Subscriptions at BigStock have clearly started to gain in popularity based on my numbers.

Although there is half a day left in April, I'm finding my sales numbers to be somewhat interesting and I thought I'd share what I'm seeing.

Subscriptions officially launched in February I believe, and I saw sub sales increasing through March which was by BME at BS.

My April numbers show a 96% increase in files sold over March (previous BME) - Revenue was up 52% over March (previous BME).

Obviously, I'm selling more for less on the new sub model.

Now, since I am on "the Bridge", my sub sales are at $.38 each. If I understand correctly, after six months, my sub sales will go down to $.27 each. If I adjust my April sales number to reflect a $.27 sub sale, my revenue increase for April would drop to 32% over March.

Quote from: gbalex on April 30, 2013, 12:34

Quote from: daveh900 on April 30, 2013, 09:15

Subscriptions at BigStock have clearly started to gain in popularity based on my numbers.

Although there is half a day left in April, I'm finding my sales numbers to be somewhat interesting and I thought I'd share what I'm seeing.

Subscriptions officially launched in February I believe, and I saw sub sales increasing through March which was by BME at BS.

My April numbers show a 96% increase in files sold over March (previous BME) - Revenue was up 52% over March (previous BME).

Obviously, I'm selling more for less on the new sub model.

Now, since I am on "the Bridge", my sub sales are at $.38 each. If I understand correctly, after six months, my sub sales will go down to $.27 each. If I adjust my April sales number to reflect a $.27 sub sale, my revenue increase for April would drop to 32% over March.

That is correct you will get .27 after July, which is 3 months @ your old rate.

It will not take much for SS to convert current & large corporate customers to BS buyers over SS. And it is even more attractive to small buyers.

@SS A one year subscription will net buyers 25 images a day, every day for $2,388.00 or slightly over $.26 cents per image.

@BS A one year subscription will net buyers 50 images a day, every day for $2,879.00 or $.16 cents per image.

Why submitters are not more outraged by this blatant undercutting is alarming. The giant * sound is getting louder as we speak.

Ok, I knew this thread would probably end up going this direction. So, let me ask a question...

Why does everyone think that Shutterstock will intentionally move it's customers to BigStock. It simply doesn't make sense. While I understand the outage over the subscriptions and lower royalties, some of the reasoning (conspiracy theories) for this outrage seems flawed to me.

 What purpose would SS serve if all the "good stuff" is moved to Offset?

Quote from: daveh900 on April 30, 2013, 14:50

Quote from: tickstock on April 30, 2013, 14:27

Quote from: daveh900 on April 30, 2013, 13:26

Ok, I knew this thread would probably end up going this direction. So, let me ask a question...

Why does everyone think that Shutterstock will intentionally move it's customers to BigStock. It simply doesn't make sense. While I understand the outage over the subscriptions and lower royalties, some of the reasoning (conspiracy theories) for this outrage seems flawed to me.

It makes sense for them to move customers to Bigstock if they make more money doing so.  If they pay contributors a lower royalty rate it would make sense.  I guess you are saying they are paying the same or more to Bigstock contributors as they are to Shutterstock contributors?

Even if the profit margin was higher at BigStock, Shutterstock would never intentionally direct it's customers away from SS and push them to BS. That is just not logical at all.

If Shutterstock wanted to make more money, we all know how they would do that,  by cutting commisions at Shutterstock. BigStock is being run as it's own agency with it's own rules and it's own pricing and commission structure. It's clear to me that BigStock is targeting a different buyer.

Here is what is confusing... have you looked at the numbers?

A 12 month subscription that allows up to 50 downloads a day at BigStock costs $2879. Which, if the buyer downloaded 50 images every day for a year would cost the buyer $.16 per image, yet Bigstock will pay at least $.25 to the contributor for each sub download.

If we assume that each contributor only gets the minimum $.25 per sub download, BigStock is assuming that the subscriber will use no more than 30 or so images per day, otherwise they'll be losing money on each download.

 

Look at the 20 download plan instead, it's the one closest to Shutterstock's plan out of 20 dls per day they break even with 17 images per day downloaded at 25 cents while Shutterstock's 25 dls per day plan at 38 cents breaks even at 17 images per day also.   This means Shutterstock breaks even with 68% or less of files being downloaded while Bigstock breaks even with 85% or less of the quota being used.  Shutterstock is on a path where all contributors eventually will reach 38 cents so to up their margins they could cut royalty rates or try to get buyers to move over to Bigstock.  The actual numbers are probably almost the same right now but going forward Shutterstock contributors will be more expensive to pay and Bigstock contributors will be cheaper.

My guess is right now the bigger focus is on switching buyers from credits to subscriptions within Bigstock, the cost of paying contributors is probably cut in half if they can do that.

Quote from: gbalex on April 30, 2013, 18:14

 we really need to ask ourselves why would a business use one of its storefronts to drastically undercut the prices of it's largest storefront when they are both offering the same product?

that is indeed the question.

don't get that many downloads at Bigstock, a couple of subs a couple of credits

BS is 10% of the earnings I get on shutterstock. which matches resonably well the the earning ratings on the right.