MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: How to end the "Caps" debate: share your data.  (Read 16791 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

namussi

« on: February 19, 2018, 03:21 »
+3
C'mon then.

Show us your spreadsheets. Show us your graphs. Show us your workings.



« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2018, 03:27 »
+3
Good luck with that one. The really interesting questions to me are. If there IS a cap so what? If you think there is a cap and its unethical are you really so desperate that you continue to work with such a disgraceful outfit?

« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2018, 06:05 »
+2
People shouldnt forget that it is against Shutterstock rules to publish our earnings... I see people breaking it all the time but I wouldnt.

« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2018, 06:22 »
+3
People shouldnt forget that it is against Shutterstock rules to publish our earnings... I see people breaking it all the time but I wouldnt.

You don't have to post the actual numbers. Just the relative numbers.

« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2018, 06:26 »
+3
People shouldnt forget that it is against Shutterstock rules to publish our earnings... I see people breaking it all the time but I wouldnt.

You don't have to post the actual numbers. Just the relative numbers.

Im not going to post anything, the "cap" debate is irrelevant to me and no matter what anyone posts here, the debate will not end (it is naive to think that you can just shut down some subject..).

I just wanted to point out what many contributors seem to forget about Shutterstock - that they have literally forbidden us to show our earnings. Thats all.

namussi

« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2018, 07:12 »
0
Good luck with that one. The really interesting questions to me are. If there IS a cap so what? If you think there is a cap and its unethical are you really so desperate that you continue to work with such a disgraceful outfit?

Interesting questions. But please don't hijack THIS thread -- start another one.

I want some of the "cap" believers to give us proper evidence of the cap.

Don't let them off the hook.

namussi

« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2018, 07:16 »
0
People shouldnt forget that it is against Shutterstock rules to publish our earnings... I see people breaking it all the time but I wouldnt.

You don't have to post the actual numbers. Just the relative numbers.

Im not going to post anything, the "cap" debate is irrelevant to me and no matter what anyone posts here, the debate will not end (it is naive to think that you can just shut down some subject..).

I just wanted to point out what many contributors seem to forget about Shutterstock - that they have literally forbidden us to show our earnings. Thats all.

Fair points. But please don't hijack the thread and therefore let the cap believers off the hook.

namussi

« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2018, 07:17 »
0
Where's Derek?

You think caps are real. Let's see the data that proves it.

Shelma1

« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2018, 07:42 »
+8
Lol. Anonymous people asking others to divulge their earnings (against Shutterstock's terms).

« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2018, 07:56 »
+2
Good luck with that one. The really interesting questions to me are. If there IS a cap so what? If you think there is a cap and its unethical are you really so desperate that you continue to work with such a disgraceful outfit?

Interesting questions. But please don't hijack THIS thread -- start another one.

I want some of the "cap" believers to give us proper evidence of the cap.

Don't let them off the hook.
and if they did put figures up would you believe them? I'm not sure ANY conspiracy theory has ever been accepted as proved wrong by the believers....some people still believe the earth is flat for example ;-)

niktol

« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2018, 08:50 »
0
some people still believe the earth is flat for example ;-)

I thought it was all in jest.

I don't think anyone's sales can prove (or disprove) an artificially imposed cap. Some people can reach a limit of their monthly earnings, doesn't mean anyone did it to them. Nothing short of the search engine source code can prove or disprove anything.

jonbull

    This user is banned.
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2018, 09:08 »
0
also i don't know but if i had evidence that they cap me  i will sue them as soon as possible cause it will be clearly something unwritten in contract....or am i wrong.

niktol

« Reply #12 on: February 19, 2018, 09:14 »
+4
also i don't know but if i had evidence that they cap me  i will sue them as soon as possible cause it will be clearly something unwritten in contract....or am i wrong.

I am not a lawyer, but I doubt you can sue anyone for how they run their business. Nothing is promised with respect to [equally] promoting anyone by an agency.

« Reply #13 on: February 19, 2018, 09:22 »
0
also i don't know but if i had evidence that they cap me  i will sue them as soon as possible cause it will be clearly something unwritten in contract....or am i wrong.

I am not a lawyer, but I doubt you can sue anyone for how they run their business. Nothing is promised with respect to [equally] promoting anyone by an agency.
There are various competition laws around the world. But it would take a legal expert to know if any laws have been broken. I thought the poster you quoted did have evidence as he said it was obvious to everyone except us imbecile amateurs.

« Reply #14 on: February 19, 2018, 09:22 »
0
I don't think anyone's sales can prove (or disprove) an artificially imposed cap. Some people can reach a limit of their monthly earnings, doesn't mean anyone did it to them. Nothing short of the search engine source code can prove or disprove anything.

You can't 100% prove it, but you can show STRONG data supporting a hypothesis, or not supporting it.

Anyone with just a tiny, tiny bit of analytical interest would of course save the sales data over 6 months to a year in the spreadsheet app of their choice, along with screenshots of searches (logged in, logged out), showing that their items are hidden once they reach their cap.

The thing is, most of these conspiracy theorists don't seem to have any analytical ability at all - only emotional ability, which almost always lies.

They also don't understand that there is a NATURAL cap on sales. They will not grow to infinity. Once you reach a certain point it will take just as much effort just to keep sales the same, and not fall. This is true for most things.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2018, 09:29 by increasingdifficulty »

« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2018, 09:24 »
0
Lol. Anonymous people asking others to divulge their earnings (against Shutterstock's terms).

1. You don't need to show any earnings. Just changes in earnings.
2. This isn't in the Shutterstock forum - any capping evidence from any site would be welcome.

niktol

« Reply #16 on: February 19, 2018, 09:46 »
0
I don't think anyone's sales can prove (or disprove) an artificially imposed cap. Some people can reach a limit of their monthly earnings, doesn't mean anyone did it to them. Nothing short of the search engine source code can prove or disprove anything.

You can't 100% prove it, but you can show STRONG data supporting a hypothesis, or not supporting it.

Anyone with just a tiny, tiny bit of analytical interest would of course save the sales data over 6 months to a year in the spreadsheet app of their choice, along with screenshots of searches (logged in, logged out), showing that their items are hidden once they reach their cap.

The thing is, most of these conspiracy theorists don't seem to have any analytical ability at all - only emotional ability, which almost always lies.

They also don't understand that there is a NATURAL cap on sales. They will not grow to infinity. Once you reach a certain point it will take just as much effort just to keep sales the same, and not fall. This is true for most things.

And how do you define which data are STRONG support and which aren't? It's a matter of consensus of data experts, which very few people are, and even less people are willing to share their expertise. Like I already said, it's not academia, if someone is wrong about their conclusions, it's a cause of quiet celebration, not a heated public argument.


Shelma1

« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2018, 09:52 »
+4
Shutterstock's terms forbid you from disclosing earnings anywhere, not just in their forums.

If you had enough sales to see patterns, you'd be able to see how Shutterstock pushes newbies to the top of the search...because you'd have enough top sellers to see when they suddenly stop selling, and then when you looked at the most popular search for those keywords you'd see that your images were moved from page one to page ten overnight, while a newbie photographer now has 20 nearly identical photos from the same shoot suddenly on page oneand there's just no way 20 photos that are virtually the same would all appear on page one organically.

Or you'd see that Shutterstock switched page one in most popular for page two, because you've checked pages one and two often enough to be familiar with the order of the most popular images, generally speaking.

Or you'd know when Shutterstock was changing the search algorithm because the floodgates would open for a day or two and your sales would suddenly be back to "normal," only to be suppressed again when they switched to the new algorithm.

It only makes sense that Shutterstock would purposely promote newbies, because it increases their take. Better for them to keep 80% than 70%, so they'll play with the search as much as possible to get as close as possible to that 80% without depressing sales too much by pushing newer content that isn't as attractive to buyers. And they'll switch pages and images around to make page one appear "fresh."

niktol

« Reply #18 on: February 19, 2018, 09:53 »
0
also i don't know but if i had evidence that they cap me  i will sue them as soon as possible cause it will be clearly something unwritten in contract....or am i wrong.

I am not a lawyer, but I doubt you can sue anyone for how they run their business. Nothing is promised with respect to [equally] promoting anyone by an agency.
There are various competition laws around the world. But it would take a legal expert to know if any laws have been broken. I thought the poster you quoted did have evidence as he said it was obvious to everyone except us imbecile amateurs.

will definitely require a legal expert. the existence of a gazillion competing agencies will not make this easy.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2018, 09:56 by niktol »

niktol

« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2018, 09:56 »
+5

It only makes sense that Shutterstock would purposely promote newbies, because it increases their take. Better for them to keep 80% than 70%, so they'll play with the search as much as possible to get as close as possible to that 80% without depressing sales too much by pushing newer content that isn't as attractive to buyers. And they'll switch pages and images around to make page one appear "fresh."

I am sure they do it, but it's not my definition of a cap.

« Reply #20 on: February 19, 2018, 10:28 »
+2
C'mon then.

Show us your spreadsheets. Show us your graphs. Show us your workings.

I can't because there are no caps. Show me proof of Nessie, the Bermuda Triangle, Vampires, shape shifting birds, or a yeti. You can't because just like caps, they are a children's fairy tale or belief based on repeated false evidence. There's no proof and that's why believers defend so much. They toss out other myths to prove the first one, like new people are pushed to the front. But wait, I'm on the first page of a number of searches and have been for those same for a long time. I guess SS like me better.  :)

I think they read this forum and punish people who write bad things. So you better watch out, they're making a list and checking it twice, Gonna find out who's naughty or nice. SS caps are coming to town. Then they will change the search so only people here drop down and push horrible new cheap images to the front so buyers will say, SS has terrible photos, we need to go someplace else.

Just because somebody makes a claims and a small minority of believers agree and make the same claim, that don't make it proof. Just false rumors. The number of wrong people doesn't make evidence, it just means more people who have no sense.

« Reply #21 on: February 19, 2018, 10:32 »
+3

It only makes sense that Shutterstock would purposely promote newbies, because it increases their take. Better for them to keep 80% than 70%, so they'll play with the search as much as possible to get as close as possible to that 80% without depressing sales too much by pushing newer content that isn't as attractive to buyers. And they'll switch pages and images around to make page one appear "fresh."

I am sure they do it, but it's not my definition of a cap.
Why wouldn't they promote new contributors? completely different from a cap. Who says newer content isn't as attractive its no more "fair" to put established best sellers at the front of the queue than fresh new content.

jonbull

    This user is banned.
« Reply #22 on: February 19, 2018, 10:42 »
+2
also i don't know but if i had evidence that they cap me  i will sue them as soon as possible cause it will be clearly something unwritten in contract....or am i wrong.

I am not a lawyer, but I doubt you can sue anyone for how they run their business. Nothing is promised with respect to [equally] promoting anyone by an agency.
There are various competition laws around the world. But it would take a legal expert to know if any laws have been broken. I thought the poster you quoted did have evidence as he said it was obvious to everyone except us imbecile amateurs.

i didn't say this....let say an employe of shutter stock is fired and is angry and he reveals that shutter stock cap earning promoting unfair competition..
i repeat there is always a clear path in earning...sure if you earn 50 100 dollar is difficult you see this.
my point....if you earn 500 dollar you have more data simple....if you earn 1000 2000 much more.
i still have to understand why every big sales is ALWAYS and i mean ALWAYS 100% of time followed by 3 4 crap days. ALWAYS. when something happen always it's not a coincidence. and this is experienced by many authors.

farbled

« Reply #23 on: February 19, 2018, 10:49 »
+4
Good luck with that one. The really interesting questions to me are. If there IS a cap so what? If you think there is a cap and its unethical are you really so desperate that you continue to work with such a disgraceful outfit?

Interesting questions. But please don't hijack THIS thread -- start another one.

I want some of the "cap" believers to give us proper evidence of the cap.

Don't let them off the hook.

I have been there since before 2006 with over 10k photos. I certainly am not making things up or hypothesizing without solid stats. But I am not giving some random stranger my data nor making it public. I have read enough of your posts to know that you wouldn't believe it anyway and trying to convince you seems like a pretty useless waste of time to me.

You seem really exercised about the whole topic. Why is that?

Shelma1

« Reply #24 on: February 19, 2018, 10:50 »
+4

It only makes sense that Shutterstock would purposely promote newbies, because it increases their take. Better for them to keep 80% than 70%, so they'll play with the search as much as possible to get as close as possible to that 80% without depressing sales too much by pushing newer content that isn't as attractive to buyers. And they'll switch pages and images around to make page one appear "fresh."

I am sure they do it, but it's not my definition of a cap.
Why wouldn't they promote new contributors? completely different from a cap. Who says newer content isn't as attractive its no more "fair" to put established best sellers at the front of the queue than fresh new content.

It might not be a cap, but it has the effect of stopping, capping or even reversing your growth when you've reached a certain level of success, because your content is then targeted to be pushed back in favor of newer contributors'.

I used to think this cap stuff was nonsense until it happened to me, and now I just see how naive I was until two years ago, when my earnings started dropping instead of growing and I started paying attention to why that was.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
7810 Views
Last post December 01, 2010, 18:38
by ShadySue
5 Replies
7619 Views
Last post September 17, 2011, 22:33
by PeterChigmaroff
25 Replies
35629 Views
Last post May 26, 2015, 05:40
by cathyslife
8 Replies
4388 Views
Last post August 21, 2013, 23:16
by stockphoto-images.com
3 Replies
3929 Views
Last post April 17, 2016, 10:11
by helloitsme

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle