Is it not just possible that IS has come to the realisation that peed off contributors might not be the best thing for their bottom line?  Maybe some of the responses will actually be taken on board?

Paul,

To be honest it wasn�t a term that I was familiar with either so looked up the origins.  I�m not one of those folks who are naive enough to believe all men are equal but I don�t hold with one group of people been treated less favourably than another because of accident of birth, race, creed or because they happened to be in a certain place at a certain time.  Grandfathering is pure and simply a divide and conquer approach by the unscrupulous that appeals to people�s greed (or other equally natural but not very laudable traits) so they are happy enough to sell those coming after them down the river as long as they themselves are not affected.

The good news is that it won't be the last 

Ireland is not 3rd world (well, not regarded as such even if it's getting close) - they wouldn't accept a driving licence with address & photo and ended up having to submit passport 

Quote from: sharpshot on November 30, 2012, 12:27

Quote from: Mantis on November 30, 2012, 10:22

Wonder who is going to absorb the 50% hit?

I presume it will be us, unless something really has changed with FT.

I'm not a FT fanboy at all, but in this case I would say you're wrong.
FT has always payed out a fixed payout per credit. Essentially they are not paying a fixed royalty percentage on the sales price, but on the number of credits. There have been numerous discussions about that on here (because that means any currency conversions or different priced credit packages will lead to a payout different from the "official" percentage).
In such a case (they are giving away credits) that system means they effectively double our royalties on these sales.
As long as they stick to their current practice, but I haven't seen anything else in the last five years...

Yes, they (& SS) sell paint like a hardware store

http://www.ityt.com/forums/f24/if-the-airlines-sold-paint-2085.html

Sorry, doesn't qualify - double digit figure 

According to the letter from Shutter there are around 35,000 so I would think fotolia to have about the same? Is my logic flawed?

That sounds about right - may be more as FT has no entrance exam but probably not far off in terms of folks with actual ports.

Quote from: leaf on November 19, 2012, 17:38

I think it would be really interested to see a name attached with a review on Shutterstock.  To get to see who the reviewer was.  The only site that does this (that I know of) is photodune.  kudos to them.

DT does something similar too, when you contact them regarding a rejection, kind of an account manager that contacts the reviewer and then he/she let us know why it was reviewed that way, that said I have given up on that because they are always right

Interesting...  I have never even had a response to a rejection query on DT...

This is FT being discussed and not IS?

Quote from: heywoody on November 14, 2012, 10:41

I was wondering how I would be fixed when the new structure comes in but can't find the details anywhere.  From memory, it was detailed when logging in but now I just see the existing arrangements - wonder if there is a mind change???   

No such luck.  It is still under the captch page.

yeah, captcha not required for login but there it was when i went to check earnings...

ah well, might think again if they at least roll back on the subs element but no uploads in 2013 & port removal shortly after unless there is a massive increase (at least double) in dl nos.  If a lot of the small contributors bale the commission cuts will not result in increased profits.

I have a small number of photos on IS and my Photo+ quota was 10.  I used all those slots, and they're now the only photos that sell.  If I could, I'd make everything Photo+.  There certainly seems to be no point submitting more photos, if I can't also make some of them Photo+.

IS says that your quota is based on the "ratio of your approved files to overall downloads".  That means if I get more photos approved, my Photo+ quota actually goes down - unless they sell, which they apparently won't unless they're Photo+.

Is anyone seeing their Photo+ quota increase over time?

You can - its 15% of your overall port size so you can add 1 for approx every 7 approved

Sean is right as usual about incidental use.  Of course this is a crazy scenario but it�s happened with cars and shoes and now gonna happen with shades.  However, there is an element of swings and roundabouts here - producers of stock imagery are very protective, even paranoid, about their intellectual property which makes it hard to make a case against someone else defending theirs.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/wow-have-you-guys-seen-this/

I think we need to keep something in perspective.  If 35 or 40% is so unfair, I'm curious which sites you think treat you so much more fairly?   Yes, no one likes getting a cut, but when you're happily submitting to so many other agencies giving you well under 40%, how long can you expect 123RF to ignore this competition and continue paying you 50%?

By all means, if you're angry about the cut, exercise your anger by dropping your accounts at 123RF.  But given their position in the poll results (look at the list on the right... they're currently #5 of the 20 ranked agencies) I think very few people will put their money where their mouth is.

The truth is that if you were a business owner in the shoes of 123RF you would probably do the same thing.  You would adjust what you pay your suppliers to reflect the competitive marketplace.  If your suppliers were gladly selling their wares for far less money to your competition, wouldn't you hold their feet to the fire?  Of course, you wouldn't want to risk losing those that were supplying your top-selling products... in fact, you might even give those suppliers a raise to reflect how important they were to you.  But if suppliers of lower-selling products didn't like your new deal and wanted to walk away, you probably wouldn't feel much pain. 

The ball is in our court.  I'm just hoping that after Jan 1, people will make their decision and move on.  You cut the cord or you decide it's a deal you can live with.  Either way, you'll have made a decision and the complaining should stop.

I only signed up this year knowing this was coming so it�s not even about the cut.  The problem is that volumes are very low compared to the top 4, prices are rock bottom and now the commissions will be rock bottom also.  This will be fine for the established folks who keep what they have but very unattractive for anyone new. Critically, the subs rate for the small guy will be abysmal and, coupled with tiny volumes it won�t be worth the effort of unloading even given the painless mechanism and almost 100% acceptance.  IS PP is currently making double what I get from 123 with 10% of the port.