MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: The membership program is a disaster for contributors.  (Read 13984 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ShadySue

« Reply #50 on: June 02, 2016, 13:14 »
+4
...percentage of royalty doesn't matter.  Only thing that matter is how much we get in $.  If they sell for $1000 and give us 10%, it's $100 royalty per clip which is much higher than SS and others.
<sigh>


« Reply #51 on: June 02, 2016, 13:43 »
+1
"thank god for the high clip prices and keeping the market relatively stable. Think what you want about Getty (horrid low % paying co-corporation) but we need the big players to keep prices high and to stabilize the market."

Interesting. Considering you could set your own prices on Pond5 to whatever mystery price Getty decides, or even higher, then take 50% of the sales rather than 20% (is it 20%? who knows?) so, not sure how your point makes sense.

Never netted a $5 video sale on Pond5.

I don't know how many times I've read someone saying how awesome their exclusive deal with iStock seemed to them, until they dropped exclusivity and spread their work around and saw their profits go way up from the terrible % they were getting (even for exclusives it's lower than most). There's just no way to say for sure, without simply assuming, that you're getting the best deal when the terms of the exclusivity of your deal prevents you from putting those same clips, or anything even similar, elsewhere to test the waters.

Think what you want about Getty. They're still greedy, lying thieves. Thank god for honest companies like Pond5 keeping their contributors as equals to the agency and paying us 50%.

 ::)

I'm someone that actually does appreciate it when contributors are putting on the pressure and keeping their good eye on stock companies, including Pond5. And I don't know what happened with you and Pond5 to harbor such constant resentment and criticism. However, I haven't once read where you actually were able to explain a single thing they've said or done that exposes dishonesty, unfairness to the contributor, or anything as bad as you're trying to make them out to be. Plenty of sarcasm, vague negativity and only getting specific with personal swipes at management. You really do usually just come off as someone with a personal gripe, that is trying to exact "revenge" any way you can from some bad experience you have trouble getting over. Criticism with a little substance might hold more weight.

And I just did in my edit ...let me repeat it... where is the newsletter explaining recent reviews mess they promised us over a month ago?
:-)

p.s. plenty of folks not happy with P5, I just happen to be more direct.

« Reply #52 on: June 02, 2016, 13:59 »
+6
...percentage of royalty doesn't matter.  Only thing that matter is how much we get in $.  If they sell for $1000 and give us 10%, it's $100 royalty per clip which is much higher than SS and others.
<sigh>

Yeah, I hear ya.  Sigh.  Reading this thread is exactly like the same discussions about photos from a couple years ago.   And here we are now with the stills market tits up, just like the 'alarmists' and 'complainers' predicted.


« Reply #53 on: June 02, 2016, 14:51 »
+1
...percentage of royalty doesn't matter.  Only thing that matter is how much we get in $.  If they sell for $1000 and give us 10%, it's $100 royalty per clip which is much higher than SS and others.
<sigh>

Yeah, I hear ya.  Sigh.  Reading this thread is exactly like the same discussions about photos from a couple years ago.   And here we are now with the stills market tits up, just like the 'alarmists' and 'complainers' predicted.
Good point: there are a lot of similarities with what happened with the still market a few years ago, but also some differences.
The video market is a much smaller one and most of the customers are professionals (production, Tvs, media, advertising) who really don't care if they pay a clip $79 or $400 or a few 000 like in Getty's case, as long as they find what they want. At the bottom of the market there are maybe the bloggers, but they are only a small part and again they prefer to buy a good clip at $70 than a bad one at $10.
In the still market there are also a lot of individual customers, buying maybe something to post on FB, so lowering the prices to a couple of dollars opened a huge market.
In video prices could have stayed around the $50-100$ per clip for at least a couple of years and then gradually lower to reach single digit in at least 5 years.
P5 membership program is a dumping of unprecedented dimension, bringing overnight the market price for a clip from $70 to single digit. Such a crazy sudden price war never happen in the still market

« Reply #54 on: June 02, 2016, 16:36 »
+5
"thank god for the high clip prices and keeping the market relatively stable. Think what you want about Getty (horrid low % paying co-corporation) but we need the big players to keep prices high and to stabilize the market."

Interesting. Considering you could set your own prices on Pond5 to whatever mystery price Getty decides, or even higher, then take 50% of the sales rather than 20% (is it 20%? who knows?) so, not sure how your point makes sense.

Never netted a $5 video sale on Pond5.

I don't know how many times I've read someone saying how awesome their exclusive deal with iStock seemed to them, until they dropped exclusivity and spread their work around and saw their profits go way up from the terrible % they were getting (even for exclusives it's lower than most). There's just no way to say for sure, without simply assuming, that you're getting the best deal when the terms of the exclusivity of your deal prevents you from putting those same clips, or anything even similar, elsewhere to test the waters.

Think what you want about Getty. They're still greedy, lying thieves. Thank god for honest companies like Pond5 keeping their contributors as equals to the agency and paying us 50%.

 ::)

I'm someone that actually does appreciate it when contributors are putting on the pressure and keeping their good eye on stock companies, including Pond5. And I don't know what happened with you and Pond5 to harbor such constant resentment and criticism. However, I haven't once read where you actually were able to explain a single thing they've said or done that exposes dishonesty, unfairness to the contributor, or anything as bad as you're trying to make them out to be. Plenty of sarcasm, vague negativity and only getting specific with personal swipes at management. You really do usually just come off as someone with a personal gripe, that is trying to exact "revenge" any way you can from some bad experience you have trouble getting over. Criticism with a little substance might hold more weight.

And I just did in my edit ...let me repeat it... where is the newsletter explaining recent reviews mess they promised us over a month ago?
:-)

p.s. plenty of folks not happy with P5, I just happen to be more direct.

That's all you got? A late arriving newsletter? You're kidding, right?

They never dropped royalty rates to an industry low and treated contributors like crap while doing it? (iStock) They never took our money and disappeared? (Revostock) They never added everyone's files to a badly planned subscription model and made it an issue to opt out? (Fotolia) Nope. Pond5 is much worse. They haven't produced a newsletter fast enough for your liking, one in which no timeline for release was ever given to begin with. How dare they. I totally see your point now. They're the devil.

« Reply #55 on: June 02, 2016, 16:37 »
0
$400 clips seem to be selling just fine (at Pond5 and elsewhere) and many sites have been selling $8 footage for years already. Sure, I would rather have Pond5 remove the membership too but I don't think it's the end of the world...

At VB it works really well pulling in lots and lots of customers (they now have about the same traffic as P5) who don't seem to mind at all paying $49-200 for marketplace clips.

« Reply #56 on: June 02, 2016, 20:29 »
+1
Well after my disastrous start to the year at Pond5, March in particular, things have picked up there. I honestly don't think it's the membership program sales themselves that have screwed a lot of people this year but more the dramatic change of the website itself, confusion amongst buyers re: membership etc.

Some saying Pond5 are small player, I'd disagree, they were consistently my best performing agency until things went wrong. Getty seems to be getting stronger but they're royalties can have a huge swing. March I had two clips net me 4 figures each (my share,) April was a big run of $2 - $4 royalties - it all averages out pretty decently there though.

In the future it's going to be increasingly hard for people to make any decent money off standard, easy to replicate footage like cloud timelapses or city skylines. Anyone can shoot that low cost. However find your niche, difficult or tricky shots and there's still decent income to be made and always will be.

Talking of $400 clips, sold one on Pond5 this morning!

« Reply #57 on: June 03, 2016, 00:46 »
0
"thank god for the high clip prices and keeping the market relatively stable. Think what you want about Getty (horrid low % paying co-corporation) but we need the big players to keep prices high and to stabilize the market."

Interesting. Considering you could set your own prices on Pond5 to whatever mystery price Getty decides, or even higher, then take 50% of the sales rather than 20% (is it 20%? who knows?) so, not sure how your point makes sense.

Never netted a $5 video sale on Pond5.

I don't know how many times I've read someone saying how awesome their exclusive deal with iStock seemed to them, until they dropped exclusivity and spread their work around and saw their profits go way up from the terrible % they were getting (even for exclusives it's lower than most). There's just no way to say for sure, without simply assuming, that you're getting the best deal when the terms of the exclusivity of your deal prevents you from putting those same clips, or anything even similar, elsewhere to test the waters.

Think what you want about Getty. They're still greedy, lying thieves. Thank god for honest companies like Pond5 keeping their contributors as equals to the agency and paying us 50%.

 ::)

I'm someone that actually does appreciate it when contributors are putting on the pressure and keeping their good eye on stock companies, including Pond5. And I don't know what happened with you and Pond5 to harbor such constant resentment and criticism. However, I haven't once read where you actually were able to explain a single thing they've said or done that exposes dishonesty, unfairness to the contributor, or anything as bad as you're trying to make them out to be. Plenty of sarcasm, vague negativity and only getting specific with personal swipes at management. You really do usually just come off as someone with a personal gripe, that is trying to exact "revenge" any way you can from some bad experience you have trouble getting over. Criticism with a little substance might hold more weight.

And I just did in my edit ...let me repeat it... where is the newsletter explaining recent reviews mess they promised us over a month ago?
:-)

p.s. plenty of folks not happy with P5, I just happen to be more direct.

That's all you got? A late arriving newsletter? You're kidding, right?

They never dropped royalty rates to an industry low and treated contributors like crap while doing it? (iStock) They never took our money and disappeared? (Revostock) They never added everyone's files to a badly planned subscription model and made it an issue to opt out? (Fotolia) Nope. Pond5 is much worse. They haven't produced a newsletter fast enough for your liking, one in which no timeline for release was ever given to begin with. How dare they. I totally see your point now. They're the devil.

Spot on! Well said.

Trust my words....Comparing them with the worst options around is not going to help them much!
Bro, put your hopes higher than Revo, IStock or Fotolia, and you will see the real pix of P5 nonsense going around last 10 years of their existance.   8)




« Reply #58 on: June 03, 2016, 00:47 »
0
Well after my disastrous start to the year at Pond5, March in particular, things have picked up there. I honestly don't think it's the membership program sales themselves that have screwed a lot of people this year but more the dramatic change of the website itself, confusion amongst buyers re: membership etc.

Some saying Pond5 are small player, I'd disagree, they were consistently my best performing agency until things went wrong. Getty seems to be getting stronger but they're royalties can have a huge swing. March I had two clips net me 4 figures each (my share,) April was a big run of $2 - $4 royalties - it all averages out pretty decently there though.

In the future it's going to be increasingly hard for people to make any decent money off standard, easy to replicate footage like cloud timelapses or city skylines. Anyone can shoot that low cost. However find your niche, difficult or tricky shots and there's still decent income to be made and always will be.

Talking of $400 clips, sold one on Pond5 this morning!

Sincerely happy for you!

« Reply #59 on: June 03, 2016, 02:40 »
+4
"you will see the real pix of P5 nonsense going around last 10 years of their existence."

So far I see their worse crime over 10 years is not delivering on a newsletter in a timely manner.

It's like you're living in house where most of your neighbors are stealing from you, throwing their garbage on your property, bringing down the property value. Yet you ignore those neighbors and take vocal action against a good neighbor with a house painted a color you don't like. It's insanity. You have a personal gripe, something personal went down between you and Pond5 in the past and your goal in life is to smear their name in revenge. There is no substance to any criticisms you've made so far. If there was, I'd be among the first to agree and call them out on it, and not anonymously either.

Why do I care? They are nearly 50% of my livelihood and have been treated me like a partner consistently for over 5 years. No other company has this kind of history. Between you and the iStock/Getty "I wouldn't car if I was making 10%" crowd, I don't think there's anything anyone can say to inject any logic in your heads.

« Reply #60 on: June 03, 2016, 03:13 »
+1
"you will see the real pix of P5 nonsense going around last 10 years of their existence."

So far I see their worse crime over 10 years is not delivering on a newsletter in a timely manner.

It's like you're living in house where most of your neighbors are stealing from you, throwing their garbage on your property, bringing down the property value. Yet you ignore those neighbors and take vocal action against a good neighbor with a house painted a color you don't like. It's insanity. You have a personal gripe, something personal went down between you and Pond5 in the past and your goal in life is to smear their name in revenge. There is no substance to any criticisms you've made so far. If there was, I'd be among the first to agree and call them out on it, and not anonymously either.

Why do I care? They are nearly 50% of my livelihood and have been treated me like a partner consistently for over 5 years. No other company has this kind of history. Between you and the iStock/Getty "I wouldn't car if I was making 10%" crowd, I don't think there's anything anyone can say to inject any logic in your heads.


Thanks for ALL your honest concerns, I will try and get an appointment with a shrink soon.

Meanwhile, the subject of this thread is: The membership program is a disaster for contributors. (PLURAL!!!)

I am very happy for your success and love for P5, BUT "One (or two) swallow doesn't make a summer!"

Also be careful with your prediction skills buddy as you failed with Revostock badly! :-\
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-video/revostock-payments/msg391016/#msg391016

« Reply #61 on: June 03, 2016, 03:46 »
+3
"you will see the real pix of P5 nonsense going around last 10 years of their existence."

So far I see their worse crime over 10 years is not delivering on a newsletter in a timely manner.

It's like you're living in house where most of your neighbors are stealing from you, throwing their garbage on your property, bringing down the property value. Yet you ignore those neighbors and take vocal action against a good neighbor with a house painted a color you don't like. It's insanity. You have a personal gripe, something personal went down between you and Pond5 in the past and your goal in life is to smear their name in revenge. There is no substance to any criticisms you've made so far. If there was, I'd be among the first to agree and call them out on it, and not anonymously either.

Why do I care? They are nearly 50% of my livelihood and have been treated me like a partner consistently for over 5 years. No other company has this kind of history. Between you and the iStock/Getty "I wouldn't car if I was making 10%" crowd, I don't think there's anything anyone can say to inject any logic in your heads.


Thanks for ALL your honest concerns, I will try and get an appointment with a shrink soon.

Meanwhile, the subject of this thread is: The membership program is a disaster for contributors. (PLURAL!!!)

I am very happy for your success and love for P5, BUT "One (or two) swallow doesn't make a summer!"

Also be careful with your prediction skills buddy as you failed with Revostock badly! :-\
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-video/revostock-payments/msg391016/#msg391016


Not sure what your point is, but again, all you do is deflect from the fact you have cited ZERO incidents of Pond5 lying, or ripping us off.

Revostock WAS a good company, until they weren't. They paid 45%. I made a LOT of money from that company over the years they were around. Things changed, we were lied to and many were stolen from at the end, flat out. That's a whole lot different than LETTING a company steal from you on every sale and then bragging about it. (iStock/Getty) Also, I knew the ship was going down and got just about all my money from that dirtbag before he cashed out and split. So maybe you should trust my prediction skills.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-video/so-how-much-money-revostock-owe-you-let's-sum-up-the-total/msg453808/#msg453808

As to the subject of this thread, I am a contributor, so my opinions are just as valid as anyone else's. No less valid that I don't agree with the misguided speculation and vague negativity being spewed on this and other near duplicate forum threads that have no basis in reality, dominated by the same handful of contributors, some just inexperienced, some with an agenda.

But I'm done here. I don't mind a healthy debate, but this is going no where.




 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
49 Replies
9333 Views
Last post March 05, 2016, 04:12
by KnowYourOnions
29 Replies
22114 Views
Last post March 08, 2016, 05:11
by KnowYourOnions
45 Replies
20534 Views
Last post May 18, 2016, 03:10
by increasingdifficulty
8 Replies
5380 Views
Last post May 25, 2016, 00:57
by BlackJack
10 Replies
6373 Views
Last post January 31, 2018, 06:42
by Pablito

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results