|
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 - Pauws99
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 195
176
« on: June 09, 2020, 00:34 »
Time spent in reconnaissance is seldom wasted.
177
« on: June 08, 2020, 11:10 »
Your civil and "CONSTRUCTIVE" words on this forum on past posts  :
I believe in the words I say. No regrets here and by quoting me it doesn't mean anything more than your ability to copy-paste. But since you mentioned a pedestal. I'll tell you a funny story about me on a pedestal and it may, or may not reflect to the current situation in this thread:
In middle school, I was about 11 years old. I was in a private school, where supposingly the elite of the town was sending their kids. Lawyers kids, doctors kid, businessmen kids ... the "future of our country" ... that sort of stuff. Anyway I never thought of myself like the elite of anything, I grew up in the village and I loved hiking the mountain or interacting with animals. I wasn't stupid though, my iq was measured high. While in that school, despite the fact that I was like Mowgli, climbing the trees all the time, at some point I felt like I wanted to get involved to school politics for the feeling of greater good. We had a council of 15 students that tended to the student affairs with the school in general. It was mostly a place for the popular kids then but I was too naive at the time, because I wasn't so popular. You see, all the kids were mostly concerned with how others dressed, brand names etc. So, I had noticed a problem in the school, kind of important but also kind of taboo. I had noticed that in the school toilets, the administration never bought or installed toilet paper rolls. Crazy, right?
So I went up to the actual pedestal of the school morning gathering, in front of some teachers, the principals and 300 kids, to announce my candidacy. During that short speech I generally said that I was worth to be elected because I cared about school facilities to function properly. As an example, I said that toilets didn't have toilet paper. At that moment, 300 kids burst into laughing, including the teachers and the principal. Of course I felt humiliated as I sincerely didn't expect that reaction. I wrapped up my speech and left that pedestal. I wasn't voted to be in the council.
For the 6 years I was in that school, nobody ever mentioned it and toilet paper was also never installed. I can't even begin to imagine the constipation that must have took place there. Really sad. But you know what, it taught me a lot about the world. It came to be one of the most illuminating moments of my life. Do you know how much ridicule one can receive for saying the right thing, but first? The other people usually laugh or diminish and they will only admit the rightness of the right words only in their own conversations, afterwards. But never to the person that actually said the right thing first. But people that speak right, are kind of used to it anyway. Anything you might say to me, won't beat what I was made to be or do. I am far stronger in supporting my opinions that you will ever be and it shows. So you can either follow my advice and post your stats to contribute to this effort, or go ahead and go on living unwiped like some other dudes that I know of.
Possibly the most ridiculous post I've read for a while. Go set up your own forum.
178
« on: June 07, 2020, 02:45 »
If he lives in the Ukraine or any other eastern european country the living costs and wages specially on lifestyle model shoots can make a few thousands a month (if he makes that) go a long way. In Western Europe and USA you can surely not get a proper return on yours costs at this ridicolous commissions. Thats a reason why big names in this industry are also taking a stance and might well move to greener pastures........Shutter is alienating the big and small players. A shitstorm that will damage them deeply . But hey if the numbers work for him let him dance along to the playing melody........
Dude I share what I want to share. I am not the matter here. The general contributor attitude is. Some come here to be competitive towards people that are sharing truthfully. Anyway, the RPD should be calculated and it's the sole indicator of the tier system performance. Some say -50%, some say -5% ... go figure.
Actually the true indicator of performance is total income earnt. You can't buy many burgers with a high RPD if you have only sold 1 image.
179
« on: June 06, 2020, 04:09 »
You are taking a 5 day sample of one person's earnings and then telling people they need to understand maths maybe you could brush up on your statistics.
With a 25% sample you can accurately determine election results also. It's called statistics and they work. The 25% is because I counted 5 working days out of ~20 average that stock sales are most active.
One persons earnings are not quite a 25% sample of shutterstock's total payments are they? As a matter of fact election predictions have not proved particularly accurate of late...mainly due to sample bias it seems. Your sample size is so small as to be virtually meaningless and an estimate based around the published rates is just as valid.
180
« on: June 06, 2020, 02:34 »
The amount of criers in here is too high ... so does this single mother calculate the 2/3 by the reduction on the minimum earnings on a single sub image? Or was it another miscalculated mistake?
Also all those that come too emotional, did they even bother calculating their average rpd (RETURN PER DOWNLOAD)? The answer is NO, because most contributors don't care to be objective towards the situation. And by this you make us ALL look bad.
The objective approach is to measure the new average RPD and really find out how much is Shutterstock gaining towards contributors with this move. The percentage tier earnings seemed fair all along. I never understood why Shutterstock should be selling .22 and pay .38 to someone. Even paying 0.10 might put them at a loss here.
In the post we did about average RPD (that nobody bothers posting) we are currently measuring an average reduction of contributor % compared to a past lifetime average. Currently it's at just 20% average (even with some people complaining that they lost 66%). Did they get only 1*$0.1 dl compared to $0.38 and gave it as data?
The only bad thing about that new deal, objectively, is the January reset. For both economic and psychological reasons. Contributors value their gained retention and it shouldn't be taken away. That is all that any contributor should be hard to negotiate with and Shutterstock should be pushed to change their policy. The rest, might be ok at the end if measured correctly. Personally my RPD in June for the first week looks almost as before (-2% average without enhanced dl's, with enhanced I am counting a +37% in RPD right now for June) and I am level 5. So if I was level 6 I would have +5% on that and level 4 would be -5%. The "point zero" of no loss / no gain in this tier system is Level 5.
So, to recap, just push Shutterstock to remove the January reset, because it's harmful to the contributor's pocket indeed and retention psychology. But the Tier system, ain't THAT much harmful in the pocket, as much as it is in psychology of watching a new minimum amount earned per download (but a proportionate number of downloads are returning higher too).
You people remind me of the American burger market, that consumers thought that 1/4 was bigger than 1/3 ... because of the ... 4>3.
Learn some math and then come to the business. Compare:
Lifetime Income / Lifetime Downloads = x
June Income / June Downloads = y
Divide y to x and then deduct 1.
y/x-1 = Your generic average +- %
The enhanced downloads seem to complicate this so:
Go to a month that you had minimal or no enhanced downloads at all and measure that months average RPD.
That month's Income / That month's = z
And count June as if no enhanced also.
June with no enhanced income / June with no enhanced dl = v
Redo this equation:
v/z -1 = An "as accurate as it gets" representation of your gains or losses
The actual difference I am getting with this in the first week is that with the new tier system I am losing -1% or -2% in level 5. It's a negligible difference and could be attributed to normal fluctuations. But level 4 is surely at a 5% calculated loss, level 3 surely at a 10% calculated loss if they are coming from the earlier highest 0.38 tier.
And let's get some accurate results:
https://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/how-is-ss-rpd-turning-out-for-you-in-this-first-month/msg551033/#msg551033
You are taking a 5 day sample of one person's earnings and then telling people they need to understand maths maybe you could brush up on your statistics.
181
« on: June 04, 2020, 07:22 »
Shutterstock/Istock merger to "compete" with Adobe? We are doomed I tell you. Or it may be that they are seeing a massive slump ahead with Covid. I pretty sure we don't know the full story.
Getty hasn't got a bean to its name its more likely to be Visual China Group
Last time I looked which is a while back SS did have a lot of money sitting in the bank...they could maybe finance Getty's debt. In the world of investment/banking all sorts of bizarre things seem possible.
182
« on: June 04, 2020, 03:48 »
Shutterstock/Istock merger to "compete" with Adobe? We are doomed I tell you. Or it may be that they are seeing a massive slump ahead with Covid. I pretty sure we don't know the full story.
183
« on: June 02, 2020, 05:17 »
The difference is farmers can only sell the same Bacon once. What succesful farmers in the Uk have done is diversify with farm shops, premium food products, leisure facilities such as fishing and camp sites....producing food as a commodity only works for a few mega farms. For those wanting to make a serious living for photography they need to think of themselves as professional photographers not producers of stock photography as its been obvious for a while the returns on that are only going to go down.
184
« on: June 02, 2020, 02:13 »
The only way raising prices could possibly work would be actually to reduce the size of the port and have a ruthless approach to quality control so buyers could be assured they are getting top quality images which some are still prepared to pay for. Thats totally against their current philosophy so with at least a proportion of high quality producers pulling out we will see a dilution in quality and a spiral to the bottom.
185
« on: June 01, 2020, 07:41 »
Of course the hard reset on royalty percentages doesn't occur until Jan 1st 2021 so most likely you will be on your exisiting level from June 1st
Thats not what has been said we are on our new %age levels. I'm expecting SS to update the amounts when they get round to it or in my wildest dreams a last minute rethink of the scheme with the CEO's head in a basket.
186
« on: June 01, 2020, 04:46 »
From a technical point of view there's no way you'd implement a major change to billing, selling and everything else when not everyone is there to oversee it.
You do it when all staff are available to fix the inevitable problems.
Yes but this is Microstock so I wouldn't necessarily count on them to do the obvious
187
« on: May 31, 2020, 05:00 »
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.
Right. Most of the contributors take their desires for a reality...
I know different people who went from Shutterstock to iStock, not Adobe.
Buyers go where they think it's more convenient for them, and frankly they don't give a dаmn about our "little problems" as contributors!
The agencies know who the buyers are, who has come and gone over the years. Shutterstock have not been able to compete with Istock on subs until now so have only had half a product with which to compete. Both are now able to trash the competition with discounting and if they compete with each other heavy discounting. This will also trash you returns.
The next step is to introduce exclusivity, there is no way they can compete with Istock without that move. If that's on the horizon Adobe should react faster and introduce exclusivity right now, because this is the right moment for that.
You'd be crazy to accept exclusivity with SS when you've seen they are happy to slash commissions with a few days notice.
188
« on: May 31, 2020, 04:57 »
I will not disable anything.
I will wait to see the actual sales results in June and July and also to see if Shutterstock comes to their senses and adjusts their new royalty plan, especially, if they cancel the yearly reset to zero.
Once I have all that information I will adjust new uploads accordingly.
Especially with video I might favor other places.
And if the results from photo sales falls, I will upload new content elsewhere first and SS will become an agency for older content.
But if the money is more or less the same, I will change nothing.
Thanks for standing up for a little bit of reason instead of hasty angry reactions.
I will wait and see, before I determine that everything is terrible and that SS has become the evil force in the Universe of Microstock.
I don't understand why people are turning off, closing, shutting down, when they have no information or data, on how this actually affects us? If nothing else, I'm at a good level and will be going up another soon, and I can make money until January 1st, and then decide.
No I will not disable my portfolio June 1st, it's too soon to see how this will affect anything or how it will change my earnings.
I largely agree and normally I accept these changes as an inevitable result of market forces. I have never come so close though to pulling my port though as what SS have done and particularly the way they have done it is shocking. I fully get why many people have had enough and are bailing out.
189
« on: May 30, 2020, 02:41 »
This is really a great move, but am I the only one who finds the timing incredibly....convenient? Shutterstock announced a cut of our royalities and two days later Dreamstime announces a rise in royalities? Does seem a bit like an attempt to gain some publicity and customers and attrackt as many contributors who are possibly leaving Shuttersock at the same time?
Either way, I am not looking a gift horse in the mouth (too closely) and am happy about the increase in rocalities either way, whatever the motives.
Why wouldn't they try and gain publicity and customers? Name a business that doesn't do that.
Yes, there is difference between publicity and opportunity.
I am with dreamstime here as they have taken a good decision in this pandemic.
They are linked closely though...thats why TV manufacturers launch sales campaigns before world cups....any decent agency is going to look how to react to Shutterstock's move. I fear some might see it as a signal to further drop commissions others to boost their image bank.
190
« on: May 30, 2020, 00:50 »
This is really a great move, but am I the only one who finds the timing incredibly....convenient? Shutterstock announced a cut of our royalities and two days later Dreamstime announces a rise in royalities? Does seem a bit like an attempt to gain some publicity and customers and attrackt as many contributors who are possibly leaving Shuttersock at the same time?
Either way, I am not looking a gift horse in the mouth (too closely) and am happy about the increase in rocalities either way, whatever the motives.
Why wouldn't they try and gain publicity and customers? Name a business that doesn't do that.
191
« on: May 29, 2020, 15:40 »
Always had a soft spot for them. They seem to sell more of the images I like myself rather than my tawdry "me too" pot boilers ;-)
192
« on: May 27, 2020, 06:25 »
Before you blow up the whole shutterstock, please consider that they have changed the whole pricing structures for customers, so now you can not say anything about how your income will look like after the changes they want to introduce.
Subscription plan is divided now into 4 new categories, and nobody of us knows a crap how those categories work.
And the same with 'on demand' section. Not mention other.
Check this out:
https://www.shutterstock.com/pricing
One thing is for sure: contributors with little portfolios of hundreds of pictures who have been earning just a little will be getting still less because of the new system.
We know quite a bit the "most popular" image pack is .28 per image and we will be getting a perecentage of that.
193
« on: May 27, 2020, 05:19 »
So the protest from video content creators worked here is an update SS just shared about levels:
The video content creators may have protested but they did nothing to change SS' new payment model. SS admitted on their forum that they made some mistakes in the first e-mail that was sent regarding video commissions.
I hope they might just rethink the January 1st reset as that is manifestly unfair even for this industry the obvious thing to do is have a rolling 12 months. I think they are desperately worried about paying to keep their palatial accomodation and fat salaries though.
Agreed. The odds of them seeing all the backlash and then deciding to completely backtrack on the numbers due to it... all within the space of three hours, is pretty unlikely.
194
« on: May 27, 2020, 04:48 »
Just to add to the depression this now means if SS drop prices on their packages it feeds straight to us rather than having the "safety net" of the subs income at a certain level.
195
« on: May 27, 2020, 02:33 »
Regarding to subscription sales, that always was main sale; we never was paid based on the subscription package that buyer buy. There are 4 subscrption packetes:
10 images for 49usd (Packet 1 or P1)
50 images for 125usd (Packet 2 or P2)
350 images for 199usd (Packet 3 or P3)
750 images for 249usd (Packet 4 or P4)
Based on this and the % presented for SS the earnings per sale under new criteria is:
Level 1 0,74 usd(P1) ---- 0,38 usd(P2) ---- 0,09 usd(P3) ---- 0,05 usd(P4)
Level 2 0,98 usd(P1) ---- 0,50 usd(P2) ---- 0,11 usd(P3) ---- 0,07 usd(P4)
Level 3 1,23 usd(P1) ---- 0,63 usd(P2) ---- 0,14 usd(P3) ---- 0,08 usd(P4)
Level 4 1,47 usd(P1) ---- 0,75 usd(P2) ---- 0,17 usd(P3) ---- 0,10 usd(P4)
Level 5 1,72 usd(P1) ---- 0,88 usd(P2) ---- 0,20 usd(P3) ---- 0,12 usd(P4)
Level 6 1,96 usd(P1) ---- 1,00 usd(P2) ---- 0,23 usd(P3) ---- 0,13 usd(P4)
Thanks for the calculations. But it seems more complicated than that.
There is different pricing if it's monthly or annual subscription, and if the annual subscription is payed in advance or monthly. Further, if not all images are used in a month, the price per image will in reality be higher.
not the case as they state the amount is based on the full package. "If a customer buys a pack or sub, but doesnt use it all, how are my earnings calculated? When a customer buys a pack or subscription, your commission is calculated based on the price per asset assuming full usage of the pack or subscription. For example, if a customer buys a 10 images per month subscription at $49 per month, the price per image is $4.90. Your earnings percentage is based on $4.90 regardless of how many images the customer downloads from their allotment. " Not even I stock do that
196
« on: May 22, 2020, 04:00 »
123 is performing avg here. I will not say end for 123rf is anywhere near.
Theres much worse sites out there for earnings for me it took a nose dive 2 years or so and is now bumping along at a low level.
197
« on: May 19, 2020, 14:10 »
Poor but not a disaster after a couple of rising months.
198
« on: May 19, 2020, 01:33 »
My advice would be take no notice of their so called "stats" no one least of all I-stock knows whats going on.
199
« on: May 14, 2020, 02:35 »
they seem to be rejecting 95-100% of videos/images.
I suspect (not sure, but suspect) that the reviewers may have "friends" whom they are 100% approving everything for - but rejecting everything else so they can meet the "quota" set by their bosses (i.e., minimum 30% rejection rate).
I suspect that for whatever reason some contributors get a free pass and are waved through the system. I get reviewed to a high standard lately and any marginal images seem to get rejected...fair enough until I see the quality of some of the new content.
200
« on: May 09, 2020, 03:10 »
Looking ahead a lot will depend if and by how much companies cut costs and drop their contracts or simply go bust. We may even see a short boost if they buy as much as possible before dropping them. It would be optimistic to put it mildly to think that a world wide recession will not serverely impact this industry in the short/medium term. This situation is pretty unprecedented so anyone's guess how much and how long.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 195
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
