MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SSTK First Quarter 2018 report  (Read 6354 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: May 01, 2018, 10:31 »
0

Looked this morning, the stock was at $50 a share which I still think is high, at least 20% over what it should be.

How did you come up with the 20% figure?

It's $50 a share, my personal feeling is, the stock would be a good long term value at $40. I look for stocks that have growth over time potential, stability, not fast ups and downs based on some hype or news. Roughly speaking the SSTK dropped to $35 last year, but now it's $50 = over valued.
Bumping along at $42 now seems a lot of people agree with you.

I saw that drop right after the financial report. Also there are some huge investors like $350,000 from one of the teachers unions. There are funds that own similar blocks of 10,000 shares for example.

That kind of place wants growth for their retirement or financial pool. They don't want stagnation. Believe me, if I sold all my other stocks, to buy SSTK I'd need to see growth, steady and a future, not level or small earnings. The flash and boom has happened, we're just looking at the light reflection off low clouds of smoke while hearing the echo. SS needs to come up with something new that will entice and encourage investors. Something that promises continued growth.

When a company has a good strong basis and doesn't expand and diversify, investors (not me, the smart ones) will go elsewhere.
the only reason to buy into  a company not growing fast is a steady dividend stream...as far as i know no prospect of ss offering this..........


namussi

« Reply #26 on: May 01, 2018, 23:21 »
0

Looked this morning, the stock was at $50 a share which I still think is high, at least 20% over what it should be.

How did you come up with the 20% figure?

It's $50 a share, my personal feeling is, the stock would be a good long term value at $40. I look for stocks that have growth over time potential, stability, not fast ups and downs based on some hype or news. Roughly speaking the SSTK dropped to $35 last year, but now it's $50 = over valued.

So it's a guess based on emotion, and not financial analysis? :-)

OM

« Reply #27 on: May 03, 2018, 08:28 »
+1
The simple basis for all stock prices of corps in the 'new' economy (no dividends) is that at some point in the future (preferably within hours or days) a greater fool will come along and relieve you of your stocks at a higher price.  ;D

On the subject of AI to improve customer experience....they really have to do better than this if a customer wants a shot of a walnut.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2018, 10:30 by OM »

« Reply #28 on: May 07, 2018, 12:09 »
0

Looked this morning, the stock was at $50 a share which I still think is high, at least 20% over what it should be.

How did you come up with the 20% figure?

It's $50 a share, my personal feeling is, the stock would be a good long term value at $40. I look for stocks that have growth over time potential, stability, not fast ups and downs based on some hype or news. Roughly speaking the SSTK dropped to $35 last year, but now it's $50 = over valued.

So it's a guess based on emotion, and not financial analysis? :-)

If I was answering, I'd feel the same based on the stock dropping below $35 last year, the financials not as good as expected 1stQ and for what I read here, nearly every day. If the last part is, we're losing but SS is winning and gaining, that's a sad situation. How can our income not be related to the company income.

« Reply #29 on: May 07, 2018, 13:38 »
0

Looked this morning, the stock was at $50 a share which I still think is high, at least 20% over what it should be.

How did you come up with the 20% figure?

It's $50 a share, my personal feeling is, the stock would be a good long term value at $40. I look for stocks that have growth over time potential, stability, not fast ups and downs based on some hype or news. Roughly speaking the SSTK dropped to $35 last year, but now it's $50 = over valued.

So it's a guess based on emotion, and not financial analysis? :-)

Plenty of financial analysis out there

Here's one for starters and the news isn't good and the market was saying this up to two years ago.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/shutterstock-sees-mixed-performance-webdam-151700858.html

But here's the bit that kills contributors

"Paid download growth slowed to a near-standstill, rising just 0.5% year over year to 43.7 million and actually declining slightly compared to the fourth quarter of 2017. Yet Shutterstock got a lot more revenue from each download, boosting unit revenue by 17% to $3.40 per download"

So how did they do that? Either by fiddling the figures (unlikely) or by pushing the lower value 25 cent contributors therefore making more money per download

But of course thats all tin foil hat conspiracy stuff isn't it? ::)
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 14:06 by Sammy the Cat »

« Reply #30 on: May 07, 2018, 14:04 »
0
ZZZZZZZZZ yawn!!  all this is SO very uninteresting since nobody here is a trader nor stockbroker!  sorry people!

« Reply #31 on: May 07, 2018, 14:07 »
+1
ZZZZZZZZZ yawn!!  all this is SO very uninteresting since nobody here is a trader nor stockbroker!  sorry people!

Not so fast.....  8)

« Reply #32 on: May 07, 2018, 14:50 »
+1
But here's the bit that kills contributors

"Paid download growth slowed to a near-standstill, rising just 0.5% year over year to 43.7 million and actually declining slightly compared to the fourth quarter of 2017. Yet Shutterstock got a lot more revenue from each download, boosting unit revenue by 17% to $3.40 per download"

So how did they do that? Either by fiddling the figures (unlikely) or by pushing the lower value 25 cent contributors therefore making more money per download

But of course thats all tin foil hat conspiracy stuff isn't it? ::)

They are talking about revenue per download, not profit. How much the contributors get is not relevant for that figure.
Most likely they are more successful in selling higher priced licenses and / or videos.
Should be good for us (RPD going up)

Just out of curiosity, I just did a quick comparison over the last two one-year periods (May 2016 - April 2017 vs May 2017 - April 2018).
My own RPD rose from $0,75 to $0,98.

Number of downloads was almost flat (slight decline), but total revenue was up by around 20%.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 14:53 by dirkr »

« Reply #33 on: May 07, 2018, 14:57 »
0
But here's the bit that kills contributors

"Paid download growth slowed to a near-standstill, rising just 0.5% year over year to 43.7 million and actually declining slightly compared to the fourth quarter of 2017. Yet Shutterstock got a lot more revenue from each download, boosting unit revenue by 17% to $3.40 per download"

So how did they do that? Either by fiddling the figures (unlikely) or by pushing the lower value 25 cent contributors therefore making more money per download

But of course thats all tin foil hat conspiracy stuff isn't it? ::)

They are talking about revenue per download, not profit. How much the contributors get is not relevant for that figure.
Most likely they are more successful in selling higher priced licenses and / or videos.
Should be good for us (RPD going up)

Just out of curiosity, I just did a quick comparison over the last two one-year periods (May 2016 - April 2017 vs May 2017 - April 2018).
My own RPD rose from $0,75 to $0,98.

Number of downloads was almost flat (slight decline), but total revenue was up by around 20%.

A small rise in video downloads as a percentage of total downloads could explain it. 

« Reply #34 on: May 08, 2018, 00:51 »
0
But here's the bit that kills contributors

"Paid download growth slowed to a near-standstill, rising just 0.5% year over year to 43.7 million and actually declining slightly compared to the fourth quarter of 2017. Yet Shutterstock got a lot more revenue from each download, boosting unit revenue by 17% to $3.40 per download"

So how did they do that? Either by fiddling the figures (unlikely) or by pushing the lower value 25 cent contributors therefore making more money per download

But of course thats all tin foil hat conspiracy stuff isn't it? ::)

They are talking about revenue per download, not profit. How much the contributors get is not relevant for that figure.
Most likely they are more successful in selling higher priced licenses and / or videos.
Should be good for us (RPD going up)

Just out of curiosity, I just did a quick comparison over the last two one-year periods (May 2016 - April 2017 vs May 2017 - April 2018).
My own RPD rose from $0,75 to $0,98.

Number of downloads was almost flat (slight decline), but total revenue was up by around 20%.

A small rise in video downloads as a percentage of total downloads could explain it.
Along with their push to go for the higher end of the market which they've talked about many times

namussi

« Reply #35 on: May 08, 2018, 01:56 »
+2
ZZZZZZZZZ yawn!!  all this is SO very uninteresting since nobody here is a trader nor stockbroker!  sorry people!

Of course it's boring trying to understand why you are getting less money than before. Far better to promote weird conspiracy theories that have no basis in how businesses actually work


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1803 Views
Last post October 11, 2012, 17:39
by gostwyck
51 Replies
10785 Views
Last post September 30, 2013, 07:14
by sharpshot
22 Replies
6723 Views
Last post April 15, 2016, 05:53
by OM
13 Replies
2460 Views
Last post July 13, 2016, 01:54
by Pauws99
73 Replies
13334 Views
Last post August 07, 2017, 20:03
by namussi

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors