MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Brain storming : What else we can do to be heard  (Read 3770 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: June 26, 2020, 10:46 »
0
Funny idea... (maybe)

Even with the portfolio disabled, it is still possible to upload new images and they are reviewed/rejected (I tried).

So, what happens if we all make bad images, with a lot of noise, underexposed, etc. and each of us uploads 1000 or more?
Their inspector (or AI) will be very busy with... nothing :D

Okay, I need a rest I know.
Bad idea. Pads their numbers. If you have free time get on social media and spread awareness instead.


« Reply #51 on: June 26, 2020, 11:33 »
0
Pull out completely from the Facebook platform and move to a self-hosted platform like forum on your own website.

I wont be surprised if FB scans group discussions and shares relevant information with their major advertisers and then gags articles related to #boycottshutterstock as a result of that.

« Reply #52 on: June 26, 2020, 16:30 »
+2
Pull out completely from the Facebook platform and move to a self-hosted platform like forum on your own website.
...

how many visitors come to YOUR website every day?

« Reply #53 on: June 26, 2020, 17:17 »
+3
Someone pointed to SS employee reviews on Glassdoor a week or so ago but I could not find a reference to Comparably

https://www.comparably.com/companies/shutterstock/ceo-rating

Mr Pavlovsky does not seem to be loved by his minions: as CEO bottom 5% in similarly sized companies in NY area and in USA generally.

After a minute or two a pop-up appears asking you to rate Shutterstock either as an employee or a customer.

My guess is that he is short term.  He was put in the position to pre SS to be sold/acquired. I have been there.  Temporary CEO's are often put in place to foster the sale, which means get the books looking good, get the company a pretty as a picture (no pun intended) from an acquisition perspective.  Once done, he's done, and walks away with a much bigger chunk of change than what is in his current compensation package. Everything that is happening just makes me think there is more to this move.  It's short term thinking. 

« Reply #54 on: June 27, 2020, 01:33 »
+1
I think, we should notify the news agencies. Especially, the ones who use SS.

whtvr2

« Reply #55 on: June 27, 2020, 02:04 »
0
I think, we should notify the news agencies. Especially, the ones who use SS.

News agencies to do what? A new subscription if not using SS? lol!!

« Reply #56 on: June 27, 2020, 06:20 »
+3
Pull out completely from the Facebook platform and move to a self-hosted platform like forum on your own website.
Companies arent going to search 2000 different websites, each with a tiny selection of media to find what they want.  They want everything, in one place, for one price.  Thats how stock works.

And if you want to make a big stock site the prices in hardware,hosting, software development, security, legal and so on are absolutely vast.  And when you've done that you still have a platform with less content than any of the competitors, no advertising and no market share.  Good luck with that.
Microstock works because of bulk.

Quote
I think, we should notify the news agencies. Especially, the ones who use SS.
Why would they care?  From their point of view, any change that allows them to get content as cheaply as possible is good.  They aren't concerned with the background politics of how its created.

« Reply #57 on: June 27, 2020, 06:58 »
+4
Funny idea... (maybe)

Even with the portfolio disabled, it is still possible to upload new images and they are reviewed/rejected (I tried).

So, what happens if we all make bad images, with a lot of noise, underexposed, etc. and each of us uploads 1000 or more?
Their inspector (or AI) will be very busy with... nothing :D

Okay, I need a rest I know.

A better idea is to not play games. Delete your images at SS and close your account. Take your work elsewhere. Doing business with a company who has so little regard for you is a waste of your time and talent.

And actually, that already has been happening for months. The site was/is still being inundated with a lot of crappy images. Hundreds being uploaded at one time by one contributor/factory. SS doesnt care. The numbers on paper to shareholders matter. But buyers matter, too, and if there is nothing good to buy, theyll be gone. So will SS.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2020, 07:04 by cathyslife »

« Reply #58 on: June 27, 2020, 07:23 »
+5
A better idea is to not play games. Delete your images at SS and close your account.

Nice idea but at the moment a lot of people cant afford to ditch a few hundred/thousand dollars a month just to make a point as there's very little work or income elsewhere for photo or video related jobs!
And most people *already* have their work elsewhere as well.

So a choice of a greatly reduced but still some income vs guaranteed $0 income from SS isnt a choice some people can make currently.

SS know this as well - their timing was perfect.

« Reply #59 on: June 27, 2020, 19:01 »
0
A better idea is to not play games. Delete your images at SS and close your account.

Nice idea but at the moment a lot of people cant afford to ditch a few hundred/thousand dollars a month just to make a point as there's very little work or income elsewhere for photo or video related jobs!
And most people *already* have their work elsewhere as well.

So a choice of a greatly reduced but still some income vs guaranteed $0 income from SS isnt a choice some people can make currently.

SS know this as well - their timing was perfect.

Those who need the money, wont play the games, will they? So it stands to reason I wasnt talking about people who need the money. 
« Last Edit: June 28, 2020, 06:25 by cathyslife »

« Reply #60 on: June 28, 2020, 08:46 »
+4
Actually the choice here is harder, sell on Shutterstock were sales volume has been higher but while the buyer pays the same amount you get a smaller fraction. Or move entirely to Adobe, Pond5 etc, build up volume again but each sale gets you a larger share.

Pure maths says that 10c at shutterstock vs 0.36 at Adobe means that you'll break even with one third the volume share at adobe. This is much higher for vids with the new sales averages.

Moving (and shutting off SS) makes sense long term as people switch to platforms that have good content. However short term the temptation is to stay on with already created content and leech off more money from SS but harm long term.



Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk


« Reply #61 on: June 28, 2020, 16:39 »
+1
...

Pure maths says that 10c at shutterstock vs 0.36 at Adobe means that you'll break even with one third the volume share at adobe. This is much higher for vids with the new sales averages.
...
 

your (im)pure math breaks down. since most artists are ALREADY on adobe & other agencies,  deleting SS is a LOSS of income, only made up (possibly) by an unlikely, massive volume increase on Adobe 

there are other compelling reasons for leaving SS - increased $ from other agencviesd is not one of them
« Last Edit: June 30, 2020, 04:58 by cascoly »

« Reply #62 on: June 29, 2020, 01:16 »
0
News agencies to do what? A new subscription if not using SS? lol!!
News agencies to do their job - post news.
First, it's a worldwide boycott, when greedy company rips off Third-World people during pandemic. Isn't it a good headline?
Second, the company where agencies buy photos is not reliable anymore. SS started to accept literally everything to compensate the decrease of the base. A lot of accounts opened with stolen images. The Disney/Pixar pics on sale is not a harmless accident. It may be a huge problem if you bought and used it before it was deleted.

« Reply #63 on: June 29, 2020, 04:11 »
+4
It may sound cynical but unless it's a racial or sexual issue the chances of the boycott gaining traction on mainstream media are slim to none.
Thousands of contributors getting ripped off is just normal business.

« Reply #64 on: June 30, 2020, 03:09 »
+3

« Reply #65 on: June 30, 2020, 11:14 »
+1
These are the top investing funds that have money in shutterstock. Is there merit in marking them in all tweets, sending mails to support teams etc and give them a warning that this stock is about to lose the very product they sell.

There are a lot of people here, these funds might be money focussed but they all want consistent revenues, something that can't happen if contributors flee

https://www.morningstar.com/stocks/xnys/sstk/executive

Also maybe the other board of directors might be a little more smart to the problem

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: June 30, 2020, 11:33 by Rage »

« Reply #66 on: July 01, 2020, 11:09 »
+1
Article on WaPo ripe for comments
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/07/01/pay-cut-economy-coronavirus/

Notify other media like ProPublica?


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle