Doublepost

Quote from: jamiehooper on November 03, 2015, 18:57
Looked at their payment page, and now the highest SOD payment listed is $28.

I got a $30 SOD yesterday, so that can't be right.

I got a $75 SOD on Friday.

Quote from: Pixart on November 03, 2015, 23:43

Quote from: jamiehooper on November 03, 2015, 18:57
Looked at their payment page, and now the highest SOD payment listed is $28.

I got a $30 SOD yesterday, so that can't be right.

$37.50 today, $37.50 yesterday

Quote from: jamiehooper on November 03, 2015, 18:57
Looked at their payment page, and now the highest SOD payment listed is $28.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts
up to $120

I think you are talking about EDs.

OK, just got one of the .30 SODs.

Yeah, I got one this morning. Hoped it would be $122.00 but no, it was for $0.30. Downward and backward!

Has anyone ever gotten an SOD for more than $120? Because now I'm interpreting this differently:

"30% (up to $120)"

Now I think it means the most you'll receive is $120, no matter how much an image sells for.

Large enterprises pay $500 for non-web-use images, and at a 30% royalty that would be $150, not $120. So for those of us who earn 30%, we get only 24% for those large sales. If I'm correct.

That's how I interpret that as well.

I've had SODs between $0.49 and $0.66 the past couple of days but fortunately so far no 30 centers.  The only good thing is that the past couple of months the ratio of ODs/SODs/clip sales versus subs has been much higher than usual - so far this month it is running one non-sub to every 3.25 subs, compared to one every 10-15 usually.  Overall volume is down about 25% from last year but the number of non-subs is staying the same or getting better so revenue hasn't decreased that much.  Maybe subs buyers are switching to FT/Adobe but others are sticking with SS?

From the site:
30% (up to $120)†
†Percentage is based on sale price received. Amount earned may be more if sale price received is more.

A sprinkling of .30s but also a couple of 1.50 and a 3.60 - these are more wallet friendly but I can't recall seeing these amounts before either. Something is afoot or a leg - hard to tell with SS these days.

Anyway, I don't expect to know what SS serves up with tofu in their canteen or what the latest plans are to make the offices more Feng Shui - but I would like to know what I'm getting paid for so I can make informed decisions.

Well, this is a bit hilarious.  I used the SS contact form to send an inquiry.  Minutes late:
This is the mail system at host smtp.shutterstock.com.

I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not
be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.

For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster.

If you do so, please include this problem report. You can
delete your own text from the attached returned message.

                  The mail system

<[email protected]>: host ASPMX.L.GOOGLE.com[173.194.214.27] said:
    550-5.7.1 Unauthenticated email from yahoo.com is not accepted due to
    domain's 550-5.7.1 DMARC policy. Please contact administrator of yahoo.com
    domain if 550-5.7.1 this was a legitimate mail. Please visit 550-5.7.1
    https://support.google.com/mail/answer/2451690 to learn about DMARC 550
    5.7.1 initiative. 140si1233923vkc.130 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA
    command)

I looked at yesterday's stats this morning, and there were two 30 cent royalties among yesterday's SODs.

So someone was sold an image at $1

Quote from: Shelma1 on November 04, 2015, 13:10
Has anyone ever gotten an SOD for more than $120? Because now I'm interpreting this differently:

Yes -I had 5 in one day at 125.61 each last June.

Quote from: PhotoBomb on November 04, 2015, 16:49

Quote from: Shelma1 on November 04, 2015, 13:10
Has anyone ever gotten an SOD for more than $120? Because now I'm interpreting this differently:

Yes -I had 5 in one day at 125.61 each last June.

Oh, good! Good to be wrong in this case.

I think shutterstock sucks!

http://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/87108-single-other-earnings-below-minimum/?p=1512825

Quote from: dbvirago on November 05, 2015, 21:49
http://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/87108-single-other-earnings-below-minimum/?p=1512825

Well that's mostly good news - not the part about having a bug in calculating payments, but the part about identifying it and promising a fix.

I think they should e-mail contributors about stuff like this - both the bug and when they make the fix so we can go and check days when we had the wrong amount to ensure it's been corrected.

I wonder, if those amounts cross month boundaries - i.e. if we've already been paid for October by the time the adjust October earnings - will they just add some magic number to the November payout?

It'd be nice to see improved detailed statements for this type of thing, particularly if there need to be retroactive adjustments of payments for prior months (or years).

Quote from: Pixart on November 03, 2015, 23:43

Quote from: jamiehooper on November 03, 2015, 18:57
Looked at their payment page, and now the highest SOD payment listed is $28.

I got a $30 SOD yesterday, so that can't be right.

no, the highest is $120
i don't know how low it goes , but i did get SOD at 28, and a colleague got 80,and  102,
my highest to date is 80+

i also have a lot of tiny ones, but i don't pay much attention to those.
i assume there are different usage plans with each of these,
or else it would piss off the client who got us to earn 120 , 102, 80, 77, etc
to know another person got the same deal for 28 or like you say 30 ccts

I miss the days when Scott would usually clarify whats going on. Looks like we are seeing a new model. Reminds me of DPC.

Quote from: Mantis on November 06, 2015, 12:54
Reminds me of DPC.

'Fraid you're right!

I woke up this morning to the first of these lower-than-my-sub-rate SODs. Earned a grand $.26 (26 cents) for a new image of the Lower Falls of Yellowstone River.

Not happy 'bout that.

Quote from: marthamarks on November 06, 2015, 13:01

Quote from: Mantis on November 06, 2015, 12:54
Reminds me of DPC.

'Fraid you're right!

I woke up this morning to the first of these lower-than-my-sub-rate SODs. Earned a grand $.26 (26 cents) for a new image of the Lower Falls of Yellowstone River.

Not happy 'bout that.

You did read the thread on the SS forum linked above?
It's a bug and they're going to fix it and they will adjust those sales to normal subs value.
Not good that such bugs happen, but good that they are admitting and fixing it.

Quote from: dirkr on November 06, 2015, 13:03

Quote from: marthamarks on November 06, 2015, 13:01

Quote from: Mantis on November 06, 2015, 12:54
Reminds me of DPC.

'Fraid you're right!

I woke up this morning to the first of these lower-than-my-sub-rate SODs. Earned a grand $.26 (26 cents) for a new image of the Lower Falls of Yellowstone River.

Not happy 'bout that.

You did read the thread on the SS forum linked above?
It's a bug and they're going to fix it and they will adjust those sales to normal subs value.
Not good that such bugs happen, but good that they are admitting and fixing it.

Well thats good news. Unfortunatly i am banned from the ss forums. I have to jump through hoops to go in there by deleting my cookies for read onky access so i just never go there. So much for anthony saying it will be a temporary ban. That was 5 years ago...lol

I just receive 0.82$ for a SOD ..

Quote from: dirkr on November 06, 2015, 13:03

Quote from: marthamarks on November 06, 2015, 13:01

Quote from: Mantis on November 06, 2015, 12:54
Reminds me of DPC.

'Fraid you're right!

I woke up this morning to the first of these lower-than-my-sub-rate SODs. Earned a grand $.26 (26 cents) for a new image of the Lower Falls of Yellowstone River.

Not happy 'bout that.

You did read the thread on the SS forum linked above?
It's a bug and they're going to fix it and they will adjust those sales to normal subs value.
Not good that such bugs happen, but good that they are admitting and fixing it.

No, actually, I haven't read the forum link. Just woke up to find this odd sale. I'll go read it now.

Nice to hear it's not yet another "new normal" drop in royalties.


ETA: Well, I clicked the link, watched the ball spin for a while, and wound up with a "The connection was reset" message. Tried it again twice, with the same result. Guess I'll just have to take your word that there's an interesting discussion going on in the SS Forum, 'cause I don't seem to be able to get there.