pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Could it be using a shutterstock controlled revenue system?  (Read 14596 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: June 06, 2018, 17:10 »
0
Revenue is so closely linked to position in search.

Actually it's opposite.

Open separate accounts in your dogs name ?

I'm tired of doing that but yes it works.
I was so good, that I could give you perfect newbie strategy for maximizing your sales by recycling your existing portfolio and an information how long your newbie "honeymoon" will last.

As I already said before:
"All of you are probably interested in an answer is it possible to beat their machine to get more income with less work instead opposite?
From everything I learned so far the answer is Yes but a) it is not legal, b) it can't be done permanently, c) it is complicated/time consuming
If you want to play legal I think you will have better chances in a casino."


« Reply #51 on: June 06, 2018, 17:15 »
0
It actually started out as a joint venture with the CIA several years ago to undermine the stock market. After the CIA realized they had the wrong stock market they backed out but failed to remove the infrastructure for the devious plan.

Trivia: Do you know that Hollywood's biggest problem is finding a good scriptwriter?

« Reply #52 on: June 06, 2018, 17:19 »
0

There's a much simpler explanation: Poisson clumping.


How about the Theory of uncertainty?

« Reply #53 on: June 06, 2018, 17:27 »
+1
Every time I had bigger sales, next day onwards sales have drastically declined. I believe, they are controlling our revenues.

What you are saying is that your next day sales are normal and, from time to time, you have a big sale (which is also part of the "normal").
 ;D

Type of licence can't be controlled by machine in advance. Buyer is first searching for an image and when he or she find the right one he will decide will it be 30+ cents or 100+ dollars. If it is a big sale from the algorithm point of view that sale is a deviation in revenue and it will be averaged by low sales in the following period.

Friendly advice: Zero IQ is a better nickname.

« Reply #54 on: June 06, 2018, 17:38 »
0
The explanation is not "random" at all. It is simple and logical.
A big sale = a spike.
A spike is a spike only when it stands out of the normal trend, being preceded and followed by normal and obviously lower sales.

By theory of probability big sale is not related anyhow to your other sales unless they come from the same buyer which is rarely the case for a people with a lot of sales every day. So big sale is actually a random event (so true by any means) and there is no reason for unrelated sales to decline immediately after the big sale. Unfortunately that is the case which is important proof that revenue is controlled for most of the contributors.

« Reply #55 on: June 06, 2018, 17:47 »
0
What is obvious can't be denied, but too much trolls here.
Se ya next year.

« Reply #56 on: June 06, 2018, 17:59 »
+1
As I understand it the big ticket items are often found by SS staff for big account holders much easier to manipulate that that playing with a super complex algorithm and hiding contributors from buyers and risking losing them because they can't find content.


It's also silly to assume that they would control it on an individual basis, I'd imagine that if they are manipulating it then it's pretty automated.
It may be silly but there are some high earners who don't report this happening.....

niktol

« Reply #57 on: June 07, 2018, 07:30 »
0


By theory of probability big sale is not related anyhow to your other sales unless they come from the same buyer which is rarely the case for a people with a lot of sales every day. So big sale is actually a random event (so true by any means) and there is no reason for unrelated sales to decline immediately after the big sale. Unfortunately that is the case which is important proof that revenue is controlled for most of the contributors.

As much as I enjoy circular reasoning in general, I would like to point out that probability theory does not assign probabilities to events, independent or otherwise. It only tells us what happens if [insert your favorite postulate here].

« Reply #58 on: June 07, 2018, 08:58 »
+1
As I understand it the big ticket items are often found by SS staff for big account holders much easier to manipulate that that playing with a super complex algorithm and hiding contributors from buyers and risking losing them because they can't find content.


It's also silly to assume that they would control it on an individual basis, I'd imagine that if they are manipulating it then it's pretty automated.
It may be silly but there are some high earners who don't report this happening.....

Yeah, got a 3 digits sale 2 days ago, followed by another large two digits sale yesterday!

Friendly advice: Zero IQ is a better nickname.

It looks like the "controlled revenue system" has some glitches, since massive sales can be followed by massive sales the very next day  :P

Another possible theory is that the "controlled revenue system" favors those with Zero Talent and/or Zero IQ  ;D
« Last Edit: June 07, 2018, 09:51 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #59 on: June 19, 2018, 16:19 »
+3
Absolutely controlled beyond a shadow of a doubt. I can predict the paltry amount I will get most days.

« Reply #60 on: June 19, 2018, 22:42 »
+3
Absolutely controlled beyond a shadow of a doubt. I can predict the paltry amount I will get most days.

I can predict that the level of interest from buyers for what you have, is about the same day to day. That's not controlled it's just how many people are interested in what you sell. Same as how many tacos a stand sells every day, in the same place. Some days are less, some more, and some have a big swing up or down, but what you call controlled income is nothing more then average and predictable sales. Do you know when your next big sale will come or your next terrible bad day? No, but you know what your average day is, that's the average not controlled. You are trying to say that average anything is some how manipulated or controlled when by math it's just normal and average. The day of the big sale is the unusual just like the day when sales are extra low. Normal is average is what you want to say is some how controlled, when that's perfect normal. Nothing unusual about average or normal, but you see something wrong and want a claim for why something is predictable?

« Reply #61 on: June 20, 2018, 00:10 »
+2
Absolutely controlled beyond a shadow of a doubt. I can predict the paltry amount I will get most days.
"most" why not all?

« Reply #62 on: June 20, 2018, 03:08 »
0
Absolutely controlled beyond a shadow of a doubt. I can predict the paltry amount I will get most days.

I can predict that the level of interest from buyers for what you have, is about the same day to day. That's not controlled it's just how many people are interested in what you sell. Same as how many tacos a stand sells every day, in the same place. Some days are less, some more, and some have a big swing up or down, but what you call controlled income is nothing more then average and predictable sales. Do you know when your next big sale will come or your next terrible bad day? No, but you know what your average day is, that's the average not controlled. You are trying to say that average anything is some how manipulated or controlled when by math it's just normal and average. The day of the big sale is the unusual just like the day when sales are extra low. Normal is average is what you want to say is some how controlled, when that's perfect normal. Nothing unusual about average or normal, but you see something wrong and want a claim for why something is predictable?

Do you work for ss ?

« Reply #63 on: June 20, 2018, 04:37 »
+5
Absolutely controlled beyond a shadow of a doubt. I can predict the paltry amount I will get most days.

I can predict that the level of interest from buyers for what you have, is about the same day to day. That's not controlled it's just how many people are interested in what you sell. Same as how many tacos a stand sells every day, in the same place. Some days are less, some more, and some have a big swing up or down, but what you call controlled income is nothing more then average and predictable sales. Do you know when your next big sale will come or your next terrible bad day? No, but you know what your average day is, that's the average not controlled. You are trying to say that average anything is some how manipulated or controlled when by math it's just normal and average. The day of the big sale is the unusual just like the day when sales are extra low. Normal is average is what you want to say is some how controlled, when that's perfect normal. Nothing unusual about average or normal, but you see something wrong and want a claim for why something is predictable?

Do you work for ss ?
This is the problem with conspiracy theories doubters are either part of the conspiracy or have been paid off. So the debate will continue.

« Reply #64 on: June 20, 2018, 09:16 »
0
This is the problem with conspiracy theories doubters are either part of the conspiracy or have been paid off. So the debate will continue.

Yeah, YadaYadaYada is most likely a member of the "deep (SS) state" conspiring to control our revenues!

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #65 on: June 20, 2018, 09:24 »
+1
This is the problem with conspiracy theories doubters are either part of the conspiracy or have been paid off. So the debate will continue.

Yeah, YadaYadaYada is most likely a member of the "deep (SS) state" conspiring to control our revenues!

Or maybe she's a mole who's here to watch what we say, then the "SS deep state" will drop my controlled earnings and lower my cap!  ;)

The real problem is honestly, that, reality, facts, and the truth don't matter when someone is convinced otherwise and believes there's something else going on.

« Reply #66 on: June 20, 2018, 12:31 »
+3
Well if you all want to continue being deluded into thinking SS are not controlling our visibility, you carry on burying your heads in the sand. I know what I know by patterns and others do too.


« Reply #67 on: June 20, 2018, 13:30 »
0
Well if you all want to continue being deluded into thinking SS are not controlling our visibility, you carry on burying your heads in the sand. I know what I know by patterns and others do too.

Come on you raver, you seer of visions,
....
Shine on you crazy diamond
.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2018, 13:34 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #68 on: June 20, 2018, 14:36 »
0
The way stock is being devalued and oversaturated is enough to make you crazy.

« Reply #69 on: June 20, 2018, 16:19 »
0
The way stock is being devalued and oversaturated is enough to make you crazy.

This is something nobody would argue with you about. It's self evident: everybody I know is a "photographer" these days.

But this is a different issue, totally independent from the controlled revenue conspiracy, you are venting about.

« Reply #70 on: June 20, 2018, 17:08 »
0
Well if you all want to continue being deluded into thinking SS are not controlling our visibility, you carry on burying your heads in the sand. I know what I know by patterns and others do too.
So what are you actually doing about it then?

« Reply #71 on: June 20, 2018, 17:12 »
0
We are all finished, stock media is dying.

« Reply #72 on: June 20, 2018, 17:26 »
0
We are all finished, stock media is dying.
Well if you believe that time to find pastures new.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #73 on: June 21, 2018, 00:00 »
+1
Stock media has been dying from the day that stock media came into existence. Well, it has and it hasn't. The need for stock has been increasing gradually over the years. More channels, more shows, bigger audiences, more Youtube videos etc etc. So stock media is very much alive and well.

It's just the same old story of more and more competition when it comes to the people that sell stock media. There's no way to keep up with the increase in competition, so everyone gets a slightly smaller slice of the pie year over year. It's the same for everyone.... tv channels, slightly more viewers over the years, but more channels and more shows. Youtube channels... slightly more Youtube viewers over the years, but loads more channels and videos. There's not much that can be done about that.

Make more content than you did last year, make better content than you did last year, make sure you're on the sites you should be and not on the sites you shouldn't, revisit your descriptions, keywords, titles, think about branding, streamlining your working practices to make everything more efficient, consider cost-effective marketing, look for ways to maximise profits and minimise costs, add value, see what your competition are doing, review prices on sites where you can set your own, both from a time standpoint and a financial one, look for additional ways your work could be bringing in money, etc etc etc.

And if you've done all that and you still eventually get to the point where it's no longer worth while... then at least you'll know you did everything you could. You can then tip your hat to the world of stock media, say "Well, it was fun while it lasted kid. So long", and then turn your back before walking off into the mist. Or do what I'll do... say "See ya around suckers!" and fly off in my spaceship clutching a cheap bottle of wine in each paw.     

« Reply #74 on: June 21, 2018, 00:08 »
+1
Stock media has been dying from the day that stock media came into existence. Well, it has and it hasn't. The need for stock has been increasing gradually over the years. More channels, more shows, bigger audiences, more Youtube videos etc etc. So stock media is very much alive and well.

It's just the same old story of more and more competition when it comes to the people that sell stock media. There's no way to keep up with the increase in competition, so everyone gets a slightly smaller slice of the pie year over year. It's the same for everyone.... tv channels, slightly more viewers over the years, but more channels and more shows. Youtube channels... slightly more Youtube viewers over the years, but loads more channels and videos. There's not much that can be done about that.

Make more content than you did last year, make better content than you did last year, make sure you're on the sites you should be and not on the sites you shouldn't, revisit your descriptions, keywords, titles, think about branding, streamlining your working practices to make everything more efficient, consider cost-effective marketing, look for ways to maximise profits and minimise costs, add value, see what your competition are doing, review prices on sites where you can set your own, both from a time standpoint and a financial one, look for additional ways your work could be bringing in money, etc etc etc.

And if you've done all that and you still eventually get to the point where it's no longer worth while... then at least you'll know you did everything you could. You can then tip your hat to the world of stock media, say "Well, it was fun while it lasted kid. So long", and then turn your back before walking off into the mist. Or do what I'll do... say "See ya around suckers!" and fly off in my spaceship clutching a cheap bottle of wine in each paw.   

Entirely agree.

But the problem is that supply is accelerating and it's impossible to keep up.  I believe at the last market report Shutterstock said that the library had increased by about 40% but sales only by 2%.  This means that in order to just stand still one has to increase one's portfolio by 40% or so.

I accept that higher quality, more attractive concepts etc should eventually produce results better than the run-of-the-mill stuff being uploaded by many, but the problem of visibility arises - even the best work won't sell if it's drowned by millions of other images.

However, yours is a generally positive analysis and I agree - all we can do is try to produce good quality work and hope for the best.  Unfortunately even that approach is likely to end in disappointment in the long term.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
2321 Views
Last post July 23, 2013, 04:16
by shudderstok
36 Replies
10420 Views
Last post August 05, 2013, 09:16
by gbalex
134 Replies
27624 Views
Last post September 19, 2013, 12:13
by Batman
2 Replies
1038 Views
Last post March 25, 2014, 20:31
by ShadySue
2 Replies
827 Views
Last post February 24, 2017, 03:16
by Harvepino

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors