MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: XS Files are GONE  (Read 9604 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #25 on: January 22, 2014, 12:13 »
+1
We will still be getting .09 commission.  It will just cost the customer 2 or more credits for the same file.
How can you get the same commission if the credit cost doubles?
If you got 9c for a 1 credit sale, won't you get 18c for a 2 credit sale, assuming the customer paid the same for the credits?


« Reply #26 on: January 22, 2014, 12:33 »
+2
Seems like a good move to me.

I don't know if it's a good move overall or not, but I have noticed that the last couple of days my sales were about the same but royalties a bit higher.  I hadn't noticed that XS was gone, but that would explain it.  I must have had a large number of XS sales. 

I'm not going to complain about anything that results in (even slightly) higher royalties to contributors.

It seems like volume is dying. At least, for me it is. So, you might as well get as much as is reasonable out of each sale. Realistically, would any of us really join a new site that offers 1 credit sales at 15-20% royalty rates?

Although, maybe we would. Everybody did jump on board of the Stockfresh train to nowhere.

« Reply #27 on: January 22, 2014, 12:34 »
0
It WILL affect any bloggers that have remained with them.  I bet in the big picture they hope to push the bloggers to Thinkstock.  I've noticed a trend to SS these days with bloggers who actually give credit. 

I mean, logically - why give a daily user an XS when they could give them an XXL for the same price?

ShazamImages

  • ShazamImages.com
« Reply #28 on: January 22, 2014, 13:04 »
0
Did they announce this change anywhere?  If so, did they say why they have done this?

« Reply #29 on: January 22, 2014, 13:06 »
+2
The real problem isn't low prices, it's the disgustingly low royalty rates. Even Apple manages to pay 70% to app creators.

Exactly. Apple pays 70% to the creators of iTunes music and the publishers of iBooks too. Not only that but the content creator get to set their own prices. Now that would make microstock interesting.

« Reply #30 on: January 22, 2014, 13:27 »
+2
The real problem isn't low prices, it's the disgustingly low royalty rates. Even Apple manages to pay 70% to app creators.

Exactly. Apple pays 70% to the creators of iTunes music and the publishers of iBooks too. Not only that but the content creator get to set their own prices. Now that would make microstock interesting.

(I think it's the agents who get 70% from iTunes in most cases and not the artists. But I may be wrong.)

Stock royalties are too low IMO. But the Apple app store comparison is not a good one. Yes independent app developers get 70%. And Apple does well out of the App Store but ...

... the App Store is not the business. Apple is in the business of selling hardware. The App Store is one of the main reasons why people buy Apple hardware. The App Store exists to sell iPhones and iPads. Just like iTunes used to exist, primarily, to help sell iPods. The huge success of iOS today is partly because of the apps.

Apple needs for people to continue to choose to primarily develop for iOS. In some cases the makers of brands other than Apple actually pay developers to produce software for their platforms. That is how important apps have become.

« Reply #31 on: January 22, 2014, 13:36 »
+3
And so, which is the business of Amazon? They also pay 70% to kindle direct writers (provided they sell their books between 2.99 and 11), and they don't ask for exclusivity, they just ask you to don't sell cheaper elsewhere.

Ron

« Reply #32 on: January 22, 2014, 13:42 »
0
Did they announce this change anywhere?  If so, did they say why they have done this?
Link is in the OP

« Reply #33 on: January 22, 2014, 13:58 »
0
And so, which is the business of Amazon? They also pay 70% to kindle direct writers (provided they sell their books between 2.99 and 11), and they don't ask for exclusivity, they just ask you to don't sell cheaper elsewhere.

Yep. A different model from the Apple app store. Yes there are some independents and it is possible to collect 70% - but many semi-independent e-book only authors apparently still prefer not to e-publish independently. In many cases that 70% is not going straight to the writer.

Neither of us here has ever bought an independently published Kindle book. And we buy lots of Kindle books. We have 3 Kindles between us. I buy 2 or 3 books every month. In some cases I also buy a paper copy. How much of that 70% is going to the publisher and how much is going to the writer I do not know.

« Reply #34 on: January 22, 2014, 14:07 »
+5
And so, which is the business of Amazon? They also pay 70% to kindle direct writers (provided they sell their books between 2.99 and 11), and they don't ask for exclusivity, they just ask you to don't sell cheaper elsewhere.

Yep. A different model from the Apple app store. Yes there are some independents and it is possible to collect 70% - but many semi-independent e-book only authors apparently still prefer not to e-publish independently. In many cases that 70% is not going straight to the writer.

Neither of us here has ever bought an independently published Kindle book. And we buy lots of Kindle books. We have 3 Kindles between us. I buy 2 or 3 books every month. In some cases I also buy a paper copy. How much of that 70% is going to the publisher and how much is going to the writer I do not know.

I am a book author and I can tell you that during negotiations for my contract the royalties were so low to me, the author, that I decided to publish the book myself. In my case it was 10% of the price of the book minus the production cost of the book. So in my case it would have been (18.95-4.06)x.1, or $1.49 per book royalty.

« Reply #35 on: January 22, 2014, 15:08 »
0
I am a book author and I can tell you that during negotiations for my contract the royalties were so low to me, the author, that I decided to publish the book myself. In my case it was 10% of the price of the book minus the production cost of the book. So in my case it would have been (18.95-4.06)x.1, or $1.49 per book royalty.

Would that have been for Kindle sales ?

ETA: your unit production cost seems very high.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2014, 15:11 by bunhill »

« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2014, 15:30 »
+2
And so, which is the business of Amazon? They also pay 70% to kindle direct writers (provided they sell their books between 2.99 and 11), and they don't ask for exclusivity, they just ask you to don't sell cheaper elsewhere.

Yep. A different model from the Apple app store. Yes there are some independents and it is possible to collect 70% - but many semi-independent e-book only authors apparently still prefer not to e-publish independently. In many cases that 70% is not going straight to the writer.

Neither of us here has ever bought an independently published Kindle book. And we buy lots of Kindle books. We have 3 Kindles between us. I buy 2 or 3 books every month. In some cases I also buy a paper copy. How much of that 70% is going to the publisher and how much is going to the writer I do not know.

When I joined Istock  it was selling L-size images for $1.50 (less with bulk credit discounts) and the artist got 30c, irrespective of the discount. As far as I'm aware they had a profitable business even back then (and a website that actually worked too). Before the sell-out to Getty in Feb 2006, if I remember correctly, they trebled their prices from when I had started. Since then they must have doubled their prices a few times more, making the business ever more profitable, but never once did they think to increase royalty percentages ... in fact they've only ever done the opposite with the RC system, discounts removed from the contributors' payment, etc, etc.

Microstock was a new market and the fact that the agencies were highly profitable, even when prices were a fraction of what they are today, proves that there was plenty of room to pay contributors a far higher royalty than Istock ever paid. Even DT paid a straight 50% for the first couple of years when all images cost $1.

lisafx

« Reply #37 on: January 22, 2014, 16:38 »
0
I am a book author and I can tell you that during negotiations for my contract the royalties were so low to me, the author, that I decided to publish the book myself. In my case it was 10% of the price of the book minus the production cost of the book. So in my case it would have been (18.95-4.06)x.1, or $1.49 per book royalty.

Wow.  That's terrible.  So many people's dream is to become a "published author".  I don't think it's widely known how little they make these days.  Unless of course you're JK Rowling, Stephen King, or some other big name author. 

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #38 on: January 22, 2014, 16:46 »
+1
I've posted before that a former pupil was signed up by the top agent/manager in his music genre, who also manages, inter alia, one of the absolute top current international pop singers. He apparently negotiated 70%, which I was dumbfounded by.
But it seems that he got that percentage to get him to sign up and is being suppressed. His so-called agent isn't working for him, blocks his ideas, hasn't taken forward the projects that were discussed before the contract was signed, and the FP is stranded trying to scrape a living in ways outwith his contract, and wondering when he'll be able to afford a lawyer to get him out of the contract.

« Reply #39 on: January 22, 2014, 17:06 »
0
Wow.  That's terrible.  So many people's dream is to become a "published author".  I don't think it's widely known how little they make these days.  Unless of course you're JK Rowling, Stephen King, or some other big name author.

There is still some hope. A friend of mine got a pretty good book deal last year. I guess if he becomes famous, I can say I knew him when.

« Reply #40 on: January 22, 2014, 17:44 »
+1
I am a book author and I can tell you that during negotiations for my contract the royalties were so low to me, the author, that I decided to publish the book myself. In my case it was 10% of the price of the book minus the production cost of the book. So in my case it would have been (18.95-4.06)x.1, or $1.49 per book royalty.

Would that have been for Kindle sales ?

ETA: your unit production cost seems very high.

It was high because the book was four color with a varnished cover and good paper, high quality binding. (printed in 2000). Not for Kindle.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2014, 17:48 by Mantis »

« Reply #41 on: January 22, 2014, 18:20 »
+3
10-15% is and has been for ages  the norm for books printed and distributed through bookstores. In this case, the publishing houses assumes all the production, promotion  and disttribution costs of one physical product, the book. You can't compare this with stock photo sites. To compare, you must use e-books sold throught the internet. Internet stores give about 70% to indie writers, and between 40 and 55% if it's the e-book version (the internet provider takes his cut also)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
9828 Views
Last post February 02, 2010, 10:45
by Stu49
2 Replies
2076 Views
Last post August 25, 2014, 21:27
by Elenathewise
Old files are now new files?

Started by dpimborough Veer

4 Replies
3637 Views
Last post November 09, 2014, 16:33
by Pixart
26 Replies
12402 Views
Last post February 12, 2019, 22:28
by captain
7 Replies
4481 Views
Last post May 01, 2019, 17:07
by DiscreetDuck

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors