Quote from: Minsc on July 10, 2018, 10:57

I don't see any reason to hate SS since they haven't been reducing contributor royalties.

Well, considering that they haven't raise the contributor commissions for about 10 years, while raising the price of subscriptions, you may say that they have somewhat reduced the royalties.

In the past, when SS raised the price of the subscription plans, they usually raised the amount paid per download.

Plus, they seriously dropped the price of the Extended Licenses. A couple years back we would get $28 and now it's rare for them to get to the $20 mark.

I'm pretty sure that they also changed the requirements from which a buyer had to buy an EL, like the number of prints. Many sales that would have required an EL and for which you would receive $28, now you receive $0.38 or less depending on your rank because of the more permissive license.

So yes, they have been reducing the royalties.

I agree that returns have dropped by staying stagnant, because of inflation, but I haven't seen any drop in RPD over the years, actually the opposite (though not enough of an increase in recent years to offset inflation as mentioned).
I had forgotten about the EL thing though. I wonder how things will look re. RPD by the end of this year?

yes, shutterstock is replacing istock as an agency everyone loves to hate.

i left istock 2 years ago , 15% was a joke , no wonder they get replaced

I don�t hate them. In fact, right now I am loving them. I got a request for an extended license yesterday. My royalty is $100+. It is showing in my earnings, my fingers are crossed that it makes it to payout. I haven�t seen an extended license for awhile. I am down to 2 sites...SS and Adobe. I am happy with both of them. Of course I would love it if I made a lot more $$, but that�s partly on me. I could work harder.

Quote from: cathyslife on July 10, 2018, 05:53

Yes, that is what I hate about people constantly complaining about a site. Their famous line is �I am not going to be giving them any more of my images.� So the stock site�s business ethics are so disgusting that they will complain and complain and complain, but they will still let the site continue to stick it to them. They don�t want to give up those pennies, because after all, a penny is better than nothing right? Even if they suck, right?

Which of the micros do you feel has overall good business ethics? (remembering that this is a microstock site, so don't name macros)
IMO, none of them.
And we all have shown that we each have different levels of what we are prepared to tolerate. Or different 'issues' make us more angry than others feel about that issue.

I think Adobe is doing a pretty decent job. Mat Hayward is always around to help, my royalties are mostly 3x more than any others have been (as in $.99 per image vs. say $.33.) Since Adobe bought Fotolia, there hasn�t been any drama there, as far as I know.

Adobe Stock is actually in the low earners for me. Next to ishitty and Dissolve. I don't understand how could this be with over 12 thousands of video footage.

I wish I could close my account again.

I wish I could close my account again.

Why can�t you?

Just had a perfect example of what I said earlier about SS and their absurd reviews.

Had a number of images rejected for similar, where each one was a variation of another image. I mean, different images where each one had a variation. Each variation not only has a different meaning it is also hard to make from the approved image by a designer.

So, I only got one approved of each and the variation rejected. At the same time I see tenths of images being approved that look like they are the exact same frame!

I really do not understand this.

Could this be why they are disliked? showed to me by an old-timer friend!

Last week.  Monday:  172-00
                  Tuesday:     4.56
              Wednesday:    4.56
               Thursday:      5.32
               Friday:          5.32

Coincidence??  could be but not week after week after week!

Precisely. But you've only shown us one week. So your case is rather weak.

Nice to see the old timers given a  boost to their earnings every now and again to keep them interested.

Why Paws!  youre an oldie yourself by now! dont knock it!

Quote from: namussi on July 14, 2018, 00:40

Quote from: derek on July 10, 2018, 13:11

Could this be why they are disliked? showed to me by an old-timer friend!

Last week.  Monday:  172-00
                  Tuesday:     4.56
              Wednesday:    4.56
               Thursday:      5.32
               Friday:          5.32

Coincidence??  could be but not week after week after week!

Precisely. But you've only shown us one week. So your case is rather weak.

On going thing month after month! hardly any difference on patterns at all. Same with me although I have a bit more luck. My sales-pattern have been the same for over a year.

But you're not publishing the numbers, are you?

Quote from: namussi on July 14, 2018, 03:03

Quote from: derek on July 14, 2018, 02:15

Quote from: namussi on July 14, 2018, 00:40

Quote from: derek on July 10, 2018, 13:11

Could this be why they are disliked? showed to me by an old-timer friend!

Last week.  Monday:  172-00
                  Tuesday:     4.56
              Wednesday:    4.56
               Thursday:      5.32
               Friday:          5.32

Coincidence??  could be but not week after week after week!

Precisely. But you've only shown us one week. So your case is rather weak.

On going thing month after month! hardly any difference on patterns at all. Same with me although I have a bit more luck. My sales-pattern have been the same for over a year.

But you're not publishing the numbers, are you?

what numbers? I showed his numbers, my numbers are a bit higher but the same patters, one gigantic day in the week followed by four extremely similar low numbers. Been like it for over a year now, exactly the same pattern. Im not alone you know there are total of over 50 of us always comparing in the end of the month! and the same thing....capped earnings for some of us!

I concur with that