MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Why is Shutterstock sellng our images for 1Cent each??  (Read 23139 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

shudderstok

« Reply #75 on: October 17, 2013, 23:44 »
+3
Why? They are selling your images for a penny because you allow them to.


ACS

« Reply #76 on: October 18, 2013, 02:12 »
+4
A guy goes into an "all you can eat" restaurant and pays 5 bucks.  In the very unlikely event that he eats an entire cow, does the farmer who raised the animal and for which he received payment at the market rate, feel that is work has been devalued?

Probably he does not feel that way. Because tomorrow that guy will feel hungry again and will need another cow. But in MS, once you download a RF image you use it until the end of time, if not you share it with your colleagues/friends.

« Reply #77 on: October 18, 2013, 02:24 »
0
It is annoying but I'm not going to leave BigStock and stay with other sites that pay under $0.30 for subs.  It would be a choice of leaving several sites for me and I can't afford to do that right now...

I view it as more harmful to take $0.29 from Bigstock than it is to take the same (or less) from other companies. Bigstock and SS are in the same office. It's one thing to take a bad rate from an independent company and send a bad message to the industry at large. It's an entirely different thing to take a bad rate from a company that shares space and employees with the company that keeps most of us in this business. That message is potentially far more harmful, I think. And far more costly to us if it ever comes to fruition than the negative effects of a few smaller companies cutting rates because they saw someone else doing it....
Several sites have used the excuse that their rivals pay a lower commission to lower theirs, bringing them inline with the market.  So I would think its at least equally important that people don't accept lower subs commissions with SS rival sites. But the vast majority of contributors couldn't care less, so we are left in a precarious situation.  I know there are people that get $0.25 with SS but they are the one site that gives people a realistic chance to get to the higher levels.  We just have to hope they think that they can continue to keep their shareholders happy without taking more from us.

« Reply #78 on: October 18, 2013, 02:48 »
+1
A guy goes into an "all you can eat" restaurant and pays 5 bucks.  In the very unlikely event that he eats an entire cow, does the farmer who raised the animal and for which he received payment at the market rate, feel that is work has been devalued?
Probably he does not feel that way. Because tomorrow that guy will feel hungry again and will need another cow. But in MS, once you download a RF image you use it until the end of time, if not you share it with your colleagues/friends.
But the farmer can only sell his cow once, while I can sell an image many, many times.

ACS

« Reply #79 on: October 18, 2013, 03:21 »
0
A guy goes into an "all you can eat" restaurant and pays 5 bucks.  In the very unlikely event that he eats an entire cow, does the farmer who raised the animal and for which he received payment at the market rate, feel that is work has been devalued?
Probably he does not feel that way. Because tomorrow that guy will feel hungry again and will need another cow. But in MS, once you download a RF image you use it until the end of time, if not you share it with your colleagues/friends.
But the farmer can only sell his cow once, while I can sell an image many, many times.

He can sell his cow once but he can produce as much as he want when he sees an opportunity. Also he does not have to be creative, he can produce the similar ones over and over again. But here I need to be creative; I can produce the same image only once.

« Reply #80 on: October 18, 2013, 03:38 »
0
I'm not against the normal subscription model as you sign up knowing the pricing. What gets me is how Shutterstock discounted Bigstock 85%(!!) without any kind of notice.

« Reply #81 on: October 18, 2013, 07:39 »
+3
I'm not against the normal subscription model as you sign up knowing the pricing. What gets me is how Shutterstock discounted Bigstock 85%(!!) without any kind of notice.
And that 85% is on a discounted BS subscription product which had already undercut SS subscription pricing by a wide margin with the intent on utilizing those discounted prices to gain market share.

It is becoming increasing clear that SS intends on driving existing customers to BS where SS management has made the the conscious choice to pay us lower royalties.

Bigstock is not a separate company with different management than the parent company, they have the very same management. Bigstock is simply a division of SS which is being utilized by key SS management to maximize long term profit at the contributors expense.

Key SS management developed this stratagem long ago and driving profits at our expense via BS is clearly part of their roadmap.

When I think of the .38 bridge program I hear a giant * sound.

« Reply #82 on: October 18, 2013, 08:05 »
0

When a buyer buys a subscription they don't think to themselves, " I get these images for $.02"  they say to themselves I get access to the entire library for $xx per month/ year.  They have to really value all the images in the collection to commit to this amount.

From a business point of view subscriptions are great because you can budget cash flow.... they have a better idea of what they will receive in the following months.

BINGO! Yep that's correct, that's what I always thought it wasn't till I became a contributor that I do the math per image :)


My Very Best :)
KimsCreativeHub.com

« Reply #83 on: October 18, 2013, 08:08 »
0
This right here is why I opt out of any "partner programs" when ever possible.


My Very Best :)
KimsCreativeHub.com

EmberMike

« Reply #84 on: October 18, 2013, 10:00 »
+3

So here's a little buyers' perspective for you...

I have a subscription at SS right now, just for a month for a big client project I've been working on. I'm sort of regretting buying that subscription now. Most of the images I've used so far from SS I could have gotten at Bigstock.

I hate to say it, but next time I need to get a subscription for a big project, I'm going to Bigstock.

And I highly doubt I'm the only buyer realizing this.

« Reply #85 on: October 18, 2013, 10:09 »
+3
I've removed my portfolio or deactivated all my best images from several sites.  The problem is, not many others do it.  So all I'm doing is making it easier for the people that carry on using those sites.  Good luck to anyone who leaves BigStock over this.  In my experience, it makes no difference, other than the earnings loss for the contributor.  Don't blame me if the $0.38 goes, I did try to do something but it was absolutely pointless.  There's too many people that couldn't care less about their commission.  I wish that wasn't true but it is.

Perhaps the most positive thing we can do is build up the Symbiostock network?  That seems a better option than trying to stop what seems inevitable with the microstock sites.  Hopefully if there's an option for us to sell direct, the sites will see that they can't keep cutting commissions.


FWIW - I removed my best selling/favorite images from the MS sites and moved them over to Stocksy. :) And yes, with some images I took a risk - as some of them had earned over 100 USD per piece (and thus far haven't sold on Stocksy).

« Reply #86 on: October 18, 2013, 10:13 »
+2
It does look like it's a policy to move subscription buyers to BigStock.  Seems like a big risk though, as the other sites could offer a big discount as well.  Then there's the chance that SS pay per download buyers will switch to BigStock subs.  I wonder if that's already happening?  Might explain the big doom and gloom thread about poor sales in the SS forum in a month that's usually strong.

« Reply #87 on: October 18, 2013, 10:17 »
+1
I've removed my portfolio or deactivated all my best images from several sites.  The problem is, not many others do it.  So all I'm doing is making it easier for the people that carry on using those sites.  Good luck to anyone who leaves BigStock over this.  In my experience, it makes no difference, other than the earnings loss for the contributor.  Don't blame me if the $0.38 goes, I did try to do something but it was absolutely pointless.  There's too many people that couldn't care less about their commission.  I wish that wasn't true but it is.

Perhaps the most positive thing we can do is build up the Symbiostock network?  That seems a better option than trying to stop what seems inevitable with the microstock sites.  Hopefully if there's an option for us to sell direct, the sites will see that they can't keep cutting commissions.


FWIW - I removed my best selling/favorite images from the MS sites and moved them over to Stocksy. :) And yes, with some images I took a risk - as some of them had earned over 100 USD per piece (and thus far haven't sold on Stocksy).

I like your portfolio.  I'll have to apply to Stocksy soon.  Seems like one of the positive options we have at the moment.

« Reply #88 on: October 18, 2013, 11:40 »
+2
We just have to hope they think that they can continue to keep their shareholders happy without taking more from us.

I would not put any chips on that square. 
« Last Edit: October 18, 2013, 11:44 by stockastic »

« Reply #89 on: October 18, 2013, 13:12 »
0
I personally have noticed a large increase in sales on BigStock and at the same time a DROP in money per month with the new sub sales. I don't like subs, but I will stay with Bigstock as I have for over six years. Many months BigStock has been my Best earner, but I do not see that happening anymore with downloads paying .27 cents for most!

An additional note: I have not uploaded anything to anybody for about four years! Reason I earn FAR more selling photos as art on eBay. .... and with far less effort.

-Larry

« Reply #90 on: October 18, 2013, 13:54 »
+3
eBay sales for me, from their records:

Sales to date:  $147,129.28
Transactions:  7070
First eBay Sale:  11/23/2002

Sure beats most ways of sitting at a desk and printer and earning some money.

Regards -Larry



« Reply #92 on: October 18, 2013, 15:19 »
+1
eBay sales for me, from their records:

Sales to date:  $147,129.28
Transactions:  7070
First eBay Sale:  11/23/2002

Sure beats most ways of sitting at a desk and printer and earning some money.

Regards -Larry

we need to have a chat sometime Larry, is that ok?

« Reply #93 on: October 18, 2013, 16:44 »
+2
eBay sales for me, from their records:

Sales to date:  $147,129.28
Transactions:  7070
First eBay Sale:  11/23/2002

Sure beats most ways of sitting at a desk and printer and earning some money.

Regards -Larry

we need to have a chat sometime Larry, is that ok?

Greatest thread hijack ever.

« Reply #94 on: October 18, 2013, 16:52 »
0
eBay sales for me, from their records:

Sales to date:  $147,129.28
Transactions:  7070
First eBay Sale:  11/23/2002

Sure beats most ways of sitting at a desk and printer and earning some money.

Regards -Larry



we need to have a chat sometime Larry, is that ok?

Greatest thread hijack ever.

eBay sales for me, from their records:

Sales to date:  $147,129.28
Transactions:  7070
First eBay Sale:  11/23/2002

Sure beats most ways of sitting at a desk and printer and earning some money.

Regards -Larry

we need to have a chat sometime Larry, is that ok?

Greatest thread hijack ever.




I did not intend to hijack the post. :)

« Reply #95 on: October 18, 2013, 17:07 »
+1
of course you haven't Larry ;D

in fact I was serious, I have looked into your eBay profile and you sell indeed a lot of stuff but I have found more gun accessories than pictures, is that why you have made close to 150k $? please enlighten us, I am very interesting in getting that amount of cash, that said I am not willing to sell gun accessories :)
« Last Edit: October 18, 2013, 17:10 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #96 on: October 18, 2013, 17:17 »
0
Hey everyone,

Eli from Bigstock here.  Earlier this week Bigstock tested emailing different promotional offers through a partner site (MediaBistro), as you've noticed.  One of these offers accidentally applied the limited time discount offer to all subscription types, when the intention was to have the discount apply towards the first month of a monthly subscription.  This was an error on our part and we apologize for any confusion.  We quickly caught the error and the offer will be restrained. 

Bigstock often tests different promotional offers but it's important to note we never move forward broadly unless a test has proven to drive increased downloads or overall sales that result in increased downloads.  These investments are made to ensure our business continues to grow and stays competitive in the marketplace, which benefits both contributors and Bigstock.  None of this affects contributor royalty rates. 

Again, sorry for the confusion.  Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Best,

-E

Thanks Elijah. Please can you get yourself 'verified' by Leaf as speaking on behalf of BigStock so we know it is 'gospel', so to speak.

« Reply #97 on: October 18, 2013, 17:54 »
+4
I learned long ago to pay attention to actions.  Words are meaningless.

Bottom line Bigstock  is undercutting Shutterstocks prices and they are paying contributors less, until that changes I have lost respect for the Bigstock division of Shutterstock and I will not be purchasing images from them either.

« Reply #98 on: October 18, 2013, 17:56 »
0
of course you haven't Larry ;D

in fact I was serious, I have looked into your eBay profile and you sell indeed a lot of stuff but I have found more gun accessories than pictures, is that why you have made close to 150k $? please enlighten us, I am very interesting in getting that amount of cash, that said I am not willing to sell gun accessories :)
If it is all prints, there might be a few costs involved printing 7,070 of them.  Still looks a lot better than most of the microstock sites though.

« Reply #99 on: October 18, 2013, 17:58 »
+1
A guy goes into an "all you can eat" restaurant and pays 5 bucks.  In the very unlikely event that he eats an entire cow, does the farmer who raised the animal and for which he received payment at the market rate, feel that is work has been devalued?
Probably he does not feel that way. Because tomorrow that guy will feel hungry again and will need another cow. But in MS, once you download a RF image you use it until the end of time, if not you share it with your colleagues/friends.
But the farmer can only sell his cow once, while I can sell an image many, many times.

He can sell his cow once but he can produce as much as he want when he sees an opportunity. Also he does not have to be creative, he can produce the similar ones over and over again. But here I need to be creative; I can produce the same image only once.

@michaeldb - Exactly!!

@ ACS - you're obviously missing a trick - most people repeat pretty much the same thing over and over


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
18 Replies
13024 Views
Last post July 12, 2008, 14:36
by Silvercat
2 Replies
3541 Views
Last post September 05, 2008, 04:12
by DanP68
7 Replies
3849 Views
Last post May 08, 2009, 08:03
by gostwyck
2 Replies
3495 Views
Last post November 08, 2009, 20:07
by eppic
35 Replies
12512 Views
Last post June 02, 2012, 15:05
by wut

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors