Author Topic: Colourbox changes the royalty structure (Read 11657 times)

niserin · « **on:** September 30, 2013, 12:08 »

Quote

Get up to 9.5 times higher earnings on single downloads

Dear Supplier,

Great images are the most important part of any image bank, and we offer our sincere thanks to you for providing them to us. We understand that being a good stock photographer/creator is demanding and that you should be rewarded fairly for your work.

Colourbox is growing and we would like you to grow with us. We have planned a series of new initiatives, and the first one is to offer you a higher profit on all your images sold on Colourbox.

Starting on September 30, 2013, the payment for all image, vector and video downloads will be 20% of the sales price.

For example:
Single downloads: €9.50
You receive: €1.90
10+ plan download: €3.00
You receive: €0.60

Different subscription plans and campaigns may result in different sales prices. Guaranteed minimum payment: €0.20.

We hope to continue our good relationship and to see many more great images, vectors and videos from you.

Many thanks for being a Supplier!

WOOOW 20% !!! Thank you Colourbox for a generous move.
They forgot to mention: "we pay one of the highest royalty to our valued contributors"

Btw, I don't have pictures there.

Ron · « **Reply #1 on:** September 30, 2013, 12:31 »

If they offer 20% now, what was their previous royalty?? Ugh.

cobalt · « **Reply #2 on:** September 30, 2013, 12:34 »

I think it was around 3% because they always paid the same subscription price even if it was a single image sale.

So it is an improvement, quite a drastic one from their perspective.

Ron · « **Reply #3 on:** September 30, 2013, 12:47 »

Aaaaah, the 3% agency, LOL. 20% is still a slap in the face. Then again, 20% beats 15%.

cthoman · « **Reply #4 on:** September 30, 2013, 12:59 »

How do they manage to exist?

cobalt · « **Reply #5 on:** September 30, 2013, 13:12 »

Quote from: Ron on September 30, 2013, 12:47

Aaaaah, the 3% agency, LOL. 20% is still a slap in the face. Then again, 20% beats 15%.

Exactly

I´d say 20% is really the minimum for non exclusive content. And they pay in euros, so there is slight advantage in exchange rate if you want to change to dollars.

EmberMike · « **Reply #6 on:** September 30, 2013, 14:12 »

I guess this is how you make 20% look good. Start at 3% and then make the huge jump to 20%.

I'm still not interested.

3pphoto · « **Reply #7 on:** October 02, 2013, 12:37 »

It is not a generous move, its bull..
They lowered footages from 0,7e per subscription to also 0,2e per subscription.. Sneaky way to get more from us and give less

cobalt · « **Reply #8 on:** October 02, 2013, 12:44 »

On their website it still says 70 cents for the video downloads?

http://www.colourbox.com/account/supplier/import

Not that the 70 cents make it interesting to upload videos...on SS a video subscription sale can earn you 20 dollars or more.

But 20% for photos or single downloads is at least a normal baseline.

sharpshot · « **Reply #9 on:** October 02, 2013, 13:26 »

I wouldn't say 20% is normal for a small site. Several of them pay 50% and that's the only reason to use them. Low percentage and low sales volume is a waste of time.

pancaketom · « **Reply #10 on:** October 02, 2013, 13:54 »

20% or less is only normal for greedy sites like IS and FT

KimsCreativeHub · « **Reply #11 on:** October 02, 2013, 15:31 »

Quote from: sharpshot on October 02, 2013, 13:26

I wouldn't say 20% is normal for a small site. Several of them pay 50% and that's the only reason to use them. Low percentage and low sales volume is a waste of time.

I agree

Noedelhap · « **Reply #12 on:** October 02, 2013, 16:40 »

Still not interested, partly because of:

"If your educational institute has a Basic, Plus or Unlimited subscription, you can also order Colourbox Educational at no additional charge. It gives all of your faculty, staff and students access to the entire Colourbox database for non-commercial purposes."

JPSDK · « **Reply #13 on:** October 03, 2013, 08:36 »

Maybe colourbox is not such a small agency?

Their licenses are "very broard". I only upload editorials and snapshots there, not the elaborate things.
They take everything, and tehre is no MR check, and that my friends is dangerous, because then it is the responsibility of the contributor.

New commission structure, doesnt matter much, but it takes a big part of the extremely unjust and greedy policy away:
That they sold some pictures for many dollars and still only paid 20 cents.

Jens G · « **Reply #14 on:** October 07, 2013, 10:06 »

Thay are now showing the actual sales price for sold images, and the large majority are sold for 1€ or less.

So actually 0.20€ for a 0.71€ sale maybe isn't so bad(except that 0.71€ sales price isn't much).
So far I have only had one sale higher than 1€, but I don't have a large port.

Jens G

sharpshot · « **Reply #15 on:** October 07, 2013, 11:22 »

Quote from: Jens G on October 07, 2013, 10:06

Thay are now showing the actual sales price for sold images, and the large majority are sold for 1€ or less.

So actually 0.20€ for a 0.71€ sale maybe isn't so bad(except that 0.71€ sales price isn't much).
So far I have only had one sale higher than 1€, but I don't have a large port.

Jens G

So why are you bothering with them? There's enough sites that sell at higher prices and make more for independents. Do we really want buyers to start using sites like this? Do we really want the other sites to see how little they can get away with paying us? Supporting a site like this is just going to make it harder for us to make money.

Jens G · « **Reply #16 on:** October 07, 2013, 12:44 »

Quote from: sharpshot on October 07, 2013, 11:22

Quote from: Jens G on October 07, 2013, 10:06
Thay are now showing the actual sales price for sold images, and the large majority are sold for 1€ or less.

So actually 0.20€ for a 0.71€ sale maybe isn't so bad(except that 0.71€ sales price isn't much).
So far I have only had one sale higher than 1€, but I don't have a large port.

Jens G
So why are you bothering with them? There's enough sites that sell at higher prices and make more for independents. Do we really want buyers to start using sites like this? Do we really want the other sites to see how little they can get away with paying us? Supporting a site like this is just going to make it harder for us to make money.

Well,- many danish newspapers use Colourbox, and I like to see an ocasional photo of mine used there.

And is the subscription price much lower than at other sites? 0.2 EUR is ~0.27 USD.

My income from Colourbox is a little higher than from Fotolia, and about the double of Dreamstime.
Only Shutterstock and iStock make more for me than Colourbox.

Jens G

Bluebell · « **Reply #17 on:** October 09, 2013, 11:45 »

Quote from: cobalt on September 30, 2013, 12:34

I think it was around 3% because they always paid the same subscription price even if it was a single image sale.

So it is an improvement, quite a drastic one from their perspective.

Colourbox is my local agency (cos I live in Denmark)... and yes, like Jens G said, all or at least many Danish newspapers use them. I made the front page once and got 20 cents for my efforts and the credit was Colourbox.

Cobolt is perhaps right with a 3% royalty, because I have just got 2 euros on a 10 euro sale. That means a month ago, the agency took a whopping 98%... and the photographer got 2%.

In my mind that is unethical and worse than Getty, and iStock......

That is how they have managed to exist.... taking more than their fair share of the pie. And I also have to say that is very Un-Danish. !

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #18 on:** October 09, 2013, 15:31 »

I uploaded some files for a test one year ago.
I connected today to the site, and what a surprise!
A download of a vector previously paid €0.35 has been paid today €0.20 !!!?!?

a record in microstock?

topol · « **Reply #19 on:** October 09, 2013, 17:00 »

Quote from: Oligo on October 09, 2013, 15:31

I uploaded some files for a test one year ago.
I connected today to the site, and what a surprise!
A download of a vector previously paid €0.35 has been paid today €0.20 !!!?!? a record in microstock?

No, Istock has .09$ commissions

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #20 on:** October 10, 2013, 04:31 »

Was talking about vector, ie eps files...

adigrosu · « **Reply #21 on:** January 31, 2014, 08:56 »

My application have just been declined by Colourbox. It appears I have to get better if I aim so high. Interesting, since my old copycats from Shutterstock have gathered there.
However, as this is the first rejection I'm facing in several years, I did a quick research about Colourbox.
Can't tell you how grateful I am about being rejected. Being pretty naive, it would take me month to realize that I'm being robbed.

JPSDK · « **Reply #22 on:** January 31, 2014, 09:15 »

Quote from: adigrosu on January 31, 2014, 08:56

My application have just been declined by Colourbox. It appears I have to get better if I aim so high. Interesting, since my old copycats from Shutterstock have gathered there.
However, as this is the first rejection I'm facing in several years, I did a quick research about Colourbox.
Can't tell you how grateful I am about being rejected. Being pretty naive, it would take me month to realize that I'm being robbed.

Which means they already have much of the same content.
Yes dont regret, they have nasty licences, and louzy prices.
My best images are not there.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Colourbox changes the royalty structure (Read 11657 times)

niserin

Ron

cobalt

Ron

cthoman

cobalt

EmberMike

3pphoto

cobalt

sharpshot

pancaketom

KimsCreativeHub

Noedelhap

JPSDK

Jens G

sharpshot

Jens G

Bluebell

DiscreetDuck

topol

DiscreetDuck

adigrosu

JPSDK

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors