MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: What would you do if shutterstock decreased all subs to the first tier (0.25$)?  (Read 9364 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 01, 2014, 14:29 »
-11
Let's just imagine, for fun's sake, that the thing described in the subject happens. Also, all your OD's fall to the lowest price tier.

Would you quit?

I know a lot of contributors who report that around 70% of their earnings are from shutterstock. It's easy to have integrity when a small agency screws you over. If they account for 3% of your income, who cares, you have principles!

Is it the same story when the best earner does it?

EDIT: I don't understand why the downvotes. Is it wrong to ask a question like this? Some things I'll never understand.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2014, 14:46 by spike »


« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2014, 14:32 »
+6
This isn't FUN  :'(

« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2014, 14:35 »
+5
I would complain on forums  ::)

« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2014, 14:42 »
+5
I will kill myself!

I can not survive without earnings from SS...

« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2014, 14:45 »
+8

Would you quit?


Immediately - without any doubt!

EmberMike

« Reply #5 on: March 01, 2014, 16:07 »
+8
Would you quit?

In a manner of speaking, yes. I wouldn't delete my portfolio, but I couldn't continue to work in microstock and make a living at it, and I'd have to look at other options. I'd stop producing work for microstock and hopefully get by on existing earnings for a year or so while I work on something else.

Here's the more important question to me: What makes anyone think this isn't likely to happen?

We're talking about this as a "fun" topic, something to just goof around about and discuss in hypotheticals. But don't forget that Bigstock, operating out of the very same offices as Shutterstock, already are dishing out lower royalty levels. I doubt that anyone is making $0.38 per subscription sale at Bigstock. Most folks are probably making $0.31 or less.

And last summer when Bigstock reevaluated the tiers and decided to make no changes, that seemed to indicate that they're quite happy with that RC system.

Moreover, I think the tier levels of the Bigstock system were designed with porting that system over to SS in mind. 50,000 sales per year is impossible at Bigstock. 50,000 at SS is pretty tough to do, but not impossible. Sounds more like the numbers fit SS than Bigstock.

So regardless of what I'd do or anyone else would do, I'm more interested in what SS is going to do in the next year or two while Bigstock moves along with this lower paying RC system right under the same roof.

I don't think it's a matter of "if" SS ever lowers rates or changes the system. It just wouldn't make sense to have these two companies operating in the same office and paying out different rates. Eventually, those rates will have to meet somewhere. And it won't be on the high end.

« Reply #6 on: March 01, 2014, 16:17 »
+12
Thats not fun. Unask that question.

« Reply #7 on: March 01, 2014, 16:53 »
+2
Nothing. I'd just continue doing what I do.

« Reply #8 on: March 01, 2014, 17:00 »
+8
At a minimum I would not give them new content

« Reply #9 on: March 01, 2014, 18:19 »
+1
It just wouldn't make sense to have these two companies operating in the same office and paying out different rates. Eventually, those rates will have to meet somewhere. And it won't be on the high end.

Many companies operate different brands with different price points selling a very similar product from the same offices. 

« Reply #10 on: March 01, 2014, 18:23 »
+13
Whats the point of worrying about something that theres no sign of its happening isn't there enough doom and gloom on here already?

lisafx

« Reply #11 on: March 01, 2014, 18:27 »
+8
Microstock is gradually becoming unsustainable for me as it is.  If I took such a big loss at SS I would have to begin seriously planning my exit straregy.

+1 on Pauws99's statement above.

« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2014, 18:33 »
+4
If SS puts in some sort of RC system or otherwise cuts commissions it would pretty much be Game Over for microstock, at least for most contributors.  I wouldn't delete anything but it would no longer be worth keywording or uploading any more, even part time.  Not funny at all.

« Reply #13 on: March 01, 2014, 18:39 »
0
At a minimum I would not give them new content

Same Here.

Goofy

« Reply #14 on: March 01, 2014, 18:44 »
+3
Let's just imagine, for fun's sake, that the thing described in the subject happens. Also, all your OD's fall to the lowest price tier.

Would you quit?

I know a lot of contributors who report that around 70% of their earnings are from shutterstock. It's easy to have integrity when a small agency screws you over. If they account for 3% of your income, who cares, you have principles!

Is it the same story when the best earner does it?

EDIT: I don't understand why the downvotes. Is it wrong to ask a question like this? Some things I'll never understand.

Cannot believe I wasted a few minutes of my time reading this string when there are a million other ones that have some value...  :-\


« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2014, 19:05 »
-5
I'd moan but, otherwise, nothing.

ACS

« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2014, 19:18 »
+1
At a minimum I would not give them new content

+1


Goofy

« Reply #17 on: March 01, 2014, 20:00 »
+7
I'd moan but, otherwise, nothing.

better hope Shutter isn't reading this one!

« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2014, 20:36 »
+3
even representing 42.42% of my income (2013 numbers), I would stop uploading like I did at iStock, then the decreasing earnings would take care of the rest

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #19 on: March 02, 2014, 01:33 »
+15
my first thought was that the OP is SS, testing our reactions.

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #20 on: March 02, 2014, 02:23 »
+16
Aren't we traumatized enough already with real issues, that we need to punish ourselves with these kind of masochist thoughts?

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #21 on: March 02, 2014, 03:59 »
+5
I would complain on forums  ::)

I too, but on iStock forums

« Reply #22 on: March 02, 2014, 05:34 »
+2
Aren't we traumatized enough already with real issues, that we need to punish ourselves with these kind of masochist thoughts?

I'm not sure that it's unreal. On BS they cut the minimum payout from 50c (credit) to 38c (for me) for a sub and my earnings promptly slumped by 20%.

« Reply #23 on: March 02, 2014, 06:16 »
+7
I'd rather imagine them doing the opposite and paying us more.  There's not much point in supplying sites that have cut commissions too much.  If SS took the bold step to pay us more, they could become even more dominant.

Perhaps it is a coincidence that the other sites that cut commissions have all fallen behind SS in the earnings poll here and perhaps they are still making lots of money but I'd rather believe that you get what you pay for and paying us peanuts isn't working.

« Reply #24 on: March 02, 2014, 06:29 »
+2
I'm not even going to read this thread.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
43 Replies
12657 Views
Last post June 05, 2008, 10:10
by 4seasons
11 Replies
4865 Views
Last post March 06, 2009, 10:47
by ljupco
15 Replies
3946 Views
Last post February 04, 2010, 08:38
by wollwerth
11 Replies
4201 Views
Last post October 03, 2011, 11:03
by rubyroo
108 Replies
48754 Views
Last post April 16, 2015, 18:07
by OM

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle