CAP603 wrote:
Seems to me it's part of the current trend to marginalize the role the photographer has in creating an image. The pay site gets the lion's share of the money, the model gets a smaller cut (of course, the fans are voting for her, not the nameless photographer), and the photographer gets the scraps - just enough to keep him from starving, but not enough to fill his belly.

I believe that all of the contributors- model, make up, stylist, etc- in a successful image are important, but the photographer usually provides the overall creative direction of the session and coordinates the efforts of the team to achieve the intended result, and sites like this tend to re-enforce the attitude that the contribution of the photographer counts for little, since the photography part of it is so easy "a caveman could do it" (apologies to the caveman commercial)

again incorrect outlook...

its a site praising womens beauty, and the photographers cut is the same as the sites cut in terms of the votes.

plus people have to realize the networking capabilities and the fun you have with zivity sets!

If we are ALL doing it JUST FOR THE MONEY, then get the fuck off mayhem and start making it then!

http://www.zivity.com/photographers/carbondecay

http://www.zivity.com/photographers/carbondecay

http://www.zivity.com/photographers/carbondecay

http://www.zivity.com/photographers/carbondecay

TKellond wrote:
If some photographers are uninformed enough to piss away their copyright to Zivity over some TFCD images they never would have made anything on anyway, well that's their business.

There're 2 issues with that statement. 
#1, if the images are those you'd never have made anything on anyway you're not pissing ANYTHING away.
#2, you don't sign over your copyrights to Zivity, you grant them a usage license.  YOU retain copyright.

TKellond wrote:
Now that's the right attitude no matter what you plan on doing with your images!  Make sure your images are still yours!  Yes and re read the terms and conditions on Zivity before uploading another image set.  You never know when someone might want to talk money to the rightful copyright holder about publication!

My point was not to dispute whether Zivity is fun or not.  That is a side bar, and irrelevant when it comes to who owns the right to YOUR WORK!

People who do not read the actual contracts should not babble about what they do not know.

Zivity does not buy copyrights they buy usage that is non compete for 90 days only.

After 90 day I can sell the image to anyone anywhere I please.

TKellond wrote:
#1  How do you know when you have a market for images that are shot on spec or trade?  YOU DON'T  But if you don't have full control of the copyright and use, your ability to get top dollar is decreased to about what Zivity pays photographers!  Peanuts!

#2 Reread the usage license and photo submission guidelines again.  Just what do you think they are doing with an image that is 2500 pixels and doesn't have the photographers watermark on it!?

While your at it, Google "copyright protection and rights".  See what you get, and then go and compare it with the agreement Zivity wants you to sign before you post.

If your images are truly trash, and you laugh all the way to the bank every time some one votes for them and Zivity pays you in a timely manner.  I say more power to you!  Have fun!

But if you ever want to own your own work and get top dollar for it, or hope to, you may want to think twice before sending a printable size image file without your watermark to an online community.

I think that about covers it.

I thank everyone for their comments.  Freedom of speech!  The links below are for those who wish to know more about copyright protections and rights.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

http://www.copyrightregistrationservice.com/

http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/241476.html

One last link for the person says I don't know what I'm talking about regarding Zivity and copyright.  Go and reread the master agreement that Zivity has all photographers sign.

http://www.zivity.com/legal/Zivity-Mast … icense.pdf

mhm... I had a peek at the agreement. And no, it doesn't seem to support the claims you are making at all. And yes, I trained as a lawyer in Canada.  And I used to teach this stuff to lawyers in the US.  There's a difference between Googleship and scholarship.  Jumping up and down and pointing to something does not make your idea of what it means necessarily right.

Disclaimer: I have no zivity sets nor do I have any intention of putting any up in the immediate future, nor do I have a business relationship with Zivity or Chris. In fact, over the years he and I have been on opposite sides often enough. He just happens to have a much better grasp of the law ......this time

as for 1 and 2
1# who cares...really? if you think you can make more money elsewhere go somewhere else instead of continuing this rant for months and months and months.
2# who cares? an image with a watermark is useless on a site like zivity.  Theres no way someone would pay that site money every month for the right to 'vote' or view or whatever if the images had watermarks on them lol.    So bringing up a watermark is just silly.  Its the licence that counts and if someone doesn't like the licence they don't play.  watermark changes nothing.  your logic escapes me. Truly I have tried to figure it out but it just defies reason.


the worst thing about this thread coming back again and again is I keep getting reminded about pizza  and pizza ruins my keyboard every time I try to edit and inhale a slice at the same tiime
Can we all agree to make it about beer money instead? I have plenty of beer that I'm not drinking so it's a lot better for productivity

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:

mhm... I had a peek at the agreement. And no, it doesn't seem to support the claims you are making at all. And yes, I trained as a lawyer in Canada.  And I used to teach this stuff to lawyers in the US.  There's a difference between Googleship and scholarship.  Jumping up and down and pointing to something does not make your idea of what it means necessarily right.

Disclaimer: I have no zivity sets nor do I have any intention of putting any up in the immediate future, nor do I have a business relationship with Zivity or Chris. In fact, over the years he and I have been on opposite sides often enough. He just happens to have a much better grasp of the law ......this time

as for 1 and 2
1# who cares...really? if you think you can make more money elsewhere go somewhere else instead of continuing this rant for months and months and months.
2# who cares? an image with a watermark is useless on a site like zivity.  Theres no way someone would pay that site money every month for the right to 'vote' or view or whatever if the images had watermarks on them lol.    So bringing up a watermark is just silly.  Its the licence that counts and if someone doesn't like the licence they don't play.  watermark changes nothing.  your logic escapes me. Truly I have tried to figure it out but it just defies reason.


the worst thing about this thread coming back again and again is I keep getting reminded about pizza  and pizza ruins my keyboard every time I try to edit and inhale a slice at the same tiime
Can we all agree to make it about beer money instead? I have plenty of beer that I'm not drinking so it's a lot better for productivity

Bottom line!  The contract is a poor one for the protection and preservation of a copyrighted work.  There are too many escape clauses that excuse Zivity from any "accidental or unintended use of the images posted to Zivity"

Read the Additional terms and conditions and then tell me it is a good deal for you as a photographer, or any photographer.  That is all I meant, and while my choice of words may not have been legally precise the end result is you as the originator and holder of the copyright will have no control or recourse for compensation should your legal rights be violated.

Most artists get a lesson in copyright law the hard way, after their work has been ripped off.  I have not done business with Zivity nor will I in the future, but others seem to like the whole idea of a community type site that you can get money out of.  Or at least the illusion of money. 

So my lawyer friend.  You bothered to write a reply to correct my "googleship" (obviously there was something about this topic or my response that irritated you enough to insult me).  Tell me, tell everyone that Zivity is good for artists and is interested in protecting our copyright.   

Enjoy the beer!

TKellond wrote:
Go and reread the master agreement that Zivity has all photographers sign.

I find it amusing that someone who's misquoting things like image size requirements is telling others to re-read.

TKellond wrote:
Bottom line!  The contract is a poor one for the protection and preservation of a copyrighted work.  There are too many escape clauses that excuse Zivity from any "accidental or unintended use of the images posted to Zivity"

That's actually pretty common & logical... it means if someone steals your work you go after the thief, not Zivity.  Many sites have such clauses.

Sophistocles wrote:

I shot off a message to confirm this and was told yes, if you have a set in the queue, just drop them a message and they'll extend that time to let everything happen.

By way of full disclosure (though I've said this on other threads), I'm on Zivity's Artist Advisory board. So I'm obviously pleased with the site and how it's run - I wouldn't volunteer for such a role if I didn't believe in the business.

I commend for being upfront about your relationship with them. Many people are not as open and ethical to be so straightforward as to disclose connections and financial interest. Good fer you.

TKellond wrote:
#1  How do you know when you have a market for images that are shot on spec or trade?  YOU DON'T  But if you don't have full control of the copyright and use, your ability to get top dollar is decreased to about what Zivity pays photographers!  Peanuts!

#2 Reread the usage license and photo submission guidelines again.  Just what do you think they are doing with an image that is 2500 pixels and doesn't have the photographers watermark on it!?

While your at it, Google "copyright protection and rights".  See what you get, and then go and compare it with the agreement Zivity wants you to sign before you post.

If your images are truly trash, and you laugh all the way to the bank every time some one votes for them and Zivity pays you in a timely manner.  I say more power to you!  Have fun!

But if you ever want to own your own work and get top dollar for it, or hope to, you may want to think twice before sending a printable size image file without your watermark to an online community.

I think that about covers it.

I thank everyone for their comments.  Freedom of speech!  The links below are for those who wish to know more about copyright protections and rights.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

http://www.copyrightregistrationservice.com/

http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/241476.html

One last link for the person says I don't know what I'm talking about regarding Zivity and copyright.  Go and reread the master agreement that Zivity has all photographers sign.

http://www.zivity.com/legal/Zivity-Mast … icense.pdf

See boldfaced and underlined. That outfit appears to be a ripoff, masquerading as the copyright office. In fact, though, they are based in the UK, and registration with them has no legal standing as far as US copyright law.

BodyartBabes wrote:
There's a lot of things about zivity I don't like, most have been stated here.

The deal killer was uploading un-watermarked images, and not trusting their distribution method.  If I could place the watermarks, I'd have less issue.  I also don't like their site format, and anything that isn't standard HTML is usually hiding something.  (eg: flash, java, etc).   And, collectors want to view quickly, so sites that don't aknowledge that have other motivations.   

The only way I'd participate is if the image sets were payment to a model for work on other stuff, so I was giving her usage rights anyway.   I'd get a little something, while she made her money.

Scott

If you look back over the thread, that's what most of us do.  I'll do a 2 hour TF* shoot & throw in 30 minutes to shoot some Zivity images.  The model would have the images anyhow.

glamour pics wrote:
A couple more comments:

They require the girls to be 19, not just 18. Odd.

There is a huge, huge delay in payment. You can be waiting more than half a year for your money.

There is an indemnification clause. If Zivity gets in a legal brawl over your photos somehow, YOU are required to pay their lawyers.

According to the guidelines, the work they want is pretty tame.

I have no financial connection, and am not shooting for Zivity.

The 19 thing's not uncommon.  SG and some other sites have that, and it's due to differences in age of majority laws in various US states.

The indemnification thing's not uncommon either.  Say someone shoots images they don't really have the rights to & the person who does have the rights sues the poster & Zivity.  It's not THEIR fault, why should they have to pay?  Again, a number of other sites do this.

The delay's to prevent someone gaming the system with fraudulent credit cards.

Mercy wrote:
I think zivity is a great idea on a tfp. I have been offering it to anyone who makes a TFP offer to me that I would normally tfp anyway seeing as we can make a few extra bucks off it. I'm not looking for make hundreds off the site but it would be nice to open my mail box and find a $50 check right before you're about to go shopping ^_~ Wish more photographers shot for it!

~Mercy

Yep. 

TKellond wrote:

Bottom line!  The contract is a poor one for the protection and preservation of a copyrighted work.  There are too many escape clauses that excuse Zivity from any "accidental or unintended use of the images posted to Zivity"

IMA LET YOU FINISH BUT IMA REPLY IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE CAPS ARE BEST TEXT EVER!!! (also saves on making multiple quote boxes)

BOTTOM LINE THIS IS SO STANDARD MY CATS KNOW IT.  WhAT YOU ARE JUMPING UP AND DOWN ABOUT IS WHAT EVERYONE ELSE DOES.  PLEASE DESCRIBE HOW ITS A POOR ONE. PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THESE ESCAPE CLAUSES ARE SO RADICALLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT PEOPLE AGREE TO ON FB? MYSPACE? FLIKR? DEVIANTART?

Read the Additional terms and conditions and then tell me it is a good deal for you as a photographer, or any photographer.  That is all I meant, and while my choice of words may not have been legally precise the end result is you as the originator and holder of the copyright will have no control or recourse for compensation should your legal rights be violated.

SINCE THE ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ARE STANDARD BOILERPLATE I  FIND IT CURIOUS THAT YOU ARE SO UPSET ABOUT THEM.  I READ THEM THE FIRST TIME. MAYBE IF YOU TELL ME WHAT YOU FIND SO HEINOUS I CAN EXPLAIN IT TO  YOU?

Most artists get a lesson in copyright law the hard way, after their work has been ripped off.  I have not done business with Zivity nor will I in the future, but others seem to like the whole idea of a community type site that you can get money out of.  Or at least the illusion of money. 


IM SO GLAD YOU MAJORED IN SHOCK JOURNALISM.  PUTTING TWO UNLINKED IDEAS TOGETHER TO MAKE AN OPINION LOOK LIKE FACT IS GREAT FOR A FRONT PAGE TABLOID BUT REALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY ITS JUST GRANDSTANDING.  SHOW ME HOW (FOR THE FIRST TIME) ARTISTS ARE LIKELY TO GET A LESSON IN COPYRIGHT THE HARD WAY BY SIGNING UP FOR ZIVITY?  I HAPPEN TO KNOW TWO LAWYERS WHO HAVE DONE ZIVITIY SHOOTS (ONE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE LENS).  ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL ALL OF US THAT THERE ARE SUCH GREAT RISKS?  REALLY>>>>POINT TO SOME ACTUAL FACTS. HOW ARE ARTISTS GOING TO GET RIPPED OFF BY THIS?  AND NOT JUST POINT TO THE TEXT.  WALK US THROUGH IT STEP BY STEP AND EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENS AND HOW THE SITE FACILITATES RIPOFF MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE?



So my lawyer friend.  You bothered to write a reply to correct my "googleship" (obviously there was something about this topic or my response that irritated you enough to insult me).  Tell me, tell everyone that Zivity is good for artists and is interested in protecting our copyright.   

Enjoy the beer!

I cant enjoy any beer.  even one kills me for my workouts the next day Thats why its warehoused here instead of being consumed. As for insulting you, please...you haven't been insulted yet   I'm just calling you on thinking you know what you are talking about despite being corrected more than a few times long before I broke my code of silence.  When people disagree with you they may be right.  peace

Jared Holder wrote:
Sorry if I missed this part but...

what do people pay for membership to do? Just to vote?

Why would someone want to pay to be a member to vote in the first place?

they get to see the pictures.
yes.. apparently there are pics on zivity

SLE Photography wrote:
If you look back over the thread, that's what most of us do.  I'll do a 2 hour TF* shoot & throw in 30 minutes to shoot some Zivity images.  The model would have the images anyhow.

Mercy wrote:
I think zivity is a great idea on a tfp. I have been offering it to anyone who makes a TFP offer to me that I would normally tfp anyway seeing as we can make a few extra bucks off it. I'm not looking for make hundreds off the site but it would be nice to open my mail box and find a $50 check right before you're about to go shopping ^_~ Wish more photographers shot for it!

~Mercy

I shoot Zivity sets with models TFP if they pose nude for my art. I don't care about the money and who makes what nor that the model makes more than the photographer. If I get what I want and the model gets the Zivity set she wants, to me it's win-win.  It doesn't take that long to shoot a Zivity set if you know what you are doing.

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:

they get to see the pictures.
yes.. apparently there are pics on zivity

Brilliant!

glamour pics wrote:
A couple more comments:

They require the girls to be 19, not just 18. Odd.

There is a huge, huge delay in payment. You can be waiting more than half a year for your money.

There is an indemnification clause. If Zivity gets in a legal brawl over your photos somehow, YOU are required to pay their lawyers.

According to the guidelines, the work they want is pretty tame.

I have no financial connection, and am not shooting for Zivity.

Very interesting

glamour pics wrote:
A couple more comments:

They require the girls to be 19, not just 18. Odd.

There is a huge, huge delay in payment. You can be waiting more than half a year for your money.

There is an indemnification clause. If Zivity gets in a legal brawl over your photos somehow, YOU are required to pay their lawyers.

According to the guidelines, the work they want is pretty tame.

I have no financial connection, and am not shooting for Zivity.

Yea. Imagine the float on all that money, and they pass it off as credit fraud prevention. I haven't looked, but my bet is they are not keeping that money in a state that allows such things. It would be interesting to see where the payment checks come from when they reach the model/photog.

Patrickth wrote:
Yea. Imagine the float on all that money, and they pass it off as credit fraud prevention. I haven't looked, but my bet is they are not keeping that money in a state that allows such things. It would be interesting to see where the payment checks come from when they reach the model/photog.

where do you get this? credit fraud prevention? how on earth did you jump to that conclusion.  A delay in payment to the photographer isn't credit fraud prevention its just slow payment lol.    They get paid upfront and the photographer has to wait.  There's no credit fraud prevention involved at all.  Do you have anything on their TOS that remotely suggests it?

as for imagining the float....lol. you cant have it both ways. there's nothing of significant value if the photographers are getting a poor deal in the first place lol.  Even chris says its pizza money.  whats the great imagining of the float on pizza money at today's interest rates?

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:
where do you get this? credit fraud prevention? how on earth did you jump to that conclusion.  A delay in payment to the photographer isn't credit fraud prevention its just slow payment lol.    They get paid upfront and the photographer has to wait.  There's no credit fraud prevention involved at all.  Do you have anything on their TOS that remotely suggests it?

as for imagining the float....lol. you cant have it both ways. there's nothing of significant value if the photographers are getting a poor deal in the first place lol.  Even chris says its pizza money.  whats the great imagining of the float on pizza money at today's interest rates?

Its in their faq.  Chris might think its pizza money, and he would probably be correct if he was talking about models and photographers. 

But I am talking about corporate. You take in subsriber money, hold that money for xx months then send out your checks to your "suppliers".   I am not  a math kind of guy, but even at a miserly 2% a month, thats 24% a year they are getting.

Someone posted the link above me. Go check out Payment on page one.  220 days of float they are getting and put it down to credit card fraud prevention.

I am pretty sure within the scope on most states, or at least about 22 of them, they could very easily have issues with our banking laws in one form or another if that is their stated legal position.

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:
where do you get this? credit fraud prevention? how on earth did you jump to that conclusion.  A delay in payment to the photographer isn't credit fraud prevention its just slow payment lol.    They get paid upfront and the photographer has to wait.  There's no credit fraud prevention involved at all.  Do you have anything on their TOS that remotely suggests it?

as for imagining the float....lol. you cant have it both ways. there's nothing of significant value if the photographers are getting a poor deal in the first place lol.  Even chris says its pizza money.  whats the great imagining of the float on pizza money at today's interest rates?

I mentioned the credit fraud thing, and it's spelled out in the model & photographer agreements that there's a 6 month wait for payment to avoid credit card fraud.

SLE Photography wrote:

I mentioned the credit fraud thing, and it's spelled out in the model & photographer agreements that there's a 6 month wait for payment to avoid credit card fraud.

the waiting period 'reduces the risk of credit card fraud' is what it says in their license agreement which is very interesting to me.  i would be curious to see where their research determined that it reduces the risk of credit card fraud versus the traditional methods of getting lots of the proper/technical buyer info when the transaction goes down. or how that time frame was deemed to be most appropriate? there are major organizations paying out massive amounts of money in similar transactions (someone pays with a credit card and someone else gets paid for the deal) through parties like Paypal but the receivers of payment aren't waiting that long of a time frame.  Just strange. 

To me zivity is simply a clever new spin on a paysite with a community-based business model.  I'm not sure their voting system is the smartest method but overall zivity has created a very good business for themselves so far.  It's described as an 'adult content startup' that's raised $8 million so far so they will probably tweak different areas with time.  I'm sure timeliness of payment will be one.  But when you are raising capital or entertaining prospective investors (they may need further rounds of funding) their payment delay works nicely in a sales pitch to those prospective investors.  If i was a prospective investor asking the right questions I would want an assurance that there was some mechanism built into the business model so the ability for the site to 'blow-up' (the negative kind) would be or could be minimized.  And delaying payment handles that objection nicely.

Jeff Fiore wrote:

SLE Photography wrote:
If you look back over the thread, that's what most of us do.  I'll do a 2 hour TF* shoot & throw in 30 minutes to shoot some Zivity images.  The model would have the images anyhow.

I shoot Zivity sets with models TFP if they pose nude for my art. I don't care about the money and who makes what nor that the model makes more than the photographer. If I get what I want and the model gets the Zivity set she wants, to me it's win-win.  It doesn't take that long to shoot a Zivity set if you know what you are doing.

I think that is an awesome deal

~Mercy

ROXX Photography wrote:

the waiting period 'reduces the risk of credit card fraud' is what it says in their license agreement which is very interesting to me.  i would be curious to see where their research determined that it reduces the risk of credit card fraud versus the traditional methods of getting lots of the proper/technical buyer info when the transaction goes down. or how that time frame was deemed to be most appropriate? there are major organizations paying out massive amounts of money in similar transactions (someone pays with a credit card and someone else gets paid for the deal) through parties like Paypal but the receivers of payment aren't waiting that long of a time frame.  Just strange. 

To me zivity is simply a clever new spin on a paysite with a community-based business model.  I'm not sure their voting system is the smartest method but overall zivity has created a very good business for themselves so far.  It's described as an 'adult content startup' that's raised $8 million so far so they will probably tweak different areas with time.  I'm sure timeliness of payment will be one.  But when you are raising capital or entertaining prospective investors (they may need further rounds of funding) their payment delay works nicely in a sales pitch to those prospective investors.  If i was a prospective investor asking the right questions I would want an assurance that there was some mechanism built into the business model so the ability for the site to 'blow-up' (the negative kind) would be or could be minimized.  And delaying payment handles that objection nicely.

The could have their ability to take cards pulled in hours on chargebacks, consumer complaints, state regulators, ftc  and any number of other issues.  If I was an investor in a startup like that, I would be hammering them daily to see what they are doing to lessen the risk of Visa or MasterCard stepping on them.

My instincts tell me someone else besides the one on the homepage from Paypal Is involved in this model.

Patrickth wrote:

The could have their ability to take cards pulled in hours on chargebacks, consumer complaints, state regulators, ftc  and any number of other issues.  If I was an investor in a startup like that, I would be hammering them daily to see what they are doing to lessen the risk of Visa or MasterCard stepping on them.

My instincts tell me someone else besides the one on the homepage from Paypal Is involved in this model.

Well, sure but take CCBill as an example.  To my knowledge they are the largest 3rd party processor for the adult world.  They are very sensitive to chargebacks due to the nature of their underlying accounts (paysites) content and due to the fact that someone could illegally gather unauthorized content and then put together a paysite that blows up later and ultimately CCBill is on the hook for a ton of transactions. BUT.....BUT.....and I'll say it again...BUT they only have a 5% holdback on their transactions.  That 5% you get back after 6 months and then it just rolls from there.  So CCBill has an infinite more amount of risk than zivity yet they are only charging a 5% holdback which is more than fair in my opinion.  So you get paid weeks after the transaction goes down (less fees of course) rather than months.

Jared Holder wrote:
Sorry if I missed this part but...

what do people pay for membership to do? Just to vote?

Why would someone want to pay to be a member to vote in the first place?

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:
they get to see the pictures.
yes.. apparently there are pics on zivity

I've been in this (people trying to make you money with your own images by taking a cut) since the first AVS (pre-adultcheck) started up.

They all have flaws, and the flaw in zivity is the "votes."

I don't understand why anyone would buy more votes, when they still get the access/images for free with their monthly membership.

So, the "voting" is not based at all on actual times your content was delivered, but on favoritism and marketing.

A person could vote for the same people every month, but look a dozens of other image sets.

Until a system is devised where you are paid for actual times your content was delivered, it's unfair.

In the 90's I ran a service where we did just that.  Total income was taken, we took 30%, then each provider got a percentage of the remaining 70% by how many downloads they had (times the bytes -- since it was a based on data transfer)  So, if you had 30% of the downloads/transfer you got 30% of the 70%remaining.  The *ONLY* vote that counted was actual dollars spent downloading the content.  Average monthly take divided among a dozen or so providers was about $12,000 (not bad in the bbs days).

Virtually *EVERY* other system out there misses that point, and rewards the marketers, not the content providers.

AVS systems reward those that sell memberships *NOT* those that deliver any real content.   Zivity has the same inherent problems.

Scott

ROXX Photography wrote:
And delaying payment handles that objection nicely.

Right!

Always protect your own ass, not the people working for you.

I posted months ago on the dangers of zivity income planning, and maybe it was in this thread, or one like it.  They can delay payment up to almost a year!  If you read the actual terms.  While that can improve _THEIR_ cash flow, it means that check you were expecting to pay your rent was now delayed another 3 months.....

Scott

Patrickth wrote:
But I am talking about corporate. You take in subsriber money, hold that money for xx months then send out your checks to your "suppliers".   I am not  a math kind of guy, but even at a miserly 2% a month, thats 24% a year they are getting.

2% per month?????? 24% per year?????  Show me where to get those rates on short term deposits????  Read any newspapers in the last 4 years?

Cliff from NJ wrote:

2% per month?????? 24% per year?????  Show me where to get those rates on short term deposits????  Read any newspapers in the last 4 years?

I was being generic for the principal I was talking about in that post. If you want to figure out what that float actually is, go to this link, check it out then shop around for a bank and negotiate..

Whatever it is, it is, but the principal is the same. People who know how to move money, or have a bank who knows how, like Scotia Bank have software that can do it in the background once the "ENTER" but is pushed.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/fomc/fundsrate.htm