Quote from: blvdone on July 21, 2023, 11:22

Quote from: Pacesetter on July 20, 2023, 20:06

Pond5 has really died down again for me this month. I wouldn't ever go exclusive with them. Also who's to say that Shutterstock can't deliver big(ger) sales? Yes there are lots of low sales which are quite pathetic but there are lot of higher sales too and overall the site performs a lot better for me than the others (namely Pond5, Adobe Stock, iStock). The attached daily video sales was just from yesterday, admittedly my best daily earnings for this year to date, but a whole lot better than the other sites even before I had these sales.

Good for you.  Whatever works for you.  But on average, video contributors are reporting sales have gone down to 1/4 or less from before video sub was introduced on Shutterstock.  I sell my HD videos for $89 on Pond5 currently.  So, I get $50 or so on regular HD sales and over $100 on 4k sales in which I price at $199.  So, I don't want to give potential buyers an option to shop around and buy on Shutterstock or Adobe Stock and result in me getting $3 instead of $50-$120.  Too much damage.  Just doesn't make sense anymore to sell on Shutterstock or AdobeStock video subs even if I get occasional regular price or premium license sales.  RPD on Shutterstock and Adobe Stock is ridiculously low now.  Not worth it.  Seeing those video sub sales report makes me only angry, disgusted and unhappy thinking I could've gotten more than 10x on Pond5.  It's really bad for my mental health.

I do understand where you're coming from as some or even many of those commissions are pathetically low. But curious how are you going with sales on Pond5 exclusive account? Is this making up for the absence of sales from other platforms?

my rpd at adobe is around 8/9$...only video...shutterstock performs better,pond5 even better but less volume...

Eventually pond5 and ss will merge.

What will happen then?

Customers want a one stop shop with the same price for everything.

Maybe a year, maybe 3 years, but it is coming.

Or did ss put out a statement protecting the current p5 system for at least 10 years? Or 5? Or 1?

If SS puts out a legally binding statement, I would agree that having a lot of exclusive content at 60% is a good idea.

But p5 is now SS, so what will the new owners do?

Adding a link to pond5 is in principle a good thing, but obviously customers will want to use their ss plans to download freely on p5.

eta

Do you see p5 heavily promoting their exclusive plan with 60% royalty?

If they wanted to dominate the market, they would very heavily promote that. Also put out legally binding statements, that this will not change.

But I don�t see them doing that.

You are promoting a vision the company it self is not promoting.

Mostly $2.80, $5.60, and $8.60 commissions these days with the occasional $24.50, $56, and $70 thrown in there.

summer

mid july to end of august is usually very slow sales

Any reasonable contributor would laugh at what Doug says...
- 5 minutes to colour-grade the quality video, provide metadata and upload/submit
- 348$ per hour earning rate
- not including travel and fuel costs in the calculation.

C'mon, guys, why are you splitting hairs and dealing with semantics when such BS is being shovelled right in front of you?
It defies logic and experience on such a spectacular level that even the discussion about it should seem preposterous.
He's trying again to sell courses - fine by me, but not at the expense of gaslighting contributors into believing such outlandish claims.

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 14:35

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on July 04, 2023, 13:47

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 11:48

No worries, Ralf.

Discussing workflows is perfectly fine.

But there is difference between discussing workflows and chestbeating yourself with an absurd (for microstock) $348/hour earnings, only because you have fun doing your work.

And all this, to impress some who will be will  be willing to pay for his get-rich-quick course.
But since this hasn't happened here, yet: "In dubio pro reo" 

Thank you Zero for your reply.

However, I still do not understand the aggressiveness in the discussion.

As I understand it, the agitation is the $348/hour. Of course, that in itself is very lurid and attention grabbing. But Doug was also fair enough to explain how the total came about.

I can relate to all of this in that I am in the same situation and my bill looks similar.

Professionally, I do something completely different full time.
Stock photography is purely a hobby for me. High quality cameras and other equipment were already in place. The photography itself I do not see as work, but as relaxation from my actual job. During this time I could have also watched TV, read a book or done something else.
So for me, this is also not working time, but relaxing leisure. It's the same with image post-processing. 

Without it being my intention at the beginning, I now regularly earn money with it.

From this personal point of view, which is also ultimately Doug's, I find the absolute numbers presented - leaving aside the hourly wage - very impressive. 
At least for a hobby. And that's how I understood Doug's explanations here.

I also do something else full time.

But if you understand the "Jensen logic", which wrongly claims that he is making $348/hour, because he only accounts for the time spent keywording, then you also must agree that those who have fun shooting (while doing something else full time, like us) AND also have fun keywording, must be making ♾️/hour.

Presenting his absolute numbers while leaving out his $348/hour silly falacy should be perfectly fine.
 

Thank you, now I have finally understood your argumentation.

But Doug's hourly wage is still not wrong, he just defined the conditions differently than you or others and explained it the same way.
Now I can go to sleep calmly