pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: FAA now talking about 'subscriptions'  (Read 18548 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 24, 2016, 10:50 »
+5
When logging in, FAA contributors are now being asked for a 'yes' or 'no' opinion on a new plan.  Here's an excerpt:


"Fine Art America is in discussions with a major electronics manufacturer about co-developing a large-format digital picture frame which would hang on a wall and allow the owner of the picture frame to stream FAA images to the picture frame using an iPhone or Android phone.

The owner of the picture frame would pay a monthly subscription fee (e.g. $10 per month) for the ability to stream any image from Fine Art America to the picture frame at any time.
 
You (the image owner) would get paid based on how many minutes your image appeared on the digital picture frame during a given month.   Please read below for complete details."



Needless to say, your markup is ignored - you have no control over pricing, you get whatever they decide to pay, and I assume that will be pennies.   I couldn't click "NO" fast enough.   But watch the FAA forum for gushy posts thanking "Sean" for this "great new opportunity".
« Last Edit: March 24, 2016, 12:43 by stockastic »


U11


« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2016, 11:03 »
0
assuming some customer will stream only 1000 pictures a month and you will get all his money for your only picture he downloaded you'll end up with 1 cent.
Is my calculation too pessimistic?

« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2016, 11:05 »
+2
assuming some customer will stream only 1000 pictures a month and you will get all his money for your only picture he downloaded you'll end up with 1 cent.
Is my calculation too pessimistic?

Maybe too optimistic :-).  I'm guessing about 90% of the "subscription fee" goes to FAA and its new partner, so you and the rest of the contributors who got downloaded will split up that remaining $1.   
« Last Edit: March 24, 2016, 11:10 by stockastic »

U11


« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2016, 11:12 »
0
How many pictures FAA have?
Now i think that to get 1 cent from every subscriber is practically impossible

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2016, 11:35 »
+8
Ughhh. I knew this was coming at some point. And this sucks because FAA has really been doing well for me. Subscriptions eventually destroy everything for contributors of every artist industry. I'm not interested in going from selling $50, $500 and $5,000 prints to getting a few cents a month.

« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2016, 11:52 »
+3
I'm not concerned about this -it's only floating an idea for something that they may try in the future (and would be optional anyway).
Realistically, how many people are going to fork out a monthly subscription to have FAA images displayed on a screen on the wall? I already have a screen that gives me constantly changing images for free -it's called a television :)
What's interesting is that this great new idea is very similar to what Bill Gates had in mind many years ago when he founded what was to become Corbis. That went well, as we know ;)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corbis
« Last Edit: March 24, 2016, 11:55 by Newsfocus1 »

Shelma1

« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2016, 11:58 »
+2
I can't imagine there'd be a huge market for individuals, but I could see them pitching this concept to large venues who run major events...concerts, conferences, etc. So your image would be behind Beyonce and you'd make a penny.

« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2016, 12:04 »
+4
how optomistic are these numbers used in their 'example'?

For example, let's say that the royalty rate is set at $0.00005 per minute per image.   That number looks very low, but it adds up quickly. Let's see how it works.There are roughly 43,200 minutes in an average month.   If a buyer selects your image and displays it on his digital picture frame for the entire month, you would earn $0.00005 x 43,200 = $2.16 from that single device for that month.Now, if 100 different buyers did that, you would earn $216 for the month.   That's not an enormous number, but it's not too shabby, either.   Keep in mind, the digital picture frame is being manufactured by a very well known electronics manufacturer who will be putting their full marketing might behind making this product a success and getting it into as many homes as possible.Let's say that there are 100,000+ digital picture frames out there in the world.   If Fine Art America and the electronics manufacturer decide to feature one of your images and promote it to all of the digital frame owners via a newsletter or a mobile push-notification, it's entirely possible that 1,000+ of them might decide to stream your image to their digital picture frames.   That starts to generate serious revenue very quickly.

i think only faa will be making money on this, and as usual the artists/suppliers get screwged

« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2016, 12:06 »
0
Made me think of this from 1989 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corbis#History

« Reply #9 on: March 24, 2016, 12:25 »
+2
I have opted out.

« Reply #10 on: March 24, 2016, 12:57 »
+6
If this ever really happens, my guess is that it would be aimed at places like doctors' offices and hotels.  Those people won't want to spend time combing through FAA's search results.  Instead, FAA will offer them "playlists" full of proven sellers, probably with nice themes like "peaceful landscapes",  "urban nights",  "country living", "island tranquility" etc.   There would probably be dozens of photos in a playlist so even if you're lucky enough to get in one, you'll get next to nothing.   Established sellers, already in FAA's "collections", might make some money, say by getting into a hotel chain. 

This was inevitable, as display prices come down.  For most of us it will be just another way for a reseller to make money off of our work without paying us anything, while reducing its perceived value.





« Reply #11 on: March 24, 2016, 13:39 »
+7
I said no. As long as there was an opt out, in general I'd be OK with an agency trying something new. However this seems to be a rather sad attempt to replace revenue for prints with micro-revenue for streaming images to a digital frame.

Their survey said something about everyone having digital frames. Not only do I not have one, I don't know anyone who does (my brother in law gave his parents one many years ago but they don't use it and I think it's been tossed).

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/technology/why-digital-photo-frames-became-bargain-bin-jokes/

https://www.consumersdigest.com/electronics/article/digital-photo-frames-fading-from-view

So FAA's site looks like it was built 10 years ago. They are trying to add junky products like pillows and phone cases. They lurched into licensing (I sold one) without really having a clue what they were doing. Print sales have dropped off for me (I think November was the last one).

It's hard to get excited about them trying a partnership tied to a failed product category that delivers minuscule revenues to us (where we have no pricing control).

And even if I did have a digital picture frame, I'd want pictures of my family, places I'd been, etc., not some art from FAA...

Edited to add a link to this article about Kilo from art.com; perhaps this is what got FAA all fired up?

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home/klio-4k-frame-augments-digital-art/

"We're there for the next big thing in the history of art" - big claim, but I don't know why you couldn't view anything they're showing on a TV connected to a Roku... This is their promotional video for Kilo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgxKcqazXkk
« Last Edit: March 24, 2016, 13:50 by Jo Ann Snover »

Shelma1

« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2016, 14:02 »
+4
I bought a digital frame years ago for my mom when she was in a nursing home, but couldn't get it to work. My friend has one and uses it to showcase pictures she snaps of her family and her vacations. But she's an amateur photographer and is obsessed with creating photo books, photo albums, etc.

 Why would the average person want to stream stock photos? especially if they had to pay a subscription?

« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2016, 14:05 »
0
The next big thing, I hope, lies in fine art, and not just pixels.  ::)
« Last Edit: March 24, 2016, 14:43 by Freedom »

« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2016, 14:07 »
+6
The guy behind FAA seems to have a 5 minute attention span. Every couple of months he announces some big new 'opportunity'.   "Designer discounts", image licensing, shower curtains, catalog sales through retail stores... and now electronic subscriptions.   Anything except helping us sell what we want to sell at the price we want to get.


« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2016, 14:26 »
+4
The guy behind FAA seems to have a 5 minute attention span. Every couple of months he announces some big new 'opportunity'.   "Designer discounts", image licensing, shower curtains, catalog sales through retail stores... and now electronic subscriptions.   Anything except helping us sell what we want to sell at the price we want to get.

Looking for ways to make his next million on the backs of bonehead, consenting peons

Chichikov

« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2016, 15:08 »
+1
When logging in, FAA contributors are now being asked for a 'yes' or 'no' opinion on a new plan.  Here's an excerpt:

I have tried to logout and re login but no message asks me nothing.
And From some days (weeks maybe?) when I connect to FAA the URL is pixels.com


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2016, 15:17 »
0
Said No.
Possibly won't rejoin FAA when my payment becomes due next Jan.

« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2016, 15:52 »
0
...Possibly won't rejoin FAA when my payment becomes due next Jan.

I didn't this January. I got some message that they'd remove all but the first 25 images, but it hasn't yet happened...

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #19 on: March 24, 2016, 16:06 »
0
...Possibly won't rejoin FAA when my payment becomes due next Jan.

I didn't this January. I got some message that they'd remove all but the first 25 images, but it hasn't yet happened...
Gosh, last year my bank card had changed and I forgot, so it didn't 'collect', and my images all disappeared instantly.
Actually, I don't know how they got the money this year, as I checked and I don't have a direct debit or standing order. I'll need to block it with my bank if I'm leaving. I'll put a note in my diary!

« Reply #20 on: March 24, 2016, 17:20 »
0
...Possibly won't rejoin FAA when my payment becomes due next Jan.

I didn't this January. I got some message that they'd remove all but the first 25 images, but it hasn't yet happened...
Gosh, last year my bank card had changed and I forgot, so it didn't 'collect', and my images all disappeared instantly.
Actually, I don't know how they got the money this year, as I checked and I don't have a direct debit or standing order. I'll need to block it with my bank if I'm leaving. I'll put a note in my diary!

It was good fortune that I was able to stop. A year ago I had tried to have them remove the credit card from my account so they could not auto-renew. Even with a long-ish conversation with support they said that wasn't possible (which is bollocks as I know it is).

However, the credit card expiration date was last year sometime so I never updated the data with FAA. I got a message saying that they'd been unable to charge my card and please update the info. I ignored that for a bit and when I finally clicked "Cancel" it told me the images would be removed. I'm sure they eventually will be, but so far they're still there.

« Reply #21 on: March 24, 2016, 22:25 »
+5
FAA needs to spend more time building clientele to buy prints not new products.   Instead they expect contributors to promote FAA.

« Reply #22 on: March 25, 2016, 17:21 »
+2
Well I was wrong about one thing - most of the responses on the FAA forum have been negative.  Not that this guy has ever shown any response to contributor input or suggestions.

It may never happen and turn out to be just another thing for FAA to waste time on instead of fixing the obvious problems and issues with the web site.

« Reply #23 on: March 26, 2016, 04:26 »
0
jo ann, your photos will be there, only your first 25 will be displayed and for sale to a buyer. check what you see when you log out and look at your portfolio

« Reply #24 on: March 29, 2016, 11:58 »
0
jo ann, your photos will be there, only your first 25 will be displayed and for sale to a buyer. check what you see when you log out and look at your portfolio

I checked just now, and not logged in I can see images in search and then when I select one and then click on my name, all the images are displayed. I haven't tried to buy anything, so possibly I wouldn't be able to.

I'm guessing they've fallen behind on the updates that would remove items from search and that it will happen at some point.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
15 Replies
7598 Views
Last post June 18, 2006, 13:55
by Quevaal
16 Replies
9191 Views
Last post February 22, 2017, 19:16
by stockastic
11 Replies
5879 Views
Last post March 10, 2020, 07:54
by Mumut Greenstripe
33 Replies
5689 Views
Last post June 08, 2020, 17:59
by Jo Ann Snover
1 Replies
2113 Views
Last post June 10, 2020, 10:39
by whtvr

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle