I think we need a WELL DESERVED RAISE this year...

[Semmick Photo]

I am working on my raise. Just finished editing 800 images from my travel to France, now I am keywording them, I am sure they will raise my earnings. And then I have another few thousand to process. LOL.

[File Sold]

I am working on my raise. Just finished editing 800 images from my travel to France, now I am keywording them, I am sure they will raise my earnings. And then I have another few thousand to process. LOL.

Did you spot Eiffel Tower

I was in Paris 2012 taking some blurry nightshots of Champs-Elysees.

[MxR]

A rise? you knowBigstockphoto ? because those are his intentions...

Nothing is forever, when Shutter begin losing money, losing clients, we will see changes... bad or good changes?... i dont know but they copy the Istock RC sistme to Bigstock sort time ago...

[Semmick Photo]

I was in Lot,  Lourdes,  Toulouse, Saint-cirq-lapopie,  Carcassonne, Foix and the Pyrenees. It's absolutely brilliant there.

[Julied83]

All agency need to keep the prize, but raise the % to contributor ! But I'm still dreaming ! Especially Istock for non-exclusive.
Adding more easy and realistic level rank with % increase on all agency would be great too. They need to keep us motivated. But they don't understand that !

[Noedelhap]

Tyler asked and said before to please post a link to threads you are discussing that there is a link to so here it is.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=145571&start=0

Thing with all the microstock people that are the ones complining is they never worked a real job in their life!

Some 90%-95% of the micro photogs work for themselves and never had a job where they were on a timeclock or piecerate or salaried!

Google offers this and then some for their employees as do many companies in the real world anymore because they have found out that happy employees are more productive and better overall for the company!

Once all of you micro photogs work as a blue collar worker as an employee for a company that doesn't offer these kind of benefits for 20 or so years and then you see these offers from companies you too would want to work for them.

So stop your crying because someone has what you don't have and do something about it!

All you full time self employed photogs set your own hours and do whatever you want when and how you want with no one to have to report to!

SS offers this as a perk for employees who do their job they get paid to do and they have someone to report to unlike you all do!

Being in the work force my entire life I would love to have had the chance to work for or with a company that treated their employees with a little respect and dignity and offered these type of company perks unlike many do.

The only ones you have to blame for your expenses going up are yourselves.

Micro cost should be dam near nothing for dam near any shoot you do.

Wow! I've worked a typical job like most people, saved my money and then risked it all to be self employed only to have to work three times harder morning till midnight 6 days a week to get where I am. I do all the jobs a small business does with several people and I don't get paid vacation leave, I don't get sick leave, I don't get health insurance or any type of retirement. If I just do what I want I don't make any money, all my time is spent working. I also have no security, however the market goes so does my income. I also have to pay more in taxes as I don't have an employer paying half like all other employed people. I also have to file taxes four times a year. As far as having someone to report to I have to report to thousands of buyers instead of one boss. Unlike people who have a typical job I have to constantly guess what I need to do to make money whenI worked as a graphic designer there was not guess work, you did what you were assigned. I f I guess wrong I have wasted time and money.

Even though I agree with the above (in that self-employment is not easy), you make it sound like being self-employed is a torture and a punishment. I assume you gave up employment to become self-employed for a reason: because you enjoy doing this work. However, the above doesn't sound like you're enjoying it at all. If so, why not go back to employment?

For the record, I don't agree with ruxpriencdiam, because he's making it sound like we sit back and do nothing all day.
I too experience the pressure of making ends meet if times are bad, it's no walk in the park. However, it's better than employment because of the freedom it gives me. I can accept any assignment I want, I get to work in my own time, whenever I want. Therefore I would never complain about it like you did.

[EmberMike]

Would be nice to have a top-tier raise like $0.40/subs for over $50.000 earnings or something. That would give a nice bonus for people that really have been the pioneers of microstock.

When I played internet poker, there was these FPP's (player points) and when you got enough them you could buy some nice accessories like Porsche Carrera or a trip to Hawaii  Why not do something like that, but in microstock scene. I could get a retina iMac or 5d3 with my FPP's and make better microstock images. Or then a free vacation away from my computer...

This is actually kind of along the lines of what I've ben thinking. Not a raise, but more of a bonus for people over a certain earnings level. Or it could be assessed annually, if your annual earnings are over some amount, you qualify. There's some incentive to keep up good work if bonus qualifications are regularly re-assessed.

[luissantos84]

All agency need to keep the prize, but raise the % to contributor ! But I'm still dreaming ! Especially Istock for non-exclusive.
Adding more easy and realistic level rank with % increase on all agency would be great too. They need to keep us motivated. But they don't understand that !

have you noticed the 402k new approvals at SS this week? it used to be half of that (200k), I really don't believe that contributors need any further motivations, actually I think that a few thousands joined recently once I don't see how it would be this huge with the same number of contributors (as you say less motivated producing fewer)

now imagine SS giving a raise, 1 Million per week?

[etudiante_rapide]

have you noticed the 402k new approvals at SS this week? it used to be half of that (200k), I really don't believe that contributors need any further motivations, actually I think that a few thousands joined recently once I don't see how it would be this huge with the same number of contributors (as you say less motivated producing fewer)

now imagine SS giving a raise, 1 Million per week?

ya, like the telemarketing or on-line support where every end of the year they lay-off the whole crew and re-hire them next year to get govt subsidy for (quote)creating new jobs(unquote).
ask them for a raise and they politely show you the door.

[PixelBytes]

I really hope SS doesn't make the same mistakes that Getty made with IS. These sort of rumblings are exactly the kind of early warning of contributor dissatisfaction that could have been heeded by IS all those years ago and averted the decline of their site. Leaf should be paid by the agencies for providing this forum. It saves them tens of thousands of pounds on consultants that they'd need to do this kind of research.

Yes. I agree.   But once more the rumblings of contributors dissatisfaction are ignored and down the rabbit hole we go again.

[Semmick Photo]

Lets say they only raise the sub royalties. 2 cent on every tier, thats 8 cent. They had 125.9M DLs in 2014. Lets say 50% of those are subs. It would mean a $5M cost increase. No chance in hell there will be a raise. Even if its only $1M annually. They need to increase revenue, reduce cost and maximise profit. A raise does NOT fit that strategy.

[PixelBytes]

Lets say they only raise the sub royalties. 2 cent on every tier, thats 8 cent. They had 125.9M DLs in 2014. Lets say 50% of those are subs. It would mean a $5M cost increase. No chance in hell there will be a raise. Even if its only $1M annually. They need to increase revenue, reduce cost and maximise profit. A raise does NOT fit that strategy.

True and I am sure this is their thinking.  But it is very short term thinking.  GETTY is the example of  where short term thinking leads.  If SS was smart, they would think long term and figure out that a small raise to top tier contribs would earn good will and also help producers of HCV images to stay in business and keep supplying them top quality work.

[Semmick Photo]

Lets say they only raise the sub royalties. 2 cent on every tier, thats 8 cent. They had 125.9M DLs in 2014. Lets say 50% of those are subs. It would mean a $5M cost increase. No chance in hell there will be a raise. Even if its only $1M annually. They need to increase revenue, reduce cost and maximise profit. A raise does NOT fit that strategy.

True and I am sure this is their thinking.  But it is very short term thinking.  GETTY is the example of  where short term thinking leads.  If SS was smart, they would think long term and figure out that a small raise to top tier contribs would earn good will and also help producers of HCV images to stay in business and keep supplying them top quality work.

Its no longer in SS hands, its the shareholders that decide. Look at what happened at eBay. Carl Icahn is a major shareholder and was putting up a fight with eBay to split up eBay and PayPal. He said eBay was holding back growth of PayPal. eBay said no, we wont split, the companies are stronger together. A year later eBay announced the split up of eBay and PayPal saying they think its best for both companies and made it sound as if it was their own decision. Right.

[dirkr]

Would be nice to have a top-tier raise like $0.40/subs for over $50.000 earnings or something. That would give a nice bonus for people that really have been the pioneers of microstock.

When I played internet poker, there was these FPP's (player points) and when you got enough them you could buy some nice accessories like Porsche Carrera or a trip to Hawaii  Why not do something like that, but in microstock scene. I could get a retina iMac or 5d3 with my FPP's and make better microstock images. Or then a free vacation away from my computer...

This is actually kind of along the lines of what I've ben thinking. Not a raise, but more of a bonus for people over a certain earnings level. Or it could be assessed annually, if your annual earnings are over some amount, you qualify. There's some incentive to keep up good work if bonus qualifications are regularly re-assessed.

That does sound like an RC scheme. Exactly like IS and 123RF have implemented.

And I don't think that is a negative in itself. If IS had implemented that as additional bonus on top of the existing royalty percentages everyone would have applauded.

Something like that (you can win a bonus if you have a good year, but you can lose it again if the next year isn't as good) - without cutting into the existing royalties - would be a good move.

Motivating to produce more and saleable content, but no everlasting committment to the company.

[EmberMike]

...Something like that (you can win a bonus if you have a good year, but you can lose it again if the next year isn't as good) - without cutting into the existing royalties - would be a good move.

Motivating to produce more and saleable content, but no everlasting committment to the company.

I think it's the only realistic way we see anything that is even close to a "raise". An across-the-board pay raise isn't going to happen, I think we all know that. A bonus system could be interesting, though. It could have multiple milestones to affect the bonus too. Increase earnings by XX%, increase portfolio size, have a top-selling image, etc. The more milestones you hit, the better the bonus.

[PaulieWalnuts]

I strongly believe exclusivity is on its way back in, in some way or another.

I think exclusivity is a factor for uncommon images at higher price points. I don't think buyers who are getting into micro subscriptions really care about exclusive images. They want the best selection at the lowest price.

We've reached a point where buyers are willing to accept images that are "good enough" if the price is low enough. Sure, there are exceptions, but seeing how SS has skyrocketing growth and GI/IS seems to be in a downward spiral being forced to compete on price, exclusive doesn't seem to matter.

[SME]

It's not that every image in itself matters - it's differentiating your agency from another. Competing agencies have to, in essence, "steal" from SS so that they have some form of consumer monopoly. Right now, no one has a consumer monopoly because everyone is submitting to everyone.

And the way you buy a consumer monopoly is the provide exclusivity in some way or another. I don't disagree with anything you're saying - but as a competing agency, they can charge the same amount to customers as SS does and pay contributors more in order to get that consumer monopoly.

The biggest problem is every new agency is trying to do that exact same thing, but without exclusivity. So no matter how much they offer contributors, they don't get the sales because they can offer nothing to customers SS can't. All an agency would need is a massive marketing blitz where they offer incentives for contributors to only contribute to them and at the same time get customers to buy from them. They do that just once, and it permanently changes the landscape.

This is why I keep mentioning Adobe because they are actually in a position to do exactly this. The only way SS can compete is to increase payouts to contributors.

[Rinderart]

It's not that every image in itself matters - it's differentiating your agency from another. Competing agencies have to, in essence, "steal" from SS so that they have some form of consumer monopoly. Right now, no one has a consumer monopoly because everyone is submitting to everyone.

And the way you buy a consumer monopoly is the provide exclusivity in some way or another. I don't disagree with anything you're saying - but as a competing agency, they can charge the same amount to customers as SS does and pay contributors more in order to get that consumer monopoly.

The biggest problem is every new agency is trying to do that exact same thing, but without exclusivity. So no matter how much they offer contributors, they don't get the sales because they can offer nothing to customers SS can't. All an agency would need is a massive marketing blitz where they offer incentives for contributors to only contribute to them and at the same time get customers to buy from them. They do that just once, and it permanently changes the landscape.

This is why I keep mentioning Adobe because they are actually in a position to do exactly this. The only way SS can compete is to increase payouts to contributors.

+1.

[akaWinning]

Semmick Photo is correct in his statement that if you want a raise you'd better get producing new photos.  As somebody that has engaged in semipro day trading for years to help keep the bills paid I can tell you that Shutterstock is watched by a million vultures just like me waiting for the day it becomes a viable short candidate, which is where the real misery story begins.  And stock photography has so much free info on line now that amateurs (in many cases) are putting up as good or better stuff than the so called pros.  Luckily I only do stock as a hobby, so I am not concerned about payouts, but I do wish it paid a lot better, but unfortunately that is not the case and I don't see things getter any better.....  I see pros scrambling to add additional services just to keep the lights on.  I also have bought up some nice used equipment lately from (now former) full-time pros closing up shop claiming that the money is just not there anymore.

[EmberMike]

...The only possible way to differentiate oneself with SS or other large companies is to provide either exclusive platforms or exclusive images. Adobe has access to exclusive platforms, so there's that...

There are other ways, at least on the vector side of things. SS has always lagged behind in terms of what they offer the customer. They only just recently began allowing a jpg download of a vector file from the same page as the vector version, something that other companies shave done for years. They also still insist on vector files with text have the text converted to shapes (meaning you can't easily change the text to something else), while other companies also have allowed these types of fully editable files for years. And more and more I hear from customers wanting these fully editable files and not being able to get them at SS.

My point is that there is still plenty of room for improvement and innovation in terms of how companies present and deliver stock content. SS doesn't do it perfectly. And who knows, maybe they're working on some innovations of their own. I'm just saying that there are other ways a company can distinguish itself from SS and others, beyond exclusivity.

[SME]

There are lots of minor things that can be improved upon that will affect the bottom line in a minor way - SS need not act upon these things to stay afloat. The real bottom line is consumer monopoly, and the only way to generate a consumer monopoly is to attract contributors to your honeycomb, and only your honeycomb.

[Justanotherphotographer]

+1.

There is an agree button above each post, saves you having to quote whole posts with just a "+1" or "agree" under them, kind of clogs up threads. Glad I could help.

[Noedelhap]

This is why I keep mentioning Adobe because they are actually in a position to do exactly this. The only way SS can compete is to increase payouts to contributors.

Even so, SS would never raise commission before Adobe does anything. SS doesn't need to, at least not until Adobe makes a move.

[Uncle Pete]

I think you've got a good point.

Here's my answer to the raise. Offer discounted stock options.

I guess the next level added or anything that's incentive based, can be nothing but a gift or be seem like the RC which I'd hate to see. I mean, yeah, we'll pay you an incentive bonus for sales growth, but you can't make it because of the new and continuing competition. Offering something that can't be accomplished, isn't offering anything.

So my latest brainstorm (hesitant to say it's a good idea) is stock options.

This is why I keep mentioning Adobe because they are actually in a position to do exactly this. The only way SS can compete is to increase payouts to contributors.

Even so, SS would never raise commission before Adobe does anything. SS doesn't need to, at least not until Adobe makes a move.