MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Change in Commission Structure for *ALL* 123RF.com Contributors  (Read 79530 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

XPTO

« Reply #275 on: February 16, 2012, 03:41 »
0
1. With regards to sales, we're looking to more than double the figure. 2011 was great for us, we're looking to make 2012 greater. Ultimately your sales as a whole will more than just improve.

You HOPE that you will grow sales. But  the only CERTAINTY is that our commission will drop and we will be paid less for each sale! It's a fact that you will take more of our money, being able or not to double your figures. And if you don't achieve that double? Are we to expect another commission cut? I'm certain by then you get another excuse to cut the commissions again. After all you're acquiring the taste for easy money instead of using competently the 50% you already take from us!

Plus, you haven't answered my question about why a sale from a big contributor is more valuable than a sale from a smaller one, when for the buyer each image is the best one for their project and don't care for the name of the photographer. And you even charge the same for each image!

Please explain to me why a niche contributor who has a unique collection, which doesn't sell thousands of photos per month but is the only one supplying that type of imagery, should accept the commission cut when it's you who are privileged to have those photos in the first place?!

I still need to be explained why a sale from a particular contributor, is less valuable than a sale from another one!

And please don't come with the excuse that some contributors produce more salable content. If you have non-salable content in your collection blame and punish yourself for having accepted it, don't punish the contributor for submitting it.

Lastly, I do hope that everyone here enjoys the fruits of their labor earning more than 50% commissions from 123RF in 10 months time.

Do you realize how insulting this statement is?! So, the ones not achieving that +50% are lazy? Do you have the notion that the most limiting factor for us to accumulate more credits and achieve the upper level is the pitiful performance 123rf has in the stock market, where is doesn't represent more than 2 to 3% of our total income?

The fact is that you don't have ANY acceptable answer to this move except pure greed.


« Reply #276 on: February 16, 2012, 03:54 »
0
QUOTE: Lastly, I do hope that everyone here enjoys the fruits of their labor earning more than 50% commissions from 123RF in 10 months time.

(A dim and distant) hope is a jolly fine thing, given that we were led to expect a REAL 50% NOW!

Sigh..........

« Reply #277 on: February 16, 2012, 03:57 »
0
fantastic. I think I'll be in the range of 40% (in fact, 20% less commissions). 123rf, thank you for supporting employees with more than 3 years with you in 2013. Thank you so!
The royalty structure is insane! And do not ask me to increase my portfolio more. Do I have to work harder to get a 45% very very very lucky? Do you going to change my plans for 2013? Thanks for planning my life, but do not need it.

I am designer, work with some 20 associations and all I have recommended 123rf. But no, that's it!

The problem is that I think its chaotic political communication has been good for them. With the fear of charging less, in recent months many have come to 123rf contributors, and many have increased their portfolio: the result is long waits under review. This increase may compensate for possible escapes by lower royalties for 2013.

The lies and confusion, great strategies for business.

« Reply #278 on: February 16, 2012, 04:10 »
0
Hi All,

Thanks for the comments and warnings, we will take everything into advisement.

Strange, but the rest of your post doesn't sound like that. You don't respond to any of the real issues at hand.



1. With regards to sales, we're looking to more than double the figure. 2011 was great for us, we're looking to make 2012 greater. Ultimately your sales as a whole will more than just improve. We are having month after month of improving sales, spurred on by the growth - We are spending more on advertising and promotions than ever before with more campaigns coming up soon, we're allocating a large proportion of sales revenue into various marketing channels and this is bearing fruit - I believe that most have enjoyed the increased sales throughout 2011. We're not slowing down on this.

Great outlook. And that seems possible with a flat 50% commission. No need for any cuts then, right?


Rome was not built in a day and I have to ask for your further understanding. We are achieving our milestones month on month, and I believe you too will enjoy higher sales volume in the days to come. I earnestly hope that you'll continue to be a contributor even after the implementation date. Only time will tell what decision you'll eventually make. But do factor in the growth if you're plugging the figures into your spreadsheet while determining your future levels.

As I said before in this thread: If you believe that you can increase sales volumes that's great. If you can increase my sales volumes to the amount that I will keep getting a 50% commission from you, that would be wonderful (because that would be a very big increase in sales for me). If not, and if you tell me that I should be getting less than 50% because you cannot sell enough of my images, then it's not going to hurt me to delete my images.

Lastly, I do hope that everyone here enjoys the fruits of their labor earning more than 50% commissions from 123RF in 10 months time.

No need for hope here. You can easily influence that. Just set the lowest level of your new commission scheme to 50%. So you can be sure "that everyone here enjoys the fruits of their labor earning more than 50% commissions from 123RF in 10 months time."

« Reply #279 on: February 16, 2012, 04:16 »
0
1. With regards to sales, we're looking to more than double the figure. 2011 was great for us, we're looking to make 2012 greater. Ultimately your sales as a whole will more than just improve.

Obviously I want to increase my sales. But mostly I want a fair royalty.
The ultimate test of his covetousness is that they know they will increase their sales. And in 2013 also increase their commission. To our detriment. The rest are parole parole parole ...

wut

« Reply #280 on: February 16, 2012, 04:23 »
0
I didn't read through this thread since 123RF doesn't interest me all that much because it's only a mid earner for me. I was just checking earnings and saw the commission structure change from Jan 2013. I thought this only applied to new members and those with less than 150 files online, but it looks it applies to everyone, or else I wouldn't be getting this msg. So is it?

If they think they motivated me with this RC scheme they're dead wrong, they just made me care even less about them. The low earnings they bring me, the broken site UL they have (so you have to use FTP even if you upload just a couple of files) and their reviews that take weeks, everything is going downhill with this site. Such a shame, they looked perspective not so long ago. They thought they became big enough to start behaving like IS and FT. And the say money doesn't ruin people...

« Reply #281 on: February 16, 2012, 04:46 »
0
Alex,

If implementing such a change, it is absolutely essential, to make the earned RC's to date easily visible and accessible, preferably with an extrapolated prognosis, without us having to rely on our own Excel estimates. I think this should've been made available to us as soon as you publicised this structure.

Despite the spin that "competition is good for us", and "we've got 10.5 months to build a strong portfolio", which are not only patronising but also rather insulting, the lack of providing the specific data and the instruments to assess what conseqences this has for each of us, makes it impossible for us to plan ahead and take the necessary strategic decisions.

Eventhough you say the growth prognosis of 123RF looks swell, you just took away part of your incentive to realise that growth. If you fail to achieve growth, we sell less, earn less RC's, and you end up with a bigger cut, making up for the lack of growth. To me, that sounds like an undesired and unhealthy situation. It effecively places the risk of your marketing and sales performance with us. I find that rather dodgy.

I'm sure you expected the heat that would follow these changes. So please reduce the spin based on guestimates, and provides us with some arguments based on facts. I'm not looking for yet another cool lens cap. Got one forced down the throat with the first RC introductory spin.

CD123

« Reply #282 on: February 16, 2012, 05:11 »
0
What is the use?

This tread will go the same way all went when an agency cut back our rates. A lot a huff and puffs, every week or so a polite (or borderline insulting) answer from the agency, defending the change (if it is an agency who believe in some communication).

AND THEN, a big blue nothing.......... and finally implementation.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2012, 05:15 by CD123 »

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #283 on: February 16, 2012, 07:58 »
0
Okay, just did the math.  Based on 2011 numbers, I am in the 50% category, but the low end.  No chance of getting higher up, but a real chance of slipping down.  Just like Istock, I am hanging on to the rate I have earned, but just barely, and for how long? 

Paulie, I definitely get what you are saying, but do you really think Istock exclusivity offers any better protection? 

I'm not sure where you got the exclusivity part from because I didn't even mention it and it isn't my point. I'm not recommending anything.

What I'm seeing is a large number of people who still seem to be missing the "support the fair agency" pattern which is "agency X screwed us, c'mon everybody let's support agency Y. Well, agency Y now screwed us so let's all go support agency Z" and on and on.  What you do about it, if anything, is up to you.

helix7

« Reply #284 on: February 16, 2012, 08:02 »
0
...Lastly, I do hope that everyone here enjoys the fruits of their labor earning more than 50% commissions from 123RF in 10 months time.

Wow, man. You just don't get it, do you?

Or maybe I just don't get it. So please, Alex, enlighten me. Look at my account (username mcdonald). Look at my recent output. And look at what I earned last month. Can you really suggest that it'll be no one's fault but mine if I drop a level or two next year?

I make a decent living for myself in this business. I like to think that I know how to craft a quality image that will sell well, and my track record with other agencies is proof that I do, in fact, know what I'm doing. It's not a matter of working harder or building a "solid portfolio" as you put it. My portfolio is solid. I didn't start in this business yesterday. I've got the #10 best selling vector over at SS this week. And also #46 and #47. I put in the time, every day, and produce quality work that is clearly in demand.

123RF needs a new public relations person. You obviously don't know how to not be offensive or condescending, and you seem most interested in just continuing to throw blame at us for the impending cuts. This is almost worse than the istock situation because of your attitude about it. Your suggestion that it's within our control to decide our rate and earn 50% or more is downright insulting. You know as well as we do that it's not that simple. Please stop treating us like children and suggesting that we can influence where we land in 2013 if we just try a little harder.

« Reply #285 on: February 16, 2012, 08:18 »
0
I don't want to insult or defend anyone, I'm also contributor on 123rf and probably will not make to 50%, not even 40%, because of my small portfolio, but I'm 100% sure then many, or maybe most of people here complaining against new commission structure have large portfolios on sites like IS and Fotolia or other sites with even smaller than 30 percent commissions.

Someone said already, works do more than just words. If someone doesn't like percentage on certain site, he/she should delete your images from there. If 100 people do that... it will say something.

Sorry for my English.

« Reply #286 on: February 16, 2012, 08:33 »
0
someone said here that we shouldnt join small/new agencies, what shall we join??

helix7

« Reply #287 on: February 16, 2012, 08:33 »
0
...but I'm 100% sure that many, or maybe most of people here complaining against new commission structure have large portfolios on sites like IS and Fotolia or other sites with even smaller than 30 percent commissions...

You are absolutely right. I'm one of those people. However I'm not really complaining so much about the rate cut itself. I am more taking issue with Alex's assertion that reaching the 50% or higher levels is just a matter of working harder and building a "solid portfolio." Alex clearly has no idea how hard some of us already work, and that effort is not going to be the deciding factor in the rate that many of us end up with. My criticism in this thread has almost entirely been directed at the notion that we are in control of our royalty rates, and that if we fail to maintain 50% it is somehow a matter of lack of effort or a weak portfolio.

« Reply #288 on: February 16, 2012, 08:42 »
0
someone said here that we shouldnt join small/new agencies, what shall we join??

Microstockers Anonymous

XPTO

« Reply #289 on: February 16, 2012, 09:28 »
0
someone said here that we shouldnt join small/new agencies, what shall we join??

Do you have a "Join Quota" you must meet, like " you must join to 10 new sites every month, or you'll be fired"?

The problem is people joining every new agency that comes up which don't show any type of guarantee that they will survive because they have a solid background, being founded by credible people or any innovative project.

To make things worse people join these suspicious sites which undercut pricing and commissions from other established agencies, making room for the recent actions from Fotolia to reduce the commission of several members that submitted to those sites.

You may argue that some established agencies now pay lower commissions than some of those new sites. The difference is that even sites like IS or FL do sell and a lot, contrary to the new agencies that may give 80% of almost ZERO $!

I personally only joined Yay, after a promising start but after more than a year almost without sales I deleted my portfolio. After that, only supported Veer because they belong to Corbis and with acceptable results since they are way above 123rf and BS. And Stockfresh because it was founded by the creator of Stockxpert. But I'm not going to give this one much more time either since the sales are almost non-existent.

So, my personal strategy is to participate in the top 6 or 7 agencies and unless a new site has a strong credibility it won't have my support. Those sites that may only earn 2 or 3 dollars a month for each contributor, summed up, only end up giving a nice living to their creators. And I don't support that.

As you see you are not forced to join any new agency. Especially if they give valid arguments to the established ones to reduce our commissions.

« Reply #290 on: February 16, 2012, 09:39 »
0
Guess what Alex, if you guys are having trouble getting profits up, it has nothing to do with us. Your suggestion to just work harder and build up a better portfolio is offensive at best, downright ignorant at worst.

My words exactly. And 123rf should immediately add a statistics number that shows the credits, I'm not going to do the calculations.

Depending on the result, I might have room for one more logo in my avatar.

« Reply #291 on: February 16, 2012, 10:13 »
0
To make things worse people join these suspicious sites which undercut pricing and commissions from other established agencies, making room for the recent actions from Fotolia to reduce the commission of several members that submitted to those sites.

what agencies? photodune? depositphotos? how can FT, IS, 123RF be afraid of them? its pure greed nothing else my friend, these agencies do 10x less than them, they have only a strong motive which is their pockets, like 123RF, IS have said here and in the past that they have more buyers, more sales, so why the cuts?? thats not because of new agencies thats for sure! why have IS created the RCs? they were afraid of who back in 2010?

As you see you are not forced to join any new agency. Especially if they give valid arguments to the established ones to reduce our commissions.

again which agencies are you making up to this "argument"?

« Reply #292 on: February 16, 2012, 10:29 »
0
Depending on the result, I might have room for one more logo in my avatar.
lol, I must be blind because I hadn't realised until now the significance of your avatar - it's great.

« Reply #293 on: February 16, 2012, 11:12 »
0
Depending on the result, I might have room for one more logo in my avatar.
lol, I must be blind because I hadn't realised until now the significance of your avatar - it's great.

Yeah I never looked at it properly til now. Nice job Perry!  :D

« Reply #294 on: February 16, 2012, 12:28 »
0
To make things worse people join these suspicious sites which undercut pricing and commissions from other established agencies, making room for the recent actions from Fotolia to reduce the commission of several members that submitted to those sites.

+1

This is the real problem. 

XPTO

« Reply #295 on: February 16, 2012, 12:54 »
0
To make things worse people join these suspicious sites which undercut pricing and commissions from other established agencies, making room for the recent actions from Fotolia to reduce the commission of several members that submitted to those sites.

what agencies? photodune? depositphotos? how can FT, IS, 123RF be afraid of them? its pure greed nothing else my friend, these agencies do 10x less than them, they have only a strong motive which is their pockets, like 123RF, IS have said here and in the past that they have more buyers, more sales, so why the cuts?? thats not because of new agencies thats for sure! why have IS created the RCs? they were afraid of who back in 2010?

You've already mentioned two agencies, and in the past 6 years there were many others which I don't even bother to remember their names.

And when people support agencies like those it's hard for me to contest any agency using the argument that Fotolia used: "If you don't bother to sell for half the price at another agency, then you won't mind if we cut your commission here"

Even if I know they are doing it for pure greed, it's an unbeatable argument. I'm sorry to say that it makes perfect sense to me!

You also say that they don't pose a threat to other established agencies. Are you kidding? When they reduce the image price they put pressure on the established agencies. Photo buyers are very quick to blackmail an agency pointing to the competition and questioning why they should continue to buy there when they could be licensing the exact same images, with the exact same license for much less!

On Alamy (a traditional agency), I make hundreds of dollars monthly and sometimes pass the $1000 (my cut), and I can assure you that this type of pressure has reduced the average sale price by 65% since 2007. Even if Alamy gives a much broader and naturally much more expensive RF License than Micro, they were forced to drop the prices.

Buyers may be bluffing and intending in fact to continue to shop there, but the threatened agency doesn't know that and will not upset the buyers just for fun.

Summing up, don't give weapons that your "enemies" (unfortunately some agencies became enemies, instead of partners) can use against you! Some people accuse agencies of being greedy, when they themselves with the greed to increase their monthly income by $5 upload thousands of images to every crappy and suspicious site that comes up! Who's more greedy?

Microstock is a business. Unfortunatly many people look at it like a gold rush, kicking every rock in search of the last gold nugget like there's no tomorrow.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2012, 13:16 by XPTO »

« Reply #296 on: February 16, 2012, 13:07 »
0
/\ Amen, brother!

I couldn't have said it better myself.  (and apparently, I really couldn't... this was the point I tried to make, but just ended up getting some peoples' panties in a bunch.)

rinderart

« Reply #297 on: February 16, 2012, 13:42 »
0
I look strictly at cost effectiveness and time spent. I joined 123 at the very beginning and been with 34 sites since 2004 . I bailed out 2 1/2 years ago. I rejoined and sent 2000 of what I consider my best "Stock" stuff out of 5700 available 4 months ago to give it another shot. I got about 60 rejected out of 2000. I found the upload / Model release system extremely fast and had them done in a few Days. which would be nearly Impossible at any other site. Yes the reviews are slow and I don't really care. in 4 months and a few days of work my sales beat DT and FT with more than twice the Images.Thats a win, Win for me for time spent and return. I have  had personal contact with alex as I do with every site im with either with the owner or Admin and I found him to be pretty straight forward if you compare him to some I've dealt with. Im sorry guys But I think there doing a pretty * good job Considering quite a few others.

What they do or not do in the future of course will have to be considered then But if My time spent and my return stays this high regardless...I will have no Problems. And I wish I had back the countless 1000's of hours wasting time uploading to losers.
It's totally about my time and bottom Line and today is what counts for me not 2013. if im happy with my return for whatever change they make and my cost effectiveness, Im in. If not...Im out. Just my opinion and that and 3 dollars will get ya a cup of coffee. LOL!

« Reply #298 on: February 16, 2012, 13:45 »
0
To make things worse people join these suspicious sites which undercut pricing and commissions from other established agencies, making room for the recent actions from Fotolia to reduce the commission of several members that submitted to those sites.

what agencies? photodune? depositphotos? how can FT, IS, 123RF be afraid of them? its pure greed nothing else my friend, these agencies do 10x less than them, they have only a strong motive which is their pockets, like 123RF, IS have said here and in the past that they have more buyers, more sales, so why the cuts?? thats not because of new agencies thats for sure! why have IS created the RCs? they were afraid of who back in 2010?

You've already mentioned two agencies, and in the past 6 years there were many others which I don't even bother to remember their names.

And when people support agencies like those it's hard for me to contest any agency using the argument that Fotolia used: "If you don't bother to sell for half the price at another agency, then you won't mind if we cut your commission here"

Even if I know they are doing it for pure greed, it's an unbeatable argument. I'm sorry to say that it makes perfect sense to me!

You also say that they don't pose a threat to other established agencies. Are you kidding? When they reduce the image price they put pressure on the established agencies. Photo buyers are very quick to blackmail an agency pointing to the competition and questioning why they should continue to buy there when they could be licensing the exact same images, with the exact same license for much less!

On Alamy (a traditional agency), I make hundreds of dollars monthly and sometimes pass the $1000 (my cut), and I can assure you that this type of pressure has reduced the average sale price by 65% since 2007. Even if Alamy gives a much broader and naturally much more expensive RF License than Micro, they were forced to drop the prices.

Buyers may be bluffing and intending in fact to continue to shop there, but the threatened agency doesn't know that and will not upset the buyers just for fun.

Summing up, don't give weapons that your "enemies" (unfortunately some agencies became enemies, instead of partners) can use against you! Some people accuse agencies of being greedy, when they themselves with the greed to increase their monthly income by $5 upload thousands of images to every crappy and suspicious site that comes up! Who's more greedy?

Microstock is a business. Unfortunatly many people look at it like a gold rush, kicking every rock in search of the last gold nugget like there's no tomorrow.

I believe you havent read what I have just said :)

FIRST photodune is open with pictures since August 2012 (not September 2010 when IS announced the RCs and FT just a few months after) one thing as nothing to do with other, it has YEARS in between
SECOND they dont even have a subscription plan which actually makes a nice RPD agency, lowest is 33 cents but my RPD with 185 sales is close to 1$
THIRD how are you so sure 123RF is doing this because of other agencies prices? if so tell why they said here that sales/buyers are growing? dont tell me you have inside details lol

honestly I dont understand why you guys come here with non fundamented stuff when there isnt a positive argument to talk about.. BUT yes can make them look pretty, perhaps you will get somekind of reward, seriously dont blame the agencies/contributors

« Reply #299 on: February 16, 2012, 14:01 »
0
honestly I dont understand why you guys come here with non fundamented stuff when there isnt a positive argument to talk about.. BUT yes can make them look pretty, perhaps you will get somekind of reward, seriously dont blame the agencies/contributors

Luis, it is well known that some of us were directly contacted by one of the big players and told that there were certain small players we contributed to that were undercutting their business.  Agree with that argument or not, it has happened, and it is a real concern that we all have to keep in mind.  The older, big players ARE feeling threatened by the newer, small players.  And if you support the new agencies offering lower prices and commissions, you are helping to drive business away from the older agencies that you also support.  At some point you have to ask yourself if that is smart business.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
56 Replies
17026 Views
Last post February 25, 2010, 14:01
by BaldricksTrousers
7 Replies
3923 Views
Last post September 09, 2010, 20:11
by Freedom
38 Replies
6989 Views
Last post August 29, 2012, 12:00
by CD123
1 Replies
1847 Views
Last post December 31, 2014, 08:05
by klsbear
18 Replies
2910 Views
Last post November 22, 2018, 14:19
by pkphotos

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results