MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - Desintegrator

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 16
76
Even if it's just the same as with photos, editorial videos without people, it would still be great progress

77
Adobe Stock / Re: Mat Hayward - My new best friend
« on: May 29, 2020, 18:13 »
I really miss the long term annual statistics.
I really liked the graph and table showing how much i've earned every year.
Why is it gone?
Will it be back?

78
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: May 29, 2020, 13:00 »
But actually it's a good idea!
People who want to quit Shutterstock altogether should first just change their screen names to "Use Adobe Stock if you value creators"

79
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: May 29, 2020, 12:53 »
So now Im getting this on forum.

Your account has been suspended and you therefore do not have permission to access this site.
Your suspension will be lifted on June 30, 2020.

Does this stand for forum only or the site and forum are connected ?

Give us your username and password and I will check it out for you.

Sorry, Im not getting this. Where would you check ?

I think he meant if you cannot try if you can log in to your account or not and it works or not, who else can?

80
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: May 29, 2020, 12:40 »
So now Im getting this on forum.

Your account has been suspended and you therefore do not have permission to access this site.
Your suspension will be lifted on June 30, 2020.

Does this stand for forum only or the site and forum are connected ?

I suspect it's just the forum only.  Your images are still up.  And the that ban with time limit sounds very forum-like. But why can't you just try it?

81
Dreamstime.com / Re: Dreamstime increasing royalties
« on: May 29, 2020, 12:37 »
If only video prices were higher... for 4K downloads they pay around what other sites pay for HD...

82
Adobe Stock / Re: Mat Hayward - My new best friend
« on: May 29, 2020, 08:58 »
One relief in this situation that i'm having a BME on Adobe..  And already started to suggest to my designer friends to use Adobe instead of SS.

I know that there are other sites that pay higher commissions than Adobe (which can be still be considered a painfully low percentage...), but for various reasons I  just cannot see them to grow to be a true substitute for SS


83
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: May 29, 2020, 08:43 »
Another brilliant move from our beloved Company:

They purchased www.boycottshutterstock.com and redirected it to their main website.

Apparently they are screwing with us big time :)


They have purchased it a few years ago during the boycottFotolia campaign

84
Thinking more about it i would only find the currently propose percentage tier system acceptable is if it would be not even from previous 12 months, but from your all time totals

85
You must have some great items. I have not got the 90-250 dollar sell  from SS in maybe five years. I get maybe one 28.00 sale  ever three or four months. The 28 buck sell I guess will go to 4.80

for me the 90-200 dollar sales are actually a bit more frequent than the 18-29 dollar ELs. Since there is this undefined category of "single and other" sales i havn't seen much ELs

86
Yes... and how do you get those ocassional sales that yield 90-250 USD a piece?

87
Here is a way to beat SS. Unfortunately I have not the intellect to design this . As a group setup a new site, with free images. Yes free images, might as well be free if SS and the other sites go with this new model. Hard to beat free. Not even the evil SS can beat free. You have a site that is just like every other site with the difference all images/videos are free. To get a free image you have to listen to a 30-60 second add . Just like the adds on youtube. The difference you can't rush are turn off the add. At the end of the advertisement you get a unique number/code for one free picture or video that day. You can get as many pictures per day as you listen to different adds and get different codes.The codes are only good per image per 24 hours. The the payout which I guess is small , you get an advertising fee for showing the add. No this most likely won't get you more money than the slims at SS but free is hard to beat. No sure what those  adds pay but I am guessing 20 to 40 cents each. You could also charge a yearly fee like Costco dose, maybe 29 bucks a year to make a little more revenue.

Absolutely bad idea

88
Here is a way to beat SS. Unfortunately I have not the intellect to design this . As a group setup a new site, with free images. Yes free images, might as well be free if SS and the other sites go with this new model. Hard to beat free. Not even the evil SS can beat free. You have a site that is just like every other site with the difference all images/videos are free. To get a free image you have to listen to a 30-60 second add . Just like the adds on youtube. The difference you can't rush are turn off the add. At the end of the advertisement you get a unique number/code for one free picture or video that day. You can get as many pictures per day as you listen to different adds and get different codes.The codes are only good per image per 24 hours. The the payout which I guess is small , you get an advertising fee for showing the add. No this most likely won't get you more money than the slims at SS but free is hard to beat. No sure what those  adds pay but I am guessing 20 to 40 cents each. You could also charge a yearly fee like Costco dose, maybe 29 bucks a year to make a little more revenue.

I don't think it's viable. Stock image buyers are not a big enough audience for advertisement. Even youtubers with millions of views only get a fraction of their income from actual ad revenue.
Also it's a very unprofessional way to present your work

89
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: May 28, 2020, 12:28 »
The only thing that SS will cares about is their Wall Street Stock price. I urge everyone to send stores/reports to ever business news outlet. Such as CNN,CNBC,Investors Daily,Fox Business,Wall Street Report and the other 1000 business reports. Just send links of these Microstockgroup post. No business wants to see their name in a negative way in any business report. Post stories/post on Linkedin. If SS dose this and I only have to assume they will do it. All the other stock sites will follow and reduce their rates to contributors. The other stock sites have nothing to lose but gain more of your revenue.     

Would be great to see some articles along the lines of "Desperate move from Shutterstock to squeeze its supply chain"...  Unfortunatally i don't have any contacts to help spreading such news, but if anyone has, go on by all means!

Or even better: Shutterstock stepping on the path that killed IStock

90
Remember when they used to send christmas cards to contributors?  Now they whish you a happy new year by putting you on 15% commission

91
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.

That could be a sensible approach to some business model changes..
But in this case there are elements of it which are nothing but shameless greed and squeezing money out from contributors. Mainly the resetting to 15% commission every January. That is just outrageous and should not be accepted in any form, no matter how sales develop in the future.

92
https://www.microstockgroup.com/microstock-coop/microstock-coop-what-we-actually-want-to-do-ideas/

how do you access that link? trying to access it gives this message:

An Error Has Occurred!
The topic or board you are looking for appears to be either missing or off limits to you.


Worked ok for me. Maybe it got fixed?

nope, strange, doesn't work. is it typed correctly?

Works for me, that's strange:  https://www.microstockgroup.com/microstock-coop/microstock-coop-what-we-actually-want-to-do-ideas/msg546351/#msg546351

doesn't work for me either

93

I'm not sure. Adobe has a pricing structure similar to "old shutterstock" and they had no problems paying out 33c per image to contributors. https://stock.adobe.com/plans

Some complex math would be needed to see what the minimum "should" be, and it's further complicated by the fact that we have no idea how many of the buyers have those 350/750 images plans. Someone said it's a large majority of sub sales. If so - then I wouldn't go below 33c.

If they operate at a loss (which I doubt), then increase the prices for customers. Or maybe decrease your operating costs, spend less on that fancy Empire State Building office...

Yes!  We shouldn't accept anything lower than the 33cent and the average should go way beyond the current 38cent, as sales volume decreases.
If they can get away with paying out much less than Adobe then they would have an unfair competitive edge in how much they can spend on marketing. If they win over buyers from Adobe to this new scheme that would be a disaster

94

1. Percentages have to mean actual percentages based on downloads utilised by buyers. They are now meaningless. Ongoing reporting can be achieved by reporting and paying the minimum possible payout each month (if buyer uses all dls) and the remainder paid the following month when SS knows how many dls the buyer actually used.

2. Totals absolutely must be based on a rolling 12 month basis, the January reset is bizarre and indefensible. Rolling basis would have all the claimed benefits of rewarding contributors, while we still get to eat and pay rent in the first few months of the year.

We aren't going to get them to abandon the new structure entirely. We need to pressure them to make it a win win rather than simply punishing us to line their own pockets.

Percentages could also be rolled back for sub sales, so that we earn the familar 0.25-0.38 per download, as we did until now. Use percentages only for OD sales.

+

3. Video subs. Out with them.
Honestly, I don't think these are realistic demands given what other agencies are doing

At least we should demand on opt out option for video subs

95
To be honest video only makes up a relatively small percentage of my portfolio so I wont be continuing to upload any after the changes in any case (even if they change levels, do rolling etc. I would still be in too low a tier for my liking).

My knowledge for that is therefore limited. If they do levels on rolling 12 months is 251+ sales in a calendar year a lot for a mainly-video full time contributor (I genuinely don't know). This would put you on 30%.

Yes, I would probably make that, but putting 250 video sales on par with 500 photo sales is nonsense. (but the whole new payment scheme is ridiculous anyways...)

96
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: May 28, 2020, 04:38 »

Nope. I own it now. Along with f*ckshutterstock.com.

I also own the Shutterstock Boycott facebook page, facebook group and twitter account.

Great job! :D


I think when we make a defamatory campaign about SS, we should also point people towards Adobe. (I know it's not really health to put all the trust into one agency, but is there any better option now?)
If we tell people to boycott SS and they go to Getty instead that's not good at all.
So if we manage to convince some buyers to move away from SS we should also convince them that iStock/Getty is just as bad, or even worse

97

1. Percentages have to mean actual percentages based on downloads utilised by buyers. They are now meaningless. Ongoing reporting can be achieved by reporting and paying the minimum possible payout each month (if buyer uses all dls) and the remainder paid the following month when SS knows how many dls the buyer actually used.

2. Totals absolutely must be based on a rolling 12 month basis, the January reset is bizarre and indefensible. Rolling basis would have all the claimed benefits of rewarding contributors, while we still get to eat and pay rent in the first few months of the year.

We aren't going to get them to abandon the new structure entirely. We need to pressure them to make it a win win rather than simply punishing us to line their own pockets.

Also Video level limits are ridiculous like this, only the biggest studios could climb back to normal percentages. The tolerable thing for video level boundaries would be these number in dollars earned, not number of downloads

98
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: May 27, 2020, 16:26 »
-bad publicity resulting in share price drop which in turn triggers owners dumping shares

This is the key here. They already ran the numbers about how many angry contributors and files they will lose and are fine with it. Tanking stock price I doubt even crossed their mind.

Sure, we have to protest in more ways that they clearly expect. They are not dumb, they do know that there will be some protest. They watched the Fotolia Deactivation-Day campaign with the slogan and website "boycottfotolia", and i remember that time they bought the domain "boycottshutterstock.com" just so others can not. So obviously they are prepared for some outrage. Yet it's not impossible exceed what they expect.

99
 .

100
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: May 27, 2020, 13:25 »
As for spamming them with complaints... they also have a Youtube account:
https://www.youtube.com/user/ShutterstockInc/videos


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 16

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors