Author Topic: Letter to pond5 and quick Poll for contributors (Read 39343 times)

Bart · « **on:** March 21, 2019, 12:14 »

Just watched the Town Hall with Pond5. I created quick poll, please take time to complete.

Below is my e-mail to Pond5:

What just happened guys??

An ALL OUT exclusive option or 10% pay cut (that’s 20% less profit on my end)? That’s it?? We know how great ALL EXCLUSIVE programs work, we can hear all the success stories about Stocksy Video? (and no offense to Stocksy and Bruce… their content really is top quality) …The things I agree with, yes people shop around, and they will always. Myself as both a content contributor, and content buyer, I will not pay premium for exclusive content (especially when its 5-15sec stock clip), so whomever goes to ALL EXCLUSIVE at pond5, sorry you might be disappointed, unless pond5 shoves(Favors) exclusive content into buyers faces (which will not be done according to your Town Hall) . Yes, there are clips and moments that we capture that are unique, and I think you should have instead added an option based per clip (not contributor) to make exclusive… that way we could experiment, see the “great results” and be the judge for ourselves. Putting lipstick on a pig is not my cup ...Putting us contributors up against the wall like that is NOT FAIR, and I’m considering going the total opposite of “EXCLUSIVE”.

Respectfully,
Bart Sadowski

davidbautista · « **Reply #1 on:** March 21, 2019, 12:28 »

Artist exclusivity is just stupid nowadays.

eyeidea · « **Reply #2 on:** March 21, 2019, 12:30 »

Agree with you 100% Bart.

My words to Pond5 ...

My first reaction is that I wish there was an option to begin uploading exclusive content moving forward without having to kill my relationships at other agencies. This would create a more stable transition over time. If the exclusive program is an "on-off" switch and I pull all of my content from other agencies I will lose 75% of my income overnight.

What I would love to do is upload my next batch of videos and make them exclusive to Pond5. And / or the option to delete videos from other agencies and make them exclusive to Pond5. I started as an 'exclusive contributor’ with iStock back in 2006 and it did not go well ultimately, the purchase by Getty changed a lot of things. I would very much like to be part of the Pond5 exclusive program, however I would like to have 100% exclusive content on Pond5 rather than be a wholly exclusive contributor to only one agency.

everest · « **Reply #3 on:** March 21, 2019, 12:42 »

And I agree 100% with you. Clear and concise. It is what it is

Quote from: eyeidea on March 21, 2019, 12:30

Agree with you 100% Bart.

My words to Pond5 ...

My first reaction is that I wish there was an option to begin uploading exclusive content moving forward without having to kill my relationships at other agencies. This would create a more stable transition over time. If the exclusive program is an "on-off" switch and I pull all of my content from other agencies I will lose 75% of my income overnight.

What I would love to do is upload my next batch of videos and make them exclusive to Pond5. And / or the option to delete videos from other agencies and make them exclusive to Pond5. I started as an 'exclusive contributor’ with iStock back in 2006 and it did not go well ultimately, the purchase by Getty changed a lot of things. I would very much like to be part of the Pond5 exclusive program, however I would like to have 100% exclusive content on Pond5 rather than be a wholly exclusive contributor to only one agency.

tickstock · « **Reply #4 on:** March 21, 2019, 12:55 »

It says artist exclusivity some places and video artist exclusivity others. Is this just for video content? I assume it is but they license other types of media as well so just want to make sure I understand it. Time to crunch some numbers but I think pulling my video stuff off SS and iS is probably the right choice.

FWIW I think content exclusivity just won't work, too many people would abuse it by putting similar (almost identical) content on other sites, it would be impossible to police.

BigBubba · « **Reply #5 on:** March 21, 2019, 13:23 »

It should be per clip exclusivity.
I like P5...but there’s no way on earth that I’ll go full exclusive with them or anyone else.
I don’t buy the “non exclusive won’t hurt your rank” it doesn’t add up, they will have to make room (plenty) for the exclusive files to sell and that will have to push the non exclusive down.

I love P5, for real! But the smart thing will be to let the contributor pick his exclusive files.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bart · « **Reply #6 on:** March 21, 2019, 13:34 »

PS. the 20% pay cut is just the tip of the iceberg... read the new agreement (sec4.i) and I quote...

"If you do not enroll in the Exclusivity Program, notwithstanding section 3.b. above, you shall not set the price for an item of video Content that is higher than the lowest price for which the same (or substantially the same) Content item is offered by or on any Other Marketplace, and if we discover that the Content item is offered at a lower price by or on any Other Marketplace, we may change the price of your content in our marketplace."

https://www.pond5.com/legal/contributor

everest · « **Reply #7 on:** March 21, 2019, 13:41 »

That is not a problem at all the same way it is not a problem at Gettyimages. When you send content to Getty you can not send similar content to other sites. If you get caught you are out.

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 12:55

It says artist exclusivity some places and video artist exclusivity others. Is this just for video content? I assume it is but they license other types of media as well so just want to make sure I understand it. Time to crunch some numbers but I think pulling my video stuff off SS and iS is probably the right choice.

FWIW I think content exclusivity just won't work, too many people would abuse it by putting similar (almost identical) content on other sites, it would be impossible to police.

tickstock · « **Reply #8 on:** March 21, 2019, 13:51 »

Quote from: everest on March 21, 2019, 13:41

That is not a problem at all the same way it is not a problem at Gettyimages. When you send content to Getty you can not send similar content to other sites. If you get caught you are out.

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 12:55
It says artist exclusivity some places and video artist exclusivity others. Is this just for video content? I assume it is but they license other types of media as well so just want to make sure I understand it. Time to crunch some numbers but I think pulling my video stuff off SS and iS is probably the right choice.

FWIW I think content exclusivity just won't work, too many people would abuse it by putting similar (almost identical) content on other sites, it would be impossible to police.

Getty and P5 are very different in many ways and I don't think P5 wants to deal with kicking people off or policing similars. It's much simpler and clearer for the contributor if it's artist exclusive, no gray areas there.

Bart · « **Reply #9 on:** March 21, 2019, 13:57 »

I'm no lawyer, but the way I read this is that, if, let's say Shutterstock sells by clip as subscription at $1.50 (to be extreme here), this allows Pond5 to offer the same clip at same price? "we may change the price of your content" (i assume to price match the lowest price).

B

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 13:51

Quote from: everest on March 21, 2019, 13:41
That is not a problem at all the same way it is not a problem at Gettyimages. When you send content to Getty you can not send similar content to other sites. If you get caught you are out.

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 12:55
It says artist exclusivity some places and video artist exclusivity others. Is this just for video content? I assume it is but they license other types of media as well so just want to make sure I understand it. Time to crunch some numbers but I think pulling my video stuff off SS and iS is probably the right choice.

FWIW I think content exclusivity just won't work, too many people would abuse it by putting similar (almost identical) content on other sites, it would be impossible to police.
Getty and P5 are very different in many ways and I don't think P5 wants to deal with kicking people off or policing similars. It's much simpler and clearer for the contributor if it's artist exclusive, no gray areas there.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #10 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:19 »

The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join their Exclusivity Program!

Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what is.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #11 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:25 »

Quote from: Bart on March 21, 2019, 13:34

PS. the 20% pay cut is just the tip of the iceberg... read the new agreement (sec4.i) and I quote...

"If you do not enroll in the Exclusivity Program, notwithstanding section 3.b. above, you shall not set the price for an item of video Content that is higher than the lowest price for which the same (or substantially the same) Content item is offered by or on any Other Marketplace, and if we discover that the Content item is offered at a lower price by or on any Other Marketplace, we may change the price of your content in our marketplace."

https://www.pond5.com/legal/contributor

And this is absolutely crazy. Dissolve tried the same thing, it didn't do them any good but create distrust.

How Pond5 can claim we still have all the freedom after these changes is beyond me. Pretending to "be there all for the artists" while stabbing you in the back with these terrible changes. They didn't want to facilitate a race to the bottom, but they have no trouble lowering my prices to match the lowest priced agency?

tickstock · « **Reply #12 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:28 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:19

The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!

Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.

If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?

Bart · « **Reply #13 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:39 »

Volume though. SS/Adobe I get 20-30 image sales a day, pond5, 3-5 image sales a year.
How’s the extra royalty % going to help me pay bills, get new gear without volume?

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:28

Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:19
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!

Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?

unnonimus · « **Reply #14 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:41 »

0 people are going to become exclusive with pond5. pond5 will pay everyone 10% less. this is what will happen.

tickstock · « **Reply #15 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:43 »

Quote from: Bart on March 21, 2019, 14:39

Volume though. SS/Adobe I get 20-30 image sales a day, pond5, 3-5 image sales a year.
How’s the extra royalty % going to help me pay bills, get new gear without volume?

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:28
Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:19
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!

Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?

My comment was about video, other royalties aren't changing and exclusivity isn't part of the equation.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #16 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:45 »

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:28

Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:19
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!

Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?

Ah, so it's a punishment of sorts? Because I undercut myself at other sites, Pond5 follows that race to the bottom? According to your logic anyways. I thought they didn't want to do a race to the bottom.

But the content I sell on all three sites is priced pretty evenly, so for the buyers there's hardly a difference. Now Pond5 grabs a bigger cut, and for what? To compensate for the expensive Exclusivity or to force me into exclusivity?

Why would you defend their greed?

unnonimus · « **Reply #17 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:46 »

pond5 is tricking us.

let's say you have $10,000,000 in payouts to everyone non-exclusive. and that goes down to 40% so it goes down to $8,000,000. that is $2,000,000 less.

but then you have all the people who are exclusive, and the payout is $100,000. and they are getting their full share. basically what pond5 is doing is saving huge amounts of cash from non-exclusive people but that money is not going to pay exclusive people, it is going into their profit margin. the only way it might equalize is if 50% of sellers are exclusive and 50% are not, which is very very unlikely. I doubt if even 1% go exclusive.

scam

tickstock · « **Reply #18 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:50 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:45

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:28
Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:19
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!

Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?

Ah, so it's a punishment of sorts? Because I undercut myself at other sites, Pond5 follows that race to the bottom? According to your logic anyways. I thought they didn't want to do a race to the bottom.

But the content I sell on all three sites is priced pretty evenly, so for the buyers there's hardly a difference. Now Pond5 grabs a bigger cut, and for what? To compensate for the expensive Exclusivity or to force me into exclusivity?

Why would you defend their greed?

It's hard to call them greedy when they pay more for nonexclusive work than sites you like (SS, Adobe for example). They still seem to be the least greedy of the bunch don't they?
A race to the bottom involves undercutting the competition, matching pricing and paying a higher royalty rate doesn't seem to me to be part of the race to the bottom, if anything I'd say contributors accepting lower rates and prices are what's driving the race to the bottom.

tickstock · « **Reply #19 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:53 »

Quote from: unnonimus on March 21, 2019, 14:46

pond5 is tricking us.

let's say you have $10,000,000 in payouts to everyone non-exclusive. and that goes down to 40% so it goes down to $8,000,000. that is $2,000,000 less.

but then you have all the people who are exclusive, and the payout is $100,000. and they are getting their full share. basically what pond5 is doing is saving huge amounts of cash from non-exclusive people but that money is not going to pay exclusive people, it is going into their profit margin. the only way it might equalize is if 50% of sellers are exclusive and 50% are not, which is very very unlikely. I doubt if even 1% go exclusive.

scam

Did they say they aren't going to promote exclusive work? I would guess a small number of contributors are making the vast majority of sales. I'm not saying this won't be better for them but I don't think they need anywhere close to 50% exclusives for it to break even.

Bart · « **Reply #20 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:55 »

I think so.

this lovely quote sums it up...
"don't piss on my boots and tell me it's raining"

Quote from: unnonimus on March 21, 2019, 14:41

0 people are going to become exclusive with pond5. pond5 will pay everyone 10% less. this is what will happen.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #21 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:55 »

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:50

Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:45
Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:28
Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:19
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!

Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?

Ah, so it's a punishment of sorts? Because I undercut myself at other sites, Pond5 follows that race to the bottom? According to your logic anyways. I thought they didn't want to do a race to the bottom.

But the content I sell on all three sites is priced pretty evenly, so for the buyers there's hardly a difference. Now Pond5 grabs a bigger cut, and for what? To compensate for the expensive Exclusivity or to force me into exclusivity?

Why would you defend their greed?
It's hard to call them greedy when they pay more for nonexclusive work than sites you like (SS, Adobe for example). They still seem to be the least greedy of the bunch don't they?
A race to the bottom involves undercutting the competition, matching pricing and paying a higher royalty rate doesn't seem to me to be part of the race to the bottom, if anything I'd say contributors accepting lower rates and prices are what's driving the race to the bottom.

They paid more than other sites, yes, but will stop doing so. They weren't greedy, but now they are.

This isn't anything else than a cash grab, and their livestream didn't give us an explanation, only a unfair comparison to the 60% for exclusive members (which is a smaller percentage of contributors than non-exclusives, so it's not evenly divided).

tickstock · « **Reply #22 on:** March 21, 2019, 14:57 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:55

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:50
Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:45
Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:28
Quote from: Noedelhap on March 21, 2019, 14:19
The whole Town Hall livestream was a bunch of hypocritical nonsense. It started off great with them claiming they would never want to do a race to the bottom and they give contributors total freedom.
And then monkey came out of the bag, as we all predicted on this forum: a commission cut...unless you join our Exclusivity Program!

Being forced to raise prices or become exclusive, if that's not a total lack of respect towards your contributors, I don't know what it.
If you are licensing content for a lower price and accepting a lower royalty rate at other sites I'm not sure what the complaint is? SS is 30% and Adobe is 35%, last I checked 40% was better. If you value your work lower then why should you expect agencies to value it higher?

Ah, so it's a punishment of sorts? Because I undercut myself at other sites, Pond5 follows that race to the bottom? According to your logic anyways. I thought they didn't want to do a race to the bottom.

But the content I sell on all three sites is priced pretty evenly, so for the buyers there's hardly a difference. Now Pond5 grabs a bigger cut, and for what? To compensate for the expensive Exclusivity or to force me into exclusivity?

Why would you defend their greed?
It's hard to call them greedy when they pay more for nonexclusive work than sites you like (SS, Adobe for example). They still seem to be the least greedy of the bunch don't they?
A race to the bottom involves undercutting the competition, matching pricing and paying a higher royalty rate doesn't seem to me to be part of the race to the bottom, if anything I'd say contributors accepting lower rates and prices are what's driving the race to the bottom.

They paid more than other sites, yes, but will stop doing so. They weren't greedy, but now they are.

This isn't anything else than a cash grab, and their livestream didn't give us an explanation, only a unfair comparison to the 60% for exclusive members (which is a smaller percentage of contributors than non-exclusives, so it's not evenly divided).

Why should it be evenly divided they want exclusive content, nonexclusive content just isn't as valuable.

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #23 on:** March 21, 2019, 15:06 »

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:57

Why should it be evenly divided they want exclusive content, nonexclusive content just isn't as valuable.

No stock clip is exclusive for the customer if it can be bought more than once. It's just another way to be able to use the word "exclusive" in marketing.

It's more valuable for Pond5, sure, because they get more customers. It's not more valuable for the customer, or the contributor.

tickstock · « **Reply #24 on:** March 21, 2019, 15:09 »

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on March 21, 2019, 15:06

Quote from: tickstock on March 21, 2019, 14:57
Why should it be evenly divided they want exclusive content, nonexclusive content just isn't as valuable.

No stock clip is exclusive to the customer if it can be bought more than once. It's just another way to be able to use the word "exclusive" in marketing.

It's not just marketing though. If you need a specific video and it's only on Pond5 then you need to go to Pond5 to get it.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Poll

Pond5 Contributor Poll - I'd like to see _____ at Pond5

Author Topic: Letter to pond5 and quick Poll for contributors (Read 39343 times)

Bart

davidbautista

eyeidea

everest

tickstock

BigBubba

Bart

everest

tickstock

Bart

Noedelhap

Noedelhap

tickstock

Bart

unnonimus

tickstock

Noedelhap

unnonimus

tickstock

tickstock

Bart

Noedelhap

tickstock

increasingdifficulty

tickstock

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors