HOME | DD
parallellogic — Commission Suggestion
Published: 2013-10-13 23:42:36 +0000 UTC; Views: 6173; Favourites: 108; Downloads: 11
Redirect to original
Description
Requesting a commission should be a three step process:1) The buyer clicks the "Commission" button on the artist's profile page
2) Enter in how much you're paying the artist and click "Submit Request"
3) The artist is notified and clicks "Yes" to approve the commission
I have written a full explanation [here]
The staff have expressed interest in this proposal [here]
In brief:
I find the current commission process very hard to use. Rather than explaining how to use the system to each artist I wish to commission, I want to simply commission them directly.
Problem: Artists do not know about deviantART's commission system and do not trust it
Current Solution: To start each commission, I have to explain to each artist how to use and setup the commission widget on their page so I can pay them. Refer to steps 1-7 here:
parallellogic.deviantart.com/a…
Proposed Solution: I directly commission them by clicking a button on their profile page (either a button like the "Send a Note" button or a link in the "Give" menu)
Problem: Professional artists fear "points". They say: "'points' are worthless and are for little kids who only care about llama badges"
Current Solution: I need to explain, repeatedly, that only I pay with points, but they, the artist, will receive cash through PayPal
Proposed Solution: Put a BIG BOLD PayPal icon in the Correspondence Item in the Artist's Message Center and also state how many dollars they will receive.
Problem: Artists want to offer art for a range of prices (rather than a fixed price through the commission widget)
Current Solution: Each time a commissioner wishes to request art from an artist, the artist must upload a new commission item to the Commission Widget, tell the commissioner the item is available for purchase, the commissioner must request the item, then the artist must approve the correspondence item
Proposed Solution: The commissioner and artist reach an agreed price as they normally do. The commissioner requests a deviantART commission for that price and the artist approves it
Questions and Comments Encouraged
Related content
Comments: 67
So if someone uses the commission widget to buy art from me, are they giving me their actual money or do they just get the amount of points that are worth the said amount of money agreed on deducted from their account without spending actual money?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
So i got a commission from my friend using the commission widget. I've finished it already but i haven't gotten my points? I don't have a PayPal set up or anything either.
Do I have to wait a few days to get my points?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I don't see this anywhere, was it ever added to the site? If not, staff is retarded for not making something so simple.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
This is a great idea!! I hope DA goes through with it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The staff (at the time) expressed interest in the concept, but no, it has never been implemented.
comments.deviantart.com/61/398…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have a question about the commission widget. Is there a way that, someone can request a commission through the widget, pay the points, and I still receive the points without it being converted to money?
It's always confused me..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, there is a "withdraw as points" option in the "My Earnings" page. however, if you know you want points, it is better to just go through the "Donation Widget" since you earn 20% more for the same effort (there is no transaction fee).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, okay! Thanks ouo
That fee is a bit annoying though. I will definitely use the Donation Widget.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I really like your approach! Is there any status update on changing the handling of commissions via DA? I also don't really like that 20% cut : ( - I already pay for the premium membership. And because of that 20% cut I am not gonna use the current commission widget - though it would make things a lot easier -_-
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
~Is there any status update on changing the handling of commissions via DA?
No. dA moves in mysterious ways. There's no word on anything until if/when it is released.
~I also don't really like that 20% cut
dA seems to think they're competing against other professional art sites that charge 30%+. However, the existing market that exists on dA is accustomed to PayPal's ~3% rates. It seems dA didn't research the existing market before developing the Commission Widget.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hello and thank you very much for the update : ) ! About the 20% : I am not sure how other people handle it, but the commissions I get are never through professional art sites (but then again, I am not a professional xD), so I am also only accustomed to the Paypal-Fees (as you mentioned). And 20% in comparison really is a huge blow :/ . Which - at least in my case - simply results in me not using the widget xD - and I am sure I am not the only one. Though i am guessing enough people are using it, since DA doesn't feel pressured to change anything about it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't get the impression dA is ever pressured into anything. I think dA is just really focused on the next big thing rather than fixing up what they have.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sadly, this seems to be the case >.<
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
If you don't want the points to be converted to money, does just sending points through gifting still work? ((sorry i haven't been active in a long time))
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yes, using the Donation Widget is the preferred way to transfer points between users. This avoids all service fees
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I love the idea, will the "Artist receives" amount be corresponding with the currency the artist uses? Currently it shows an A beside the $ symbol to show that I receive in AUD when I'm adding a new commission to my commission widget, so it'd be useful to have that shown for the person setting the amount of points they'd like to commission for.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's a good question, I didn't know dA did that. When you quote a price to an American buyer, do you list your price in USD or AUD?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
That and the Americans would get the work cheaper due to their higher value dollar at the moment when converting in Paypal.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
AUD always. In the event they want to send the money via Paypal instead of cash I'd want to make sure I get a currency I can actually use.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i have a question.
when i received a commission through this widget,i clicked the yes button but it didn't give me the points... what do i have to do for that?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Check here: www.deviantart.com/account/ear…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
i know, but it doesn't say anything to press or anything..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It takes two weeks for the funds to clear before you can use them for anything
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
oh
well that sucks, i want them now lol
plus they took off 4 points for some reason, the price was 20
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
if you want the points then dont use the commission widget use the donation widget.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, I figured after a while.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
~off 4 points for some reason, the price was 20
dA charges a 20% fee on commissions. If you only want points, it's better to just use the Donation Widget. Those transactions don't have a fee.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Deviantart should be paying you. lol
..but yes. You summed up why I will never use the Commissions Widget. Points are worthless and look like play money for kids, and the 20% tax of Deviantart is absurd. I have a huge waiting list for commissions without the widget. I've cultivated that myself, through hard work.
My commissions are in a much higher price bracket. If I do a regular 2 character commission, they start at around $250.
DA automatically gets $50 of that if I were to use their widget. That's my cell phone bill.
The widget with it's focus on fake currency and 3/5 price ranges being between 1 cent and $2 seems like it's a game they want kids to dabble in.
As for your suggestion about the "Request Commission" button- I think that would be interesting. It might streamline the process. I get many many notes from people requesting commissions and they seemingly ignore all of my commission information and offer me a handful of points 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
~ Deviantart should be paying you. lol
~If I do a regular 2 character commission, they start at around $250
dA actually caps each commission at $80 (received by the artist). You'd actually need to split up the payment of a commission into multiple parts if you had a desire to use the widget.
Whenever I think of the dA 20% cut, I equate it to Simcity. A 20% tax rate is the max you can set it to in the game. If you set it that high, citizens abandon their homes.
I think the goal for dA is to treat sub-$80 commissions through dA and anything higher through dreamup.com
~3/5 price ranges being
Hmm, I've heard others mention the prices dA gave encouraged smaller commissions, but I didn't really understand the argument until you stated it like this. I'm a bit mixed on whether or not dA is actively encouraging small commissions, the pricing scale follows a log trend quite well. I've seen that same trend in some of my informal experiments tracking user behavior with points outside the commission widget. Personally, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that dA is legitimately responding to the typical use of the widget.
~ It would be nice to just click "No"
I've mentioned comments.deviantart.com/1/4070… ">elsewhere that this suggestion is really geared for the more expensive commissions (where the artist likely doesn't understand how the widget works). Even if this suggestion were implemented, I don't think users would be inclined to "lead with their money" (try to pay you before asking whether you're accepting commissions). I think users would still note you before trying to send you points (in whatever form), so I don't think it would be as simple as hitting "No".
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Personally, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that dA is legitimately responding to the typical use of the widget."
Isn't that cause and effect? The commission widget is capped at far below professional (or even..reasonable) rates (and I forgot about the 80$ cap, but I think the 80$ is after they raised it, right?). I thought originally it was much lower. Like 4,000 points being the cap.
So when you introduce a tool where the cap is very low, it attracts and caters to younger users who aren't, or don't have to, take it seriously (it's likely they have parents paying bills).
So if DA is responding to the typical use of the widget, it's something they kind of created themselves. Because people who can't sell so low, and who can't afford the 20% tax, couldn't even use the tool to begin with. Which again, makes me feel this is specifically aimed at younger users and encourages the under $5 art sales :/.
It kind of makes curious as to what would have happened if they made the tax reasonable to begin with. Even the artists I know who are willing to sell sketches for $25 would never consider using the widget, because the tax is too high (and we have to pay Paypal a reasonable fee after everything as well).
As for the 'leading with their money', I guess I misunderstood you. I got dazed and confused by the allure of a giant "NO" button.
"Whenever I think of the dA 20% cut, I equate it to Simcity. A 20%
tax rate is the max you can set it to in the game. If you set it that
high, citizens abandon their homes."
that made me lol
..I don't think I'd ever be someone who would use the Dreamup thing, though I've heard it mentioned a zillion times; " The commission widget is not for people like YOU. People like YOU should use Dreamup" lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Dreamup has the exact same ridiculously low priced artists as on DA.... probably because they're from DA :/ I don't see how Dreamup is any different from DA really other then it's more difficult to find.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
~Isn't that cause and effect?
Not necessarily. I'm saying they know how the points platform has been used (donations through Donation Widgets) have been used over the past few years. They released the Commission platform several months before releasing the search service, so they have natural "undisturbed" data from before the search was released. Before releasing the search, they should have already had a good idea of how users would price commissions. Once they had that knowledge, they should have been able to choose commission price breaks that broke up commissions into even distributions (so roughly one fifth fit into each section). I'm saying they knew a lot about how things were being used before they chose the price breakpoints in the search page
~I think the 80$ is after they raised it, right?
Yeah, it was like $50 or something before.
~The commission widget is capped at far below professional (or even..reasonable) rates
Professional rates, sure. However, I question how many artists on this site are documenting these commissions for tax purposes (through the Commission Widget, PayPal, or otherwise). From what I've seen, most treat commissions here as a secondary income - as a hobby of sorts. I originally assumed the $100 limit in the widget was for some legal reason (like some form of limit for e-commerce). Though, I'm thinking now it might be to prevent fraud - I have reason to believe they're actively watching every significant commission that goes through this site.
~ it attracts and caters to younger users who aren't
Well, keep in mind a large number of users on the site are already quite young, see my recent journal parallellogic.deviantart.com/j…
~ I got dazed and confused by the allure of a giant "NO" button.
Heh, I can respect that. I've run into the reverse problem with users begging for points, a spam filter would be great.
~ I'd ever be someone who would use the Dreamup thing
I was fed that same line many months ago: how I should really be looking for artists on DreamUp instead of through dA through the Commission Widget. But, I'm only doing commissions in the first place because my money is locked up in points
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
15% cut?! I'll stick with DA and the 2%+ cut for using Paypal. Then again Galleries take 40%-60% of sales from the artist usually, and about 40% as well for entering shows which although huge is necessary to some extent as if they don't make money then you can't use galleries/shows to show your work as they'll then have to close down. So in comparison to that alternative, then 15%-20% is wonderful, but it's still a large amount once tax is also taken so if I can stick with just the Paypal deducted amount (as I've yet to get commissions anyway) then I'm happy with that.
The one advantage of the commission widget though is that it advertises your commission automatically through the search results, assuming of course that people go through the list of available commission from the front page. So in that sense it's like paying an advertising fee but a lot cheaper.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd wager you get more exposure online (more people browse the net every day than will go to a show). I can't really see the justification for an increased fee for appearing in a brick-and-mortar gallery.
~assuming of course that people go through the list of available commission
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
But DreamUp only takes a 15% cut, it's so much better
good lord. lol
Nope @ that too. It feels like they're grooming young teens into accepting huge taxes and underpricing work, only to herd them like cattle to dreamup where they will again, accept a crazy high tax and continue to siphon money from them D:
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thank you for illustrating your request.
Please keep this in your gallery for a while. I have added this to the other suggestions I have gathered.
For the request commission button, this seems like with your request that it is up to the buyer to add in the price. This seems like it is geared solely for people who have previously talked and agreed upon a price. If a buyer randomly stumbles on your page, as a seller, would you think it would be better to leave the price blank?
The buyer would make a request for what they want done.
The seller would see the request and set a price for that commission or reject it.
The buyer can accept or decline the price.
The commission would then continue as normal if accepted.
I do like the idea of requesting a commission, especially as so many artists are used to putting up a number of prices at once, like lineart, coloring, and backgrounds so buyers can mix and match.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Please keep this in your gallery for a while.
Sure thing
This seems like it is geared solely for people who have previously talked and agreed upon a price
Yes. To me there are two typical markets for commissions. One is the "adopt" type market. These are cheap commissions (below, say, $5). The artwork being requested can be described with a sentence or two (and can thus fit in the commission request form currently used). These may take up to an hour or two to complete, and even if the result isn't perfect, the commissioner may seek to commission the same artist again or seek out an artist making similar artwork (there is low cost for "failure"). The existing Commission Widget works well for this market since both the purchase and the description of the art being requested can be done in a single action.
My suggestion is targeting the second market. The other market is the more expensive commissions (say $50+). These works constitute a higher risk. If the art comes out "wrong", there is less chance the commissioner will seek to have the desired artwork recreated elsewhere. Thus, there is more pressure between the commissioner and artist to ensure the final artwork exactly meets the requirements of both parties, so more communication is required (notes). These works typically take more time, so there is a stronger selection process taken by the artist to avoid committing to an excessive workload. What this means is that the typical process goes as follows:
1) An artist posts a journal (or a deviation) announcing they're open for commissions: example
2) Commissioners send notes to the artist in order confirm that they are available and are ok with the desired subject matter. Once the details of the commission have been worked out (poses, backgrounds, colors, etc), the artist quotes a price and the commissioner haggles as necessary to meet their budget
3) Then the commissioner pays the agreed-upon fee.
You'll note how $spyed attempted to use the current system with his experiment but still needed to send a note to each artist, even for relatively cheap commissions. I would find it challenging to fit everything needed for a commission into a single correspondence.
Keep in mind that there are several questions that need to be answered before starting a commission:
- Is the artist accepting commissions? Just because the artist has the widget on their profile does not mean they're available. They may have abandoned their profile some time ago, or they may have forgotten to remove the widget, or may currently be backlogged with completing current commissions.
- Will the artist take this particular commission? Even if the artist is available, they may only want to make commissions for a certain type of subject matter (ie, artwork displaying only certain characters from a fandom: [link] ). The artist may not be fluent in English and only accept commissions from users in their native tongue.
- Can you afford the commission? For more costly artworks, artists typically provide some guidelines for the rough cost of particular levels of artwork (cost for sketch, color, background, etc), but more complex requests can add additional cost. Since the price will vary based on what is requested, it is best to talk with the artist first and limit what you're requesting to your budget.
The above questions need to be answered before starting a commission. Thus, in general, there is communication between the potential commissioner and the artist prior to initiating a commission. When I tried to contact *Ruhje for a commission , they ignored every attempt I made to reach them. If I had sent them money first (had they had the Commission Widget available), I would have had to wait a month for the commission offer to expire before I could spend the points elsewhere (since I would, theoretically, never know whether they were working on the commission or not). To mitigate the risk of tying up funds in a commission that will not be completed, it is best to contact the artist first. This, incidentally, is also why I view all forms of negative feedback (whether past commission offers were accepted or not) as useful. If/when commission feedback becomes available, I hope that even users who did not receive a completed commission will be able to provide feedback.
as a seller, would you think it would be better to leave the price blank?
While this may be a nice feature, I do not see the potential benefit offsetting the required development time. I ask: how many additional commissions will this proposal enable over the alternative? Does leaving the price field blank and starting a commission with a correspondence item reduce the amount of time/effort needed to conduct a commission?
This proposal for a blank price field would require a minimum of two correspondence items: one from the commissioner to the artist to start the commission and another from the artist to the commissioner to verify/approve the price (if the commissioner declines the price, two more correspondence items are needed to repeat the entire process from scratch). From my understanding, this would add unnecessary complexity. This proposal requires the first correspondence item to remain open while the artist and commissioner discuss price and only once an agreement is made, would the second correspondence item be created. If this first correspondence item is deleted from the message center of the artist, or the commissioner loses one of the artist's replies, the entire process would need to start over with a new commission request. With the current message center design, it is very easy to lose comments and correspondence items permanently (by inadvertently deleting them), but it is harder to lose track of notes (which require additional steps to be permanently deleted from the message center)
Your proposal targets price uncertainty in conducting a commission. Rather than attempt to solve this problem with a new system, I think it would be best to allow users to discuss pricing through systems they're already familiar with and trust (comments/notes). Since most users are, in general, new to the commission system and do not trust/understand it initially, I think it best to limit the overhead of the commission process.
I believe most commissions start after the commissioner and artist have discussed the subject matter. If I had access to dA's servers, I'd run the following experiment: compile a list of recent commissions conducted through the widget: collecting the usernames of every commissioner and artist for each transaction. For each of those records I'd check to see where the commissioner contacted the artist through notes prior to initiating the commission. If users exchanged notes immediately before (within a few weeks) initiating a commission, I would conclude it is typical for users to discuss the commission before committing money to it.
If you are looking for additional features that would be useful, please consider:
- Allowing a commission to be paid half up-front and half upon completion (the latter half requiring the approval from the commissioner before the artist receives the funds). The current system requires all to be paid up-front (which puts the commissioner in a somewhat risky situation if the artist loses interest in putting necessary details into the final work). Alternatively, the artist may opt to receive payment upon delivery of the work (which is more risky in my perspective since it's not covered by dA's ToS if the commissioner eventually fails to pay). Now compare that with the typical payment method which involves an initial PayPal transfer up-front for half the cost and another transfer for the remainder upon delivery. That is harder to do with dA since the interface is more cumbersome and there is a two-week hold period on payments (users thus opt to do everything at once). It would be nice if there was a way for the commissioner to pay the full fee up front (and allow the two week period to pass while the commission is being completed), but only release the latter half of the payment to the artist once the commissioner verifies the work is complete. If you would like to see a visual suggestion for this process, please let me know and I will post one.
- Allow feedback from users that never commissioned the artist. If an artist routinely ignores commission requests (opting to only respond to, say, half of the requests) then it would be useful to have this information included in the feedback area too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
And a reduction of the sick 20% fee for DA, please. Or the proffessional artists won't really use it no matter what kind of improvements will be made. Noone will even pay them that much (let's assume a 300$ commission, add the 20% to it. NOPE.) anyway.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd like to see a reduction in the fee as well, though I doubt it will happen, it seems like the system was designed with the 20% in mind (since the math works out so nicely).
~Or the proffessional artists won't really use it
My assumption would be that artists will still list commissions on the system if they're so inclined, they'll just list prices that are 20% higher to account for dA's tax, so there's a large disadvantage for commissioners to buy points in order to buy commissions rather than going directly through PayPal.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's what makes the widget useles... I do premium downloads (of very rough sketch to make it a payment in advance, well, sort of
And which will cause the potential customers to not commish the pro artist this way.
Buying points is completely pointless, and in addition to, they cost far more than they pay even without this 20% fee added. The customes looses twice: 1st on buying points, then on the 20% fee.
All in all, the DA commission widget is an absurd, it's far better to have money and pay with money, one looses less (just on the PayPal fee which is low, and on currency exchange if any). Even in case sb just have those points (e.g. I won many of them, or traded for llamas, or got paid with via standard point transfer before the widget was created), there is no use of the commission widget if one knows it's mechanism (of unnecessary 20% fee DA tries to explain just to get it), it's better to simply transfer/donate the points or make a premium download which doesn't steal any % of the paid amount and the artist gets $ in their 'my earnings' just like if it was a commission widget, just without stealing 20%.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Buying points is completely pointless, and in addition to, they cost far more than they pay even without this 20% fee added. The customes looses twice: 1st on buying points, then on the 20% fee."
I am confused with this statement, so forgive me if I am reading it wrong. It seems that you are saying people lose money by purchasing points. When someone buys, say, 400 points, they pay $5. With that, they will get $5 in points to spend on this site. There is no fee for purchasing points, it is a direct conversion.
When buying premium content or a commission, that is when the 20% comes into play. Purchasing anything else on this site, it is a direct conversion, 400 points per $5.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
First of all: I mentioned 1st buying points(let's take your 5$ makes 400p sample; while one purchases a premium download - which is theoretically feeless or DA added a fee that is not mentioned anywhere, at least not visibly... becuase there was nothing about any fee for premium downloads it gives a conclusion the loss of 1$ (5$->400p->4$) occurs at the point of buying the points, not buying a premium download, or am I wrong and there IS a premium download fee which makes 5$->400p->4$?) THEN >if< it comes to the commission widget, one looses 20%. That's where this "twice" came from (1st loss: 5$->400p->4$; 2nd: -20$ if commission widget used).
"they cost far more than they pay" - "pay" in a sense of how much value do they have when used (besides the commission widget), so: 5$ to buy 400p, but if you use this 400p to pay for sth (besides via commission widget) you are like paying 4$ instead of 5$. Is that what was the confusing part? Is it understantable now?
"With that, they will get $5 in points to spend on this site" ? But in practise 400p makes 4$, not 5$...(e.g. premium downloads) and just 3,20$ if if it's a commission widget fee included... so it's a loss of almost 2$(1,80$) form 5$ after using a commission widget... So what is it acutally like? can my 400p make 5$ in sb's earnings(of which I've NEVER heard of before) or not(like I'm saying)?
I'm sorry if my English is confusing in use, it's still a foreign language I try to learn, and it's difficult to me to express more complicated things...
My while thinking is based on the maths I noticed:
I have 5$
I buy 400p and pay 5$ for them (5$ turned into 400p) suggested value of 400points? 5$
I use my 400p and the seller gets 4$ (400p turned into 4$; a 1$ loss from the basic 5$) practical value of 400p? 4$
I use my 400p to buy a commission via widget, there comes the official 20% fee and the seller gets 3,2$ (400p turned into 3,2$, 0,80$ loss from the 400p/4$ BUT 180$ loss from the basic 5$) commission value of 400p? 3,2$
Each action takes a 20% loss...
1st: 5$ into 400p which can pay 4$ - 20% loss
2nd if the commission widget is used: it's another 20$ loss (of the new amount this time) [36% loss from the starting amount(which was 5$)]
and so on and so on...
Maths, maths, maths...
See my point now?^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think I see what's going on. I'm going to take you step by step through to show you exactly what happens. Your english is terrific, by the way.
First, buying 400 points=$5 to keep that example.
When a seller sets up a commission, say for 400 points, it shows the final profit they receive at $4. This is the final profit after the 20% has been taken.
The buyer will still pay the full 400 points, $5. After the 20% is taken, the seller earns $4.
In the sellers earnings account, they will see the $4 and can then pull the funds to Paypal, a mailed check or points, if they wish.
Your math is flawed, as you take $5, lower it based on an already completed commission sale for $4 profit, than run that through a second commission, getting your final total.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
First of all, I'm terrible at explaining, especially things like maths...
...
I'm sorry I'm sleepy right now, it's a bit late in my country and I had to get up early...
I've just changed my currency to be displayed in USD(-_-). Now I see it's 400->4$ here as well, just like in premium content downloads... I never knew points are 400p=5$ before and that everything that makes them a payment medium results in a 20% loss(which... still makes purchasing points pointless for into-real-money payment reasons, it's still more profitable to use PayPal for a money to money transaction, even if theres really just one fee, but it's still 20%)... it was noticeable only in the case of the commission widget(400p->320p)... it actually has a power of 100p->1$ but 100p->80p... and, if I haven't missed anything, only the commission widget allows a points->points payment(I'm not telling about transfer nor donations of course) while the rest allows points->money payment only... Right?
But now, another thing appears: Just tell me: so why premium content download DOESN'T have the information about the 20% fee visible in opposite to the commission widget while it appears they BOTH have it? I was unawared of that while I knew about this fee in the case of commission widget... It seems that you used two different ways to express the same thing, now it confuses a lot of people... most think premium download doesn't have a fee, but commission widget does, and now I'm finding out that BOTH have a 20% fee, just one pretends there is none...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The commissions widget is a direct offshoot of the premium content platform. Both work relatively the same way, as far as payment goes. Both have the same 80-20% split and both are added directly to your earnings account. By using the commissions widget or clicking the Purchase button on a deviation, the profits from that will always go to the Earnings page and nowhere else.
By using the commissions widget, points used to purchase a commission will always be added to the earnings account. It will not be added directly to the points account.
As the premium content platform and the commissions widget are the same, they have the same agreement as well, both using the premium content terms of service which explains the 80-20 split. They also both show that if 400 points is named the price, $4 is what the seller will be given as earnings.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
but there is no information put directly in the premium download purchase info area(both for the seller and the customer, just checked it)... it's really confusing and problematic. Such information shouldn't be hidden like this, it should be clear, highlighted and definitely not hidden within another page, duesn't it?... Well, if it weren't for our today's conversation and the thought of changing my displayed currency into $, I would never know these two BOTH cause a 20% loss... And interesting thing I noticed is that I've seen a lot of comments about 20% COMMISSION WIDGET fee, and none about premium content download... I'm pretty sure that if people who complain about the 20% fee of the commission widget knew premium download has it too, they would mention the premium content downloads nearby, not just the commission widget... I suppose it means most of people who are awared of commission widget fee are not awared of the fact the 20% is everywhere, eg. in premium download...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>