Author Topic: Fotolia - higher prices (Read 6852 times)

roede-orm · « **on:** February 18, 2014, 18:17 »

I am wondering, has no one noticed that Fotolia has increased the prices? Starting with the Silver level and above. Hopefully it is not a fault?

dirkr · « **Reply #1 on:** February 18, 2014, 18:36 »

Quote from: roede-orm on February 18, 2014, 18:17

Starting with the Silver level and above.

... and for sizes M and bigger...

THP Creative · « **Reply #2 on:** February 18, 2014, 19:00 »

Not a bug, here is the new list, from their "Sell Pictures" link:

White   20%   1   3   5   7   8   10   20
Bronze   23%   1   3   5   7   8   10   50
Silver   25%   1   3   6   8   10   12   100
Gold   31%   1   3   6   8   10   12   100
Emerald   37%   2   6   12   16   20   24   100
Sapphire   40%   3   9   18   24   30   36   100
Ruby   43%   3   9   18   24   30   36   100
Diamond   46%   3   9   18   24   30   36   100

Previously silver had the same prices as bronze the whole way through the size scale.

I for one am happy for prices to go up a bit. Seems they are experimenting a bit with pricing at the moment, after raising vector pricing a few weeks ago.

U11 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 19, 2014, 10:54 »

will not resume uploading as long as their subscription is lower than [also not not so high] $.38 of SS

lisafx · « **Reply #4 on:** February 19, 2014, 13:10 »

This list shows emerald starting at 2 credits, but AFAIK my images that haven't sold in 6 months are all still knocked down to 1 credit.

I too would be happy to see prices go up, but I don't understand why they went down to a 1 credit base after 6 months to begin with...?

gostwyck · « **Reply #5 on:** February 19, 2014, 13:39 »

Quote from: lisafx on February 19, 2014, 13:10

This list shows emerald starting at 2 credits, but AFAIK my images that haven't sold in 6 months are all still knocked down to 1 credit.

I too would be happy to see prices go up, but I don't understand why they went down to a 1 credit base after 6 months to begin with...?

I know! I've got lots of images that have each sold hundreds of times that have been down-graded to 1 credit pricing. Of course the reason that they stopped selling was not due to their price ... but because FT insisted on knocking older images so far back in the default sort order that buyers never get to see them.

FT don't appear to have been investing much in their site for ages, in contrast to most others. I wonder if the price increase could be the first step towards an exit strategy?

stocked · « **Reply #6 on:** February 19, 2014, 14:59 »

Quote from: gostwyck on February 19, 2014, 13:39

first step towards an exit strategy?

I would guess too, no lunatic have seemed to be willing to give them their 300 billion 'special dividend'.

roede-orm · « **Reply #7 on:** February 19, 2014, 15:05 »

Quote from: gostwyck on February 19, 2014, 13:39

FT don't appear to have been investing much in their site for ages, in contrast to most others. I wonder if the price increase could be the first step towards an exit strategy?

Could you explain that in more detail?

qwerty · « **Reply #8 on:** February 19, 2014, 23:37 »

Quote from: roede-orm on February 19, 2014, 15:05

Quote from: gostwyck on February 19, 2014, 13:39

FT don't appear to have been investing much in their site for ages, in contrast to most others. I wonder if the price increase could be the first step towards an exit strategy?
Could you explain that in more detail?

They basically went to the market for a loan to pay special divendend to the owners. There was a thread on it on here before.

lisafx · « **Reply #9 on:** February 19, 2014, 23:42 »

Quote from: qwerty on February 19, 2014, 23:37

Quote from: roede-orm on February 19, 2014, 15:05
Quote from: gostwyck on February 19, 2014, 13:39

FT don't appear to have been investing much in their site for ages, in contrast to most others. I wonder if the price increase could be the first step towards an exit strategy?
Could you explain that in more detail?

They basically went to the market for a loan to pay special divendend to the owners. There was a thread on it on here before.

Having read that thread, I am still curious about the possible "exit strategy" Gostwyck mentioned.

Are you thinking the owners may be boosting the prices to fatten the bottom line in advance of an outright sale or a public offering?

Ariene · « **Reply #10 on:** May 23, 2014, 10:41 »

I wonder about FT pricing in Westend61 case. Is this company able to set their own prices? Or ... how did they do this?

http://www.fotolia.com/id/54998333

It's from 20 credits for XS to 495C for XXL size and 795C for EL.

They keep the same pricing level everywhere else.
Example http://www.westend61.de/koala2/collectionLanding8.html#preview
and all over around...

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #11 on:** May 23, 2014, 12:11 »

I see other infinite collection images on FT at different prices - 15 to 200 credits for iceteaimages for example. So I assume that each agency negotiates a price when they agree to distribute through Fotolia?

Pixart · « **Reply #12 on:** July 10, 2014, 13:56 »

Thought there was a thread on some new subscription offerings back about May - didn't want to open a new thread so adding here.

Just received 3 x subs that earned $9. That's better than their ordinary sales. My earnings overall are still crap, but I do notice that my RPD is going up slightly. Last year it was between 45-55 cents and this year it seems to be around 65 cents.

But, too many tantrums.. too many deleted files.