MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stock Marketplaces Under-Reporting Sales...what's stopping them?  (Read 3273 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 15, 2016, 00:30 »
+6
I see one MASSIVE issue that I can't find anyone talking about.  Bluntly, what is stopping any stock marketplace from under-reporting contributors sales? It would be extremely easy for any stock marketplace to only partially report sales.  I see nothing that is stopping them and there is no way that a marketplace can prove that they are in fact reporting 100% sales. Can anyone help me understand this problem?


« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2016, 01:13 »
+1
This cannot happen, unless everything is handled by a single person who is the owner...

« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2016, 01:37 »
0
huh? It could easily happen in any company in a ton of different ways...a rogue programmer, a colluding group of programmers, a contractor hired by the CIO to 'review code', the CEO himself changing payouts just before they go out, a hacked site where a rogue contributor is stealing all the credits, an entire company of bad actors, etc, etc, etc... all that is needed is a script run against the database to change it...since there is no buyer visibility for contributors, you will never know...am I missing something?

« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2016, 01:42 »
+2
I have caught one of the sites doing this twice. Same company twice that is. Another contributor on this forum posted something that made me think they had a similar experience with the same company. It is one of the small agencies, so it is possible. I would say unlikely for one of the big sites as there is too much oversight and too much to lose.

« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2016, 01:52 »
+5
Just because a company is big and 'has too much to lose' doesn't mean they aren't doing it...no one believed that Enron & WorldCom & Bernie Madoff (insert your favorite fraudster) would commit massive fraud because they were 'too big'...but they did it and got away with it for years before anyone figured it out.  The 'too much to lose' argument is extremely weak, it might actually be easier for a big company to pull this off because their systems are more complex and the codebase is very large to know exactly how all of it works. 

Oh and 'oversight'? There is no independent 3rd party that reviews these sites.  It's the fox watching the henhouse, any promises from the marketplaces themselves can't be trusted, they are not in business to call themselves out.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2016, 02:01 by StockGuy »

« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2016, 02:12 »
+2
Chill

« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2016, 02:15 »
+2
^^ +1

I suspect any reasonably large company will be audited

« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2016, 02:37 »
0
Ah okay, I understand the truth now that us contributors are just pawns and preyed on by big companies as the answer of 'Chill' does nothing to address this massive issue and instead is the standard 'ad hominem attack' (attack the person not the issue) used most likely from a stock marketplace employee or shill. 

@TheDrift, audited by whom exactly?  Wouldn't the marketplace be paying some auditor to support their narrative and story?  ...and if the auditor did find an issue we would never hear about it.

Folks, wake up and demand more accountability and transparency in these marketplaces...we need a better system instead of just trusting that there are no bad actors or hackers screwing us out of our royalties!

« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2016, 02:56 »
+2
Baaaaa

« Reply #9 on: February 15, 2016, 02:57 »
+1
Am I missing something?

Yes, if something like this happens, it will come out someday unless everything is handled by a single person how is the owner. You cannot do any business without trust. I rather worry about royalty cut.

« Reply #10 on: February 15, 2016, 03:11 »
+1
Rly? 'Baaaa' is your answer... <sarc> thanks for your wisdom and adding so much to the conversation </sarc> Please don't reply to this thread anymore as the adults are having a serious discussion.

@anathaya hmm, okay let's say it does come out that a major marketplace has under reported...surely you don't expect to get compensation back, do you? Most likely the money is gone/business is closed/(pick your reason why us contributors are left holding the bag). 

« Reply #11 on: February 15, 2016, 03:18 »
0
Surely you don't expect to get compensation back, do you?

Depends. First we need to unite to fight against that sort of things, unfortunately it's highly unlikely....

« Reply #12 on: February 15, 2016, 03:25 »
0
My tone is in response to your tone in responding to my initial reply when I actually tried to engage in some kind of grown up conversation.

If you want to have a "serious discussion" your first step will have to be to chill. You're  welcome.

« Reply #13 on: February 15, 2016, 05:42 »
0
Ah okay, I understand the truth now that us contributors are just pawns and preyed on by big companies as the answer of 'Chill' does nothing to address this massive issue and instead is the standard 'ad hominem attack' (attack the person not the issue) used most likely from a stock marketplace employee or shill. 

@TheDrift, audited by whom exactly?  Wouldn't the marketplace be paying some auditor to support their narrative and story?  ...and if the auditor did find an issue we would never hear about it.

Folks, wake up and demand more accountability and transparency in these marketplaces...we need a better system instead of just trusting that there are no bad actors or hackers screwing us out of our royalties!

I agree ... but how?
Until we get the insiders willing to talk about it we will sit in a dark.
AND they can not come out because they sign "keep your mouth shut" agreements for good $.
And it's not just under-reporting sales, it's under-reporting everything...salaries, expenses...
Making books look good is not that hard job for pros. Look just how Google avoided taxes in the UK.

Nobody got rich by playing fair play and by the rules.  :-\

« Last Edit: February 15, 2016, 06:11 by KnowYourOnions »

« Reply #14 on: February 15, 2016, 08:10 »
+2
The way agencies get caught is for contributors or friends buy some images. A ring of contributors can buy each others images. Then check the contributor monthly accounting to see if your image has been reported as sold when your friends have reported as bought. Correlate buyer and seller transaction date and time to confirm. It's not tough - but it does take a little money, time, and effort.

« Reply #15 on: February 15, 2016, 10:32 »
+5
You started a new profile just to discuss this?

« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2016, 11:30 »
+2
I don't think the big sites would risk their business by doing this.  The small sites have less to lose but they don't sell much anyway, so I don't see this as a big problem.  The tax people would catch them out as well.

« Reply #17 on: February 15, 2016, 12:54 »
+3
If agencies wanted to take more for themselves because the whopping .25 to .38 they pay us is too much why do you think they would sneakily do it by under reporting sales? They could do it legally by announcing a royalty cut. Shutterstock just did that.

But then, maybe everyone is out to get you. That's what the voices say right?

« Reply #18 on: February 15, 2016, 13:17 »
+1
I thought about this issue back when i started around 2008. I felt microstock is the wild wild (cyber)west with no regulations and lots of opportunities to exploit many loopholes. I didn't worry too much at the time since i only submitted to istock. I only have my files in at 3 top agencies now and don't really put my files elsewhere.

I don't know why, but i don't trust the smaller start-ups as there is no enforceable law that stops them from not reporting sales and I'm not naive enough to think all these agencies are looking out for me at all. Some agencies are literally run by mafia/crooks in my eyes. You better believe that gangsters and the mob are monetizing what they can online...

« Reply #19 on: February 15, 2016, 13:38 »
0
Regarding this topic, I've received this text message from a "unknown sender" last year in August. Ive pqssed it over to Jeff from audio crew cause at that time I was returning to exclusivity for audio. Anyway, it was a bit clumsy written and nothing was "published" anywhere after the sms. Afaik. Some others received it also. Heres the copy paste

You are being played and rigged! Istock owns you money! This message is for Mirko Pernjakovic and several others who received it also. You are robbed from your daily and monthly earnings and limited to a daily download limit set by IS. We have a proof and we will announce it. Share this! - end of quote.

« Reply #20 on: February 15, 2016, 13:38 »
+1
So, go figure...

« Reply #21 on: February 15, 2016, 18:41 »
+2
Regarding this topic, I've received this text message from a "unknown sender" last year in August. Ive pqssed it over to Jeff from audio crew cause at that time I was returning to exclusivity for audio. Anyway, it was a bit clumsy written and nothing was "published" anywhere after the sms. Afaik. Some others received it also. Heres the copy paste

You are being played and rigged! Istock owns you money! This message is for Mirko Pernjakovic and several others who received it also. You are robbed from your daily and monthly earnings and limited to a daily download limit set by IS. We have a proof and we will announce it. Share this! - end of quote.
So they didn't have proof and they didn't announce it?  Looks like they made it up then.

« Reply #22 on: February 15, 2016, 18:53 »
0
Sometimes when all PPs and subs from IS are through I kinda feel something... under-reported ;D

« Reply #23 on: February 16, 2016, 11:23 »
0
Regarding this topic, I've received this text message from a "unknown sender" last year in August. Ive pqssed it over to Jeff from audio crew cause at that time I was returning to exclusivity for audio. Anyway, it was a bit clumsy written and nothing was "published" anywhere after the sms. Afaik. Some others received it also. Heres the copy paste

You are being played and rigged! Istock owns you money! This message is for Mirko Pernjakovic and several others who received it also. You are robbed from your daily and monthly earnings and limited to a daily download limit set by IS. We have a proof and we will announce it. Share this! - end of quote.
So they didn't have proof and they didn't announce it?  Looks like they made it up then.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Don't know why would anyone bother doing those kind of conspiracy theories. But I must admit I had several minutes back then, thinking about  the possibility of "not reporting sales" etc. Cause one company doesn't have a motif to "not sell" your work. But does have one not to report those sales back to you. Also, it's a wide spread criminal act and it's possible that's for sure. Two years ago I had apple sales from tone store for 24c instead of 25c. I reported it and it was a "manual mistake" made by a person doing it. It wasn't much but x1000 contributors x100.000 sales it adds up.

« Reply #24 on: February 16, 2016, 17:29 »
0
Ah okay, I understand the truth now that us contributors are just pawns and preyed on by big companies as the answer of 'Chill' does nothing to address this massive issue and instead is the standard 'ad hominem attack' (attack the person not the issue) used most likely from a stock marketplace employee or shill. 

@TheDrift, audited by whom exactly?  Wouldn't the marketplace be paying some auditor to support their narrative and story?  ...and if the auditor did find an issue we would never hear about it.

Folks, wake up and demand more accountability and transparency in these marketplaces...we need a better system instead of just trusting that there are no bad actors or hackers screwing us out of our royalties!

How they became large companies?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
1619 Views
Last post May 07, 2012, 13:16
by lisafx
57 Replies
8627 Views
Last post April 25, 2014, 04:38
by gostwyck
19 Replies
3465 Views
Last post June 10, 2014, 18:58
by emblem
105 Replies
13390 Views
Last post September 05, 2014, 07:06
by Justanotherphotographer
4 Replies
949 Views
Last post January 10, 2019, 11:53
by panicAttack

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results