MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Realistic price to sell a non-exclusive perpetual license to Getty?  (Read 662 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 08, 2022, 01:42 »
+1
Getty got in touch with me asking to buy non-exclusive perpetual licenses for over 1000 of my photos at a high single digit USD price per photo. This would mean that I am allowed to keep selling these photos through other channels, however Getty is allowed to sell the photos through all their websites for eternity without ever having to pay me for it again.

Through a bit of back and forth, I was able to almost double their initial offer per asset. They always raise their offer by just a dollar or two at a time and I feel like they are still trying to low ball me, however when I don't respond to an email within a couple of days they get in touch to remind me of the offer that's on the table so they are definitely keen to seal the deal. My main problem is that I have absolutely no idea what a realistic price for a non-exclusive perpetual license would be, $15, $25, $50 per asset, I just don't know.

Hence, my question to you: Does anybody have prior experience with this sort of license and would be willing to share a ballpark figure of what you were able to negotiate?


« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2022, 05:16 »
+5
Several people have also gotten this offer. DON'T DO IT!

Their offer is beyond pathetic (single figure, often less than a standard license sale). They have a big market share will exploit it to the max. Last time they got hold of some images (that time by just helping themselves) sales for the ones they appropriated completely dried up.

Compare it to Adobe's $5 for 1 year offer. Getty also offered it in the worst way possible. Not letting you opt out any of the images and a rude as heck "take it or leave it" attitude. They will never budge to a reasonable price, like $50+ per image.

« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2022, 09:01 »
0
Thanks for your answer, I definitely agree that Getty comes into it with a take it or leave it attitude that left a bad taste. Also I have long been unhappy with the pathetic money I have been making on iStock when compared to shutterstock or adobe so this might be the right motivation to remove my portfolio all together from iStock.

A couple more questions about what you wrote. When you say "sales for the ones they appropriated completely dried up" you are talking about the sales of that particular image on other platforms such as shutterstock etc. dried up? On Getty the sales would obviously dry up because they wouldn't need to report sales to you anymore since they have the perpetual license right? As for the Adobe $5 per 1 year offer, what exactly is that about? So far I have uploaded my portfolio on Adobe Stock and make a couple hundred $ every month but everything I make is based on how many pictures I sell. Does Adobe have another licensing deal going where they offer you a flat $5 per image to sell that image for 1 year?

Thanks for your help.

« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2022, 10:10 »
+4
For many of my images I wouldn't accepted 50$ either

I rejected them and feel very good about it.

« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2022, 10:25 »
+1
When you say "sales for the ones they appropriated completely dried up"

...As for the Adobe $5 per 1 year offer, what exactly is that about? ...Does Adobe have another licensing deal going where they offer you a flat $5 per image to sell that image for 1 year?

1. The images Getty took and gave away some years ago stopped selling on other sites, don't know if that was just my experience.

2. Adobe offered $5 per image to let them add it to their free collection for one year. They let you choose which to offer from a selection. Not my cup of tea, but they did it in a much more contributor friendly way, and for more money.








f8

« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2022, 10:33 »
+2
When you say "sales for the ones they appropriated completely dried up"

...As for the Adobe $5 per 1 year offer, what exactly is that about? ...Does Adobe have another licensing deal going where they offer you a flat $5 per image to sell that image for 1 year?

1. The images Getty took and gave away some years ago stopped selling on other sites, don't know if that was just my experience.

2. Adobe offered $5 per image to let them add it to their free collection for one year. They let you choose which to offer from a selection. Not my cup of tea, but they did it in a much more contributor friendly way, and for more money.

both are shameless and predatory. you are shooting yourself in the foot with these deals.

« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2022, 10:57 »
+1
When you say "sales for the ones they appropriated completely dried up"

...As for the Adobe $5 per 1 year offer, what exactly is that about? ...Does Adobe have another licensing deal going where they offer you a flat $5 per image to sell that image for 1 year?

1. The images Getty took and gave away some years ago stopped selling on other sites, don't know if that was just my experience.

2. Adobe offered $5 per image to let them add it to their free collection for one year. They let you choose which to offer from a selection. Not my cup of tea, but they did it in a much more contributor friendly way, and for more money.

both are shameless and predatory. you are shooting yourself in the foot with these deals.

Agree, I wouldn't go for either. Just pointing out Getty is offering even less for MANY more rights.

« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2022, 11:10 »
0
When you say "sales for the ones they appropriated completely dried up"

...As for the Adobe $5 per 1 year offer, what exactly is that about? ...Does Adobe have another licensing deal going where they offer you a flat $5 per image to sell that image for 1 year?

1. The images Getty took and gave away some years ago stopped selling on other sites, don't know if that was just my experience.

2. Adobe offered $5 per image to let them add it to their free collection for one year. They let you choose which to offer from a selection. Not my cup of tea, but they did it in a much more contributor friendly way, and for more money.

Interesting! When I did my estimations I only compared the one time yield to what those images were earning me on iStock, extrapolated for the next decades. Unsurprisingly, since iStock often pays just a few cents per sale, the one time payment came out ahead in this calculation. However, if like you say sales of those images on other platforms die down as a consequence, this would look very different.

« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2022, 12:10 »
+2
Several people have also gotten this offer. DON'T DO IT!

Their offer is beyond pathetic (single figure, often less than a standard license sale). They have a big market share will exploit it to the max. Last time they got hold of some images (that time by just helping themselves) sales for the ones they appropriated completely dried up.

Compare it to Adobe's $5 for 1 year offer. Getty also offered it in the worst way possible. Not letting you opt out any of the images and a rude as heck "take it or leave it" attitude. They will never budge to a reasonable price, like $50+ per image.

Actually, depending on their long-term performance $50 might not be sufficient.
I just did the math for my port: since inception (~9 years), my average revenue per photo is ~$150. This is important in case your photos may be offered for free.

If Getty will continue to sell them as usual, then what matters is your Getty-only all-time revenue per photo (or over a shelf-life duration you are ok with).  Mine is ~$25/photo over ~ 9 years.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2022, 13:12 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2022, 13:49 »
+1
Several people have also gotten this offer. DON'T DO IT!

Their offer is beyond pathetic (single figure, often less than a standard license sale). They have a big market share will exploit it to the max. Last time they got hold of some images (that time by just helping themselves) sales for the ones they appropriated completely dried up.

Compare it to Adobe's $5 for 1 year offer. Getty also offered it in the worst way possible. Not letting you opt out any of the images and a rude as heck "take it or leave it" attitude. They will never budge to a reasonable price, like $50+ per image.

Actually, depending on their long-term performance $50 might not be sufficient.
I just did the math for my port: since inception (~9 years), my average revenue per photo is ~$150. This is important in case your photos may be offered for free.

If Getty will continue to sell them as usual, then what matters is your Getty-only all-time revenue per photo (or over a shelf-life duration you are ok with).  Mine is ~$25/photo over ~ 9 years.
Good point. It's a lot less than many extended license sales and gives away a lot more rights.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
7437 Views
Last post November 17, 2006, 18:36
by madelaide
2 Replies
2611 Views
Last post March 04, 2009, 06:04
by Fred
1 Replies
3539 Views
Last post April 02, 2012, 14:27
by heywoody
13 Replies
5528 Views
Last post April 15, 2014, 10:17
by Morphart
65 Replies
15200 Views
Last post October 28, 2017, 01:01
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle