|
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 - emblem
51
« on: May 13, 2014, 19:23 »
Until now all we receive is our regular subscription rate.
For example the smallest package sells at $25 for 5 XXL images, i.e. we used to receive $0,25 - $0,40 per sale depending on our rank.
That is 5% - 8%.
Thanks for pointing that out, I never realised how appalling low the commission could actually be.
If agencies squeezed their work colleagues in the same way they would eventually just leave, suppliers are no different to the employees they sit next to every day. Push too hard and they'll give up and move on to something less demoralising.
I think agencies find it all too easy to forget the real people behind the images.
The appalling commission rate of 5 - 8% that Fotolia has been paying is indicative of the utter lack of respect it has for its contributors...and this type of corporate abuse has been going on for years. What a nerve they have now to try and bribe their way out of a situation that they have created themselves. If we stay the course, this will be the most important example of contributor power in microstock's short history...and a warning to other agencies that fair representation for contributors is a must.
52
« on: May 06, 2014, 19:38 »
To the people who haven't opted out and are waiting for changes to DPC....doesn't it make any difference about the unethical and immoral way that Fotolia has gone about creating this aberration. If it wasn't for people rebelling against this, it would be too late now and the damage already done.
53
« on: April 30, 2014, 21:17 »
Opted out...done.
54
« on: April 29, 2014, 23:22 »
I disagree we have way too many agency reps coming in here to sell us on any ideas at all, bad or otherwise. There are actually very few agency reps that bother coming in here anymore, regardless of what's going on. There definitely is a perception that this is a hostile place for agency reps.
Personally I am always appreciative when a representative of any agency comes here to take questions and provide clarity, regardless of whether or not I like the policy they are explaining, or whether I agree with their explanation. At least it shows an effort at contributor relations.
There's way too much shooting the messenger going on around here and it is already biting us on the hind end because so few agencies even bother with us (at MSG) anymore.
Thanks Mat, for braving the shark tank. Hope you continue to do so.
It would have been nice if we knew he was an agency representative in the first place....but it is more Fotolia than Mat which is the problem here. Tough job to sell something like this.
55
« on: April 29, 2014, 19:21 »
Are you employed by Fotolia?
Yes, after volunteering as a moderator in the Fotolia forum for many years I made the decision to leave the restaurant business I had been in for more than 25 years and turn my focus to my true passion of photography. The timing was fortuitous as an opening came available on the Customer Service team at Fotolia that I happily accepted this past September...
Thanks for the clarification, Mat. I hope you realize that this was misleading, though, by earlier emphasizing the point that you are a contributor but never mentioning that you are an employee as well.
I also hope you realize that misrepresenting yourself only adds to the mistrust we already feel towards many agencies these days. Since you are a contributor, you know as well as all of us that it isn't easy being in the microstock business, especially recently. Many companies look to exploit every angle and opportunity to get the most profit from our work while paying us the least amount possible.
So you coming in here acting like a regular joe, hawking the DPC product and expecting us to buy into it all while under the employ of the very company that sells the product is pretty shady.
Frankly, it doesn't speak well to what Fotolia is about today. We need more honesty in this business, not less. I'm opted out of DPC, not just because I think it's a bad deal for artists but also because I'm concerned about the direction Fotolia seems to be going in. If you are truly intent on doing a good job for Fotolia and representing the company here and as a customer service rep in a positive way, I hope we can expect to see some better contributor relations going forward. That needs to include some real transparency and disclosure.
Fair enough Mike, thanks for the feedback. The truth is, this forum is very hostile. Yes, my employment status has changed in recent months, but sharing that here was not something I felt compelled to do. It's not about being "shady" it's simply an unpleasant place to attempt a reasonable discussion/debate or to share news. How many times have we seen agency representatives attempt to engage in a discussion here only to get the digital equivalent of an angry mob with pitchforks and torches? I've been a member of this forum a lot longer than I've been an employee at Fotolia and I know how this place works.
My offer stands, I've shared my email address [email protected]. Feel free to write to me directly if you have any questions, (reasonable) comments or concerns and I will do my best to respond as quickly as possible.
Kind regards,
Mat
This forum is the only place contributors can speak about agencies in an uncensored way. After the way Fotolia has treated contributors over the years, how do you expect them to act? Fotolia has a history of shafting contributors without any explanation in a totally secretive and underhanded manner so I'm sorry if it seems a little unpleasant for you...but I respect the fact that you are making an attempt to communicate at least.
57
« on: March 27, 2014, 19:32 »
I'd have more sympathy if they had been more transparent over the last six months...
58
« on: March 26, 2014, 19:44 »
I'd be interested to know as well...
59
« on: March 21, 2014, 00:36 »
I received mine on time...
60
« on: March 18, 2014, 21:00 »
That was excellent...
61
« on: February 13, 2014, 18:32 »
I've stopped uploading months ago after having the same problems as everybody else here. If they were upfront about their problems like Revostock have been, they may have gained some support from contributors. This strategy is unacceptable and has damaged their business beyond repair.
62
« on: February 07, 2014, 02:36 »
Yeah slight exaggeration...
63
« on: January 29, 2014, 01:39 »
Yeah mine stopped over Xmas and New Year.still waiting for a sale in January.
64
« on: January 21, 2014, 02:37 »
It would be nice if they could give us some sort of updateall this negativity is not doing their business any good.
65
« on: January 21, 2014, 02:32 »
Yeah me too.I can't log in with any browser.
66
« on: November 17, 2013, 19:11 »
Revostock has been very good at communicating with contributors ("producers" in Revo parlance). This blog post from yesterday:
http://www.revostock.com/ProducerNews.html?ID=175
announces a delay in the November payout, warns of some changes to come (uh-oh?), and lets contributors know what has been a big part of the cause of the drop in Revo sales over the last 18 months or more.
It's a very sobering read. For those too lazy (or uninterested) in clicking through, the upshot is a frivolous patent infringement lawsuit was filed against them, and they had to spend significant money and time in order to fight it. The good news is, it's now over, and just in time to (hopefully) save the sinking ship. I do wish them well.
Well that certainly goes a long way to explain the drop in video sales there over the last 18 monthsit must have been a lot of pressure on them. I wish them well as well.
67
« on: November 14, 2013, 18:35 »
It's a strange project. I suppose the air force wanted the shots and arranged it all, since the expense certainly doesn't seem justified for stock purposes. You could tell he works mostly in a studio from the time it took him to hit on panning as the solution, which I'm pretty sure a motor-sports shooter would have done automatically.
I couldn't agree moreI thought it was a little embarrassing the amount of time he wasted trying to get the shot. Obviously you have to pan with the plane as it passes by to get a shot like thatpretty ordinary result in the end as well.
68
« on: November 01, 2013, 01:34 »
They still sell, but they don't pay. My pending payment is now approaching 3 months.
That's not good enough...
69
« on: October 27, 2013, 19:01 »
I can't be bothered uploading to a site that removed a large chunk of my portfolio. If it returns, I might start uploading again but otherwise, they aren't worth my time.
Couldn't agree more...
70
« on: October 10, 2013, 01:04 »
I used to quite like Veer but they've become a bad site for contributors. Low sales, not much communication here anymore and various problems with uploads have put me off them. A new gimmick is unlikely to help. They had a great chance to become one of the big selling microstcok sites but I think they wasted it.
very well said! I remember having +80 pictures removed from my portfolio without any explanation, that was over 1 year ago
Count yourself lucky. I had 1,400 removed. When asking about it, Ryan said back in May,
"We've temporarily deactivated some older content from the Veer UGC collection to bring more stability to our platform as we prepare for the launch of our new site. We'll be reactivating this content once the new site launches."
I had over 2,000 taken from my port...I wish there was some explanation as to why that had to be done because of the new site coming. Sales have slumped since the deletion.
71
« on: October 10, 2013, 00:47 »
Now I wish I could get a reply back from ClipDealer. It does not look good.
[/quote]
I don't think there is anything wrong with Clipdealer....I've emailed them a couple of times recently and got quick responses.
72
« on: August 30, 2013, 01:56 »
I can't help thinking that my sales have been affected by the few thousand files they kindly deleted from my port...wonder if I'll ever see them again.
73
« on: August 30, 2013, 01:49 »
Quote: "announcements and plans that we make in June, will likely not all be the exact same plans that we have in August."
My favourite line.
Yeah that line is a scream...
74
« on: June 07, 2013, 01:55 »
Yes definitely use MPEG Streamclip...it will simply convert most codecs into photo-jpeg (which is basically the stock video standard now.) You haven't said what camera you are using.
75
« on: May 29, 2013, 19:29 »
I don't get it....why try and fix something that's not broken. If this goes ahead it could the death knell of this forum.
It seems that maybe leaf does think its broken and would like to try something different.
The sanitisation of the forum would be terminal in my view....
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
