|
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 - crashoran
26
« on: February 06, 2013, 20:34 »
Following the IPO they will be talking about increasing profits, not rewarding contributors. They are probably currently discussing reductions, not raises.
They are cutting our income on Feb 28th. Look at the new referral program.
27
« on: February 06, 2013, 20:30 »
Hello everyone,
We apologize for any confusion.
The Referral Program page (http://submit.shutterstock.com/refinfo.mhtml) is for informational purposes only. It does not override Shutterstocks Submitter Terms of Service (TOS). The email sent yesterday is simply an advance notice of a pending change to our Submitter TOS.
When the referral program re-launches on February 28, you will receive $0.04c for every referred download for a period of 2 years after a contributor has been approved.
Here are examples of some of the changes:
* If you refer someone and that contributor is approved on March 1, 2013, you will receive referral earnings of $0.04c per download for that contributor's downloads for the next 2 years (until March 1, 2015).
* If you referred someone 12 months ago (January 1, 2012), you will begin earning $0.04c for each download beginning on February 28, 2013, and you will continue to earn this rate until January 1, 2014.
* If you referred someone 5 years ago, those referral payments will end on February 28, 2013, because the contributor was approved over 2 years ago.
We hope the examples above help clarify the upcoming changes. If there are more questions, we encourage you to write in to us at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Anthony Correia
Director, Contributor Success
Shutterstock|Bigstock
Why . do they release a statement on the basis of "confusion"? Nobody here is confused. They're simply ignoring the outrage we're expressing. Typical corporate robot response..
28
« on: February 05, 2013, 17:24 »
And they don't need the program, that's obvious. The review queue is nearly 2 weeks long. Clearly no shortage of new content there.
And yet, their explanation is "The goal of these changes is to bring a wider variety of new contributors and content to our site."I'm outraged because I spent lots of time bringing in new photographers for Shutterstock. Now they are completely cutting off my referral earnings, while continuing to sell those photographer's images. They didn't uphold their end of the agreement. It's a complete and total shaft.
29
« on: February 05, 2013, 14:19 »
Once I reach the $100 payout, all 255 of my files will be deactivated.
30
« on: February 05, 2013, 12:25 »
Just unlike their facebook show them what it is like to loss a little something...make them go under 100K likes again . We have more control then you think. Harmless but powerful.
I tried commenting on the facebook page but it looks like comments need approval. How surprising.
31
« on: February 05, 2013, 12:05 »
I get under $1 a day in referral earnings, so this won't really affect my income. But it does give me a slightly uneasy feeling about what's coming next...
As others have said the need for the referral system probably disappeared long ago. The person that got my referral, from a cheeky post on the Fred Miranda forum, is still 'earning' about $100 per month from my sales __ over 8 years later.
I'm hoping that by reducing the referral system they can pay more out to contributors instead because they're the people that are actually doing the work and generating the content.
I wouldn't be surprised is this has something to do with a sudden rush of ex-exclusives from Istock uploading large portfolios and all attached to a 'referral'. There's no value in that to SS.
If they wanted to end the referral system then they would stop all future referrals, not suddenly gouge us on our referral earnings. It's all about the profit, and if you think doing this will result in pay increases for contributors, then LOL.
32
« on: February 05, 2013, 11:35 »
I have 47 referred photographers. All of them joined 2010 and earlier.
33
« on: February 05, 2013, 11:05 »
Considering it takes at least 2 years for anybody to build a reasonable portfolio to bring in income, no surprise that some money hungry CEO would take advantage of this. I CANNOT BELIEVE they are suddenly adding a time limit cap, what a huge stab in the back.
Referring contributers literally helped SS build their entire image collection. What a * huge backstabbing.
34
« on: July 14, 2010, 01:49 »
Do you think an image of a person or group of people is more likely to sell (over it's lifetime) than a still life image?
35
« on: February 02, 2010, 13:45 »
36
« on: February 01, 2010, 22:53 »
Strange, FT is my top performer...
37
« on: February 01, 2010, 20:01 »
I don't understand...
For example..I sold an extended RF license and received $6.20 for it. The buyer paid $24.00.
So they raise the price of a credit but don't adjust the contributor's earnings to go with it? This is a huge slap in the face.
38
« on: January 18, 2008, 23:38 »
"Please contact the server administrator, [email protected] and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error." Hehe, what could I have done to shut them down?
39
« on: January 16, 2008, 23:14 »
Have you considered investing the bulk of your earnings once you reach a pinnacle Yuri? I've read you were going to school for another major and were doing this to pay tuition. I don't know your future plans - but the portfolios you have created online are literally a gold mine. Even if one day you retire from microstock to pursue your major, your earnings will still come in each month - and all you need to do is reinvest everything. As time passes your investment dividends will keep multiplying. By the time you reach your 40's or 50's, you will be financially set for life.
Like I said I don't know what your future plans are, but I've started to invest early. It's amazing to see an initial $10,000 USD investment grow to over 60 million dollars over 70 years at places like Edward Jones and such.
But, that aside, if your passion is to continue microstock photography - go for it
Sorry for off-topic :\
Yuri Arcurs
Freezingpictures (558)
GeoPappas
Smithore (596)
rene
sharpshot (2756)
ldambies
epixx
latex
FlemishDreams.
RTimages
Vonkara
helix7
Travelling-light
Mjp (994)
northflyboy
ason
sorsillo (538)
boatman
Alex
Eco
Rozmaryna (68)
Pixelbrat
Read_My_Rights (277)
vphoto
faber (300)
dbvirago
cmcderm1
boryak
HughStoneIan
digiology
moori
pixart
fauxware
rosendo (313)
Lukasphoto
aremafoto (2147)
IKOphotos (1842)
Kiya
erwinova
Velvia
DanP68
Jorgeinthewater
digitalfood
nativelight (195-StockXpert & 213-SV)
ljupco (1920)
fotomy
Batman2000
stokfoto
khz
techno (2057)
Aurelio (2426)
Mshake (860)
Pierdelune
Crashoran
40
« on: December 31, 2007, 01:26 »
Here is an inspiration from one of my photos that appeared in the top 50  Mine  Theirs 
41
« on: December 30, 2007, 17:29 »
Thanks Helix,
I saw those other vector floral copies on the SS forums, and those in my opinion were obviously copied - even with the same keywords, forgetting to remove "Vector" from his raster file
42
« on: December 28, 2007, 22:33 »
He is undoubtfully very talented regardless of the equipment
43
« on: December 28, 2007, 21:35 »
My account has been reinstated. Back to selling photos.
I am going to delete this icon set.
Happy New Years everybody
44
« on: December 28, 2007, 14:41 »
Helix,
You can spend all day searching for icons from everybody across the microstock industry and line up all of the ones that look similar. What's the point? I have found dozens in less than 5 minutes that look just like mine that were created after mine were.
45
« on: December 28, 2007, 14:29 »
Sodafish has the copyright to which I set my clockhands at?
You rotated my magnifying glass to try and frame me?
The locks are identical? no
The briefcases are identical? no
The shopping carts are identical? no
The graphs are identical? no
46
« on: December 28, 2007, 14:21 »
Now I'm not allowed to even choose my own color scheme for my icon sets!!? I can't arrange my icons in rows and columns like everyone else?!?! I give up...
47
« on: December 28, 2007, 14:04 »
Why don't you do a search for a shopping cart and clock and see what you come up with? How is a clock not supposed to look like a clock other than the way I created it and my shopping cart contains several weaved angles together in a single object. How does a magnifying glass look any other way? This is common sense. Until you find anybody's icon with my design you don't have any grounds of your words. My reflections were created on my own and are open paths. There is no other place to put a reflection other than the obvious place where the light would bounce off of the icons. Several of his reflections are single strands of lines while mine are rounded or curved corners. They all have the same reflection? You dont make any sense.
Geez. I guess before I submit an icon set I should search every microstock website to see if any of them look like mine?
48
« on: December 28, 2007, 14:01 »
Uh, yeah, they are. The briefcase you stole is from another one of his sets, as is the clock. They are nearly identical, save for a few minor stoke weights. Just because you picked some icons from his many sets and made one new set from them, doesn't mean they're not stolen.
I'll give you this: those last couple are definitely yours, as they are no where near as good as sodafish's.
Somebody is in a bad mood today
49
« on: December 28, 2007, 13:59 »
No, his briefcase icon is not mine. Look at it. A briefcase will always look like a box with a handle...
50
« on: December 28, 2007, 13:55 »
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
