Are the people who wait so long 'nudging' Support? I contact them after six months and put a note in my diary for four weeks later, and I've only had to use the four-weeks-later reminder once. But I guess some buyers will be 'stickier' to catch up.
It also seems that certain distributors need nudging sometimes.

I nudged them, and posted their reply. They gave a standard cut-and-paste response, pretty much out of the Agency playbook. My account will be closed within 2 months, but I will probably have this uncleared balance to deal with for the next year or so.
 

Here is their response to my complaint about uncleared payments from early July -

Hello Daniel

The time it takes for a sale to clear depends on the type of customer and if they�ve got a particular deal with us. We report sales in as they happen to contributors, unlike many other stock agencies who would only inform you when they�ve received funds.  This transparent system has great benefits for contributors, the down side is contributors are able to see uncleared sales. 

If you haven�t seen the payment clear we haven�t given up or forgotten about it, our Credit control team are still chasing and we�ll update your account once we�ve collected payment

If there's anything else we can do for you, just give us a shout.

Thanks,
 
Rehana
Member Services


Sorry but that isn't good enough. I expected a weak response, and that is exactly what I received.

4 1/2 months is a ridiculously long period for a payment to clear, and I don't buy it. The idea that other agencies wait several months for checks to clear, or credit cards to process, etc., or for buyers to decide that they really want the image they ordered, is a little unbelievable. These days I expect nothing less from a stock agency than smoke, mirrors, and a whole lot of deflection.

I really don't think there is "anything else they can do for me", so I guess it is time to clear out my portfolio, wait a few years for the payments to clear, and then close the account permanently.

I just reach 3000 dollars and the site went down suddenly 

You see? It really is unsustainable!

That's funny (well not really, it isn't) because Alamy responded to a post I made on MSG by saying that the maximum clearing time was 4 months. You are going on 17 months without clearance. Ridiculous.

So if we close the accounts or delete the "sold" images immediately, do the sales get cancelled? Because at this point we should do it just to spite the buyer and Alamy, as 17 months is way too long to decide if you want to spend $100-200 or not. Sorry but you had your chance. Waste somebody else's time.

My theory is that agencies have been selling images so cheaply, for so long, that it's gotten to the point where a growing number of customers simply don't need that many images anymore. I'm not suggesting that they have stopped buying, but perhaps they buy less than they used to?

I can't back this up with data. But for years many have argued that there was no difference between selling 5 images for $7 each and 100 images for $0.35 each. It still pays the same, right? The difference is the former option theoretically keeps demand higher (because I only own 5 images and I need 95 more), whereas the latter option reduces demand more quickly (I already have 100 images, I don't need any more).

I don't think the agencies have all the answers, regardless of their data. It could be that they realize they are killing demand long term by grabbing market share now, and are looking to make their money and run before the market collapses.

I don't believe that there are many customers looking to make purchases from specific contributors. So even if you go exclusive to protect your own pricing, that doesn't stop customers from browsing for similar images at a cheaper outlet.

If there is anybody who should be selling Direct, it's you Sean. From what I have heard from others about EVO, there is little chance you will do better through them than through Direct channels.

Not an advertisement for Symbiostock, KTools or Photoshelter. Choose a platform that you like, set the pricing and licensing to your specification, and decide which collection of images you wish to market. There are only a handful of contributors on this site whose ports are large enough (and premium quality) to have a significant customer base looking for them specifically. You should take advantage of it.

I haven't been able to log in to the contributor side for the last 20 minutes. Just checked the main website and it too was not accessible. Anyone else having problems getting in?

Almost every new band I've found in the last 15 years I have found through the internet, with a few more being found through XM/Sirius. The spread of ideas and art is undeniably a wonderful thing. But theft is theft.

The major record labels usually siphon off most of this income, and then they dribble about 15-20% of what's left down to their artists.

That sounds familiar.

Before they broke up earlier this year, Grammy Award winners The Civil Wars eschewed record companies completely and did it on their own. Every CD or MP3 they sold, that was their money and they kept it. I remember them saying how incredible it was to go on tour and actually have it be profitable (most bands lose money on tour, but do it to spur additional CD sales).

Yes that latter issue is important for both site speed, and page "focus" within search engines. Not to mention end user functionality.

That sounds promising. I will take a look at it once I take care of some work this morning. Do you know off-hand where the original watermark is stored in the SY zip file? It's been a long time since I looked at the watermark files.