pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Bad july.. How was yours?  (Read 14122 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

farbled

« Reply #75 on: August 02, 2018, 22:00 »
0
Well, I am happy you believe that. Good for you!



« Reply #76 on: August 02, 2018, 22:18 »
0
Well, I am happy you believe that. Good for you!
Hmmm, it looks like you are not "done for tonight", as promised a moment ago! You are "better that that", indeed.

So, cap or no cap? :D
« Last Edit: August 02, 2018, 22:21 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #77 on: August 02, 2018, 23:39 »
0
Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice  :)

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now.  ;D

I used a simple logic to prove that cap theory exists too... it is called statistics and math. We took that in school, remember?

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #78 on: August 03, 2018, 00:44 »
0
Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice  :)

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now.  ;D


Well your theory is WRONG man, your logic is totally up the spout and knows nothing. What do you think? haha!  you think this little forum is the only one place in the world where they discuss capping, orchestrated algorithms etc, etc. Well youre wrong there as well.

You know why you dont want earnings capped or fooled around with?  I tell you: because everyones dream, everyones dream-agency is falling apart and the " do good" agency is not doing so good anymore, the so called most honest agency in the world turned out no more then any other agency.

Now if two x-employees of SS say not to me but to others, full-time photographers that earnings are controled, portfolios are controled!  well then you can imagine that theyre not going to believe YOU!!  are they?  just another supplier who is so good with stats. yeah sure man!....and you have been with micro-stock long enough now to know the score to see and judge for yourself that something is wrong, badly wrong and instead of believing that this "God sent to suppliers"  agency is nothing but just another agency!  crushing your dreams maybe. Well sorry about that!.....btw! I know you behind that pseudo of yours and you should really know better!
« Last Edit: August 03, 2018, 00:46 by derek »

« Reply #79 on: August 03, 2018, 02:23 »
+2
Microstock is dead, only masochists would be pursuing it going forward.

« Reply #80 on: August 03, 2018, 06:45 »
0
Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice  :)

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now.  ;D


Well your theory is WRONG man, your logic is totally up the spout and knows nothing. What do you think? haha!  you think this little forum is the only one place in the world where they discuss capping, orchestrated algorithms etc, etc. Well youre wrong there as well.

You know why you dont want earnings capped or fooled around with?  I tell you: because everyones dream, everyones dream-agency is falling apart and the " do good" agency is not doing so good anymore, the so called most honest agency in the world turned out no more then any other agency.

Now if two x-employees of SS say not to me but to others, full-time photographers that earnings are controled, portfolios are controled!  well then you can imagine that theyre not going to believe YOU!!  are they?  just another supplier who is so good with stats. yeah sure man!....and you have been with micro-stock long enough now to know the score to see and judge for yourself that something is wrong, badly wrong and instead of believing that this "God sent to suppliers"  agency is nothing but just another agency!  crushing your dreams maybe. Well sorry about that!.....btw! I know you behind that pseudo of yours and you should really know better!

Here you go again.
Another one who blames others for his own failures
Another one  who finds easier to follow a cult than to look in the mirror and face reality.

Make up your mind folks: are your revenues capped or just controlled?


« Reply #81 on: August 03, 2018, 06:56 »
+1
Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice  :)

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now.  ;D

I used a simple logic to prove that cap theory exists too... it is called statistics and math. We took that in school, remember?
No one on here has the statistics to prove "capping" exists or otherwise which is why the argument keeps going at best we can say it is possible that some people might be capped and not everyone is capped. The rest is a guess.

« Reply #82 on: August 03, 2018, 07:05 »
0
Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice  :)

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now.  ;D

I used a simple logic to prove that cap theory exists too... it is called statistics and math. We took that in school, remember?
No one on here has the statistics to prove "capping" exists or otherwise which is why the argument keeps going at best we can say it is possible that some people might be capped and not everyone is capped. The rest is a guess.

Of course... I can't see anything strange from this graph too. That's why it took some time to investigate sales in deeper numbers in a few years of time.

nobody

« Reply #83 on: August 03, 2018, 08:22 »
0
this topic discussion is turning into 'The X-Files'...  The truth is out there...

farbled

« Reply #84 on: August 03, 2018, 10:05 »
0

Hmmm, it looks like you are not "done for tonight", as promised a moment ago! You are "better that that", indeed.

So, cap or no cap? :D
Basic reading comprehension escapes you it seems (must have learned that the same place you learned statistics), asked and answered a few times. I am putting you on ignore now, not because you disagree with me with a head in the sand determination that is actually impressive, but because I find you a condescending ***. I don't need that.

As far as this discussion goes, I truly hope it happens to you so that you can see what others see, even though if it did you would never admit it in a million years. Best of luck!

« Reply #85 on: August 03, 2018, 10:12 »
0
I am putting you on ignore now...

Yep, that's right, keep your bubble intact! Ignore facts and opinions contrary to your beliefs.
That's the best way to get to the truth, indeed!  ::)
« Last Edit: August 03, 2018, 10:17 by Zero Talent »

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #86 on: August 03, 2018, 10:21 »
0
Lol, if you say so. I literally have said I don't think there is a "cap" and I have stated what I believed already. But hey, keep going! I used the phrase flat-earther because you seem to live in your self imposed denial where anything that contradicts your narrative gets discarded, but I guess it went over your head. No worries. No cap my friend. And wherever you went to get that background in stats, well, you may want to look at refunds. I think they did you a disservice  :)

Have at it. Arguing with you is pointless. You think you are smarter than you actually are. Done for tonight, good luck.

I just used simple logic to prove the cap theory wrong, indeed.
I'm glad you agreed with logic and got convinced.

You can drop that dictionary now.  ;D


Well your theory is WRONG man, your logic is totally up the spout and knows nothing. What do you think? haha!  you think this little forum is the only one place in the world where they discuss capping, orchestrated algorithms etc, etc. Well youre wrong there as well.

You know why you dont want earnings capped or fooled around with?  I tell you: because everyones dream, everyones dream-agency is falling apart and the " do good" agency is not doing so good anymore, the so called most honest agency in the world turned out no more then any other agency.

Now if two x-employees of SS say not to me but to others, full-time photographers that earnings are controled, portfolios are controled!  well then you can imagine that theyre not going to believe YOU!!  are they?  just another supplier who is so good with stats. yeah sure man!....and you have been with micro-stock long enough now to know the score to see and judge for yourself that something is wrong, badly wrong and instead of believing that this "God sent to suppliers"  agency is nothing but just another agency!  crushing your dreams maybe. Well sorry about that!.....btw! I know you behind that pseudo of yours and you should really know better!

Here you go again.
Another one who blames others for his own failures
Another one  who finds easier to follow a cult than to look in the mirror and face reality.

Make up your mind folks: are your revenues capped or just controlled?

Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

Capped or controlled?? hehe! whats the bloody difference?  nobody should control youre earnings.  But hey!  you carry on in this world of yours thinking youre working with honesty and rightfullness.....btw, how come people accept something called " hit the wall" ??  but not capping, to me thats just about the same! also these are the words of an x-employee!! ( not photographers)  get that into your head please!

« Reply #87 on: August 03, 2018, 10:32 »
+1
Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

I can guarantee that 90-100% of the capping theorists here are nowhere near $2,500 per month from Shutterstock.  :)

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #88 on: August 03, 2018, 10:34 »
+2
Quote
I can guarantee that 90-100% of the capping theorists here are nowhere near $2,500 per month from Shutterstock.  :)

I should have been if I wasn't capped!

« Reply #89 on: August 03, 2018, 10:40 »
0

Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

Capped or controlled?? hehe! whats the bloody difference?  nobody should control youre earnings.  But hey!  you carry on in this world of yours thinking youre working with honesty and rightfullness.....btw, how come people accept something called " hit the wall" ??  but not capping, to me thats just about the same! also these are the words of an x-employee!! ( not photographers)  get that into your head please!

2.5k/month on SS is the threshold for capping? That's very interesting! You just added something new to this discussion, indeed!

Let's see what the implications of your statement are.
The implications are that the likes or Herg (with only a "few downloads over several days") or even farbled (some of the most vocal members of the "capping cult") have no idea what they are talking about. If it is 2.5K/month, they have so much, so very much growth to do, before hitting that ceiling! So it's not the capping for them, it is them.
Is this what your are saying?

On the other hand, "capping and "controlled" are not the same. "Capping" is a subset of "controlled", indeed. But"controlled" can very well mean that some ports, images, categories, etc are favored by the popularity algorithm. That's "controlled" (as some understand it), but not "capped".

The popularity algorithm is definitely "controlled" by SS and it is clearly impacting individual sales in a positive, or negative way.
Moreover, the popularity algorithm is "controlled" on a regular basis. SS must be constantly attempting to tweak it as well as possible, in order to maximize customers satisfaction with the results of their searches (and maximize global revenue for SS)
That's totally different than "capping" and there is nothing evil about it!

« Last Edit: August 03, 2018, 10:53 by Zero Talent »

farbled

« Reply #90 on: August 03, 2018, 10:44 »
+1

I can guarantee that 90-100% of the capping theorists here are nowhere near $2,500 per month from Shutterstock.  :)
Maybe change "capping theorists" to: "people who have seen their income straight-line for one reason or another".  As I said earlier in one of the threads or this one, I don't actually believe SS is maliciously targeting specific portfolios. I think there is some software glitch or algorithm that is tweaking earnings some of us.

Case in point, this past July I was on track to eat some crow since my sales plummeted. Any change, however negative it might be, would show I was not being affected. On the 31st, my day was filled with high value SODs (after zero sods all month long) to bring me right up to my level.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #91 on: August 03, 2018, 10:54 »
0

Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

Capped or controlled?? hehe! whats the bloody difference?  nobody should control youre earnings.  But hey!  you carry on in this world of yours thinking youre working with honesty and rightfullness.....btw, how come people accept something called " hit the wall" ??  but not capping, to me thats just about the same! also these are the words of an x-employee!! ( not photographers)  get that into your head please!

2.5k/month on SS is the threshold for capping? That's very interesting! You just added something new to this discussion, indeed!

Let's see what the implications of your statement are.
The implications are that the likes or Herg (with only a "few downloads over several days") or even farbled (some of the most vocal members of the "capping cult") have no idea what they are talking about. If it is 2.5K/month, they have so much, so very much growth to do, before hitting that ceiling! So it's not the capping for them, it is them.
Is this what your are saying?

On the other hand, "capping and "controlled" are not the same. "Capping" is a subset of "controlled", indeed. But"controlled" can very well mean that some ports, images, categories, etc are favored by the popularity algorithm. That's "controlled" (as some understand it), but not "capped".

The popularity algorithm is definitely "controlled" by SS and it is clearly impacting individual sales in a positive, or negative way.
Moreover, the popularity algorithm is "controlled" on a regular basis. SS is constantly attempting to tweak it as well as possible, in order to maximize customers satisfaction with the results of their searches (and maximize global revenue for SS)
That's totally different that "capped" and there is nothing evil about it!


Of course how silly of me youre absolutely right in everything you say! thank God you have such an insight in SS and all their contributors!  whatever would we do without you! ::) ::) ::)  no need for any further conversation its lost its alure!


derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #92 on: August 03, 2018, 10:58 »
+1
Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

I can guarantee that 90-100% of the capping theorists here are nowhere near $2,500 per month from Shutterstock.  :)

well you will never find out will you youre not exactly the type people confide in are you?  but I can guarantee you that right here now today there are several earning even more and thats per month!  but you will never know them will you?  too bad.

« Reply #93 on: August 03, 2018, 11:06 »
0

Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

Capped or controlled?? hehe! whats the bloody difference?  nobody should control youre earnings.  But hey!  you carry on in this world of yours thinking youre working with honesty and rightfullness.....btw, how come people accept something called " hit the wall" ??  but not capping, to me thats just about the same! also these are the words of an x-employee!! ( not photographers)  get that into your head please!

2.5k/month on SS is the threshold for capping? That's very interesting! You just added something new to this discussion, indeed!

Let's see what the implications of your statement are.
The implications are that the likes or Herg (with only a "few downloads over several days") or even farbled (some of the most vocal members of the "capping cult") have no idea what they are talking about. If it is 2.5K/month, they have so much, so very much growth to do, before hitting that ceiling! So it's not the capping for them, it is them.
Is this what your are saying?

On the other hand, "capping and "controlled" are not the same. "Capping" is a subset of "controlled", indeed. But"controlled" can very well mean that some ports, images, categories, etc are favored by the popularity algorithm. That's "controlled" (as some understand it), but not "capped".

The popularity algorithm is definitely "controlled" by SS and it is clearly impacting individual sales in a positive, or negative way.
Moreover, the popularity algorithm is "controlled" on a regular basis. SS is constantly attempting to tweak it as well as possible, in order to maximize customers satisfaction with the results of their searches (and maximize global revenue for SS)
That's totally different that "capped" and there is nothing evil about it!


Of course how silly of me youre absolutely right in everything you say! thank God you have such an insight in SS and all their contributors!  whatever would we do without you! ::) ::) ::)  no need for any further conversation its lost its alure!

It's not just SS who is "controlling" what their customers see. It is Google, it is Facebook, it is Amazon and many others.
Why are you surprised by it? Even your local brick and mortar supermarket is "controlling" what you see, by organizing their shelves in a way they think will maximize their profit.

And what about the 2.5k capping? Do you agree that the likes of Herg, farbled & Co are not capped (as they claim), since they are well below your capping threshold?
« Last Edit: August 03, 2018, 11:10 by Zero Talent »

farbled

« Reply #94 on: August 03, 2018, 11:09 »
0

Youre not BIG enough to have experienced it! havent been doing it long enough to experience it. I cant remember but I think that somewhere along 2.5K a month was the barrier after that you were included in the capping brigade.

Capped or controlled?? hehe! whats the bloody difference?  nobody should control youre earnings.  But hey!  you carry on in this world of yours thinking youre working with honesty and rightfullness.....btw, how come people accept something called " hit the wall" ??  but not capping, to me thats just about the same! also these are the words of an x-employee!! ( not photographers)  get that into your head please!

2.5k/month on SS is the threshold for capping? That's very interesting! You just added something new to this discussion, indeed!

Let's see what the implications of your statement are.
The implications are that the likes or Herg (with only a "few downloads over several days") or even farbled (some of the most vocal members of the "capping cult") have no idea what they are talking about. If it is 2.5K/month, they have so much, so very much growth to do, before hitting that ceiling! So it's not the capping for them, it is them.
Is this what your are saying?

On the other hand, "capping and "controlled" are not the same. "Capping" is a subset of "controlled", indeed. But"controlled" can very well mean that some ports, images, categories, etc are favored by the popularity algorithm. That's "controlled" (as some understand it), but not "capped".

The popularity algorithm is definitely "controlled" by SS and it is clearly impacting individual sales in a positive, or negative way.
Moreover, the popularity algorithm is "controlled" on a regular basis. SS is constantly attempting to tweak it as well as possible, in order to maximize customers satisfaction with the results of their searches (and maximize global revenue for SS)
That's totally different that "capped" and there is nothing evil about it!


Of course how silly of me youre absolutely right in everything you say! thank God you have such an insight in SS and all their contributors!  whatever would we do without you! ::) ::) ::)  no need for any further conversation its lost its alure!

Wow, I am happy everyone seems to know how much or how little I make these days.

I think the reason I may be argumentative about this so much is being talked down to like I am some kind of idiot. Those who know me or have known me over the years can gauge for themselves whether I know what I am talking about or not.

Even in unrelated threads the "experts" all talk about those "conspiracy nut-jobs" and the like. Disagree with me, absolutely, we can discuss. Insult and condescend, well, I cannot help you there. 



« Reply #95 on: August 03, 2018, 12:00 »
+1

I can guarantee that 90-100% of the capping theorists here are nowhere near $2,500 per month from Shutterstock.  :)
Maybe change "capping theorists" to: "people who have seen their income straight-line for one reason or another".  As I said earlier in one of the threads or this one, I don't actually believe SS is maliciously targeting specific portfolios. I think there is some software glitch or algorithm that is tweaking earnings some of us.

Case in point, this past July I was on track to eat some crow since my sales plummeted. Any change, however negative it might be, would show I was not being affected. On the 31st, my day was filled with high value SODs (after zero sods all month long) to bring me right up to my level.
Interesting indeed but what I struggle with is why would SS want to do that? So maybe your right that theres strange things happening with the Algorithm(s) I wouldn't be surprised if over time they haven't become so complex no one understands fully how they return  the results they do. For example the perceived  need to give customers a changing variety of images could easily push images back and forth if something sells "too much" or "two little" over a period thus evening out sales over a period.

farbled

« Reply #96 on: August 03, 2018, 12:11 »
+1
Interesting indeed but what I struggle with is why would SS want to do that? So maybe your right that theres strange things happening with the Algorithm(s) I wouldn't be surprised if over time they haven't become so complex no one understands fully how they return  the results they do. For example the perceived  need to give customers a changing variety of images could easily push images back and forth if something sells "too much" or "two little" over a period thus evening out sales over a period.

That's the thing, I think it is an unintentional by-product of (maybe competing or interfering) algorithms that hits that perfect storm of factors for what? a few dozen or hundreds out of the hundred plus thousand contributors? I worked in enough software companies to know there are always some clients who find that "one thing" that will never make things go right for them.


« Reply #97 on: August 03, 2018, 12:16 »
+1
Bad July?, be prepared for even "better" August, because the customer side of SS doesnt even load properly. (EU)

« Reply #98 on: August 03, 2018, 12:17 »
0
Bad July?, be prepared for even "better" August, because the customer side of SS doesnt even load properly. (EU)
I had an awful start to the month just put it down to natural variation/season but maybe this is a factor.

« Reply #99 on: August 03, 2018, 12:52 »
0
50% down on ss which is the norm these days, and 33% down on the new norm. so basically july is at 33% of what i used to make.



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
July payment?

Started by Perry « 1 2  All » Shutterstock.com

25 Replies
10670 Views
Last post July 10, 2010, 06:59
by gostwyck
50 Replies
14022 Views
Last post July 11, 2011, 16:34
by Shank_ali
2 Replies
2015 Views
Last post August 02, 2015, 01:13
by PZF
July stats in

Started by Dumc « 1 2 3  All » iStockPhoto.com

50 Replies
14701 Views
Last post September 20, 2018, 14:39
by ShadySue
July Payment

Started by Sedge Canva

1 Replies
3175 Views
Last post August 17, 2018, 17:14
by PhotoBomb

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle