pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Countdown to 100 Million on SS - is over  (Read 15535 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: September 10, 2016, 18:09 »
0
Come on. Istock has been 10x as bad for 10x as long and is still dragging along. SS won't be disappearing anytime soon.

They just need to get things fixed. Hopefully the real competition from Adobe will get them to up their game.

Sales were better in August and ELs have been picking up again.

oh, so i guess to you ss as it is today with all the strange things happening consistently
is good???
and you think it's ok for ss to be like istock ... just dragging along???

funny, i thought most contributors ... and shareholders... would rather have
the ss before they went public, instead of just being like istock ...
dragging along  8)


Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #26 on: September 11, 2016, 03:47 »
0
Absolutely right. I was just arguing that they aren't going disappear and there are much worse sites out there.

« Reply #27 on: September 11, 2016, 10:14 »
+1
Absolutely right. I was just arguing that they aren't going disappear and there are much worse sites out there.

ah, ok, i get what you mean!!!  u r correct, it would just be that ss drops into mistrust
like istock and we have a new agency which will be the new ss...
like adobe/fotolia.

i don't have much faith in the rest to the right column here, as they have been all
dead in the water since inception.
we just need a new agency with a new culture instead of the usual we are the cheapest
in the world , even give away our goods if you join now since the images we have
are not our work but stooges who think they can make money with us.

dpimborough

« Reply #28 on: September 11, 2016, 10:20 »
+3
https://twitter.com/jonoringer/status/773921086237016065

Looks like Jon Oringer doesn't seem to think there is any problem over at the HQ

To busy buying guitars with the money he made off the chumps and chumpettes

« Reply #29 on: September 11, 2016, 10:20 »
+6
Content volume can easily expend to infinite :D, but content quality by time is slowing down, just saying.

« Reply #30 on: September 11, 2016, 12:51 »
+4
https://twitter.com/jonoringer/status/773921086237016065

Looks like Jon Oringer doesn't seem to think there is any problem over at the HQ

To busy buying guitars with the money he made off the chumps and chumpettes

someone sent me a msg opening my eyes. it said, so what is the crisis with J.O???
say 200 old contributors complain shortfall of 50% and more since the vanishing port issue.
but did you go see ss forum how many newbies are going wooo yay my first download.
if you lose 1000 dls and the other 199 lose 200,000 dls a month,
there are still 200,000 newbies getting 2 dls a week cheering for ss.

of course there is no crisis for big O !!!

« Reply #31 on: September 11, 2016, 12:59 »
0
Five years from now.... it will be half a billion images or more...

Five years from now the company won't even exist. All internal problems, staff this and that bean-counters at the steering wheel coupled with mounting competition plus all external problems.
Who knows maybe if SS folded we would be back to square one and a much healthier stock climate?

I am sorry but what a bull%$^ you are saying. I am always surprised how much many people pretend to know.......

The managing part SS will know far much better what to do then us. They are running the company for year..... we are the photographers. For sure we dont know better what to do. It is always easy to talk on the other side.

I dont say it is true but i dont belief that SS will close any time soon and for sure not in 5 years. Just because you dont like that there is so many competition (best would be to have all agency for your own) doesnt mean that it is going bad with the company.

Just to be short. SS is for everybody and everyone has right to submit their images. If you dont like that start your own website and sell them there. No competition on your site.

100 million is still far and far not much. There is so much to be covered in different ways and everything is needed. Especially in the editorial section is much work to do. The possibilities are endless.

And also no need to say again where is the quality. What is quality. Your image need to be technically correct along with a good composition. Then most is sold. I said it already but when someone needs a pear photo for an fruit article he just needs a pear on the photo. Done. A HDR colorwonder of a hybrid pear on a futuristic table is not needed. Useful images are needed and not wall decorations. My last 20 sales are of subjects that are the most common things photographed on most simple way.

To be short 100 million is nothing in this business. 100 million dollars in my pocket is a different thing.

Spoken like a true believer. I knew there must be one somewhere.

gyllens

« Reply #32 on: September 11, 2016, 13:19 »
+2
https://twitter.com/jonoringer/status/773921086237016065

Looks like Jon Oringer doesn't seem to think there is any problem over at the HQ

To busy buying guitars with the money he made off the chumps and chumpettes

someone sent me a msg opening my eyes. it said, so what is the crisis with J.O???
say 200 old contributors complain shortfall of 50% and more since the vanishing port issue.
but did you go see ss forum how many newbies are going wooo yay my first download.
if you lose 1000 dls and the other 199 lose 200,000 dls a month,
there are still 200,000 newbies getting 2 dls a week cheering for ss.

of course there is no crisis for big O !!!

Very true!!  and that agency strategy was one of the major contributors that finally brought IS to its knees.

« Reply #33 on: September 12, 2016, 01:50 »
+1
Agencies and contributors have different "meaning of life". After that everything is predictable.

OM

« Reply #34 on: September 12, 2016, 16:09 »
+2
https://twitter.com/jonoringer/status/773921086237016065

Looks like Jon Oringer doesn't seem to think there is any problem over at the HQ

To busy buying guitars with the money he made off the chumps and chumpettes

someone sent me a msg opening my eyes. it said, so what is the crisis with J.O???
say 200 old contributors complain shortfall of 50% and more since the vanishing port issue.
but did you go see ss forum how many newbies are going wooo yay my first download.
if you lose 1000 dls and the other 199 lose 200,000 dls a month,
there are still 200,000 newbies getting 2 dls a week cheering for ss.

of course there is no crisis for big O !!!

...and even better for Big O, those 200,000 newbies may have to wait a year or so before they reach payout. Like having creditors' terms that give you a year to pay instead of 30 days!  ;)

« Reply #35 on: January 27, 2017, 18:44 »
0
No longer reporting image count. Sometime last week or maybe earlier, all the pages that still showed the real count and new images, are showing the stock number, 800,000 new images added each week. No more watching for 110,00 million images.

I found this interesting. Hope it formats right.

Year   Cont YR   < 0 Img      Cont % < 0   Cont T      < 0      Cont % < 0

2004    1,950       1,030       52.82%    1,950       1,030       52.82%
2005    15,426       4,725       30.63%    17,376       5,755       33.12%
2006    26,349       3,676       13.95%    43,725       9,431       21.57%
2007    36,631       3,939       10.75%    80,356       13,370       16.64%
2008    48,267       5,767       11.95%    128,623    19,137       14.88%
2009    70,125       7,866       11.22%    198,748    27,003       13.59%
2010    58,454       6,324       10.82%    257,202    33,327       12.96%
2011    66,479       6,026       9.06%       323,681    39,353       12.16%
2012    154,082    9,661       6.27%       477,763    49,014       10.26%
2013    205,951    10,990       5.34%       683,714    60,004       8.78%
2014    228,906    14,050       6.14%       912,620    74,053       8.11%
2015    343,461    26,455       7.7%       1,256,081    100,508    8.00%
2016    422,950    64,440       15.24%    1,679,031    164,949    9.82%

Close enough. Left is new contributors per year, total contributors is 5th column. Last column is contributor % with more than zero images. That's 9.82% means 93% of the count have no images?

I think I read that SS rejects up to 80% of the new applications to become contributors.

But there you are. 110,000 million images from 164,949 people or groups. I thought that number of contributors was less.

One more small note. 14,500 people have over 1000 images on SS. That's it. 9% of the people who have at least 1 image live on SS as of January 2017 have 1,000 or more images. If that's what serious means, it's a pretty small club.

Want one more? 3811 have 5,000 or more images on SS. You can figure where you are from that. Roughly top 2% group of all artists with one image accepted, are over 5,000 images. Here's to you 2%ers.

FlowerPower

« Reply #36 on: January 29, 2017, 00:11 »
0
Commodity, produce peanuts, get paid peanuts. 100 million peanuts by 100,000 artists divided gets you your minimum wage 100 peanuts. Not getting better, not going to get better. Face it the market is going bottom up.

« Reply #37 on: January 29, 2017, 12:56 »
0
Come on. Istock has been 10x as bad for 10x as long and is still dragging along. SS won't be disappearing anytime soon.

They just need to get things fixed. Hopefully the real competition from Adobe will get them to up their game.

Sales were better in August and ELs have been picking up again.

Istock is a perfect example of how bad things can get.  Only reason they are still limping along at all is because they have Getty behind them.  Ironic that Getty destroyed them but is now (barely) propping them up.

Besides, with the continued steps of Getty to fully integrate Istock into the Borg , IS may cease to be a named separate entity within months.  Aren't we still waiting for their annual. EFFyou announcement soon?

Didn't get to give this a plus the first time around. It's worth quoting. The annual announcement was much different than predicted and you are both right. Adobe should force SS to improve.

« Reply #38 on: February 23, 2017, 16:11 »
0
Stats are back, found this today.

Shutterstock 125,886,516 royalty-free stock images / 971,473 new stock images added this week

I think this explains the drop in sales pretty well. Going to reach 1 million new images a week soon.

Might add, that Alamy isn't far behind, 96,860,897 stock photos, vectors and videos.

Adobestock is no slacker, 71,691,042 total


« Reply #39 on: February 23, 2017, 17:12 »
0
The scariest one is Dtime with 55 Million and adding a million every three or four weeks. I seem to remember at one time Alamy had by far the most images. Given that I can sell anything at all in this ocean of images  I can only assume there's a lot of poor quality and endless repetition out there.

« Reply #40 on: March 17, 2017, 14:27 »
+1
Just a note for St. Patrick's Day

130,581,642 royalty-free stock images / 1,293,793 new stock images added this week

This is a runaway freight train.


jonbull

    This user is banned.
« Reply #41 on: March 17, 2017, 14:47 »
0
Just a note for St. Patrick's Day

130,581,642 royalty-free stock images / 1,293,793 new stock images added this week

This is a runaway freight train.

its' clear as told many times,,most are coming from poor or semi poor country where cost of living let people earn 500 600 dollar and live. and we have not seeing nothing. in those country lives millions of people with a camera.


jonbull

    This user is banned.
« Reply #42 on: March 17, 2017, 14:54 »
0
https://twitter.com/jonoringer/status/773921086237016065

Looks like Jon Oringer doesn't seem to think there is any problem over at the HQ

To busy buying guitars with the money he made off the chumps and chumpettes

someone sent me a msg opening my eyes. it said, so what is the crisis with J.O???
say 200 old contributors complain shortfall of 50% and more since the vanishing port issue.
but did you go see ss forum how many newbies are going wooo yay my first download.
if you lose 1000 dls and the other 199 lose 200,000 dls a month,
there are still 200,000 newbies getting 2 dls a week cheering for ss.

of course there is no crisis for big O !!!

in addiction spreading the download between a lot of port makes many don't even reach payout for months.
i'm sure 100% they drive sales to do mostly this. in march i see a pattern of controlled sales on m,y folio. is not possible that suddenly sales are few, same number for 5 days , and in the same hours of day. it's clear they are doing something so after youreached your quota per day you disappears from search engine.

JimP

« Reply #43 on: March 18, 2017, 14:30 »
0
https://twitter.com/jonoringer/status/773921086237016065

Looks like Jon Oringer doesn't seem to think there is any problem over at the HQ

To busy buying guitars with the money he made off the chumps and chumpettes

someone sent me a msg opening my eyes. it said, so what is the crisis with J.O???
say 200 old contributors complain shortfall of 50% and more since the vanishing port issue.
but did you go see ss forum how many newbies are going wooo yay my first download.
if you lose 1000 dls and the other 199 lose 200,000 dls a month,
there are still 200,000 newbies getting 2 dls a week cheering for ss.

of course there is no crisis for big O !!!

in addiction spreading the download between a lot of port makes many don't even reach payout for months.
i'm sure 100% they drive sales to do mostly this. in march i see a pattern of controlled sales on m,y folio. is not possible that suddenly sales are few, same number for 5 days , and in the same hours of day. it's clear they are doing something so after youreached your quota per day you disappears from search engine.

If it's clear maybe you can show us some proof that SS cares enough to watch your earnings, turn you on or off or set limits on your downloads and earnings. The opposite would be, maybe you only sell that much on average and SS doesn't care since they make money no matter who gets the download.

Any proof or is this just another inventive claim like the rest that people come up with to blame the agency for everything that happens.

dpimborough

« Reply #44 on: March 19, 2017, 05:02 »
+3
But just look at what is being added

The biggest additions are just repetitive graphics and not very good one either.

It's just junk

http://www.microstock.top/indeximg.phtml?sort=added

They should separate out the photos from graphics.  It's the vector "artists" that stuffing the library

And one of the biggest adders of photos is Rawpixel who  are basically giving away images for free yet they have a port on SS

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Rawpixel.com

https://www.rawpixel.com/free-image-license

What on earth!
« Last Edit: March 19, 2017, 06:16 by Sammy the Cat »

« Reply #45 on: March 19, 2017, 09:59 »
+1
The top "performer" - Welcome to Madness (take a look at the new images and you will see what I mean)

« Reply #46 on: March 19, 2017, 10:23 »
+5
So... this vector "artist"... joined in 2016... and by now has 428,000 images in his port...

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/icparvu

And thats how Shutterstock gets their 200 million of excellent premium quality CREATIVE and ORIGINAL images!... sickening...

Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #47 on: March 19, 2017, 10:55 »
+2
So... this vector "artist"... joined in 2016... and by now has 428,000 images in his port...

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/icparvu

And thats how Shutterstock gets their 200 million of excellent premium quality CREATIVE and ORIGINAL images!... sickening...
Wow that's awesome. So the sh*t in just that portfolio makes up .5% of the the library by itself. If I was a major shareholder I would be considering taking SS to court about now. How can they claim the percentage growth in their collection to investors when they are artificially inflating it with all these duplicates? When are investors going to ask why SS lets people with STRs of like .2% flood the library? I would love to see stats of how many images overall actually ever get a download on the site nowadays.

« Reply #48 on: March 19, 2017, 12:19 »
0
So... this vector "artist"... joined in 2016... and by now has 428,000 images in his port...

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/icparvu

And thats how Shutterstock gets their 200 million of excellent premium quality CREATIVE and ORIGINAL images!... sickening...
Wow that's awesome. So the sh*t in just that portfolio makes up .5% of the the library by itself. If I was a major shareholder I would be considering taking SS to court about now. How can they claim the percentage growth in their collection to investors when they are artificially inflating it with all these duplicates? When are investors going to ask why SS lets people with STRs of like .2% flood the library? I would love to see stats of how many images overall actually ever get a download on the site nowadays.
As long as the were growing income I doubt investors would be interested..the last set of figures weren't great and the spin put on it unconvincing. If the next report continues the trend I think shareholders will begin to look more carefully.

jonbull

    This user is banned.
« Reply #49 on: March 19, 2017, 13:44 »
+1
https://twitter.com/jonoringer/status/773921086237016065

Looks like Jon Oringer doesn't seem to think there is any problem over at the HQ

To busy buying guitars with the money he made off the chumps and chumpettes

someone sent me a msg opening my eyes. it said, so what is the crisis with J.O???
say 200 old contributors complain shortfall of 50% and more since the vanishing port issue.
but did you go see ss forum how many newbies are going wooo yay my first download.
if you lose 1000 dls and the other 199 lose 200,000 dls a month,
there are still 200,000 newbies getting 2 dls a week cheering for ss.

of course there is no crisis for big O !!!

in addiction spreading the download between a lot of port makes many don't even reach payout for months.
i'm sure 100% they drive sales to do mostly this. in march i see a pattern of controlled sales on m,y folio. is not possible that suddenly sales are few, same number for 5 days , and in the same hours of day. it's clear they are doing something so after youreached your quota per day you disappears from search engine.

If it's clear maybe you can show us some proof that SS cares enough to watch your earnings, turn you on or off or set limits on your downloads and earnings. The opposite would be, maybe you only sell that much on average and SS doesn't care since they make money no matter who gets the download.

Any proof or is this just another inventive claim like the rest that people come up with to blame the agency for everything that happens.

i don't have proof but after 6 months of steady increasing weekly..i suddenly had one week of -50% compared to previous week....i sold practically same number of photos every day, ate same period of day.
maybe is just a casual week. sure if you stop uploading even for 14 days you soon have a big impact on dl number. i stopped uploading last weeks and saw this last week.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
The countdown to 1,000,000

Started by Dreamstime News Microstock News

10 Replies
4633 Views
Last post February 08, 2007, 09:32
by leaf
Countdown to Punctum

Started by Istock News Microstock News

0 Replies
1816 Views
Last post August 09, 2007, 15:55
by Istock News
107 Replies
49340 Views
Last post June 15, 2018, 09:02
by YadaYadaYada
2 Replies
3260 Views
Last post March 06, 2015, 06:03
by sunflowerstock
2 Replies
2132 Views
Last post February 01, 2021, 11:39
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors