Quote from: stockmarketer on May 13, 2013, 15:21

Quote from: falstafff on May 13, 2013, 15:12

Quote from: Jonathan Ross on May 13, 2013, 15:02

Hi All,

 Just wanted to concur with everyone here my ShutterStock sales that have been solid ( within $100 a month for years, averaging about $1400-$1500 a month )  have taken a dramatic drop for the first time ever this month, sad to see the best of Micro following the pack. ShutterStock was the one micro agency that gave me hope in this model of stock, now ...they can talk about adjustments but this one was a doozie.

Cheers,
Jonathan

Thanks Jonathan!  you just underlined it all.

Yes, he underlined that sales for many people are down.  That settles it.

You are trying to hard; to not be invested in some way stockmarketer.

Aren't we all "invested in some way"?

Its like I am seeing Gostwyck write those comments but then the name is different.

I'm trying hard to understand what any of this debate means.  Is there a recommended action?  Is this reaching any conclusion?

I think both sides have decided "someone on the Internet is wrong" and we're furiously typing away trying to sway hearts and minds.  Just like all good web debates.

My sales are just average, nothing changed, but adding new stuff changes nothing for me. I around the same earnings for months now whilst adding about 70 images per month.

But I agree that experimenting with live portfolios shouldnt be done. Whatever the outcome may be.

My sales are just average, nothing changed, but adding new stuff changes nothing for me. I around the same earnings for months now whilst adding about 70 images per month.

But I agree that experimenting with live portfolios shouldnt be done. Whatever the outcome may be.

Thanks. Appreciate that comment.

Quote from: Poncke v2 on May 13, 2013, 16:05

experimenting with live portfolios shouldnt be done. Whatever the outcome may be.

The guy supplying blank CDs to Target probably said the same thing... "taking my stock off the endcaps should not be done... whatever the outcome may be."  He thought Target was to blame for the fact that customers didn't want blank CDs anymore.

Change is not what I am talking about, its about the fact that Anthony said they are experimenting and if it doesnt work out, they will change it back. Its the experimenting part that doesnt sound good. Your example of the CDs only applies to a certain point. You are dealing with digital goods here subject to an algorithm. If putting the CDs in the back of the store turns out to be a bad idea you can easily put them back in the front. But it doesnt work like that with an image that has now lost sales over another image that did pick up sales. The life cycle of that image is then forever changed. There is plenty proof of that around, just check the SS forum, people reported drops before and they never recovered.

Quote from: stockmarketer on May 13, 2013, 16:11

Quote from: Poncke v2 on May 13, 2013, 16:05

experimenting with live portfolios shouldnt be done. Whatever the outcome may be.

The guy supplying blank CDs to Target probably said the same thing... "taking my stock off the endcaps should not be done... whatever the outcome may be."  He thought Target was to blame for the fact that customers didn't want blank CDs anymore.

Change is not what I am talking about, its about the fact that Anthony said they are experimenting and if it doesnt work out, they will change it back. Its the experimenting part that doesnt sound good. Your example of the CDs only applies to a certain point. You are dealing with digital goods here subject to an algorithm. If putting the CDs in the back of the store turns out to be a bad idea you can easily put them back in the front. But it doesnt work like that with an image that has now lost sales over another image that did pick up sales. The life cycle of that image is then forever changed. There is plenty proof of that around, just check the SS forum, people reported drops before and they never recovered.

It sounds to me like Shutterstock is doing A/B testing, as evidenced by him saying that the changes are not affecting every search result.  This is really intelligent marketing stuff that lets you get real-time results, gain knowledge about customer preferences at any instant, and constantly readjust based on what you learn. 

You have a point that a good image can be harmed by being pushed to the background... it will see less sales during this experiment, and if the system is put back to the way it was, that image now has fewer sales than it had before, and will not (at least initially) rank as highly as it did before.  But I contend that if the image is good, people will find it again, and it will rise again in the popularity ranking.  To say this should never change is to never allow in fresh content, and SS will start being seen as a behind-the-times marketplace of imagery... the kiss of death for an agency.

Sounds more like multivariate testing to me, which is used in marketing for achieving a higher conversion rate and is done in live environments. Anyhoo, whatever testing they do, it can have negative results for some and positive results for others.

Just like all the micros have done and still do, right? Nearly every time a change is made, someone benefits and someone loses.  This is not unique to SS.

Quote from: Mantis on May 13, 2013, 17:44

Quote from: Poncke v2 on May 13, 2013, 16:50

Sounds more like multivariate testing to me, which is used in marketing for achieving a higher conversion rate and is done in live environments. Anyhoo, whatever testing they do, it can have negative results for some and positive results for others.

Just like all the micros have done and still do, right? Nearly every time a change is made, someone benefits and someone loses.  This is not unique to SS.

 

My sales are just average, nothing changed, but adding new stuff changes nothing for me. I around the same earnings for months now whilst adding about 70 images per month.

This is the problem I too have with SS. Despite frequent uploading, no new images seem to get regular sales (compared to the images I had accepted before November 2012).
Everyone used to say that their new images at SS always got a few downloads in the first few days and the real stars-to-be just kept on selling until they made it to the first page of 'popular'. Nowadays, that just doesn't seem to happen. Files get buried and die with excessive speed and I wonder if there hasn't been a change in the 'new' search too? Without a decent crack of the whip in 'new', there's virtually no chance that even the 'stars' will make it further up the listing.

Which brings me to the point of difference between the search in 'popular' or 'new'. If you search for something in 'popular', the chances are that almost every image on P1 conforms to the keyword used. Do the same in 'new' and there's huge numbers of pretty irrelevant 'dross' you have to get through to find something that conforms to the keyword you searched with.
 
Take, for example, 'garlic'. In 'popular' you get mostly images of garlic and the keywords under the individual images are ordered in importance......garlic coming first.

Go to 'new' and search for 'garlic' and you get a hotchpotch of every sort of food with 'garlic' in the keywords. Keywords in 'new' also seem to be in no particular order of importance but are alphabetically ordered (contrast with popular). IMO searching in 'new' is a nightmare for customers and a disaster for contributors now and I cannot imagine that it has always been like that. There is so much irrelevant material to wade through in 'new' that only the real diehard searcher will persevere to find the pearls.
If anyone knows for certain that 'new' used to be different, I would be glad to hear it.

I wouldn't say I'm experiencing a huge drop in earnings, but I am down about 20% on average.  And I agree that the OD, EL, and other single sales have practically disappeared. 

I'm not exactly alarmed yet, but this is not something I am particularly happy about it it continues. 

I would throw in my .2� but why?

I wouldn't say I'm experiencing a huge drop in earnings, but I am down about 20% on average.  And I agree that the OD, EL, and other single sales have practically disappeared. 

I'm not exactly alarmed yet, but this is not something I am particularly happy about it it continues.

I'm the opposite, I've made more from OD than subs so far this month.  Subs are well down and I'm selling mostly old stuff, hardly any newer images.  A bit down overall on last month but I've had several amazing months and I don't think one slower month is a big concern.