MicrostockGroup
Microstock Footage Forum => General - Stock Video => Topic started by: helloitsme on June 07, 2019, 18:00
-
It's half the Adobestock video sales this month now. 1/3 the Pond5's video sales probably. Since they started promoting their own contents under the Eighth Wonder name, our contents got pushed back on searches and sales started to fall drastically. I have no hope on Shutterstock at this point to be honest. Pond5 and Adobestock are our future. Shutterstock's business model now is to create own contents by imitating top selling contents and keep 100% of sales to themselves. This week's sale at Shutterstock is like 1/5 of last year's peak. Horrible.
-
My photo is 1/10 of what I used to get. Be happy you’re only down to 1/5, lol.
-
... something changed overnight... and definitely ruined footage side of SS... no official words, but I`m sure that forcing of Select played a role in whole case... with constant changes on site, without valuable reasons, it`s going even deeper... with Select, they slapped us really hard after years of contributing...
-
Here is an outsider's observation,
Landing on their frontpage i am welcomed to browse/buy those items in this order:
Photos
Vectors
Illustrations
Icons
Footage
Music
In my mind, footage is just one place before bottom important?
Strange order.
-
Photo are falli g down too. Im experiencing a strong grow of istock and as i said connect is killing ss. Last four days are appalling.
-
My outsider's perspective: if I follow a link from Google, from the UK, I always get the Russian language site.
-
Well I honestly have to say the opposite, I usually have a couple of clips sold in a month, but last three months it suddenly became 12 or more. Not great numbers but something has happened for sure. Only one sale was low value (3,15 us$])
I have around 1000 clips in my port, and no "premiere content" so... Let's see how long there will be this good way
-
outsider's perspective
Ah, ShadySue? I will declare you as my official English teacher / corrector!
:P
(Thanks! :) )
-
My outsider's perspective: if I follow a link from Google, from the UK, I always get the Russian language site.
shutterstock is getting a russian contributed website mostly. most of photographer featured are from russia....mosto of content come from russia...simply because is so chap to produce content in russia.
-
outsider's perspective
Ah, ShadySue? I will declare you as my official English teacher / corrector!
:P
(Thanks! :) )
Nonono, your use of 'observation' was perfectly correct!
-
I had a video sale on SS a couple of days ago. Royalty.....60 cents. :(
-
My outsider's perspective: if I follow a link from Google, from the UK, I always get the Russian language site.
shutterstock is getting a russian contributed website mostly. most of photographer featured are from russia....mosto of content come from russia...simply because is so chap to produce content in russia.
Mebbes aye, mebbes naw, but even if they were officially a Russian company, their system should surely automatically appear in the most likely language of a possible potential buyer, at least if that is one of the world's most widespread languages.
Not that I actually care.
-
outsider's perspective
Ah, ShadySue? I will declare you as my official English teacher / corrector!
:P
(Thanks! :) )
Nonono, your use of 'observation' was perfectly correct!
I was going to "observe" that too! :)
-
My outsider's perspective: if I follow a link from Google, from the UK, I always get the Russian language site.
shutterstock is getting a russian contributed website mostly. most of photographer featured are from russia....mosto of content come from russia...simply because is so chap to produce content in russia.
From my point of view (another way of saying "observation" or "perspective"), it doesn't matter how many Russians send images to SS or how cheap it is to produce them there… because my specialty is North American nature and critters.
So, while the Russians may be up to their eyeballs in American electoral politics, not too many of them compete in my special photography niche. 8)
-
I've noticed an increase in sales over the past few months as well. So it's probably just a change to the search engine... I'm sure they'll change it again before long and some people will notice more sales and some people will notice less. I don't think it's the start of a sinking ship or anything.
-
My photo is 1/10 of what I used to get. Be happy you’re only down to 1/5, lol.
1/10 comparing to when?
-
Since wendsday the sales at ss have tanked near 80%.seems like they have completely switches off my folio. Unbielevable. Only some all time best seller still sales but nothing more
-
Very true! They played with rankings and rotated something... I see my files, but pushed back... and Select on top of that...
-
It's half the Adobestock video sales this month now. 1/3 the Pond5's video sales probably. Since they started promoting their own contents under the Eighth Wonder name, our contents got pushed back on searches and sales started to fall drastically. I have no hope on Shutterstock at this point to be honest. Pond5 and Adobestock are our future. Shutterstock's business model now is to create own contents by imitating top selling contents and keep 100% of sales to themselves. This week's sale at Shutterstock is like 1/5 of last year's peak. Horrible.
How do you know that eightwonder is actually a portfolio owned by shutterstock??do they hire people to shoot their stuff??
-
Yup another strange month with single figure sales and few to no ODDs and SODs :(
I'll be lucky to see $100 this month on current projections
However I know that by the end of the month SS will miraculously make $211 to $212 just like the previous months this year since January.
And they claim sales aren't fixed ~ yeah right ::)
-
Got a 3$ video sale, man this hurts, especially with Pond5's new royalty rates it seems like there is no decent place to sell video
-
And they claim sales aren't fixed ~ yeah right ::)
How are they fixed?
-
And they claim sales aren't fixed ~ yeah right ::)
How are they fixed?
How are they fixed? Send that question to SS.
If every month you had sales revenue that was within $1 of the previous months for 5 months I'd say that was just beyond pure co-incidence
There's an old saying
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck then its a duck ~ Quack!
-
...not fixed for me. They go up or down $50, $100, $200.
It's funny how many posts about bad sales we're getting when sales are fixed. ;) You'd think all months would be the same then, i.e., no bad sales.
-
...not fixed for me. They go up or down $50, $100, $200.
It's funny how many posts about bad sales we're getting when sales are fixed. ;) You'd think all months would be the same then, i.e., no bad sales.
I don't say anything about your sales or anyone elses ::)
Read what I said about MY sales. Within $1 per month for the last 5 months
-
...not fixed for me. They go up or down $50, $100, $200.
It's funny how many posts about bad sales we're getting when sales are fixed. ;) You'd think all months would be the same then, i.e., no bad sales.
I don't say anything about your sales or anyone elses ::)
Read what I said about MY sales. Within $1 per month for the last 5 months
Yes, I don't doubt YOUR sales were like that. But why did they choose to fix YOUR sales?
How many images do you have? It's quite natural that the demand for certain content stays consistent.
Travel to London isn't 1 million people one month, 25,000 the next, 4 million the month after that. No, it stays quite consistent, with gradual change over time.
-
And they claim sales aren't fixed ~ yeah right ::)
This happened to me recently in a period of 3 or 4 weeks. Can someone explain?
- Three consecutive Mondays with the exact same number of sales.
- Followed by three consecutive Tuesdays with the exact same of downloads.
- And two similar and consecutive Wednesdays.
- And two Thursdays with the difference of a single download. But the following two Fridays were equal but higher.
- And two consecutive Fridays with same number of downloads. But the previous Friday was equal to the following two Fridays. Which means that in five weeks I could count two variations of daily downloads. So I can add a new pattern here.
- The weekend was more irregular but always is.
Could this be a coincidence? Really?
So, in this period I can say that the number of downloads I had were the number of downloads I was allowed to have. If I want to be positive I may say that this allowed me to have those sales, otherwise I could have less.
I understand that we may have roughly the same downloads per week based on our portfolio. But that number being achieved by having consecutive weeks almost xeroxed days from the previous week?
One thing no one can convince me at this time. That the downloads we have are not controlled by Shutterstock.
-
And they claim sales aren't fixed ~ yeah right ::)
This happened to me recently in a period of 3 or 4 weeks. Can someone explain?
Well, first we need to know how many downloads we're talking about. Single digit? 3, 4? Double digit? 44, 45? Triple digit? More?
When the average person goes grocery shopping every Monday, they might buy two cartons of milk and one pack of eggs. They don't suddenly buy 5 cartons of milk and 4 cartons of eggs. No, it stays the same. And, on average, this is true for the entire population. And then we see a change over certain holidays like Christmas, or if they're having people over, but then the guests would probably buy a bit less since they didn't have to cook that night.
This is why the store roughly sells the same amount of milk and eggs every week. And not 1,000 cartons one week, and 23 the next. Unless it's Easter, but that's reflected in image sales as well.
---
I'm not saying it's IMPOSSIBLE that they shift around the search results based on previous sales (although that would be quite stupid, since it would be better to reward high sellers), but also that wild swings as well as even sales are both normal.
-
The numbers I'm referring are NOT single digits.
And it does not matter if they are single, double, triple or whatever. I believe it's impossible to have consecutive Mondays, followed by consecutive Tuesdays and so on with the exact same number of sales each day for weeks.
Plus, I just took a look at the three Mondays sales and they are completely diverse.
One has more seasonal images and almost all subscriptions. Other has a lot of travel and all subscriptions and the third basically religions themed with a lot of OD and SO.
Sorry, but I do not believe this is due to season, portfolio, demand, etc. The exact same downloads each day for weeks with very diverse themes sold? LOL
Comparing the needs of tenths of thousands buyers across the world with the need of a single person regarding supermarket needs is non-sense.
I've been with SS for over a decade and this is really strange to me.
-
And it does not matter if they are single, double, triple or whatever.
Oh, it doesn't? Well, that tells me everything I need to know... (hint, it matters one heck of a lot).
Comparing the needs of tenths of thousands buyers across the world with the need of a single person regarding supermarket needs is non-sense.
Not at all. And if you read the post the habits of one person (but maybe instead of milk, the next likes tomatoes) stretches out to the entire population, which is why a store doesn't sell 1,000 cartons one week, and 23 the next.
And they always, every week, sell more candy on Saturdays than on Mondays. Coincidence?
-
with a lot of OD and SO.
Sorry for the offtopic, but what is OD and SO mean?
-
And it does not matter if they are single, double, triple or whatever.
Oh, it doesn't? Well, that tells me everything I need to know... (hint, it matters one heck of a lot).
Comparing the needs of tenths of thousands buyers across the world with the need of a single person regarding supermarket needs is non-sense.
Not at all. And if you read the post the habits of one person (but maybe instead of milk, the next likes tomatoes) stretches out to the entire population, which is why a store doesn't sell 1,000 cartons one week, and 23 the next.
And they always, every week, sell more candy on Saturdays than on Mondays. Coincidence?
Listen, I'm on the Microstock, Mid and Macrostock business for almost 15 years and have a portfolio just under 20.000 images across several agencies. I've told you that my sales are NOT single digits and I live solely from Stock income.
I have a lot of images on the first page of competitive themes, and I've been featured on SS lightboxes a lot of times.
I'm not someone with 100 mediocre images that produce 100 more, doubling the portfolio which impacts clearly the earnings and with luck strikes one good image creating continuous BME's (I've been there). Contributors earning 0,25c and being promoted by SS to avoid paying 0,38c to older members earning them more money.
Your supermarket comparison is non-sense from the point of view of a contributor.
I just told you that my sales from the several Mondays were very different in terms of themes each week. From your logic they should be somewhat the same in terms of themes. After all people always buy the same amount of milk and eggs each week, right? They are not buying the sames images to me except the ones that are best sellers. Not only in terms of themes but varied greatly in terms of subscriptions vs OS and SO.
You cannot say that having the same number of sales on a weekday for several weeks is normal. Even more when that happens to whole weeks for several weeks! You just can't!
-
with a lot of OD and SO.
Sorry for the offtopic, but what is OD and SO mean?
"On Demand" and "Single & Other"
-
...not fixed for me. They go up or down $50, $100, $200.
It's funny how many posts about bad sales we're getting when sales are fixed. ;) You'd think all months would be the same then, i.e., no bad sales.
I don't say anything about your sales or anyone elses ::)
Read what I said about MY sales. Within $1 per month for the last 5 months
Yes, I don't doubt YOUR sales were like that. But why did they choose to fix YOUR sales?
How many images do you have? It's quite natural that the demand for certain content stays consistent.
Travel to London isn't 1 million people one month, 25,000 the next, 4 million the month after that. No, it stays quite consistent, with gradual change over time.
"Yes, I don't doubt YOUR sales were like that. But why did they choose to fix YOUR sales?"
There are others who have also reported similar none variations.
3,100 images of a varied set of subjects including editorial, food, travel, industrial and historical.
No ducks, flowers and other common stuff.
Statistically the likelihood of hitting the same values every month for 6 months are negligible.
I should add the annual figures (over 4 years) are all within a spit of eachother too at a $50 variance over $x,xxx
-
I have been with Shutterstock for seven years. I have a lot of experience with them and my Shutterstock earnings have passed $220K.
I firmly believe that Shutterstock does manipulate my earnings by turning my port on and off. Either that or at certain times of the month my port is moved to a very low position in the search results.
Everyday I have several video sales on Pond5 and at least one on Adobe. So far this month I have had 3 sales on Shutterstock. Today is the 11th of the month and my port is earning again. I believe my port was off/low search for the first 10 days this month.
It never used to be this way but now they definitely control my earnings. They have decided how much to allow me to earn.
-
I`m glad that older and established contributors are willing to participate here... this is not conspiracy, It`s happening, obviously...
-
I don't know much about video sales since they are very rare for me, but photo sales have been sad for a while and are pretty lame this month. I also notched up my first 0 sales weekday yesterday. I've had a few 0 sales days on weekends in the last few years and in my first months, but not on a weekday. Maybe not ever since I got my first 7 accepted, certainly not since I had more than 20 or so accepted.
-
it's clear that ss control in a way the engine and the position of each contributor...the pattern of sales are always the same despite the growing content library. and in my case is not 5 months its'3 years...the line is practically the same every year, in the first 6 month thee difference compared to last year is something like 20 dollar and i'm talking of 4 digit sum, more than 5000 to understand....in addiction seems like every month the path is to reach a sum, often with some sod at the end of month.
now in the last 5 days i'm down 80% daly, after midweek zero sales. only best seller sells , everything else is non existent. personally i0ve stopped any download to ss. i prefer risk to sell nothing in stocksy, through addictive stock, and cavan images, than upload content of good to very quality to an agency with zero quality control and a search engine that simply can bury your folio in a bit,like happened since 4 june.
clearly we don't have the proof, and i think is very hard to find,because i think if therewereofficial sign that they control sales this could be a complete break of contract and potentially any contributor could sue the for damages and lost earning.
-
in addiction think of this...they are not growing..every quarter the growth is becoming a negative loss compared the past quarter...how can they achieve better financial results with a falling market? one key is sells images of low end contributor paying 25 cent compared to 38 cent...it's near 50 & less royalty and if we consider million of download we begin understand that we are talking off a giant sum of money, not thousand buck...that's why they have lost any interest in quality control and accept everyday thousand of contributor who don't have a clue of what they are selling
-
It's half the Adobestock video sales this month now. 1/3 the Pond5's video sales probably. Since they started promoting their own contents under the Eighth Wonder name, our contents got pushed back on searches and sales started to fall drastically. I have no hope on Shutterstock at this point to be honest. Pond5 and Adobestock are our future. Shutterstock's business model now is to create own contents by imitating top selling contents and keep 100% of sales to themselves. This week's sale at Shutterstock is like 1/5 of last year's peak. Horrible.
Maybe you are just shooting the same stuff.
-
It's half the Adobestock video sales this month now. 1/3 the Pond5's video sales probably. Since they started promoting their own contents under the Eighth Wonder name, our contents got pushed back on searches and sales started to fall drastically. I have no hope on Shutterstock at this point to be honest. Pond5 and Adobestock are our future. Shutterstock's business model now is to create own contents by imitating top selling contents and keep 100% of sales to themselves. This week's sale at Shutterstock is like 1/5 of last year's peak. Horrible.
Maybe you are just shooting the same stuff.
Maybe you should read what helloitsme wrote.
-
It's half the Adobestock video sales this month now. 1/3 the Pond5's video sales probably. Since they started promoting their own contents under the Eighth Wonder name, our contents got pushed back on searches and sales started to fall drastically. I have no hope on Shutterstock at this point to be honest. Pond5 and Adobestock are our future. Shutterstock's business model now is to create own contents by imitating top selling contents and keep 100% of sales to themselves. This week's sale at Shutterstock is like 1/5 of last year's peak. Horrible.
Maybe you are just shooting the same stuff.
Maybe you should read what helloitsme wrote.
Well I did and most of the thread is contradictions, saying sales are dropping, sales are steady and sales are rigged, fixed or as it's been called before "capped".
But the OP wrote: Shutterstock's business model now is to create own contents by imitating top selling contents and keep 100% of sales to themselves.
Now the whole subject has been hijacked by the usual conspiracy theories.
So I'll try to get back to the question, what portfolios are SS owned, content that copies and imitates artists, so SS can keep 100% instead of paying us.
Do I dare ask, if they are stealing our sales, how can so many people be paid, exactly the same for months and months or over years. From what I read, nearly everyone is losing income and sales, not running flat. The people with fixed income must be special and get special treatment that the rest of us don't. Because year after year, sales and income has been dropping, since 2012? :o
Running flat would be a prize and I'd like the same income that's reliable, month after month. How do I get on the fixed income train?
-
Read what I said about MY sales. Within $1 per month for the last 5 months
I say total coincidence and no conspiracies. This is my 12-month trend: Full of ups and downs.
-
My sales have been going up every year, so no conspiracy for me either, I'm not following the trend.
Now looking at the pattern of my sales over each years, there's always been a drop between March and June, followed by an increase from July to November. So my guess is that bigger sales will make their come back in July and over the summer.
-
Mines even more uppy-downy! If there is a cap then it fluctuates wildly!
-
Mines even more uppy-downy! If there is a cap then it fluctuates wildly!
Images yes ~ Not for video :D
-
Mines even more uppy-downy! If there is a cap then it fluctuates wildly!
Images yes ~ Not for video :D
Yeah I mean it just wouldn't make sense for there to be a cap on video earnings. But images... it's perfectly clear why they cap them and not video.
-
I never understood why people here gets so heated up about the "cap" theory.
SS has by far the most sophisticated algorithm of all agencies.
They aim to make as many contributors happy (not having just a handful making huge gains, but spreading the gain a bit more), they push people to upload regularly (if you don't upload for a few weeks your sales go down), and they punish people spamming, or uploading too many similar clips (in my experience the ratio between clips in portfolio to sales is very important). Also they rotate the files in a way that customers don't find always the same images in their searches.
It does make perfectly sense to me.
I do only video, SS is my best agency by country miles (it makes more than all other combined) and last month was my BME at SS.
I must admit that IN MY PORTFOLIO, I noticed several points of behavior underlined by people in the "cap" theory camp:
- Sometimes a month starts very well and by the middle of the month I get almost to my average gain, then my sales stop completely for the next two weeks
- Other times the months starts incredibly poorly, but I do not worry because in the last days I get extremely high priced sales and I end up around my average
- Without any doubt there are weeks where only one of my files sells, always the same one (but can still be a decent week because the same file sells a lot), other weeks where all my files sell, old or new ones
- If I upload regularly and my ratio of sales per clip remains good, every seven or eight months my average income goes up by a decent step (I get a pay rise)
This happens for my portfolio, because of my geographical location, because of the time when I started contributing, because of the kind of clips I do.
For other portfolios it might be totally different.
I still do not understand why people must get so heated up and mistrust what other people say.
And anyway, I am very happy that SS algorithm has a cap system
-
Mines even more uppy-downy! If there is a cap then it fluctuates wildly!
Images yes ~ Not for video :D
Yeah I mean it just wouldn't make sense for there to be a cap on video earnings. But images... it's perfectly clear why they cap them and not video.
Yes it's clear for the most of us, but Brightontl is "very happy that SS algorithm has a cap system" because his video portfolio probably is not capped.
Brightontl, SS don't need to cap video because they pay all contributors 30%. But if you do images there's a very big % difference between the contributor levels and they want to keep these money for themselves.
And I'm sure they don't try to make contributors happy. Because how to be happy if I work harder and harder, to produce more and more, better and better images and they artificially stopped my progress and even don't care if my income falls from $3000 to $700!
That's why many "people here gets so heated up about the "cap" theory"!!! Capisce?
-
Oh I think everyone understands why someone be upset if there was a cap in place... that's not the issue. I think everyone just doesn't understand why so many people think there's a cap in place without any evidence to support the theory. And having similar sales on a monthly basis doesn't really constitute evidence. These caps and whatever other theorys are doing the rounds at the time... they always just feel a little bit like:
"ok, my sales aren't what they used to be and/or aren't what I feel they should be. Who is to blame for this? I have no idea... so I should invent some kind of theory that would explain it, even if there's no evidence to support that theory. Great, now I have something/someone to blame and can sleep better and night."
-
Oh I think everyone understands why someone be upset if there was a cap in place... that's not the issue. I think everyone just doesn't understand why so many people think there's a cap in place without any evidence to support the theory. And having similar sales on a monthly basis doesn't really constitute evidence. These caps and whatever other theorys are doing the rounds at the time... they always just feel a little bit like:
"ok, my sales aren't what they used to be and/or aren't what I feel they should be. Who is to blame for this? I have no idea... so I should invent some kind of theory that would explain it, even if there's no evidence to support that theory. Great, now I have something/someone to blame and can sleep better and night."
Shutterstock = No video sales for ten days.
Pond5 = Several video files sold every day.
Adobe = At least one video file sold each day.
After ten days Shutterstock turned my portfolio back on and I now sell several files every day.
To me, that is evidence of a cap.
-
To me, that is evidence of a cap.
...but, we were just told that video sales weren't capped. That's what Fairplay said. It only applies to selected image sellers.
So...
...confused. :|
Anyway, going to go read up on the Loch Ness Monster.
-
Isn't it just evidence that you had no Shutterstock sales for ten days?
-
Cap or no cap what ll hurt us a lot is the $7 video sales that keep coming in. What are these? Is it like a subscription model for videos, will all sales eventually move to this price point?
-
...but, we were just told that video sales weren't capped. That's what Fairplay said. It only applies to selected image sellers
Exactly!
It's easy to understand that there is a special team, very well payed guys, who stay all the day checking contributors portfolios, and choosing
"this can be free / the other should be capped
And every ten days (I suppose) they have to check again.
Hard work. And it's very expensive for SS to maintain the cap system!
-
... someone is constantly confusing people... OP mentioned sudden change on footage side of SS, with less then normal sales - changed suddenly, overnight few months ago! Image sales cap theories do exist and there is a logic to force lower tier contributor files, to get much money with less to pay...
-
As I said previously, at this time I have absolutely no doubt that the earnings are controlled. I'll exemplify what I said earlier which happened to me recently. Numbers are completely fictitious and used to exemplify what happened.
| | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri |
| Week 1: | | 75 | | | 70 |
| Week 2: | 70 | 75 | 80 | 61 | 50 |
| Week 3: | 70 | 75 | 80 | 60 | 50 |
| Week 4: | 70 | | | | 70 |
| Week 5: | | | | | 70 |
Are those sales pattern are a product of coincidence? Yeah... right... Not even with anyone selling 5 to 10 images per day that would be normal, much less when we're talking of a larger sales volume.
I've also noticed what others said, and happened to me for many months now. Like having very low sales half the month and all of the sudden buyers discover my portfolio. And this is not just on SS but on DT and 123RF is pretty evident too. Or sales drying up after a large SO or even EL sale.
I believe SS uses different methods to control the exposure/income of the contributors, not just one. And rotates the methods. Honestly, I would do the same in their position and in terms of programing it's not even that hard.
I think some people wouldn't believe in this even if Jon Oringer said it on video. They would probably argue that it was a doppelganger...
-
It’s hard to believe SS can implement this incredibly intelligent cap system when most of the IT ‘enhancements’ they have released over the last five years have been woefully poor. Equally, confronting conspiracy theorists with logic is the same as trying this approach with religious fundamentalists. However …
If you believe your sales are capped based on looking at your sales figures you are looking in the wrong place. It might give you an idea about a cap but the proof, if any, is on the supply side. ‘My portfolio is turned off’ is a testable assertion. Remove the possibility the evil demons at SS are tricking you by showing you one thing and buyers another by using a VPN (Nord or HMA) and browsing anonymously/use the browser incognito window. Choose four or five places in the world for the VPN and search from these every couple of days and check the position of your top sellers in the search results. If they are not found at any given point then perhaps the claim ‘my portfolio is turned off’ is not complete nonsense. If they drop down a couple of pages halfway through a month then come back to a higher place the following month, and repeat this pattern over a period of time, you could make a case for capping (the cyclical part removes the explanation that they have just been displaced by newer/cheaper/better contributions).
-
...but, we were just told that video sales weren't capped. That's what Fairplay said. It only applies to selected image sellers
Exactly!
It's easy to understand that there is a special team, very well payed guys, who stay all the day checking contributors portfolios, and choosing
"this can be free / the other should be capped
And every ten days (I suppose) they have to check again.
Hard work. And it's very expensive for SS to maintain the cap system!
No need at all of people to do this sort of things.
They use this new sort of machines. What they call them?
Oh, yes, computers
-
It’s hard to believe SS can implement this incredibly intelligent cap system when most of the IT ‘enhancements’ they have released over the last five years have been woefully poor. Equally, confronting conspiracy theorists with logic is the same as trying this approach with religious fundamentalists. However …
If you believe your sales are capped based on looking at your sales figures you are looking in the wrong place. It might give you an idea about a cap but the proof, if any, is on the supply side. ‘My portfolio is turned off’ is a testable assertion. Remove the possibility the evil demons at SS are tricking you by showing you one thing and buyers another by using a VPN (Nord or HMA) and browsing anonymously/use the browser incognito window. Choose four or five places in the world for the VPN and search from these every couple of days and check the position of your top sellers in the search results. If they are not found at any given point then perhaps the claim ‘my portfolio is turned off’ is not complete nonsense. If they drop down a couple of pages halfway through a month then come back to a higher place the following month, and repeat this pattern over a period of time, you could make a case for capping (the cyclical part removes the explanation that they have just been displaced by newer/cheaper/better contributions).
Unless you can explain how a portfolio with many thousands of images which has from isolated on white objects/seasonal images/travel and commercial and editorial content, plus video and illustrations has a sale pattern like the one I've posted I cannot accept that you call me a conspiracy theorist.
How is this mathematically possible if not by a controlled sales system? Isn't this beyond a coincidence?
| | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri |
| Week 1: | | 75 | | | 70 |
| Week 2: | 70 | 75 | 80 | 61 | 50 |
| Week 3: | 70 | 75 | 80 | 60 | 50 |
| Week 4: | 70 | | | | 70 |
| Week 5: | | | | | 70 |
You claim that the IT enhancements at SS have been poor. That means nothing. I can argue that they may have diverted efforts to this project. Or outsourced the search results and earnings programing. Who knows.
-
How is this mathematically possible if not by a controlled sales system? Isn't this beyond a coincidence?
Everything is mathematically possible, especially when you pick and choose the numbers that fit your theory. It's a good way to get fired if you're a research scientist.
I guess it's too much hard work to actually do what douglas suggested, use a VPN and search for your images over two months. That way you might actually get some usable data. When you reach 80 (or your actual number) next Wednesday, show us that your portfolio can not be found, or that it's impossible to make a purchase if you find it.
The range of likely sales numbers of any given portfolio is not unlimited. When I walk out the door at the same time every Wednesday, I am likely to see, say, 20 cars. I'm not likely to see 100 cars, or 0, unless something special is going on. Sometimes it's 18, sometimes 22, and if I note down the number 8 weeks in a row, it's quite likely that 4-5 of those Wednesdays will land on 20. Then I write to the government and tell them something strange is going on...
And one last thing that people seem to have trouble remembering:
Search rotation is not the same as capping.
-
...but, we were just told that video sales weren't capped. That's what Fairplay said. It only applies to selected image sellers
Exactly!
It's easy to understand that there is a special team, very well payed guys, who stay all the day checking contributors portfolios, and choosing
"this can be free / the other should be capped
And every ten days (I suppose) they have to check again.
Hard work. And it's very expensive for SS to maintain the cap system!
No need at all of people to do this sort of things.
They use this new sort of machines. What they call them?
Oh, yes, computers
It was a joke 😁 referred to the "selected sellers" cap 😁