MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Changes to the Referral program  (Read 12811 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2013, 12:16 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 22:28 by tickstock »


« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2013, 12:23 »
0
I'm hoping that by reducing the referral system they can pay more out to contributors instead because they're the people that are actually doing the work and generating the content.

I don't think it's fair to say referrers don't do any work. It can be a lot of work to run a well read blog or website. Plus, they bring in buyers, contributors and links. Those are things that grow sites like SS to the size they are today. That said, I think SS's referral program was pretty generous, so it isn't surprising to see it scaled back.

« Reply #27 on: February 05, 2013, 12:24 »
-2
Just unlike their facebook show them what it is like to loss a little something...make them go under 100K likes again . We have more control then you think. Harmless but powerful.

« Reply #28 on: February 05, 2013, 12:25 »
+2
Just unlike their facebook show them what it is like to loss a little something...make them go under 100K likes again . We have more control then you think. Harmless but powerful.

I tried commenting on the facebook page but it looks like comments need approval. How surprising.

« Reply #29 on: February 05, 2013, 12:41 »
-2
Just unlike their facebook show them what it is like to loss a little something...make them go under 100K likes again . We have more control then you think. Harmless but powerful.

Are you serious? Isn't that what 9-year olds do to express themselves?

« Reply #30 on: February 05, 2013, 12:53 »
-1
Just unlike their facebook show them what it is like to loss a little something...make them go under 100K likes again . We have more control then you think. Harmless but powerful.

Are you serious? Isn't that what 9-year olds do to express themselves?

lol :) you can't bring yourself to do it I understand your afraid :)

« Reply #31 on: February 05, 2013, 12:58 »
+1
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 22:28 by tickstock »

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #32 on: February 05, 2013, 13:12 »
0
I am now accepting offers for my wonderful domain (still unsure if I'll sell it, just considering):

http://www.microstockphoto.co.uk

Perfect for someone wishing to open a new agency or a personal portfolio in the UK.

(I had a list of all stock sites and used it mainly for referrals until yesterday, but I quickly converted it to a meta-search engine today after reading the news about the referral programme)


Poncke

« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2013, 13:34 »
0
I get under $1 a day in referral earnings, so this won't really affect my income.  But it does give me a slightly uneasy feeling about what's coming next...

EXACTLY! +1 and a ♥
Hear hear, hearts for all

« Reply #34 on: February 05, 2013, 13:42 »
+9
From Shutterstock's referral program page (emphasis added):

Quote
Make money by referring other photographers! If you sign up a photographer - that photographer will receive $0.25 on their photo downloads - and you will receive $0.03 on their downloads! You could make money by merely promoting the Shutterstock Submit Program! All you have to do is have them visit the link customized for your account below. A cookie will be stored on their computer so that they could sign up within 30 days - and you will still receive credit! As long as they continue to be a member, you will continue to make money off of their photos!

Basically they're now trying to reneg on their side of the contract in respect of past referrals.

If they want to do it for future referrals that's one thing - if you don't want to participate you can simply withdraw from the program by deleting links etc or not passing on information by word of mouth. For past referrals, there is simply no way of "unreferring" contributors. You've already performed your end of the bargain, now they're trying to back out theirs by cutting off payment.

Time to seek decent legal advice for those that have enough of an interest in this.

« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2013, 16:26 »
+1
With 200,000 downloads/day

saving them:
- 180k $ per month
- 2.16 Million $ per year


EmberMike

« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2013, 16:46 »
0
With 200,000 downloads/day

saving them:
- 180k $ per month
- 2.16 Million $ per year

Give us a penny raise on subs out of that 2 mill and it costs them $730,000. They keep the other mil and a half.

They still look good to investors, saving the company over a million dollars, and at the same time help us offset some the loss of referral earnings.

They could do even one better. Kill off the referral program completely. Forget $0.03 or $0.04 payouts. Just end it. Obviously that's the intent of this move anyway. They save even more money by not having to payout anything at all if the referral program doesn't exist. And they don't need the program, that's obvious. The review queue is nearly 2 weeks long. Clearly no shortage of new content there.

« Last Edit: February 05, 2013, 16:53 by EmberMike »

« Reply #37 on: February 05, 2013, 17:04 »
0
pretty much I wasn't screwed this time but I feel like I was, agencies keep on disappointing and prove again they don't really care about the ones who submit or write blog posts bringing them more contributors

they can end it for me too, I don't have a single referral at SS but I would love to get something out of this, like many said a raise would be suitable

« Reply #38 on: February 05, 2013, 17:24 »
+1
And they don't need the program, that's obvious. The review queue is nearly 2 weeks long. Clearly no shortage of new content there.

And yet, their explanation is "The goal of these changes is to bring a wider variety of new contributors and content to our site."

I'm outraged because I spent lots of time bringing in new photographers for Shutterstock. Now they are completely cutting off my referral earnings, while continuing to sell those photographer's images. They didn't uphold their end of the agreement. It's a complete and total shaft.

« Reply #39 on: February 05, 2013, 17:29 »
+2
"The goal of these changes is to bring a wider variety of new contributors and content to our site."

what a joke, a few guys write this down and then show to Jon, what does he say? can anybody explain me their logic? why aren't agencies open and truth? even SS is playing with us

Poncke

« Reply #40 on: February 05, 2013, 17:32 »
+4
Its a first kick in the balls for everyone believing in SS. I dont have any referrals but I am as worried as the rest of you.

They raise you one cent, but take away dollars.

lisafx

« Reply #41 on: February 05, 2013, 17:33 »
0
Its a first kick in the balls for everyone believing in SS.

That's my reading of it too.


« Reply #42 on: February 05, 2013, 17:43 »
-1
I don't think that it's only coincidence that they have changed rules now - when many ex-exclusives  are heading to SS and many current SS contributors try to make them to use their referral link.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #43 on: February 05, 2013, 18:08 »
+1
Not a big deal in terms of income loss (only have one referral), but I worry about the things to come.

« Reply #44 on: February 05, 2013, 18:43 »
+2
Its a first kick in the balls for everyone believing in SS.

That's my reading of it too.

Call me cynical but I have been expecting the worst for some time!  I really wish I could believe differently, but I have been kicked in the teeth too many times to miss the writing on the wall.

If we want to be treated fairly we will have to be prepared to make it happen for ourselves one way or the other!

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #45 on: February 05, 2013, 18:47 »
+2
Not good. This will hurt a LOT of people.

Surely the least they could do is grandfather the existing referrals as lifetime, since that was the agreement in the first place.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #46 on: February 05, 2013, 19:02 »
+5
It was only a matter of time before they started looking to squeeze every extra penny of profit out of the company. 

The easiest place to start is wringing contributors dry like every other place else has. Begin with the low impact stuff like referrals. When that isn't enough, start taking benefits away. When that isn't enough, drop commissions and raise prices and say "but you make the same money". And on and on.

Deja Vu

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #47 on: February 05, 2013, 19:03 »
+2
Didn't we agree to a CONTRACT stating we would earn referral revenues for a lifetime?

Can they just breach the contract?

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #48 on: February 05, 2013, 19:05 »
0
Contract? We don't need no stinking contract.

« Reply #49 on: February 05, 2013, 19:09 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 22:28 by tickstock »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1079 Views
Last post July 30, 2014, 07:45
by Stock Performer
7 Replies
4817 Views
Last post August 26, 2014, 08:14
by kayann
1 Replies
1981 Views
Last post November 17, 2014, 02:48
by jareso
3 Replies
2057 Views
Last post October 17, 2017, 10:36
by Microstock Man
0 Replies
693 Views
Last post November 03, 2018, 06:03
by arapix

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results