MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock Level 6 Congrats, you climbed to a higher level as an image contrib  (Read 1262 times)

1 Member and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

H2O

« on: November 17, 2020, 08:19 »
+4
Just received a email titled:- Congrats, you climbed to a higher level as an image contributor!

I haven't uploaded since their criminal behaviour started.

It makes no difference in my earnings, I will, as soon as I can shut my Port down.


« Reply #1 on: November 17, 2020, 08:36 »
+6
Congratulations! As a super Level 6 contributor, you will now earn a whopping 10 cents per image!

They should include that in the email.  >:(

« Reply #2 on: November 17, 2020, 08:37 »
+9
and from January 1st you'll be back to level 1  ::)

What a frikkin joke shitterstock are  >:(

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2020, 08:39 »
+4
While moving up a level might not have a massive impact on your earnings (although it will to some extant... that is how the levels work after all!) if you're getting over 25,000 downloads in a year, then I can pretty much guarantee that it will make a difference in your earnings if you're planning to close your account!

« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2020, 13:30 »
+9
And back to Level 1 on 12/31/2020 11:59 and 59 seconds  :-[

« Reply #5 on: November 17, 2020, 15:48 »
+7
Just received a email titled:- Congrats, you climbed to a higher level as an image contributor!

I haven't uploaded since their criminal behaviour started.

It makes no difference in my earnings, I will, as soon as I can shut my Port down.

don't worry about this: in 2 months you'll be back at the worst level existing, as every one else in SS.

« Reply #6 on: November 17, 2020, 16:27 »
+3
Yes, Shitterstock contributors, you can celebrate New Year's Day with gleeful rounds of HAPPY DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN!!!!!!!!!

Or maybe not.

« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2020, 14:32 »
+3
Well just 1 download needed to make it from level 4 to level 5 ~ so with only 1 month and 9 days left I'll be on 35% or 10 cents per image download. ::)


Then get sent back down the snake to level 1 15% on January 1st. >:(

« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2020, 15:08 »
+11
Just remember the only reason you get 0.10c per download at the highest level is because you allow it. It's not the fault of Shutterstock, it's your fault. Blame nobody but yourself.

« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2020, 15:16 »
0
.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2020, 15:46 by Clair Voyant »

« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2020, 18:24 »
+3
Just remember the only reason you get 0.10c per download at the highest level is because you allow it. It's not the fault of Shutterstock, it's your fault. Blame nobody but yourself.

Amen. Well said.

« Reply #11 on: November 22, 2020, 03:36 »
+8
Just remember the only reason you get 0.10c per download at the highest level is because you allow it. It's not the fault of Shutterstock, it's your fault. Blame nobody but yourself.

I don't need you or anyone to remind me. I spent the last two years caring for my elderly 80 year old mother who had cancer and died recently of lymphoma.

Stock was the only option besides doing commision photography which collapsed during this pandemic.  It allowed me to spend time looking out for her while earning a crumb.

I needed money no matter what.  Anyway Mama is gone now and I try to rebuild whats left of a shattered life.

So thank you I know its my fault  ::)

H2O

« Reply #12 on: November 22, 2020, 08:08 »
+8
Just remember the only reason you get 0.10c per download at the highest level is because you allow it. It's not the fault of Shutterstock, it's your fault. Blame nobody but yourself.

I don't need you or anyone to remind me. I spent the last two years caring for my elderly 80 year old mother who had cancer and died recently of lymphoma.

Stock was the only option besides doing commision photography which collapsed during this pandemic.  It allowed me to spend time looking out for her while earning a crumb.

I needed money no matter what.  Anyway Mama is gone now and I try to rebuild whats left of a shattered life.

So thank you I know its my fault  ::)

I sympathise with you, I myself am in a similar position to yourself, in that the micro stock income allowed me to look after my Mother, and as I originally posted, as soon as I can I will shut my Port down.

I feel utterly let down by the rapacious disrespect from Shutterstock that I as a contributor with years of uploading, key-wording and the sheer volume of time I have put in, to be shafted by their greed.

In my opinion Shutterstock started to go down hill when they bought in external shareholders, the writing was on the wall, these people, as the press always calls them investors is a misnomer, as most of the time they are not investing, if it was investing then they would be building or creating something with there cash, it is just a way to farm a business, they are often more like the characters in a Martin Scorsese film like Goodfellers, after they have sucked the life blood out of a business they burn the place down to collect the insurance.

The reality is the whole business model is flawed and I believe certain business should not be allowed to have external shareholders.

The micro stock business being one of them, after all they are really an Agent for a Artists work, which should be at the very least a 50-50 split on the income, I dont see any aligning of shareholders to this business model.

This whole sector of the gig economy as the press calls it, is in need of reform, this part of the Capitalist system has grown into a monster that has basically ended up scamming all the contributors who have put in years of hard work to build the business.

This Pavlovsky bloke that  Oringer bought in to do his dirty work is just a criminal in a suit and if he ever came to the UK, I would be the first to clock him one.

Personally, I wish him and his family all the ill luck in the World and would hope that he comes to a Sticky End as we say in the UK.

« Reply #13 on: November 22, 2020, 15:25 »
+12
It is categorically not contributors fault that Shutterstock's behavior over the last several years, culminating with the June 1 royalty cut, has been short-sighted, greedy and unethical.

Shutterstock - particularly Jon Oringer and Stan Pavlovsky - has to shoulder the blame for this debacle.

It is naive at best to suggest that contributors had a "choice" in this matter, any more than Getty photographers had a choice when Getty decided to move RM files to RF over their objections, or Pump Audio contributors (Getty acquired them) had a choice when Getty cut their royalties.

People need to eat. When all the options stink, taking the least stinky isn't something I'd blame people for.

I am tempted to blame anyone who took a special deal to continue to support the sleazes, but even they probably have salaries and rents to pay.

If someone who went back to Shutterstock acted surprised at the January royalty cuts back to level 1, I'd suggest they should refer to the lovely Maya Angelou quote "When someone shows you who they are, believe them, the first time."

I understood that speaking out about Shutterstock's bad behavior might cost me my account, which it did, but I had the freedom to lose that income (and I'm aware I'm very lucky in that regard). Not everyone is in that situation.

Save all our ire for the scuzzbuckets running agencies.

« Reply #14 on: November 22, 2020, 17:23 »
+3

...
...
The reality is the whole business model is flawed and I believe certain business should not be allowed to have external shareholders.

The micro stock business being one of them, after all they are really an Agent for a Artists work, which should be at the very least a 50-50 split on the income, I dont see any aligning of shareholders to this business model.

This whole sector of the gig economy as the press calls it, is in need of reform, this part of the Capitalist system has grown into a monster that has basically ended up scamming all the contributors who have put in years of hard work to build the business.
...

unfortunately the model isn't flawed - it's a predictable outgrowth of the laissez-faire capitalism championed by the right,  channeling of profits and tax cuts to the 1% while destroying the power of unions and the ability to organize and destroying regulations, the EPA, clean air & water acts, et al that protected workers, public health and the environment.  trump's nihilistic approach to government just exposed the process that has been underway for 40 years

a similar era of free rein capitalism triumphed in the late 19th century until exposed by muckraking journalists leading to progressive legislation

"Progressive reformers successfully influenced the passage of much substantive legislation, including several amendments to the US Constitution. The Sixteenth Amendment established a federal income tax, the Seventeenth Amendment allowed for the direct election of Senators, the Eighteenth Amendment prohibited sales of alcohol, and the Nineteenth Amendment guaranteed women the right to vote.
Legislation aimed at strengthening protections for workers and consumers included the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which created the Food and Drug Administration to guarantee the safety and purity of all food products and pharmaceuticals, and the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which sought to curb business practices aimed at stifling competition
."  https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/rise-to-world-power/age-of-empire/a/the-progressive-era
 

« Reply #15 on: November 22, 2020, 21:00 »
+1
Just remember the only reason you get 0.10c per download at the highest level is because you allow it. It's not the fault of Shutterstock, it's your fault. Blame nobody but yourself.

Shutterstock, microstock ... It's not my fault, it's my choice. I don't feel guilty of anything.
:)

Moving from level 5 to 6 on SS a few weeks ago, I didn't notice any significant difference in total earnings.

And, if you are at level 5 now, you should be back to this level sometime in February.

H2O

« Reply #16 on: Today at 12:49 »
0
. . . . . . . . . . .

Just remember the only reason you get 0.10c per download at the highest level is because you allow it. It's not the fault of Shutterstock, it's your fault. Blame nobody but yourself.

AND


...
...
The reality is the whole business model is flawed and I believe certain business should not be allowed to have external shareholders.

The micro stock business being one of them, after all they are really an Agent for a Artists work, which should be at the very least a 50-50 split on the income, I dont see any aligning of shareholders to this business model.

This whole sector of the gig economy as the press calls it, is in need of reform, this part of the Capitalist system has grown into a monster that has basically ended up scamming all the contributors who have put in years of hard work to build the business.
...

unfortunately the model isn't flawed - it's a predictable outgrowth of the laissez-faire capitalism championed by the right,  channeling of profits and tax cuts to the 1% while destroying the power of unions and the ability to organize and destroying regulations, the EPA, clean air & water acts, et al that protected workers, public health and the environment.  trump's nihilistic approach to government just exposed the process that has been underway for 40 years

a similar era of free rein capitalism triumphed in the late 19th century until exposed by muckraking journalists leading to progressive legislation

"Progressive reformers successfully influenced the passage of much substantive legislation, including several amendments to the US Constitution. The Sixteenth Amendment established a federal income tax, the Seventeenth Amendment allowed for the direct election of Senators, the Eighteenth Amendment prohibited sales of alcohol, and the Nineteenth Amendment guaranteed women the right to vote.
Legislation aimed at strengthening protections for workers and consumers included the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which created the Food and Drug Administration to guarantee the safety and purity of all food products and pharmaceuticals, and the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which sought to curb business practices aimed at stifling competition
."  https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/rise-to-world-power/age-of-empire/a/the-progressive-era

YES, I know all this and understand all this about the Capitalist system, having read, Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century amongst many other books on the social economic system that Western Countries run.

PERSONALLY, over the years I have come round to the last resort, where Pavlovsky or Oringer ever to come to the UK, I believe that as a base instinct, they need to be 'clocked one.

I would advocate violence towards these two criminals, as there is no other course of action open to me in a democratic society, which is really sad.

If a few more people took it upon themselves to dish out direct action, these people may think twice before they cause trouble.

I know this is not politically correct, but what the heck, a good left hook maybe worth it.

I wish them and their families all the ILL WILL IN THE WORLD.




 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
4416 Views
Last post May 12, 2008, 13:03
by Whiz
15 Replies
7387 Views
Last post November 28, 2009, 11:30
by PeterChigmaroff
4 Replies
3269 Views
Last post January 03, 2010, 20:18
by icefront
10 Replies
3541 Views
Last post June 23, 2016, 05:08
by Justanotherphotographer
3 Replies
2073 Views
Last post October 03, 2016, 22:15
by Microstock Posts

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle