MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstocks new pricing structure  (Read 6552 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 13, 2017, 15:11 »
0
Some good, some bad. The bulk buy option sounds like the kind of garbage fotolia offers with regards to how much we will make.

Email from shutterstock:

"While high resolution footage is increasingly popular with our customers, they often choose entry-level clips because of the lower price. To encourage bulk high resolution downloads, we've narrowed the pricing gap across all our video packs. By raising the price for entry-level clips and lowering the prices for higher resolution packs, we've made this higher-quality content an easier choice for our customers. These pricing changes will vary globally.

We're introducing a new high-volume footage package.

Recently there's been a demand for a large number of downloads from a specific set of customers from large companies. To suit their needs we will soon introduce a high-volume footage package. This package gives your work an opportunity to reach a broader audience that could result in even more downloads.

We will only be offering this package to large business customers who are guaranteeing bulk purchases of footage. It wont be shown on our public website. With this package, clients will be given the opportunity to download a large volume of footage clips at a negotiated price per clip. As with our other footage products, your earnings under this high-volume footage package will be a percentage of the purchase price of each download, with payouts between $3 and $6 per clip."


« Reply #1 on: April 13, 2017, 15:30 »
0
Some good, some bad. The bulk buy option sounds like the kind of garbage fotolia offers with regards to how much we will make.

Email from shutterstock:

"While high resolution footage is increasingly popular with our customers, they often choose entry-level clips because of the lower price. To encourage bulk high resolution downloads, we've narrowed the pricing gap across all our video packs. By raising the price for entry-level clips and lowering the prices for higher resolution packs, we've made this higher-quality content an easier choice for our customers. These pricing changes will vary globally.

We're introducing a new high-volume footage package.

Recently there's been a demand for a large number of downloads from a specific set of customers from large companies. To suit their needs we will soon introduce a high-volume footage package. This package gives your work an opportunity to reach a broader audience that could result in even more downloads.

We will only be offering this package to large business customers who are guaranteeing bulk purchases of footage. It wont be shown on our public website. With this package, clients will be given the opportunity to download a large volume of footage clips at a negotiated price per clip. As with our other footage products, your earnings under this high-volume footage package will be a percentage of the purchase price of each download, with payouts between $3 and $6 per clip."

If you could target for that market; the volume might make it worthwhile.   Sure is a low pay-out, though

« Reply #2 on: April 13, 2017, 15:51 »
+13
Some good, some bad. The bulk buy option sounds like the kind of garbage fotolia offers with regards to how much we will make.

Email from shutterstock:

"While high resolution footage is increasingly popular with our customers, they often choose entry-level clips because of the lower price. To encourage bulk high resolution downloads, we've narrowed the pricing gap across all our video packs. By raising the price for entry-level clips and lowering the prices for higher resolution packs, we've made this higher-quality content an easier choice for our customers. These pricing changes will vary globally.

We're introducing a new high-volume footage package.

Recently there's been a demand for a large number of downloads from a specific set of customers from large companies. To suit their needs we will soon introduce a high-volume footage package. This package gives your work an opportunity to reach a broader audience that could result in even more downloads.

We will only be offering this package to large business customers who are guaranteeing bulk purchases of footage. It wont be shown on our public website. With this package, clients will be given the opportunity to download a large volume of footage clips at a negotiated price per clip. As with our other footage products, your earnings under this high-volume footage package will be a percentage of the purchase price of each download, with payouts between $3 and $6 per clip."

If you could target for that market; the volume might make it worthwhile.   Sure is a low pay-out, though

Is there an opt out? These fkrs use the "higher volume" every mf time and only the sheep dont care. Sick of this sh!t.

« Reply #3 on: April 13, 2017, 15:59 »
+8
Like fotolia, i uploaded two clips there to test it out and made $3 on a sale! What is that all about? Said it depended on if it was clip packs etc. I've pulled my stuff from that site and won't hesitate with shutterstock if this happens. $3-$6 isn't much, even if I sell 100 clips that devalues my work way too much and is a slap in the face to any serious producer.

KB

« Reply #4 on: April 13, 2017, 16:00 »
+2
We will only be offering this package to large business customers who are guaranteeing bulk purchases of footage. It wont be shown on our public website. With this package, clients will be given the opportunity to download a large volume of footage clips at a negotiated price per clip. As with our other footage products, your earnings under this high-volume footage package will be a percentage of the purchase price of each download, with payouts between $3 and $6 per clip."
Fantastic. This is the same tactic that Getty uses. Only their BEST customers (i.e., those who buy the most files) get the steep discounts, so those who make the bulk of the purchases pay the least.

I so look forward to most of my HD & 4K video sales bringing in between $3 and $6 a clip. Can't wait.  >:(

« Reply #5 on: April 13, 2017, 16:02 »
+4

Is there an opt out? These fkrs use the "higher volume" every mf time and only the sheep dont care. Sick of this sh!t.
[/quote]

I just sent them a message asking to opt out of this bulk sale bs.

« Reply #6 on: April 13, 2017, 16:03 »
+5
We will only be offering this package to large business customers who are guaranteeing bulk purchases of footage. It wont be shown on our public website. With this package, clients will be given the opportunity to download a large volume of footage clips at a negotiated price per clip. As with our other footage products, your earnings under this high-volume footage package will be a percentage of the purchase price of each download, with payouts between $3 and $6 per clip."
Fantastic. This is the same tactic that Getty uses. Only their BEST customers (i.e., those who buy the most files) get the steep discounts, so those who make the bulk of the purchases pay the least.

I so look forward to most of my HD & 4K video sales bringing in between $3 and $6 a clip. Can't wait.  >:(

I will gladly remove my entire catalog if they go this route. This is why nobody uploads to videohive.

« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2017, 16:05 »
0
Just out of curiosity, how much do you currently make per month per clip at Shutterstock only? Or which site has the best $/clip/month for you? Question aimed at anyone.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2017, 16:08 »
+1
Just out of curiosity, how much do you currently make per month per clip at Shutterstock only? Or which site has the best $/clip/month for you? Question aimed at anyone.

Currently an HD sale nets me $17-$23.

« Reply #9 on: April 13, 2017, 16:11 »
0
I have already seen some $5 sales. Not pleased!

« Reply #10 on: April 13, 2017, 16:14 »
0
I have already seen some $5 sales. Not pleased!

Yes they have that silly lo-res option which makes you peanuts! Why can't they switch to HD and 4k only? Videoblocks is quickly becoming my favorite site because the commission is 90% of the sale.

« Reply #11 on: April 13, 2017, 16:16 »
0
Just out of curiosity, how much do you currently make per month per clip at Shutterstock only? Or which site has the best $/clip/month for you? Question aimed at anyone.

Currently an HD sale nets me $17-$23.

That is not what I asked.

« Reply #12 on: April 13, 2017, 16:20 »
0
Just out of curiosity, how much do you currently make per month per clip at Shutterstock only? Or which site has the best $/clip/month for you? Question aimed at anyone.

Currently an HD sale nets me $17-$23.

That is not what I asked.

I've made 23$/ sale as well. Some months thats it. In two years I've made $1000 with about 400 clips, however I started with nothing so give me another year and I'll tell you my new total.


« Reply #13 on: April 13, 2017, 16:22 »
0
Let me clarify: $/clip/month = monthly earnings divided by how many clips you have.

« Reply #14 on: April 13, 2017, 16:28 »
0
I don't look at $ per month per clip. Just overall sales. If you factor in all of the garbage clips that don't sell then how's $0.10/clip per month? More/less? Don't know don't care

« Reply #15 on: April 13, 2017, 18:15 »
0
Is that $3 for 4k footage?

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #16 on: April 13, 2017, 19:01 »
0
Let me clarify: $/clip/month = monthly earnings divided by how many clips you have.

$1000 over two years with 400 clips would make it about $0.10 per clip, per month.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #17 on: April 14, 2017, 00:06 »
+2
I don't look at $ per month per clip. Just overall sales. If you factor in all of the garbage clips that don't sell then how's $0.10/clip per month? More/less? Don't know don't care

You should look at $ per month per clip. It gives you an idea of how much you're earning based on the amount of time, money and effort you're putting in... which is vital information for any business. Whether you're a large multi-national, or a one man band. And knowing the dollar value on a per clip basis, will allow you to focus your efforts on higher selling content.

« Reply #18 on: April 14, 2017, 00:53 »
+2
We all know where this is headed!
We really need a opt out, or the footage market will be completly ruined in no time.... 

« Reply #19 on: April 14, 2017, 02:09 »
+1
Prices are starting to go down... that is what the market demands because of some other agencies that are dumping prices. Now incomes will go down, and agencies that are already dumping prices will probably go even lower to be competitive.

GJ.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #20 on: April 14, 2017, 02:30 »
0
Prices are starting to go down... that is what the market demands because of some other agencies that are dumping prices. Now incomes will go down, and agencies that are already dumping prices will probably go even lower to be competitive.

GJ.


Still peddling that page full of nonsense I see!

« Reply #21 on: April 14, 2017, 02:33 »
+1
It's just too bad.
I opted out from Adobe/Fotolia "low prices for big company affair", but it seems that it is not possible with SS.
They will also lower a lot their income. It must be that they feel obliged in following this running to the bottom.

« Reply #22 on: April 14, 2017, 02:37 »
0
I'm not that concerned if I'm getting $5 a clip, or $99 a clip... or I'm getting 15% a sale or 70% sale...it's not like there's been a massive rush at SS or iS to drop HD files to $8..



http://www.microstockgroup.com/photodune-108/what-a-'nice'-surprise/25/

« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 02:42 by Daryl Ray »

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #23 on: April 14, 2017, 02:53 »
0
I'm not that concerned if I'm getting $5 a clip, or $99 a clip... or I'm getting 15% a sale or 70% sale...it's not like there's been a massive rush at SS or iS to drop HD files to $8..



http://www.microstockgroup.com/photodune-108/what-a-'nice'-surprise/25/


A) My statement was based on information that was accurate at the time.

B) Still, I wouldn't class ten years later as a "massive rush"

C) Do you honestly believe that the new price changes at Shutterstock are as a result of VideoHive introducing $6 videos ten years ago?

« Reply #24 on: April 14, 2017, 03:09 »
+3
Prices are starting to go down... that is what the market demands because of some other agencies that are dumping prices. Now incomes will go down, and agencies that are already dumping prices will probably go even lower to be competitive.

GJ.


Still peddling that page full of nonsense I see!


I actually don't care about your limited view of whole situation... when everything will collapse as we fear it will, you won't be anywhere around because you didn't react properly when you had a chance and crying in shame.

Many years ago we foresee istock/getty collapsing and destroying incomes, but it was just a talk between contributors (we even been banned because we warned them on their forum).... now it is happening. We just laugh out loud now.

« Reply #25 on: April 14, 2017, 03:10 »
+3
My point was, and always has been, that contributing to bottom feeding sites will eventually drive prices down as a whole. Here we can see clear evidence that prices on SS are being lowered. Draw your own conclusions. I'm just here to balance the views either defending the bottom feeders or ridiculing those that are trying to bring fellow contributors around to keeping prices fair (like Video-StockOrg above).

Look, I honestly hate being right sometimes. Especially about others lack of perspective and their poor decisions that eventually affect all of us.

« Reply #26 on: April 14, 2017, 03:29 »
+2
Some good, some bad. The bulk buy option sounds like the kind of garbage fotolia offers with regards to how much we will make.

Email from shutterstock:

"While high resolution footage is increasingly popular with our customers, they often choose entry-level clips because of the lower price. To encourage bulk high resolution downloads, we've narrowed the pricing gap across all our video packs. By raising the price for entry-level clips and lowering the prices for higher resolution packs, we've made this higher-quality content an easier choice for our customers. These pricing changes will vary globally.

We're introducing a new high-volume footage package.

Recently there's been a demand for a large number of downloads from a specific set of customers from large companies. To suit their needs we will soon introduce a high-volume footage package. This package gives your work an opportunity to reach a broader audience that could result in even more downloads.

We will only be offering this package to large business customers who are guaranteeing bulk purchases of footage. It wont be shown on our public website. With this package, clients will be given the opportunity to download a large volume of footage clips at a negotiated price per clip. As with our other footage products, your earnings under this high-volume footage package will be a percentage of the purchase price of each download, with payouts between $3 and $6 per clip."

If you could target for that market; the volume might make it worthwhile.   Sure is a low pay-out, though

Is there an opt out? These fkrs use the "higher volume" every mf time and only the sheep dont care. Sick of this sh!t.

Spot on!  just another high-volume scam! very similar to the Getty crap!

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #27 on: April 14, 2017, 03:40 »
+1
Prices are starting to go down... that is what the market demands because of some other agencies that are dumping prices. Now incomes will go down, and agencies that are already dumping prices will probably go even lower to be competitive.

GJ.


Still peddling that page full of nonsense I see!


I actually don't care about your limited view of whole situation... when everything will collapse as we fear it will, you won't be anywhere around because you didn't react properly when you had a chance and crying in shame.

Many years ago we foresee istock/getty collapsing and destroying incomes, but it was just a talk between contributors (we even been banned because we warned them on their forum).... now it is happening. We just laugh out loud now.


I'm specifically on about your strange calculations here...

"If you sell your work on Pond5, Shutterstock and Dissolve, each agency gives you about from $23 to $39 if you priced them all right. That means all together about $85 per sale on each site. While if you start selling your clips on Videoblocks for $49 and you get $48 per sale, thats almost twice less than you would get from other agencies."

Surely I can't be the only one who thinks that's completely wrong? You honestly believe that when you're uploading to Pond5, Shutterstock and Dissolve, and earning $85 per month (as an example)... then if you also start uploading to VideoBlocks as well, you'll then only earn $48 a month?

If you upload to Pond5, Shutterstock and Dissolve then you'll get $23 to $39 per sale, as you've stated, you won't get $85 per sale, as you then also stated for some reason. So how is $48 per sale considerably worse than getting $23 to $39 a sale?

And just to note... you're aware you sell on 123RF and they sell HD for $54 or less, but at a much lower commission? So $54 (earning you about $17) is fine, but $49 (earning you $48) is horrible? What's the magic cut off point? Is it $50, $51, $52 etc?


SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #28 on: April 14, 2017, 03:41 »
+1
My point was, and always has been, that contributing to bottom feeding sites will eventually drive prices down as a whole. Here we can see clear evidence that prices on SS are being lowered. Draw your own conclusions. I'm just here to balance the views either defending the bottom feeders or ridiculing those that are trying to bring fellow contributors around to keeping prices fair (like Video-StockOrg above).

Look, I honestly hate being right sometimes. Especially about others lack of perspective and their poor decisions that eventually affect all of us.

Well when creating images and footage becomes cheaper and faster, combined with the concept of supply and demand... the prices were unlikely to ever go up were they?

« Reply #29 on: April 14, 2017, 04:00 »
+5
Believing that the trend of the industry is downward is understandable. But actively encouraging it, spinning PR for bottom feeding companies that hasten the process, and then making extra effort to pick apart someone pushing to keep their, yours and my prices fair? Less understandable.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 04:15 by Daryl Ray »

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #30 on: April 14, 2017, 04:28 »
+1
I haven't got a problem with him pushing to keep prices fair, I've just got a problem with him using nonsense figures to try and get his point across.

« Reply #31 on: April 14, 2017, 05:02 »
+3
Look Spacey, SS is dropping prices even lower to be competitive... when your lovely Videoblocks starts lowering prices too, you wont get $48 anymore, but much less. So, your overall earning will drop drastically. Will Videoblocks earnings cover the loss? No it wont. When they will have enough people onboard that they will even lower your earnings because their business model is suspicious and it doesn't even slightly cover expenses of storage, support, taxes and employees confirming your files. They are working on marketing too... that isn't free either. It's just a matter of time when you will earn on videoblock just as much (or even less) as you do on SS, Dissolve or Fotolia today. At that time those agencies will sell your files for $ 3-6. Too late to weep about dumping as that happends. *cry baby cry*

« Reply #32 on: April 14, 2017, 06:32 »
+4
This is utterly messed up.
All the talk of large customers is rhetoric ...
They are on the path to dropping prices...
I got that email and immediately got a $5 sale , almost like the bulk buyers were just sitting and waiting for it to go live.
Shutterstock should provide an opt-out feature
« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 06:52 by damseremie »

« Reply #33 on: April 14, 2017, 07:32 »
0
probably on the way of reducing commission and dropping prices on stills as well. I mean really its just getting beyond belief now and its obvious we are being taken for fools! bugs and glitches everywhere and strangled incomes because of their constant tinkering with the algorithm!  people leaving and an obvious lack of buyers and now this "superb" footage news.
Why dont they just come clean and tell us to go bugger ourselves?

Seriously though I am now fully convinced that before the end of the year we are staring at a deja vu Istockphoto. :(

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #34 on: April 14, 2017, 08:06 »
0
Just out of curiosity, how much do you currently make per month per clip at Shutterstock only? Or which site has the best $/clip/month for you? Question aimed at anyone.

Currently an HD sale nets me $17-$23.

That is not what I asked.

LOL, sorry, I've had a long day. I should calculate it, but the result would be kind of skewed since I have recently been uploading more videos than in 2016. But my guess is around $0.10 per clip per month on SS.
VB has the best $/clip/month for me.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #35 on: April 14, 2017, 10:52 »
+1
Look Spacey, SS is dropping prices even lower to be competitive... when your lovely Videoblocks starts lowering prices too, you wont get $48 anymore, but much less. So, your overall earning will drop drastically. Will Videoblocks earnings cover the loss? No it wont. When they will have enough people onboard that they will even lower your earnings because their business model is suspicious and it doesn't even slightly cover expenses of storage, support, taxes and employees confirming your files. They are working on marketing too... that isn't free either. It's just a matter of time when you will earn on videoblock just as much (or even less) as you do on SS, Dissolve or Fotolia today. At that time those agencies will sell your files for $ 3-6. Too late to weep about dumping as that happends. *cry baby cry*

So you're saying that all sites will start lowering prices at some point, no matter what... so it doesn't really matter what we do or who we upload to? Even if it does matter, they'd have to drop their prices to about $18 to get what I am currently from some sites. They might drop the prices, but 64%? I think it's going to be quite a bit down the road until that happens.

Their business model isn't really suspicious. I would prefer if they took a share of the sale as it gives them more of an incentive, but the marketplace is more of a value-add for their main business... it brings more customers through the door for their main product.

But still, the point I was trying to make is that you're using inaccurate and misleading information on your page to support the cause. The truth should be all a cause needs to gain support, so it makes me wonder why you feel the need to make stuff up, or bend the truth. 

« Reply #36 on: April 14, 2017, 13:24 »
0
Thinking few steps ahead... that is what you need to learn.

« Reply #37 on: April 14, 2017, 14:53 »
+6
Video is going down the same path as photos. As supply increases and demand doesn't keep pace then everyone's market share will drop. The barrier to entry continues to drop, camera's are cheap, 4K stabilized footage is easy to produce. Why would anyone pay a premium for clips that some kid with an Iphone can create?

If you want to be able to charge a premium for high quality content that the average joe can't make then microstock is the wrong market place. I don't really see a point in fighting to hold onto "how it used to be" because the market is changing and if you don't adapt then you're going to get left in the dust.

People can say they will pull their portfolios but in the end someone else will fill that space. We can complain all we want but we all know the direction this is heading and it's not up...

« Reply #38 on: April 14, 2017, 15:18 »
+1
Video still has a long way to go before it becomes as inflationary as photos. There are 200 (?) million photos, versus 5 million (?) clips.

And most of them are holiday snapshots or even editorial. The number of people who actively set up shootings for stock production...that is a very small group.

It is also not such a popular hobby as photography. Everybody loves taking pictures, but how many say their favorite hobby is creating videos?


SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #39 on: April 14, 2017, 19:34 »
0
Thinking few steps ahead... that is what you need to learn.

It's apparently what you need to learn, because if price dropping is inevitable across all sites, then why not get 100% of $49 now while you can?

But you seem to be avoiding all of my points... are you going to remove the misleading information from your site?

« Reply #40 on: April 16, 2017, 23:41 »
0
Does anyone know if the new pricing means as little as $3 paid for 4k footage?

« Reply #41 on: April 17, 2017, 02:52 »
0
Honestly I don't find SS very good in terms of video they seem to sell very little and as far as Adobe sales are almost non existant Safest bet for somebody producing good and commercial footage is to completely get out of stock-filming and go with a solid prod-company with automatic buying and promotion since the groundwork have already been done.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #42 on: April 17, 2017, 06:54 »
+1
Honestly I don't find SS very good in terms of video they seem to sell very little and as far as Adobe sales are almost non existant Safest bet for somebody producing good and commercial footage is to completely get out of stock-filming and go with a solid prod-company with automatic buying and promotion since the groundwork have already been done.


What, like getting a job?! I think I just did a little bit of sick in my mouth.

« Reply #43 on: April 17, 2017, 09:18 »
0
Honestly I don't find SS very good in terms of video they seem to sell very little and as far as Adobe sales are almost non existant Safest bet for somebody producing good and commercial footage is to completely get out of stock-filming and go with a solid prod-company with automatic buying and promotion since the groundwork have already been done.


What, like getting a job?! I think I just did a little bit of sick in my mouth.

Hahaha! no not getting a job sod that. Working through a Production-company as freelance! and that way you get hired for commercial filming etc able to supply really high class stuff. not getting a JOB! F that!

« Reply #44 on: April 17, 2017, 10:50 »
+3
Video is going down the same path as photos. As supply increases and demand doesn't keep pace then everyone's market share will drop. The barrier to entry continues to drop, camera's are cheap, 4K stabilized footage is easy to produce. Why would anyone pay a premium for clips that some kid with an Iphone can create?

If you want to be able to charge a premium for high quality content that the average joe can't make then microstock is the wrong market place. I don't really see a point in fighting to hold onto "how it used to be" because the market is changing and if you don't adapt then you're going to get left in the dust.

People can say they will pull their portfolios but in the end someone else will fill that space. We can complain all we want but we all know the direction this is heading and it's not up...

Could not agree more.  This is exactly like reading a discussion about still image trends from a couple of years ago.

What's really sad is that a lot of people got into shooting footage to compensate for the erosion of the photo market.

Fab

« Reply #45 on: April 17, 2017, 14:03 »
0
I just got a video sale: 2.40 $  :o :o :o

« Reply #46 on: April 17, 2017, 14:18 »
0
I've had plenty of $4, $5, and $6 footage sales at Shutterstock before (lowest being $3.77).

KB

« Reply #47 on: April 17, 2017, 18:24 »
0
I've had plenty of $4, $5, and $6 footage sales at Shutterstock before (lowest being $3.77).
Until this new pricing structure, such sales were always so-called "low res" clips. (Of course, since SS doesn't actually tell us the size of the file sold, we could never be sure what size was bought/sold.)

Now, unless they create a new category for these sales, we won't know if a $4 sale was a low res clip, or a 4K clip.  >:(

« Reply #48 on: April 17, 2017, 19:12 »
+8
I emailed them asking for an opt out option. I already know the answer but I want them to know how I feel.  This is simply yet another way to devalue our work and put greed first and foremost.  As soon as they had enough content to build in defection and not hurt their collection, they launched this offering.  It is a big FU to content providers.

« Reply #49 on: April 18, 2017, 06:54 »
+3
Isnt this the result of the pond5 membership program? they are offering files extremly cheap, incuding lots of very high quality files. So of course SS has to offer something.

I wish Adobe was stronger with video sales, would be great to have a strong third player in the market.

« Reply #50 on: April 18, 2017, 07:03 »
0
I can't really voice an opinion on this I am not 100% involved in video prod. All I know a friend of mine with thousands of clips and thousands of stills bailed out of SS and he was sort of complaining about all pricings etc said its just leading nowhere at this rate and be giving them away.

Prior to that he had made some deal with some agency on a much higher percentage commission!
--------------------------

Speaking for myself I was recommended to upload footage to Adobe-Ft and uploaded plenty some months back and well?? that was a complete waste of time both on the stills and video side.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 07:08 by derek »

« Reply #51 on: April 18, 2017, 08:02 »
+1
Isnt this the result of the pond5 membership program? they are offering files extremly cheap, incuding lots of very high quality files. So of course SS has to offer something.

I wish Adobe was stronger with video sales, would be great to have a strong third player in the market.
Totally agree: P5 membership hurts the video market big time. SS and FT had to respond (FT has not done it yet).
And I am glad they are doing it: at least from SS sales we do get something, while in P5 membership artists get absolutely nothing, just loads of sales stolen from us

« Reply #52 on: April 18, 2017, 09:54 »
+4
Have any of you ever actually done real searches for content on Pond5, comparing regular results to the membership clips? Because if you did, you'd notice that it's not very extensive and not "very high quality" or inclusive of the best options by a long shot. One piece of criteria for inclusion was that the clips had to be a poor sellers to begin with, did ya know that? I do not participate in the program so cannot comment further, but I can say that when searching for clips relevant to mine, I do not feel the slightest bit threatened by the competition of the membership options. These "loads" of lost sales are pure imagination.

Considering Shutterstock, Videoblocks, Fotolia (and everywhere else for that matter) already had subscription programs in place, doesn't it make more sense to speculate that Pond5 was responding the them, not the other way around? This latest action is just Shutterstock taking it further and squeezing more profit for their shareholder reports and to pay for their unnecessarily lavish real estate needs.

Disheartening how the reaction for some is being "glad" that Shutterstock is lowering their price and not anger and resistance to all price drops like this by any company. So many pessimists around here believe the trend is ultimately going downward, but instead of kicking and screaming and making it at least uncomfortable for them to marginalize our livelihoods, you choose to lay down and justify it.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 10:06 by Daryl Ray »

« Reply #53 on: April 18, 2017, 13:13 »
0
The sales has decreased from Pond5 lately. However, the recent sale was a 4k which I set the price at around $200.

Just had two sales from SS, which I got over $200. I cannot tell which one was sold at what price. Can anyone tell me how to check?

Thanks!

« Reply #54 on: April 18, 2017, 13:29 »
0
@Daryl Ray, +1

it's just some people don't have balls to admit they are run only by "profit" and not looking around what long run costs that short run profit will have.

« Reply #55 on: April 18, 2017, 14:19 »
+1
Have any of you ever actually done real searches for content on Pond5, comparing regular results to the membership clips? Because if you did, you'd notice that it's not very extensive and not "very high quality" or inclusive of the best options by a long shot. One piece of criteria for inclusion was that the clips had to be a poor sellers to begin with, did ya know that? I do not participate in the program so cannot comment further, but I can say that when searching for clips relevant to mine, I do not feel the slightest bit threatened by the competition of the membership options. These "loads" of lost sales are pure imagination.

Considering Shutterstock, Videoblocks, Fotolia (and everywhere else for that matter) already had subscription programs in place, doesn't it make more sense to speculate that Pond5 was responding the them, not the other way around? This latest action is just Shutterstock taking it further and squeezing more profit for their shareholder reports and to pay for their unnecessarily lavish real estate needs.

Disheartening how the reaction for some is being "glad" that Shutterstock is lowering their price and not anger and resistance to all price drops like this by any company. So many pessimists around here believe the trend is ultimately going downward, but instead of kicking and screaming and making it at least uncomfortable for them to marginalize our livelihoods, you choose to lay down and justify it.
I respect your point of you and I was with you 100% until P5 started their MS program.
Now things have changed completely.
Don't get me wrong, I really like P5 for a lot of reasons, but their MS has really done a lot of damage.
Videohive is not an issue in the video market: they sell files for very low prices, but volumes are ridiculous: they are not interested in video, they just have 1 reviewer, there is 4-5 months wait for review and they refuse most files as they cannot afford the cost of bandwidth. And anyway I didn't even know they existed until a few weeks ago.
Videoblock is a bit of a nuisance with their weird business model, but their membership collection is very, very poor.
P5 MS collection is excellent. I have browsed it zillions of times. They started it as a leader in the video market. so they could choose excellent files with a very broad collection covering most of customer's needs.
Yes, they said they have chosen clips with less than two sales, but that is extremely easy to overcome. You know that at P5 it takes several months for a file to start selling, so if you choose a new file... Or else you choose a slightly different take from an excellent shooting and you get a clip that has not yet sold, but is just as good as a best seller.
At the moment I have 5 times more sales at SS than P5, and 3 times more sales at FT than at P5. I am not part of the bloody MS so I am heavily penalised in the search engine.
At SS I do get the occasional $6 or $8 sale, but they are quite rare, most of them are aver $20 and sometimes over $100 for whatever reason.
As I said I am pretty much sure that the P5 MS is absorbing not only 70-80% of previous P5 sales, but also an important part of sales from other agencies and P5 scheme is the only one that doesn't give the artist even a sniff of the money collected (at least as far as I know)

« Reply #56 on: April 18, 2017, 15:47 »
0
I respect your point of you and I was with you 100% until P5 started their MS program.
Now things have changed completely.
Don't get me wrong, I really like P5 for a lot of reasons, but their MS has really done a lot of damage.
Videohive is not an issue in the video market: they sell files for very low prices, but volumes are ridiculous: they are not interested in video, they just have 1 reviewer, there is 4-5 months wait for review and they refuse most files as they cannot afford the cost of bandwidth. And anyway I didn't even know they existed until a few weeks ago.
Videoblock is a bit of a nuisance with their weird business model, but their membership collection is very, very poor.
P5 MS collection is excellent. I have browsed it zillions of times. They started it as a leader in the video market. so they could choose excellent files with a very broad collection covering most of customer's needs.
Yes, they said they have chosen clips with less than two sales, but that is extremely easy to overcome. You know that at P5 it takes several months for a file to start selling, so if you choose a new file... Or else you choose a slightly different take from an excellent shooting and you get a clip that has not yet sold, but is just as good as a best seller.
At the moment I have 5 times more sales at SS than P5, and 3 times more sales at FT than at P5. I am not part of the bloody MS so I am heavily penalised in the search engine.
At SS I do get the occasional $6 or $8 sale, but they are quite rare, most of them are aver $20 and sometimes over $100 for whatever reason.
As I said I am pretty much sure that the P5 MS is absorbing not only 70-80% of previous P5 sales, but also an important part of sales from other agencies and P5 scheme is the only one that doesn't give the artist even a sniff of the money collected (at least as far as I know)

I think you've claimed that the P5 search is affected by the MS program 20 times already, and it's still not true. It may have affected overall sales, but NOT the search.

And just so you know, Envato (VideoHive) is a multi-million dollar business with profits higher than Shutterstock, P5, Fotolia and the rest. They can afford to pay for bandwidth. Why they don't have more reviewers is another story, but it's not lack of money.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 16:00 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #57 on: April 18, 2017, 16:01 »
+1
I respect your point of you and I was with you 100% until P5 started their MS program.
Now things have changed completely.
Don't get me wrong, I really like P5 for a lot of reasons, but their MS has really done a lot of damage.
Videohive is not an issue in the video market: they sell files for very low prices, but volumes are ridiculous: they are not interested in video, they just have 1 reviewer, there is 4-5 months wait for review and they refuse most files as they cannot afford the cost of bandwidth. And anyway I didn't even know they existed until a few weeks ago.
Videoblock is a bit of a nuisance with their weird business model, but their membership collection is very, very poor.
P5 MS collection is excellent. I have browsed it zillions of times. They started it as a leader in the video market. so they could choose excellent files with a very broad collection covering most of customer's needs.
Yes, they said they have chosen clips with less than two sales, but that is extremely easy to overcome. You know that at P5 it takes several months for a file to start selling, so if you choose a new file... Or else you choose a slightly different take from an excellent shooting and you get a clip that has not yet sold, but is just as good as a best seller.
At the moment I have 5 times more sales at SS than P5, and 3 times more sales at FT than at P5. I am not part of the bloody MS so I am heavily penalised in the search engine.
At SS I do get the occasional $6 or $8 sale, but they are quite rare, most of them are aver $20 and sometimes over $100 for whatever reason.
As I said I am pretty much sure that the P5 MS is absorbing not only 70-80% of previous P5 sales, but also an important part of sales from other agencies and P5 scheme is the only one that doesn't give the artist even a sniff of the money collected (at least as far as I know)

I think you've claimed that the P5 search is affected by the MS program it 20 times already, and it's still not true. It may have affected overall sales, but NOT the search.

And just so you know, Envato (VideoHive) is a multi-million dollar business with profits higher than Shutterstock, and most likely P5, Fotolia and the rest. They can afford to pay for footage storage.
I started at P5 about 2 years ago and I was having decent sales, constantly increasing as my portfolio increased. I was having about a dozen sales per month, not a lot but better than a punch in the eye (as my sister would say).
Then the bloody MS started in May 2016. After that I did not have a single sale for about 8 months, my portfolio became practically invisible, not a single view for the same period.
Than a couple of months ago there was a very heated discussion in P5 forum about people in the MS being incredibly pushed up in the search engine. After that a moderator in P5 came up saying: we don't do this sort of thing.
After that, as magic, my sales went up and I had an excellent month of March.
This is my genuine experience, you can believe it or not. All I can do is to tell you what happen to me, you are free to think what you want

« Reply #58 on: April 18, 2017, 16:03 »
0
I believe that YOUR sales have gone down, absolutely.

But I test the search engine very frequently and non-MS files are simply not pushed down in the search results. It's quite easy to test yourself... Only takes a couple of minutes. I mean, there is no mystery to it. Just search "berlin" or anything else and see what happens. I'm not in the MS program and my files are easy to find (logged in and logged out). They mostly even show up before MS files.

Sales and upload date matter.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 16:08 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #59 on: April 18, 2017, 16:07 »
+1
As far as Envato is concerned, I believe that they do most of their business in motion graphics, animations, templates and other weird things that I do not understand, but certainly not in footage.
And anyway I have tried their insane uploading system.
After trying to upload 15 video to their system I get constant nightmares. I wake up every night several times sweating and I have to take all those little green pills that the doctor gave me.
Maybe one day I will be the same me as I was before attempting to upload a file at Videohive, but the doctor tells me I have little chances

« Reply #60 on: April 18, 2017, 16:11 »
+2
Yes, Wordpress and After Effects templates (also big at P5 + VB) are their big business, followed by music. But they are a VERY profitable company.

You must be stuck in the old upload system (which is a nightmare, yes). The new upload system is faster than P5.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2017, 04:35 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #61 on: April 18, 2017, 16:14 »
0
I believe that YOUR sales have gone down, absolutely.

But I test the search engine very frequently and non-MS files are simply not pushed down in the search results. It's quite easy to test yourself... Only takes a couple of minutes. I mean, there is no mystery to it. Just search "berlin" or anything else and see what happens. I'm not in the MS program and my files are easy to find (logged in and logged out). They mostly even show up before MS files.

Sales and upload date matter.
I have done another test:
I have monitored all people in P5 forum who were complaining of poor sales (there were a lot until a couple of months ago) and they were all people not part of the bloody thing (including video-stock-org, who posted just above).
On the other end people boosting good sales were all part of the bloody thing.
Again, you don't have to believe me, you can always tell me: "please, stop making sense", or "please, don't confuse me with facts"

« Reply #62 on: April 18, 2017, 16:22 »
0
I believe that your sales have gone down.

I don't believe that the SEARCH is responsible. It isn't. It doesn't push non-MS clips down. That is just a fact.

If customers choose to buy MS clips instead, that's another story.

There are maybe around 30-40 active posters at the P5 forum, out of thousands of contributors. Who do you think is more likely to be vocal in the forums? People who want to complain or people who are happy? Basing theories off of forum posts instead of spending 1 minute with the search engine isn't really the best way to see what the search does.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 17:24 by increasingdifficulty »

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #63 on: April 18, 2017, 20:04 »
+4
it's just some people don't have balls to admit they are run only by "profit"

What else would anybody do microstock for? So you can impress you family?

"You get twenty cents for a photo? Oh, that's lovely dear. What time are you coming round for dinner?"

« Reply #64 on: April 19, 2017, 15:10 »
+1
To evaluate a forum post and complaints, you just look at peoples portfolios. If someone has a high quality port, or a very, very large port with over 10 000 files, then I take them more seriously than a newbie with 500 files who has been there less than two years.

My own sales on pond5 are fine, volume went down a bit when they raised their minimum price, but so far it is balanced if i do get sales. Sales on the higher end havent really changed.

However shutterstock has seen a very strong increase in video sales, so since both get the same files, i conclude that SS is maybe doing more advertising or marketing to improve growth.

The pond5 membership collection has over 200 000 excellent quality videos and over 400 000 files in total. It is literally a world on its own and a very nice collection.

Lovely quality and excellent value for money.

However  - only when the artist get the sales data how many times these videos sold for the 3-8 dollar price pond5 charges on average, will the artist know if it is really a good deal.

So far that data hasnt been released.

What if pond5 instead had a "ultracheap" videocorner with 6 dollar files, but where the artist gets their usual 50%, i.e. 3 dollars. Wouldnt that make the artist 10 times more money, than the current membership plan?

The program is only open to a select few, but since nobody is sharing data, we all dont know if it is working.

What we do know, it is one of the cheapest offers for good quality video content in the industry.

Like I said, i dont feel my sales have been affected. Overall pond5 is certainly one of the most friendly places to work with. Ive just had several exchanges with their contributor support about a tax issue and they have been just lovely, sometimes they reply in 10 minutes. Never had an experience like that.


« Reply #65 on: April 19, 2017, 16:19 »
0
Yes, Pond5 staff members are very friendly and easy to work with. Can't say the same for many other sites.

It's a good site if you got in early and collected the sales to give you exposure. For new contributors it's a very hard market with way, way, way too many good files to be seen.

It is only number 3 or 4 for me when it comes to footage (I started relatively late), but a clear winner for the other things I sell. Author pricing helps a whole lot.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
138 Replies
31914 Views
Last post April 26, 2011, 14:39
by WarrenPrice
5 Replies
2392 Views
Last post May 18, 2011, 13:18
by Roadrunner
New DT 2012 Pricing Structure

Started by red « 1 2 ... 5 6 » Dreamstime.com

135 Replies
18358 Views
Last post May 02, 2012, 03:39
by Microbius
8 Replies
1875 Views
Last post June 08, 2016, 17:54
by KONJINA
0 Replies
493 Views
Last post March 26, 2017, 21:53
by pixel8

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors