|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Jo Ann Snover
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 ... 291
1101
« on: June 05, 2020, 18:26 »
His twitter feed has only 281 followers? What kind of a CEO is this?
And you are right, his likes are a lot of Trumpian glory likes.
Every day I learn something new that is worse than before.
@spavlovsky
https://twitter.com/spavlovsky?s=20
Why dont even the employees follow their own boss? Business partners? Some of the 1.2 Million producers?
How is this profile designed to represent the company, get ready to connect with all the other CEOs and impress potential customers?
That twitter account is gone and has been replaced by this one https://twitter.com/stanpavlovsky1Creative name  I assume it's to clean up any messy associations he didn't want people to see He can't clean up his bad report card so easily though... https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1269027677047930887
1102
« on: June 05, 2020, 18:22 »
...On about June 2/3, it became apparent that content was declining faster than it was increasing. Possibly for the first time since SS came into business (This is an assumption, not an investigated fact)
I've been keeping track since the evening of June 2nd. Since then they've lost 1.7 million images (add to that whatever the uploads are which I have no insight into). They are dropping the number day by day that they say they are adding - it was 171,000 a day and now they say 160,400 a day Numbers remaining 4pm June 5th and the change since 5pm June 2nd. Note that there is some overlap between illustrations and vectors, so the numbers don't add up Photos 212,156,701 -1,322,077 Illustrations 111,156,382 - 510,107 Vector 69,675,150 - 302,972 All 324,066,312 -1,720,141
1103
« on: June 05, 2020, 18:16 »
But what if they went back to the old pay system. Would you take SS Wall Street stock as payment ?
No
1104
« on: June 05, 2020, 17:44 »
Just wanted to drop in and say how much I appreciate this vector image, which got approved. I especially love keywords like 0.10, 0.1c, fuck you, greed and insulting, lol... 
Link to Original work
Anyone on twitter can retweet this or make up their own to spread the love far and wide https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1268618550580674566Don't forget the #BoycottShutterstock hashtag
1105
« on: June 05, 2020, 17:41 »
Just noticed this on dreamstime: "Due to the massive uploads, our pending area has been limited to 1000 submissions per user daily. Please continue the upload process after 24 hours have passed since your first submission."
Are contributors migrating from SS to DT?
I did my uploading over the weekend, but when I looked today it said I could upload another 7,000 I don't have that many (goes to check in the sofa cushions...) Possibly it's related to approval rating?
1107
« on: June 05, 2020, 09:42 »
Just one remark - why you all expect that SS cannot manipulate the database numbers? As this is one of few numbers which can show the impact of any contributors action, it would be clever from them to manipulate this numbers like - "Yes, some small number of old images dissapeared, but the flow of the new content is unchanged - so your actions are worthless".
Some contributors act emocionally - "I will not sell my ART for $0,10."
But others (the bigger ones and fulltimers) do it as business "Price is not so important, overall income is what matters." also "If microstock is dead anyway, in the remaining time I will take all the money I can (even $0.10) and move to do another business.".
So if the impact of contributors actions seems to be too small (like database numbers don't change enough), business contributors do maybe overall nothing.
It's not just the overall numbers - although they're down again by ~600,000 since yesterday - but what is leaving. It's the noticeable stuff. I'm just one small producer and this is just one search that used to have 455,000 results. It keeps shrinking, and the new uploads are irrelevant Yesterday https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1268581431724261377https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1268584287068016641Today https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1268911279004987392https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1268917256085368834
1109
« on: June 04, 2020, 18:42 »
Thank you for the reply. Do you know if one can still go to earnings summary and see the daily stats and what was used day by day and month by month for each year? Will it still how the thumbnail of each image and show what they earned on each particular day?
Yes - as long as you are just disabling the sales of your portfolio, all that past information remains Here is an embarrassing earnings page I just took a snapshot of from November 2005 (when I was relatively new there)
1110
« on: June 04, 2020, 17:21 »
For all those planning to wait and see how things turn out, do remember that if there is an improvement down the road after Shutterstock watches their assets walk out the door, it will be because of other people's efforts that you can enjoy the benefits of that improvement.
My prediction is that the financial pressures on Shutterstock will not let up, but that we might be able to persuade them to look elsewhere for the cash instead of gutting royalties (and don't be beguiled by the big percentages; it's the low subscription royalties that will boost their profits and tank your overall earnings.
1111
« on: June 04, 2020, 17:17 »
So when you opt of sales.. can you still view the date of what images sold month by month and the all the sets in the catalogue manager with the earning amounts and contents of each set? Or when you opt out of sales is everything gone?
Anyone know?
I've checked the catalog manager earnings stats for a few of my sets and it all looks intact. From the contributor home page, I can still see the top performers list with earnings and download numbers. The only thing that went away is the top keywords for downloading an image in the top performers list - which is a shame as that had lots of great insight. Not sure if I have all my images in one set or another, but I can't add anything as the main display of all images has nothing. I would advise anyone about to delete who doesn't have sets to select all their images and put them in a set (and I'm not sure if you can do a select all across multiple pages; obviously can't test that out now )
1112
« on: June 04, 2020, 16:59 »
There's something strange, i've opt out for 7000+ photos and 500+ video selling, when i'm consulting my dashboard I can see now there is still 970 photos in my portfolio, that's means nothing !!!!
Contributors who have opted out, do you encountering the same issue ?
Yes. My portfolio count went down in fits and starts and finally reached zero. I also saw that when the count on the screen you showed was one number, if you clicked on the portfolio link right there it'd show a different number.
It'll all go to zero shortly
So when you disable, are the files deleted? My portfolio now shows 0 files. Not that I care if they're deleted. Just curious.
When I returned to being an independent in 2011, I turned the portfolio back on and all the undeleted images were still there. Right now, for all the sets I had in the catalog manager, I can select an image, click the edit pencil and up comes the watermarked image with all the metadata for me to edit, so I am fairly sure the data is all still in the database
1113
« on: June 04, 2020, 15:37 »
1114
« on: June 04, 2020, 13:15 »
There's something strange, i've opt out for 7000+ photos and 500+ video selling, when i'm consulting my dashboard I can see now there is still 970 photos in my portfolio, that's means nothing !!!!
Contributors who have opted out, do you encountering the same issue ?
Yes. My portfolio count went down in fits and starts and finally reached zero. I also saw that when the count on the screen you showed was one number, if you clicked on the portfolio link right there it'd show a different number. It'll all go to zero shortly
1115
« on: June 04, 2020, 12:50 »
Shutterstock has added a post to their Facebook account this morning saying, among other things "we understand your frustrations" and "your feedback is very important to us" Bollocks https://www.facebook.com/pg/Shutterstock/posts/?ref=page_internalI've given them my feedback Want to add yours?
1116
« on: June 03, 2020, 18:13 »
Very frequent selling image on several agencies, with about 1000 downloads on Shutterstock alone. Top line in relevant search results for "patriotic" and "patriotism" among 800,000 results. Not any more. Not on Shutterstock.
Are you on twitter? I see an account for @Atomazul - is that you. You should tweet about that (and where it can be found now)
1117
« on: June 03, 2020, 18:09 »
One of the side effects I've noticed is that I get more for EL and large SODs.
I believe the large SODs were previously $75. Now it's $96. We just need more of these to offset the sub losses.
I had SODs for all sorts of values - $32 to $120 (I think that was the highest) There isn't a fixed royalty on those, just a percentage of the buyer's price. Certainly, if there were more of them, if you're at 40% you could do better. However, their enterprise sales (where all those nice fat royalties come from ) has been shrinking for the last two quarters and the "e-commerce" side is what's growing
1118
« on: June 03, 2020, 16:06 »
Have disabled all files for now, if nothing changes in the next month may as well close the account. Was hoping enough people would disable to prompt some action from SS, but can understand not everyone can afford to, especially while other income sources for creators have dried up with the virus. Almost like they knew people would be desperate at the moment, quite evil really.
Don't forget there are a lot of people like me who are waiting for their final payout before disabling. I just got notified that my earnings were calculated, so as soon as the money turns up in PayPal, I'm disabling everything. The email said I'd receive the money by June 15th, so I think we can expect another wave of portfolios going down around mid-month.
As another data point, I disabled my portfolio on Sunday and I received the "earnings calculated" email this morning. I expect Shutterstock to pay me as they always have. They make idiot policies, but they're not cheats. I can understand the nervousness - and I wouldn't post rude things or links to other agencies in my portfolio header - but I think they'l do the right thing and pay what they owe. I received the PayPal email this morning (June 4)
1119
« on: June 03, 2020, 16:02 »
Based on sales at other sites, it appears that the smaller subscriptions of 10 to 50 images per month are more popular that the large subscriptions of 350+ images per month. Based on this experience at other sites, I assumed the new structure might not be as big of disaster as most anticipated but now that we are three days in, that is not the case. Why are all sales coming in around the 10 - 15 cent size. Its hard to believe so many use the smaller subscriptions at the other agencies but no one does at Shutterstock.
These "subscriptions" of 10 or 50 images per month aren't really subscriptions at all - no volume. They're discounted image packs. However, I think Shutterstock was previously making out like bandits on any of the 10/50 per month as we would get 38 each and they'd pocket the rest. The On Demand images (a package where you have one year to use your downloads) paid $2.85 royalties each which left Shutterstock much better off when they bought the smaller package and worse off, but still profitable, when they bought the larger one. Given how well Shutterstock was (theoretically) doing on the 10/50 subscriptions, I'm assuming they weren't selling, or at least not as much as the higher volume 350/750. And when they introduced the annual pay-up-front option recently, which discounted images to the buyer to as little as 22 cents, they would have lost up to $118 a month on each if a buyer downloaded all of a 750 subscription. The other two options for 350/750 left Shutterstock a little better off. So my conclusion is that sales were down, or not growing as they'd like, and they tried to boost them with the cheaper annual pay-up-front option. They had to cut subscription royalties to be able to afford that, and they could offer almost whatever percentages they liked to try and persuade contributors to buy this awful arrangement because the percentages don't matter anything like as much as the massive reduction in subscription royalties.
1121
« on: June 03, 2020, 10:53 »
Here's an idea: []
Thousand of contributors have already closed their account or disabled their portfolio.
Surely not thousands and surely very small portfolios in the vast majority. As I said, not nearly enough.
You haven't checked out what's been going on. Between last night and this morning - i.e. less than 24 hours - there were nearly 200,000 fewer images & illustrations on Shutterstock. Remember the boast up top that says they add 171,000 images daily. So the swing in less than 24 hours is at least 370k That doesn't count the big name producers, or video - like eyeidea yesterday - who have an impact beyond their numbers. When a sizeable portion of the saleable content leaves, you have the millions of image spam portfolios which no one cares about as it doesn't sell https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1268201397230551040And later on the morning the number has grown to over 445k removed - over half a mlllion swing in less than a day https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1268231587025391617
1122
« on: June 02, 2020, 23:29 »
Edit: I expect them to hide the portfolio disable buttons next. 
I'm surprised they didn't do it already. Even more surprised they didn't disable it right before they announced the change. ...
I was fully prepared for them to take away the on/off switch, but as I see how many people are disabling portfolios - I watched the number of photos drop by 70,000 in a half an hour this afternoon while I was tweeting some #BoycottShutterstock stuff - it dawns on me that the more we disable, the less likely they are to remove the control. At some point, it becomes in their interest to leave them enabled if they believe they can talk contributors into restoring images. Come the end of June they'll have more financials to report and an image count. They may not want to fess up that they inspired a boycott and only have a small growth or a decline in the collection. Also, it would force contributors to choose to close their accounts or delete images if the button were gone - all much more work to manage than the on/off switch. As they couldn't manage the code to get royalties into the correct columns after the change, they may not want to make things more complicated for engineering than it needs to be
1123
« on: June 02, 2020, 23:22 »
Wind of portfolios being disabled has reached the investor community - in a Seeking Alpha article about Shutterstock's dividend. I submitted a comment explaining that the fury and exodus of portfolios is very real https://seekingalpha.com/news/3579529-shutterstock-goes-ex-dividend-tomorrowAnyone else want to help investors understand how Shutterstock's idiot move has damaged the company?
1124
« on: June 02, 2020, 21:25 »
I haven't received an email, but what I saw in the SS forum and a Facebook group looked like something written by a non-English speaker (or something written in another language and run through Google translate).
I can't imagine anyone in New York writing something that mangled, so it's either a scam of some sort or perhaps a manager in another country trying to do something local for contributors in his/her country.
1125
« on: June 02, 2020, 15:34 »
...But, Are you still collaborating with istock? I say this by your signature. They pay also cents, sure?
Yes and no. I do have my account there still and I have 100 or so images that I shot at an iStockalypse when I was an iStock exclusive. The terms of the deal (they provided the settings, models etc.) were that you could only upload the work to iStock. As I can't license those images anywhere else, the loss to me of leaving them there to receive the utterly pathetic royalties iStock now pays independents is nil. It also gives me a way to see what they're up to I haven't uploaded there since I shut down almost all of my portfolio over the Getty-Google fiasco in 2013.
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 ... 291
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
