|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - obj owl
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 25
151
« on: April 08, 2019, 14:09 »
i am not exclusive, but this video is only in pond5. They still offer 50% because they will start exclusivity 8 april.
they gave 50% after they cut 30% so $99 sale, i get $35...
I'd say that's out of order, they have no need to discount any item only to be found on Pond5 given that they can now price match against the lowest price anywhere. I feel they may come a cropper if they try that with exclusive content without the consent of the contributor.
I didn't understand what you were writing at first. Maybe I don't still. Pond5 will price match of a same image, at the lowest price found anywhere else? Not sure I understand leox83 either. If the image was only on Pond5, not under exclusive terms, I read it as, they discounted his set price. Do they do that?
I do understand the last words, I think? They should hold the prices what we set them at for exclusive, and not offer discounts. Right?
He got less than 40% when the rate at the time of the sale was 50%, that suggests discounting, maybe there is another explanation. All the other agencies do it, but it's not always transparent. Pond5 you would think would not do it as it nullifies the point of setting your own price, which is an attraction to the contributor. They have enterprise customers and are always offering some discount to first time buyers, question is do they take the discount on the chin or do they pass it down to the contributor. They also test prices, which is another reason you may make less than thought you would. From the POND5 CONTRIBUTOR AGREEMENT "4. Special Terms for Video I. If you do not enroll in the Exclusivity Program, notwithstanding section 3.b. above, you shall not set the price for an item of video Content that is higher than the lowest price for which the same (or substantially the same) Content item is offered by or on any Other Marketplace, and if we discover that the Content item is offered at a lower price by or on any Other Marketplace, we may change the price of your content in our marketplace." As you can see with the new structure they now have the ability to price match any video in their collection sold at other agencies, a unique selling point maybe, at least the only one to be able to do it transparently (as long as they don't discount, which would muddy the waters). Whereas before they were hamstrung by contributors setting high prices making them noncompetitive, now they can say they are the cheapest in the business for all their content if they use their ability to price match.
152
« on: April 08, 2019, 12:53 »
Which sites pay a higher percentage?
They don't market themselves as "caring so much about artists"
I think the problem was that contributors would use Pond5 to get premium prices (prices above the market average) while at the same time selling the same product elsewhere dirt cheap. Caring for contributors just made them look stupid.
153
« on: April 07, 2019, 12:57 »
i am not exclusive, but this video is only in pond5. They still offer 50% because they will start exclusivity 8 april.
they gave 50% after they cut 30% so $99 sale, i get $35...
I'd say that's out of order, they have no need to discount any item only to be found on Pond5 given that they can now price match against the lowest price anywhere. I feel they may come a cropper if they try that with exclusive content without the consent of the contributor.
154
« on: April 06, 2019, 17:07 »
Today i had a sale in Pond5.
https://www.pond5.com/stock-footage/75806859/pangea-continents-drifting.html
it is priced $99. They cut it to $71.1. And i got just $35...So my %50 is just %35....
How can we trust Pond5 when we go exclusive??? they can cut 30% whenever they need. This is happening to me very frequently... 6 months of trust seems very dangrous...[/font]
Have you gone exclusive or do you have the item for sale cheaper elsewhere?
155
« on: April 05, 2019, 12:54 »
156
« on: April 05, 2019, 12:33 »
Copy paste from another topic:
OK, after I slept this over, after long conversation with IRS yesterday I would like to share my experience and knowledge to everyone concerned about AdobeStock, 1042s forms and taxes, and there are people who asked me about that so I would like to say it public for everyone who wants to know. I am talking only about withheld tax when adobe was US-based company for non us contributors, nothing else.
I need to be fair to AdobeStock, as I already wrote on this topic before, they are becoming friendly stock company and getting better earner at least for me. After I wrote my concern about getting paid from Adobe Canada, and not getting 1042s form from them, just signed letters, even that's contrary from what is stated on irs.gov official site, we can use that letter along with other sites 1042s form for tax return, and as long as we are getting adobestock withheld tax returned there is nothing to worry about.
That's it from me about this theme.
Good news, and being in the US I was totally baffled by the whole situation. So as long as the IRS accept "the letter" everyone is fine.
Everyone is fine except for the Canadian tax authorities who are not getting their withholding tax.
157
« on: April 04, 2019, 18:56 »
Yes, because contributors keep supplying them, I don't deny your pessimism, but it's not the lower paying sites that are to blame it's contributors and the answer is in their hands.
I wouldn't call it pessimism, rather understanding of the law of supply and demand. Laws of economics work because they operate within large groups of people with different interests. Just because one person's interests aren't met doesn't mean that there isn't a huge group of people whose interests are fully satisfied.
Well if contributors are following the gibberish you call the Laws of Economics no wonder they are in a mess.
158
« on: April 04, 2019, 13:02 »
...As a result, also all existing contributors had to accept the terms of use dated June 2018 upon login to the portal.
Kirsten,
Thank you for explaining the background of this login surprise for contributors. However benign the intentions were here, I think this highlights an area which would really benefit from improvement in contributor communications.
At least two other agencies - Shutterstock and Alamy - provide clear explanations of what changed whenever the upload agreement/contributor terms of use are updated. As these documents are long and dense, it is hard otherwise to figure out what the changes are. They also send contributors email, as well as information on the contributor web site prior to requiring acceptance of the new terms.
It really helps to build trust with contributors when the agencies communicate with us over pricing, licensing and upload/contract changes.
Examples, FYI
Shutterstock terms - note the helpful summaries of each section on the right
https://submit.shutterstock.com/legal/terms
SS summary of changes the last time they happened in 2015
https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/2015-contributor-terms-of-service-updates
Alamy's terms and their contract change record
https://www.alamy.com/terms/contributor.asp
https://www.alamy.com/terms/contributor-contract-changes.asp
Hi Jo Ann,
That's some very solid feedback and I'm sure Kirsten has recorded it. This is similar to what we do when we update Creative Cloud.
Thanks!
Dennis
Dennis, you have a contributor account, you know it's not on when you sign in to upload something and you get hit in the face with "check this box to say you have read the terms and conditions". You haven't got time to read minute complicated documents on the fly, but you have to check the box regardless, it was a cheap trick and unnecessary. Not solid feedback maybe, but in lieu of an apology, which Kirsten didn't quite manage, it's what you get.
159
« on: April 04, 2019, 12:37 »
Is this you? http://alexmaxim.ca/
Yes, my old portfolio website. Let's keep the poll impersonal. I don't want any bias.
Knowing who you are makes it seem like you are more serious. My first thought was this is a strange question to be asking for someone who has a plan. It seems very arbitrary. I think the Stocksy model is a good one.
Yes, I think they have a good approach, being a co-op and highly selective. I don't agree with the RF license model that much. And I usually stay away from exclusive deals. They are very appealing to agencies, that's true, to have unique content, who wouldn't want to. But they take the distribution rights away from photographers. Maybe it's fine with most photographers, though. I don't know.
You want to be another RM distributor with the contributor taking a cut from a cut, don't you think that there are enough of them around. If that's the case 80/20.
160
« on: April 04, 2019, 11:55 »
I don't follow. If everyone chose to put their work on the highest paying sites then the lower paying sites would go out of business. For the most part they don't own any of the supply, we do.
In theory. It really sounds great.
But you can't have one perfect store where every customer would be happy to shop forever and the management won't go crazy next month for whatever reasons.
It's an utopia.
I'm not saying that. If lots of people move to a higher paying site then other sites will pay more to stop losing content, a race to the top instead of a race to the bottom.
The risk is that buyers will find the content they need from lower paying sites and move there. That seems to be the more likely outcome based on the evidence.
Yes, because contributors keep supplying them, I don't deny your pessimism, but it's not the lower paying sites that are to blame it's contributors and the answer is in their hands.
161
« on: April 04, 2019, 10:01 »
Agencies and buyers are not the problem, it's contributors who undervalue their work, they could sell at 50% at a reasonable price, but they choose not to.
We all can choose to sell at 90-100% at our own shops. Why do we choose not to? And are you sure you will be able to sell with even 30% profit after all the business expenses?
Maybe because the reason why there is no sales at 50% sites is that they don't have money for a good marketing?
Point is that our competitors, other contributors, choose to sell at 15%. I can't compete with that.
162
« on: April 04, 2019, 09:50 »
Agencies and buyers are not the problem, it's contributors who undervalue their work, they could sell at 50% at a reasonable price, but they choose not to.
163
« on: April 03, 2019, 17:59 »
I believe it should be a place that offers inspections. You have to protect the customer from our mistakes and make sure there is a minimum level of quality. Also if the place offers legal guarantuees with an extended license that would be useful for the customer as well. Also somebody with professional international accounting, especially for eu sales tax and also data protection regulation
So I do believe it would need to be some kind of existing stock agency that would welcome exclusive content from people who are ready to self market via social media.
These things dont come for free.
Sounds like a description of Pond5 to me. Form a syndicate or two, one for Premium and one for the chaff and you are ready to self market via social media. Trouble is finding enough people to take part, but everybody should do it.
164
« on: April 03, 2019, 15:35 »
Why would we get US 1042s forms from a Canadian company? Canada have their own tax treaties, which should applicable.
165
« on: March 24, 2019, 08:28 »
What will happen when in 1-3-5 years Pond5 will sell for the same $1.50? But you won't be able to get an additional income from anywhere else and lose all the positions in searches?
Exclusivity is such a short term "win".
Getty is still in business because of their exclusive collection
Exactly, this is Pond5 who needs this to market against Getty, it has nothing to do with "agency is honoring my hard work". This sounds so naive, sorry.
And the next step to "win against Getty" for them will be another "Premium access", and they will shower you with promises again, because "this is the only way to go", because the evil Getty does it...
And doing all that for just 60%... this is unbelievable 
Unbelievable is that you call it just 60%, that's 400% better than Getty. Nobody knows what the future holds at Pond5, but you can hazard a reasonable guess that Istock, shutterstock and most of the rest will only go one way and with it your prices on Pond5 if you stay independent..
166
« on: March 23, 2019, 18:12 »
i hope they go bankrupt...lot of possibility of sales out there without those bigh sucker company...the problem is that if they go bankrupt imagine 00 millions file and more coming toward ss and fotolia...o better they stay there selling for penny to contributor...the problem is already there lot of exclusive seeing there rperd falling down and thinking to leave their exclusive status.
They wont go bankrupt but they might sellout to someone like Visual China Group... like Corbis did.
iStock has already been sold as part of a deal with Visual China Group. All istock uploads and older files are mirrored to veer and vcg.
Have you got a link for that?
The official word was that "VCG is a trusted business partner for Getty Images in China" meaning to get Getty images into the Chinese market.
Which of course led to low prices, mass copying and even them giving images away for free, though after many complaints that was said to have been stopped.
Whatever, it's not the same as being "sold".
It s kept very quiet, it is not in the news as the corbis sale, but every sign shows that the same has happened.
http://aspp.com/10253-2/ iStock uploads are making it quicker onto Veer than own page. Veer was part of the Corbis sale.
Its a partnership murky and dodgy as it maybe VCG do not own Istock.
They don't own Corbis either, they were bought by Unity Glory International Ltd, an affiliate of VCG and owned by some of their directors. According to Bloomburg Unity Glory International Ltd. operates as a subsidiary of Huaxia Vision (Tianjin) Information Technology Co., Ltd. You did say murky.
167
« on: March 19, 2019, 17:37 »
As with all rules there are exceptions, you can use NASA images within your work as long as you give them credit.
168
« on: March 15, 2019, 08:57 »
I'm not sure telling people there is a big announcement in a week is the best way to avoid panic!
Get people to anticipate the worst case scenario and let them down gentle with the next worst outcome, tell themselves the outcry could have been worse.
169
« on: March 15, 2019, 08:52 »
170
« on: March 09, 2019, 11:51 »
171
« on: March 07, 2019, 13:18 »
Any images bought or made into a template by anyone remains for sale indefinitely, I just sold one this month that was retrospectively rejected before August 2015.
172
« on: February 25, 2019, 15:18 »
Today they rubbed salt in the wound. A sale from last week was refunded and repurchased for the same price, except they took 20% more of it and I got 20% less. ouch.
How did that work? What I mean is, we got a 10% cut, how did they take 20%? I don't understand.
I sold an image on the 20th Feb for $200 of which my cut is 50% or $100. If I had sold that image on the 21st Feb my cut would be 10% less at 40% equals $80. As you can see that would be 20% less than the day before. They may be only taking 10% more commission, but they have got 20% of your earnings.
173
« on: February 23, 2019, 10:24 »
If large numbers of buyers start using s to buy credits, because it's cheaper they will change it, but it's all about the buyers not us. It's swings and roundabouts anyway, payments in dollars are well up on a few years ago, because of the drop in the pound.
174
« on: February 21, 2019, 13:08 »
I received an e-mail from Mostphotos to change my e-mail and gave my address to get instructions on how to reset it. No E-mail!! Is this a Hack? Thanks
Mostphotos has sent an email out saying it is a scam.
175
« on: February 20, 2019, 15:10 »
My thoughts on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxJnrHktl9g&t=2s
No concise summary to share with the forum? I have no wish to watch anybody's utube channel or read someone's blog to find out their thoughts, that's why I come here.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 25
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
