am getting 25 cents come january, but 25 cents at a low volumes is not good enough. 123 is not SS, they cant pull a stunt like this.

Quote from: Poncke on December 22, 2012, 13:22
If thats the case, why would they accept everything you throw at them? They can easily hit the LCV button on small timers and only accept high quality pro stuff

Most microstock sites accept pretty much anything if it passes a technical criteria, to be able to determine whether a file is LCV requires a extremely good knowledge by the reviewer of what sells, by the very nature of microstock those who know what sells are out there uploading and selling it. Do you know of any successful contributors who are reviewers? There's some exceptions on iS because they have different incentives to be an inspector there, but generally speaking those who review are not big sellers.

Quote from: Poncke on December 22, 2012, 17:05
35 percent of nothing is still nothing. Their 21 cents is the lowest in the industry apart from IS. I am getting 25 cents come january, but 25 cents at a low volumes is not good enough. 123 is not SS, they cant pull a stunt like this.

Sorry to tell you but I think you'll find they can do what they like. I can understand you're angry and I'm not justifying or advocating anything they do, just giving my theory as to why.

@RT
I think you are missing the point of what most of the members are trying to tell you here:
1. The issue with 123RF is not only the % they are paying their contributors, but the price of their image packages, which COMBINEDLY will make it one of the worst (if not the worst) paying sites.
2. 123RF will not go to this extreme lengths to get rid of smaller contributors, if there was a much easier and less risky method of just refusing most of their work. It has nothing to do with good or bad the reviewers is/are/should be. It is about the business strategy.

This is why no one so far agrees with your analysis of 123RF's actions.

RT I do think you are an intelligent guy and sure you add a lot of value to this forum but I don't think showing off or bullying other will ever work out, maybe only for the person who does it, anyway I believe you know why iStock dropped you too back in 2009, don't forget we are all on the same boat, yes yours will take longer to sink

Thanks Charl, thats exactly what I meant

Quote from: RT on December 22, 2012, 17:00
...... I expect 123RF know this as the royalties they pay are still higher than most.

If you mean percentage, possibly true, but if you look at royalty $$ for a given file size, they're lower than PhotoDune (often cited as a low price site) and CanStock most of the time. 123rf numbers vary much more, so once in a while I make more for an XXL file there.

Their prices are cheap and their discounting to buyers is very, very heavy. They offer a reasonable volume on low-ish returns, but in no way would I say "higher than most" about their payouts to contributors