pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: BigStock Selling HD Videos for $0.15 !!  (Read 76175 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: November 13, 2014, 15:20 »
+2
This is total crap and makes me glad I am exclusive today! I took a look at the videos and there is some high end content there.
At a place that reduced the pricing of video by a factor of 3?
Good point.  Selling video at iStock for between $48 and $65 is about the same as selling video at Bigstock for between 60 cents and 15 cents a clip.  Shutterstock is selling the same videos for $79 that they are now selling for 15 cents, can you tell us what factor that is reduced by?
I'm not sure what your point is. "Selling for" and "getting paid" are also factors. This deal with BS is just that, but true to form, all of a sudden, iStock isn't so bad anymore.
I guess my point is that when Shutterstock is reducing the cost of videos by a factor of more than 525 iStock's reduction looks pretty small.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2014, 15:23 by tickstock »


Lightrecorder

« Reply #76 on: November 13, 2014, 15:21 »
+12
I get $19 for a video on SS, I need to sell that same video 127 times now on BS to make the same. There is no chance in hell that the 'regular' consumer market will be good for that kind of volume on BS. Shutterstock is controlling the image market, if they upped their prices, other agencies dont have to keep looking for the bottom line, they could ease up as well and increase pricing with Shutterstock. But no, the market leader just went beyond the unimaginable and dropped video prices to 15 cent. It is just atrocious.

Lightrecorder

« Reply #77 on: November 13, 2014, 15:33 »
+1
i am sure this is SS's idea. But this doesn't mean it will be automatically transferred to SS.

My video income is 90% pond5 and SS. So having to drop SS, or downgrading them to a place "for testshots only" would be really sad.
I hope you wouldn't even consider uploading test shots if they are going to be sold for 15 cents.
  or 12 euro cent, you cant make this stuff up. probably 10 pence. f.f.s


« Reply #78 on: November 13, 2014, 15:34 »
+3
I get $19 for a video on SS, I need to sell that same video 127 times now on BS to make the same. There is no chance in hell that the 'regular' consumer market will be good for that kind of volume on BS. Shutterstock is controlling the image market, if they upped their prices, other agencies dont have to keep looking for the bottom line, they could ease up as well and increase pricing with Shutterstock. But no, the market leader just went beyond the unimaginable and dropped video prices to 15 cent. It is just atrocious.

Right. I won't support it. As a contributor who prefers to support fair trade it's hard to balance that with my revenue needs.  I will end up eating my own words that I will never go exclusive.  The real danger here is creating a DPC of video for all to follow. And as many of you smart folks have stated in past threads the ONLY way to stop this is to get every video contributor to remove their ports and that simply isn't going to happen with enough critical mass to make a real, sustainable difference.

« Reply #79 on: November 13, 2014, 15:37 »
+11
i am sure this is SS's idea. But this doesn't mean it will be automatically transferred to SS.

My video income is 90% pond5 and SS. So having to drop SS, or downgrading them to a place "for testshots only" would be really sad.
I hope you wouldn't even consider uploading test shots if they are going to be sold for 15 cents.
  or 12 euro cent, you cant make this stuff up. probably 10 pence. f.f.s
It's even crazier that the most popular video on Shutterstock for 'blowing bubbles' is being offered on Bigstock at less than 1% of the price.  How could that contributor agree to it? 

« Reply #80 on: November 13, 2014, 15:37 »
+7
Hiring a helicopter and doing aerial shoots over Istanbul has been done and for sale on Bigstock footage. It will only take 34,354 downloads to become profitable - quite tempting really

http://www.bigstockphoto.com/video-74473681/

« Reply #81 on: November 13, 2014, 15:44 »
+2
i am sure this is SS's idea. But this doesn't mean it will be automatically transferred to SS.

My video income is 90% pond5 and SS. So having to drop SS, or downgrading them to a place "for testshots only" would be really sad.
I hope you wouldn't even consider uploading test shots if they are going to be sold for 15 cents.
  or 12 euro cent, you cant make this stuff up. probably 10 pence. f.f.s
It's even crazier that the most popular video on Shutterstock for 'blowing bubbles' is being offered on Bigstock at less than 1% of the price.  How could that contributor agree to it?

That's a point I made in another post. A 99% discount.

Tror

« Reply #82 on: November 13, 2014, 16:07 »
+15
You cannot trust any company which is listed on the stock market and which is in the hands of shareholders. In fact, I think this scheme currently running large parts of the economy is just distorted capitalism and should be banned and punished.

1. As a matter of definition the main goal of such a legal entity (shareholded and p. listed company) is to produce pure profit and increasing the profits continuously compared to the previous quarter.

2. This goal has a strategic horizon of 3 month. No long term strategy will be applied - in most cases.

3. The output product is almost always unproductive (pure liquidity without any necessary real application beyond the joy of the shareholders to have a couple of zeros more in their accounts). Investments reduce Profit. Sustainable thinking and strategy reduces Profit. Empathy reduces Profit.

Cleared profit might be invested later on but by experience these investments are rarely beneficial for those on the bottom of the economic pyramid or consist e.g. in financial re-investments or a nice new office in a expensive building in Manhattan. These spendings do not result - or very little - in any real productivity.

4. The method of increasing Profit is first and foremost by increasing market share. This is done by e.g. creating a good product and a good offer to the consumer (the nicest part of the process) and later by e.g. lowering prices and thus gaining market share from the competition. But no market can grow forever no matter how aggressive and successful the strategy is. This means that at some point...

5. ...the company has to reduce production costs. Squeeze suppliers, reduce quality, simplify processes, fire people etc.

6. The company eventually will end up at point 5 since there are only few possible escape routes from this scheme and will fail at some moment for whatever reason.

Under the current regime, we destroy nature, sacrifice our lifetime, cut down trees, enslave ourselves and our creativity, burn down woods, mistreat animals, ....  for the marvelous outcome that some d*** who bought some papers somewhere is happy to see some abstract numbers without inherit value going up. Even if this shareholder will spend this abstract value in the form of any fiat currency it is unlikely that this value returns to the consumer base. It is more likely - again- to be re-invested as a pure financial product or that it is simply spent on luxury goods for the benefit of few other companies.

Or, in simpler words: we eat up the world to create a infinite number of fiat money without real value.

Shutterstock is no different. No raise. No new features for Contributors. Lousy and incompetent inspection process (but surely cost effective...lol). No support of creativity and investment security (collections). Allowance of copycats. Not even a simple database feature (optional sensitive usage) or a additional payout method  (payoneer) which some of us desire so badly.

Their revenue has gone up by 40% in the last quarter? (? - don`t remember the exact number, can be found here in the recent thread) Well, but certainly not mine. I always have to expand and invest and work more for the same revenue. This is why the gap between poor and rich is widening so fast and the middle class is disappearing in so many parts of the world.

But hey, we got a fancy world map showing our latest sales!
« Last Edit: November 13, 2014, 16:12 by Tror »

Lightrecorder

« Reply #83 on: November 13, 2014, 16:12 »
+9
With this move SS is full of BS  :o

« Reply #84 on: November 13, 2014, 16:26 »
+7
I am well aware of iStock and Getty trends! I do this for a living and have been submitting since 2006. I am aware that no place is safe. Bottom line is I do what is best for me $$ wise and being exclusive works a lot better for me! To each their own and I hate for the whole industry when this happens! Even if I am exclusive I still feel shafted.

« Reply #85 on: November 13, 2014, 16:34 »
+1
I am well aware of iStock and Getty trends! I do this for a living and have been submitting since 2006. I am aware that no place is safe. Bottom line is I do what is best for me $$ wise and being exclusive works a lot better for me! To each their own and I hate for the whole industry when this happens! Even if I am exclusive I still feel shafted.

I hear you, Jjneff the main reason is that one company will create an industry wide problem that isn't reversible.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2014, 19:50 by Mantis »

Lightrecorder

« Reply #86 on: November 13, 2014, 18:06 »
0
Bump

« Reply #87 on: November 13, 2014, 18:52 »
0
Selling videos at 15 cents each how much do contributors get. Maybe 6 or 7 cents a sale. Clearly you don't think BigStock is going to give contributors all of the big money.

« Reply #88 on: November 13, 2014, 19:20 »
+2
Mind boggling that Shutterstock can be selling a high volume of footage clips for great prices one moment, and then introduce footage sales at world record low prices the next, in fact footage sales even cheaper than DFC giveaway photo prices. It's not April, so what's going on? Is there a collective wish at SS to wind down and bankrupt the company? Are they on drugs?

There is a collective wish at shutterstock to drive up stock prices... Annual revenue at shutterstock is 235.52Million.   

To date the SSTK take for stock shares sold by key inside investors is 351.5 Million excluding stock sales by INSIGHT VENTURE PARTNERS V L P, SHUTTERSTOCK INVESTORS I LLC, as well as Institutional holdings via INSIGHT HOLDINGS GROUP, LLC.

Just think what their take must be when you add in their larger holdings.

Again these guys are in it for the short term and they do not give a rats @$$ what happens to the video market long term. By then they will be cashed out and will have moved on to the next vehicle/victim.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2014, 21:54 by gbalex »

« Reply #89 on: November 13, 2014, 19:29 »
+3

Again these guys are in it for the short term and they do not give a rats @$$ what happens to the video market long term. By then they will be cashed out and will have moved on to the next vehicle/victim.

This sums it quite well. Since P5 got external funding I've been holding my breath expecting the standard, " in light of current financial.... and need to sustain growth... percentages will be reduced...."

« Reply #90 on: November 13, 2014, 19:37 »
+9
i am out of bigstock since today. what a waste of contributors :)
stupid prices.. lose lose situation

« Reply #91 on: November 13, 2014, 19:58 »
+6
Selling videos at 15 cents each how much do contributors get. Maybe 6 or 7 cents a sale. Clearly you don't think BigStock is going to give contributors all of the big money.

I am curious what contributors are getting for a sale - probably more than .15 since as we all know the number of subs actually downloaded is quite a bit less than the maximum allowed.

BS - that is total BS. you aren't trying to sell only to youtube people, you are playing in your sandbox to see if you can make more $ with rock bottom offerings - similar to what you do with stills too - undercutting SS.

« Reply #92 on: November 13, 2014, 20:06 »
-2
Mind boggling that Shutterstock can be selling a high volume of footage clips for great prices one moment, and then introduce footage sales at world record low prices the next, in fact footage sales even cheaper than DFC giveaway photo prices. It's not April, so what's going on? Is there a collective wish at SS to wind down and bankrupt the company? Are they on drugs?

There is a collective wish at shutterstock to drive up stock prices... Annual revenue at shutterstock is 235.52Million.   

To date the SSTK take for share sold for key inside investors is 351.5 Million excluding INSIGHT VENTURE PARTNERS V L P, SHUTTERSTOCK INVESTORS I LLC, as well as Institutional holdings via INSIGHT HOLDINGS GROUP, LLC.

Just think what their take must be when you add in their larger holdings.

Again these guys are in it for the short term and they do not give a rats @$$ what happens to the video market long term. By then they will be cashed out and will have moved on to the next vehicle/victim.

No matter how much you wind yourself up into a frenzy, no matter how many times you regurgitate and re-post the same half-arsed conspiracy theories ... the truth is that absolutely nothing has changed in the two years since the IPO. Other than SS becoming even more successful by following the same path as before that is.

« Reply #93 on: November 13, 2014, 21:15 »
+10
Mind boggling that Shutterstock can be selling a high volume of footage clips for great prices one moment, and then introduce footage sales at world record low prices the next, in fact footage sales even cheaper than DFC giveaway photo prices. It's not April, so what's going on? Is there a collective wish at SS to wind down and bankrupt the company? Are they on drugs?

There is a collective wish at shutterstock to drive up stock prices... Annual revenue at shutterstock is 235.52Million.   

To date the SSTK take for share sold for key inside investors is 351.5 Million excluding INSIGHT VENTURE PARTNERS V L P, SHUTTERSTOCK INVESTORS I LLC, as well as Institutional holdings via INSIGHT HOLDINGS GROUP, LLC.

Just think what their take must be when you add in their larger holdings.

Again these guys are in it for the short term and they do not give a rats @$$ what happens to the video market long term. By then they will be cashed out and will have moved on to the next vehicle/victim.

No matter how much you wind yourself up into a frenzy, no matter how many times you regurgitate and re-post the same half-arsed conspiracy theories ... the truth is that absolutely nothing has changed in the two years since the IPO. Other than SS becoming even more successful by following the same path as before that is.

Nothing has changed yet AT SHUTTERSTOCK,  but how can you possibly ignore this gutting of the video market by their subsidiary, Bigstock?  Or for that matter the introduction of subs and the pitiful tier system they put in place for BS contributors who weren't in Bridge?  In both cases, undercutting sales on SS.  Weren't you one of the loudest voices complaining when Istock did the same things with Thinkstock?  Sorry, but your fanboy routine for SS seems pretty inconsistent with your stands against other companies for similar behaviour.

« Reply #94 on: November 13, 2014, 21:58 »
+3
Mind boggling that Shutterstock can be selling a high volume of footage clips for great prices one moment, and then introduce footage sales at world record low prices the next, in fact footage sales even cheaper than DFC giveaway photo prices. It's not April, so what's going on? Is there a collective wish at SS to wind down and bankrupt the company? Are they on drugs?

There is a collective wish at shutterstock to drive up stock prices... Annual revenue at shutterstock is 235.52Million.   

To date the SSTK take for share sold for key inside investors is 351.5 Million excluding INSIGHT VENTURE PARTNERS V L P, SHUTTERSTOCK INVESTORS I LLC, as well as Institutional holdings via INSIGHT HOLDINGS GROUP, LLC.

Just think what their take must be when you add in their larger holdings.

Again these guys are in it for the short term and they do not give a rats @$$ what happens to the video market long term. By then they will be cashed out and will have moved on to the next vehicle/victim.

No matter how much you wind yourself up into a frenzy, no matter how many times you regurgitate and re-post the same half-arsed conspiracy theories ... the truth is that absolutely nothing has changed in the two years since the IPO. Other than SS becoming even more successful by following the same path as before that is.
That is right, I guess you missed the fact that they are utilizing Bigstock to do the dirty work once again.

You will defend them until their detrimental moves toward contributors have become absolutely undeniable.

I suppose you will keep your vids opted in at BS.

shudderstok

« Reply #95 on: November 13, 2014, 22:44 »
+5
if ever there was a time to pull all of your work to send a very clear message that this is not acceptable, this is it. it's crap or get of the pot time.

« Reply #96 on: November 13, 2014, 22:50 »
+7
Stock photography is kinda like prostitution. You know you are going to do it , now you just established how cheap you are willing to do it.

« Reply #97 on: November 14, 2014, 05:27 »
+10
Mind boggling that Shutterstock can be selling a high volume of footage clips for great prices one moment, and then introduce footage sales at world record low prices the next, in fact footage sales even cheaper than DFC giveaway photo prices. It's not April, so what's going on? Is there a collective wish at SS to wind down and bankrupt the company? Are they on drugs?

There is a collective wish at shutterstock to drive up stock prices... Annual revenue at shutterstock is 235.52Million.   

To date the SSTK take for share sold for key inside investors is 351.5 Million excluding INSIGHT VENTURE PARTNERS V L P, SHUTTERSTOCK INVESTORS I LLC, as well as Institutional holdings via INSIGHT HOLDINGS GROUP, LLC.

Just think what their take must be when you add in their larger holdings.

Again these guys are in it for the short term and they do not give a rats @$$ what happens to the video market long term. By then they will be cashed out and will have moved on to the next vehicle/victim.

No matter how much you wind yourself up into a frenzy, no matter how many times you regurgitate and re-post the same half-arsed conspiracy theories ... the truth is that absolutely nothing has changed in the two years since the IPO. Other than SS becoming even more successful by following the same path as before that is.
So do you understand why they let BigStock go down a different path that looks more like the disastrous istock way of treating their contributors so badly they end up leaving?  I can only hope that they treat BigStock as if it was an independent business, and they have nothing to do with the way the site is run, but it still reflects badly on SS because everyone knows they own it.  Looking at the earnings poll and my earnings, BigStock has not done well since the SS takeover.  I can see it falling back in to low earners and then there will be no reason to have a portfolio there.  I think they should either close it and send all the customers to SS or go for the higher end of the market.  Low commissions and low sales volume is a disaster for us all, as istock has proved in recent years.

« Reply #98 on: November 14, 2014, 10:34 »
+2
Mind boggling that Shutterstock can be selling a high volume of footage clips for great prices one moment, and then introduce footage sales at world record low prices the next, in fact footage sales even cheaper than DFC giveaway photo prices. It's not April, so what's going on? Is there a collective wish at SS to wind down and bankrupt the company? Are they on drugs?

There is a collective wish at shutterstock to drive up stock prices... Annual revenue at shutterstock is 235.52Million.   

To date the SSTK take for share sold for key inside investors is 351.5 Million excluding INSIGHT VENTURE PARTNERS V L P, SHUTTERSTOCK INVESTORS I LLC, as well as Institutional holdings via INSIGHT HOLDINGS GROUP, LLC.

Just think what their take must be when you add in their larger holdings.

Again these guys are in it for the short term and they do not give a rats @$$ what happens to the video market long term. By then they will be cashed out and will have moved on to the next vehicle/victim.

No matter how much you wind yourself up into a frenzy, no matter how many times you regurgitate and re-post the same half-arsed conspiracy theories ... the truth is that absolutely nothing has changed in the two years since the IPO. Other than SS becoming even more successful by following the same path as before that is.
So do you understand why they let BigStock go down a different path that looks more like the disastrous istock way of treating their contributors so badly they end up leaving?  I can only hope that they treat BigStock as if it was an independent business, and they have nothing to do with the way the site is run, but it still reflects badly on SS because everyone knows they own it.  Looking at the earnings poll and my earnings, BigStock has not done well since the SS takeover.  I can see it falling back in to low earners and then there will be no reason to have a portfolio there.  I think they should either close it and send all the customers to SS or go for the higher end of the market.  Low commissions and low sales volume is a disaster for us all, as istock has proved in recent years.
Because is instills an idea into people's heads. Case in point this comment from above."I guess my point is that when Shutterstock is reducing the cost of videos by a factor of more than 525 iStock's reduction looks pretty small." This person sees the iStock reduction as just fine. Any future adjustment at SS would be viewed as not too bad when compared to others.

« Reply #99 on: November 14, 2014, 10:47 »
+3
What do I get paid for my hard work is the first question. If I were non-exclusive I probably wouldn't be loading to iStock either! I find the iStock/Getty connection to be of more value to me in both money and time. Do I  have a plan "B" yes! I have a plan "C" and "D" as well. Companies will always look out for their bottom line and I expect that. I don't take decisions personally as no one really cares about my work but me. These are all companies trying to make as much profit as possible and doing it on our backs. Make decisions that are best for you $$ wise and forget about saying company X is better then company Z. Focus on producing compelling content and rising above the storm. The better work you produce the more other doors will open for you! 


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
5588 Views
Last post May 13, 2013, 07:43
by click_click
12 Replies
8400 Views
Last post December 15, 2015, 18:13
by trek
12 Replies
6175 Views
Last post February 12, 2017, 03:19
by izustun
2 Replies
2966 Views
Last post July 23, 2017, 19:20
by SuperJeff
16 Replies
5565 Views
Last post August 19, 2018, 14:49
by increasingdifficulty

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle