DISCLOSURE
Commission differs by maker, and always has.
This is the part that decides whether shops will use it, and shops are the side that has to say yes. A system that publishes their rates will be refused by every one of them.
The shop holds all three. Each maker holds one. No maker is a party to another maker agreement, so none of them receives it.
| Their own terms | Another maker’s rate | The shop’s full roster | A maker’s other shops | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The shop | ● | ● | ● | — |
| Maker A | ● | — | — | — |
| Maker B | ● | — | — | — |
| Tempo Titip | — | — | — | — |
The last row is the one that matters. Operating the system is a different thing from being able to read what is on it.
Rates vary and that is ordinary trade
A known ceramicist takes a better split than someone starting out. That is normal commerce, not a scandal, but it is not something a shop will broadcast to its roster.
Makers do not see each other's terms
An agreement covers one maker and one shop. Another maker on the same shelf is not a party to it and does not receive it.
Shops do not see a maker's other placements
Where else the work is placed, and on what terms, is the maker's business. It stays that way.
We hold no view into either
The agreement belongs to the maker and the shop. Running the infrastructure underneath it does not put us on the contract.