MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - OM

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33
751
As Gostwyck suggested a couple of weeks ago, they could be preparing to get 'absorbed' by aliens.
This would be the second law of thermodynamics applied to stock. Ultimately, we will all end up as subs on thinkstock.

Excellent!  :D

It would be funny if it weren't true.

752
Anyway, I'm none the bloody wiser, but to you use an expression from my US colleagues "don't piss down my neck and tell me it's raining".
I'm learning a lot of great English expressions here all the time.  :P In Dutch we say to grease somebody up with his own fat.

Sometimes Dutch is far more expressive though. Take for example, "Teflon Don". "Zo glad als een aal in een emmer snot." ;D

753
As Gostwyck suggested a couple of weeks ago, they could be preparing to get 'absorbed' by aliens. Boosting the bottom line and (maybe it's just me) acceptance rate has been remarkably high since Oct/Nov 2009. "All the better to be eaten with, grandmama." ;)

Beam me up, Scotty.

754
What are "credits awarded"?
Sounds like they are giving it away as a promo tool. Something like printing money.

Similar but subtly different. "We have been able to 'award'  extra credits because our contributors are generously paying for them. It's like the UK team once stated, We are the deciders and we decided that they would."

755
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 17, 2010, 08:44 »
I'm nearly 2 weeks into a subsless existence but it seems like the rate of PpD is dropping off from its previous tempo. It's too short a time to judge and, quite honestly, my portfolio is too small but I'm keeping a wary eye on it.

I'm pretty sure that opting out of subs, even if you could, would impact on the sort-order position of your images and therefore affect PPD sales too. As far as I'm aware a sub-sale still counts for the purposes of assessing the popularity of an image. I doubt that the impact would become evident within a couple weeks though.

The fact that FT were relatively slow to introduce subs (as indeed were IS via Getty/Thinkstock) suggests to me that agencies, generally speaking, don't like subs any more than their contributors do. However there is obviously a significant market for subs and presumably the agencies find them profitable.

Thanks for that info about sort order of images. I've checked on views/per day and there is no detectable change yet. On the other hand, from my tiny portfolio, I was often getting 2 or 3 PPD per day and the odd subs download. PPD sales were regular until I stopped subs. Now I have the feeling that they're less regular. I give it a month and report back with some figures.

756
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 17, 2010, 05:49 »


Yes. I'm getting a feel for things slowly and I have neither the time nor inclination to submit to the other larger agencies just yet.

Ah - that explains it.  Thanks for clearing up my confusion :)

I have a feeling that soon the only way to avoid subs will be to go exclusive somewhere.


Hi Lisa,

I have to say that I'm still having my doubts about canceling subs. I'm nearly 2 weeks into a subsless existence but it seems like the rate of PpD is dropping off from its previous tempo. It's too short a time to judge and, quite honestly, my portfolio is too small but I'm keeping a wary eye on it. I have noticed that the views/newly uploaded images is slower than it was with subs. But I just hate getting 30+ pence for an "L".............that's robbery.

757
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 16, 2010, 16:25 »

Just over one third of my sales are subs/premium subs there but these amount to a total of about 1/10th of my yearly earnings. Only got a small portfolio and have just canceled subs last week.........give it a month and see how it affects regular sales. Sometimes with new uploads, I get the impression (never applied the rigors of statistical analysis to it) that subs sales may lead to real sales sometimes.
Often a subs sale is followed a few hours later with an L or XL sale. Cannot be the same buyer because they already get L size in their subscription. It's puzzling. I'm wondering if subs buyers maybe get a daily view of all new accepted files that are in subs whereas regular buyers have to search for them?????

(my emphasis)
What do you mean you "cancelled subs"?  AFAIK you can't cancel, or opt out of subs on Fotolia unless you are exclusive.  Are you exclusive at Fotolia?  l

For most of us we are stuck with subs on the sites that have them.

Yes. I'm getting a feel for things slowly and I have neither the time nor inclination to submit to the other larger agencies just yet.

758
Adobe Stock / Re: FT partners
« on: February 14, 2010, 11:46 »
I've now moved my images out of subs with FT. Payment for the contributor was just too derisory for the size of image. That won't affect them in any way and I'll have to see if it affects my regular downloads.
Are you saying you opted out of subs on FT? I didn't think that was possible, but if it is, I'm definitely interested in learning how to do it.
OM is probably exclusive there.
Oh, yeah, there is that way.  ;D
Sorry; I completely forgot. Thanks!

I believe you can remove any exclusive photo's if you're part exclusive as well. I'm very small fry, fairly new and still trying to get a feel for microstock.
I depend on studio photography for a living but wonder if I'll be able to supplement my old-age  state pension with micro earnings in a few years time. I just don't have the time or patience to submit to other agencies at the moment. So I'll stick with FT until they screw me once too often. It's only pocket money at the moment and I'm sure that I could find something else to do 'photographically' that would bring in as much or more on a regular basis than micro........just haven't discovered it yet and besides, I'm rather lazy! 

759
Adobe Stock / Re: FT partners
« on: February 13, 2010, 16:56 »
I never read much of the sales information in FT since they stopped showing the buyer's name (so I would see if I could find it in use).  Then today I entered that page and noticed a "Credit for subscription based photo sale by reseller", and found out this subs earnings came from a Norwegian company called Scanpix.

http://scanpix.no/

I can't see the prices in the English page, but there is something in the Norwegian page (Leaf, can you check that?). I also wasn't able to find my imagethere.



The only images I could find on the scanpix site appeared to be designated 'folio RM' when I ran the mouse over them. They had a total of around 21,000 images.

I've now moved my images out of subs with FT. Payment for the contributor was just too derisory for the size of image. That won't affect them in any way and I'll have to see if it affects my regular downloads.

760
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 13, 2010, 07:39 »
I looked over all my sales this year and it's subs, subs, subs and more subs. I was pretty worked up over this deal, but if FT is becoming a subs site maybe I should just give up.

Just over one third of my sales are subs/premium subs there but these amount to a total of about 1/10th of my yearly earnings. Only got a small portfolio and have just canceled subs last week.........give it a month and see how it affects regular sales. Sometimes with new uploads, I get the impression (never applied the rigors of statistical analysis to it) that subs sales may lead to real sales sometimes.
Often a subs sale is followed a few hours later with an L or XL sale. Cannot be the same buyer because they already get L size in their subscription. It's puzzling. I'm wondering if subs buyers maybe get a daily view of all new accepted files that are in subs whereas regular buyers have to search for them?????

761
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia's 28% tax ... Do What ?!?!?!
« on: February 04, 2010, 20:13 »
I'm on UK, requested payment last month, got Paypal through yesterday. No deductions because I filled out W8 (or something form) last year. No ITIN requested. No probs.

762
Adobe Stock / Re: FOTOLIA - NOW PAYING LESS THAN 16% !!!!!!
« on: February 04, 2010, 19:54 »
Ok what i was saying was this and now I know it wouldnt work thats fine (dont whant to be involved in any fruad case !!)

I can buy credits yeah, so I pay 2000 for 3200 credits @ 0.63, they go into my credit balance so I cash them in as a contributor @ 0.75 ........ 400 instant Profit
I know this wouldnt work but it does give you an idea of how much we are getting scewed for !!

For your info Baldricks

Gosh, I hope there are no Wall Street types reading your post Warren........they'll all want to join as a contributor and do what you describe.  :D
Nothing better than arbitrage for sitting on your bottom all day in front of a monitor and raking in the cash for no productive work!

Seriously though, i wonder if FT's raised rates for buyers will actually result in a loss of business if other competing sites appear cheaper than FT. Now that would be a double whammy for contributors.........less buyers due to a price hike and less commissions for contributors because FT has 'made it so' by order of the captain.

763
Adobe Stock / Re: FOTOLIA - NOW PAYING LESS THAN 16% !!!!!!
« on: February 03, 2010, 18:53 »
Im a contributor from Spain, and i get paid in dollars from fotolia and from anyother site. I wish 1 credit would be 1 euro though that is not true.

If you live in Spain how come you're not paid in Euros? I see they've got an office/website in your country.

The plot thickens!

I seem to remember some old discussions about this. Depending on when someone signed up - and I think in some cases where from (IP address) - FT assigned each contributor a 'home'. In the early days FT had fewer sites.

People had asked in the past to get moved to somewhere more appropriate - generally to get a more favorable exchange rate. AFAIK the answer was always "no". I can see why they wouldn't want someone switching weekly trying to play currency trading games, but if someone moves from the US to Spain, or UK to US, it would seem reasonable to let them switch. Then they get paid in local currency.

Of course, when the Euro was less than the US Dollar, people were happy to be paid in dollars, but these days, not so much :)

When I joined 2 years ago, there were a few options: Join US and get paid in USD, join UK and get paid in GBP with 60 pence credits,
join Germany or France sites and be paid in Euro but have to complete registration in either German or French. Now, I live in a eurozone country and if it hadn't been for the language barrier, I would have gladly signed up for Germany to be paid in euros (also missing preypal's 4% commission on currency conversions). So, I chose UK and even at 60 pence credits the currency cross rates at that time meant that there wasn't much difference between payment in or GBP.
About 8 months after joining UK, FT introduced the EU site for anyone preferring payment in euro but registration in English. At that time the cross rate GBP/euro had gone from 70% to almost parity, making payment in 60 pences to be converted to spendable euro, a very bad deal. FT would not allow transfer of a UK account to a EU account and the only way to achieve that would be to start from scratch: delete the UK portfolio and resubmit images as an EU contributor. I considered this to be too risky, having already suffered the whims of the 'rejectors' in the past!

The only advice I would give to recent members who deem themselves in a disadvantageous position with regard to country/currency is to start afresh. Pull everything from the present location (especially if you don't have too many uploads/sales) and re-submit to the country/site of your choosing.

764
Adobe Stock / Re: FOTOLIA - NOW PAYING LESS THAN 16% !!!!!!
« on: February 03, 2010, 18:00 »
Actually i should have twigged long ago that something about Fotolia was not quite as it should be........ it was when Chad Bridewell started posting in forums under THE CHAD.  ???

Anyway, his latest pseudo-apologetic epistle just can't be taken seriously. He advises every contributor to get in touch with support; individually no less. I think that he imagines that UK actually has 'support'. Well take it from me, THE CHAD, it doesn't. When they give advice, it's usually written so that it is incomprehensible even to native speakers and if it can be understood, the advice is probably erroneous anyway. Advice about US ITIN tax was incorrect. Despite repeated emails requesting a hard copy letter on FT notepaper (W7 or something), all anyone got was a worthless email and then stonewalled. The email reply to Warren0909:

"it will have been a technical issue on the 1 - it must have been, while updating our website.
I have no answers for you as far as the other why why why's. We update our website sometimes, we change prices sometimes. We create new products sometimes. Why? Because we decide to Smiley
Kind regards,
Fotolia Team U.K."

is utterly disdainful and unprofessional. Seems like they may have George Bush working for them probably from behind a monitor somewhere in Bengal. ???

For starters, I'll take advice offered earlier (reversible actions). Stop uploading and cancellation of subs participation. Then I'll wait and see if more drastic action is required.

765
Adobe Stock / Re: FOTOLIA - NOW PAYING LESS THAN 16% !!!!!!
« on: February 03, 2010, 16:29 »
Anyone expecting fair and honest business practices in thier dealings with Fotolia has not been paying attention the past four years. They have a long history of self serving business practices that have shown little to no regard to the wlefare of their greatest asset (the contributor) and have always paid full service to their greatest concern (their greed)

Fotolia has always been known to bait and switch at the contributors expense.

True enough Bobby but this one really does take the biscuit. In particular it's the sleight of hand (or 'cut by stealth' as another poster put it) that really grates. When is a 'percentage' not actually a percentage? When it's at Fotolia.

Maybe they're are already gearing up to sell the company and both the slow payments and these further erosions of commissions are intended to boost cash and profitability.

You might just have something there. Standard practice at corporations getting ready to sell.

766
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 01, 2010, 14:27 »
OM,

I havent taken all my images off Fotolia ( I need the income !) just took them from exclusive images so I can sell the same images elsewhere.  :)

Not sure which Warren he's talking about, mate; there are two of us. :o
WarrenP


Oh no, not 2!  ;D Sorry hadn't seen that. I'll go with Warren0909's strategy.

767
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 01, 2010, 14:24 »
OM,

I havent taken all my images off Fotolia ( I need the income !) just took them from exclusive images so I can sell the same images elsewhere.  :)

I understood what you wrote, Warren. I think that is a sensible course for me to follow too. I'm too old to cut off my nose to spite their face. :)

768
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 01, 2010, 13:52 »
With the deplorable reputation that Fotolia has for communication with its contributors, I'll wait awhile to see what really is happening. If it is a bad as it appears today then I'll be forced to follow in Warren's footsteps.

769
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 01, 2010, 13:19 »
Thanks for posting Warren. I find that last reply showing total disdain for you as contributor/writer of the email and for Fotolia contributors in general. Really rather shocking.

770
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 01, 2010, 13:02 »
Why do I get the impression that at FT the contributor is the enemy. If you look at one of the later posts on their forum by FT UK office, it basically says that they do whatever they want and contributors can like it or lump it.

They also insisted that everyone must submit an ITIN for US tax authorities just a few weeks ago. :'(

771
Adobe Stock / Re: Increase in Credit Value at Fotolia?
« on: February 01, 2010, 05:44 »
Cashed out yesterday too............I think for GBP0.75/credit. One small sale today and the credit is indeed now increased GBP 1.00/credit. Ooh, that's nice.

772
If a buyer with subscription buys a 10 credit image of yours, how much do you get as contributor?

You get your percentage of 10 $.96 credits, at the minimum.

Thanks. That seems a decent system for the contributor.

773
sub sites will always be here and growing,that's where all the buyer  do most of their shopping. The economy is down and will be for awhile.

You wouldn't know it from my sales.  40% of my sales still come from IS, which doesn't have an "all you can eat" type subscription model at all.

Thanks. I just looked at the IS credits subs system and it it much less generous to the buyer than the 'all you can eat system' of FT. Effectively, you buy credits in bulk and 3 months in advance at a discount of 70% but you have to use your number of credits each day or they turn into pumpkins at midnight. ;) If a buyer with subscription buys a 10 credit image of yours, how much do you get as contributor?

774
I just can't understand why the subscription sites can't have different prices for different sizes?
Instead of "25 images a day" they could have "50 credits a day". 50 credits could for example mean 50 tiny web images or 5 XL images.
The current situation where a thumbnail costs the same as 20 megapixel image is just insane.

Agree. I just checked at FT to see what you get for the basic subs package: $199 buys you 750 downloads/month, single user and max 'L'
format. If used fully, that $199 buys you (depending on the contributor level) a minimum of $5,250 worth of 'L' files at $7 PPD. Should contributor be slightly higher in the pecking order then your advantage as subs buyer becomes a multiple, 2x or 3x of that amount.
Dunno if it works in the same way with other RF sites but where else in the world can you get 5K, 10K or 15K worth of goods/services for 200 bucks?
What I also haven't figured out is why FT in particular would sell subs to a buyer at $0.27/download and give the contributor a minimum of $0.30 for that same download. Obviously, not all subs buyers extract to the max otherwise subs would be a real loss leader even at the present low rates paid to the contributor. For the present, though, it is no doubt profitable but always at the expense of the contributor.

It seems to me that the only way to get better prices for subs would be for many major contributors to opt out of subs at every agency they are at (don't know whether that is possible). Only when subs buyers were faced with a such a depleted stock of the most popular images, the agencies could have their hand forced and have to recognise their contributors for what they are really worth and get a deal which would be less lob sided than the present one.




775
Must be the only industry where the wholesale price is so absurdly out of whack with the retail price.
Especially considering  that the buyer can download those L files for the same price(effectively) as XS, M etc.
I'm most surprised that whoever started the subsclub, started with such an exceptionally good deal for the buyers and such a rotten one for the contributors (although contributor rewards have never figured much in the calculations of some sites). Offering an immediate discount of 90%+ for forward payment is not exactly common practice in industry generally.

As to whether contributors can do much about it, I don't know. Sometimes after getting a subs sale from a new image, I get some downloads of the same image for regular rates (XL) which dissuades me from removing my contributions to subs. Do subs act as badly paid advertising for an image? Don't know that either. I agree that the minimum reward for a subs sale should be more in the region of $1, rather than the 30 cents it is now. On the other hand, if the buyer were only able to download to "M" as a maximum size in subs, I think that this may encourage more PPD's for the larger sizes from the same subs buyers.

Ideally, subs would disappear overnight but lacking that option (which is unrealistic), I could live with a system in which subs were limited to M max and, that should the subscription customer require a larger file for download, they could do this at a not too substantial discount to the PPD rate.
But as I'm fairly new to all this WTHDIK.

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle