MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock testing new pricing plans for customers  (Read 15146 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: February 03, 2017, 11:58 »
+6
I closed my account at SS a month ago and I feel good about that.



« Reply #51 on: February 03, 2017, 12:46 »
+4

Yes, Tyler Olson aka Leaf owns and runs this place. It's not a democracy. He's King or dictator or whatever anyone wants to call it, but he's captain of the MSG ship and makes the rules.  ;D

As for the actual topic, I'd agree with the people here who say this could replace what we have, if it works for the agency. That would make me very unhappy.

We haven't seen the results of the new and exciting changes at IS but I'll predict what it means. Less for us, more for them. And the same will be true with shared plans like the new SS test. If they make more, we get less and the plan is a success for the agency.

Not for us!

Wait I have an idea. Since SS is so profitable and we are the suppliers who helped make it that way, how about a raise. One more level for the true artists who make the sales, and were important for making SS what it is? Now there's a plan I could like.

They gave us a raise every year for a few years, and we could still be getting one if we stopped taking lower rates from other sites. If they know we will take less why would they pay more? they are a business not a charity.

« Reply #52 on: February 03, 2017, 12:48 »
0
I closed my account at SS a month ago and I feel good about that.
Really ?

« Reply #53 on: February 03, 2017, 13:08 »
+3

Yes, Tyler Olson aka Leaf owns and runs this place. It's not a democracy. He's King or dictator or whatever anyone wants to call it, but he's captain of the MSG ship and makes the rules.  ;D

As for the actual topic, I'd agree with the people here who say this could replace what we have, if it works for the agency. That would make me very unhappy.

We haven't seen the results of the new and exciting changes at IS but I'll predict what it means. Less for us, more for them. And the same will be true with shared plans like the new SS test. If they make more, we get less and the plan is a success for the agency.

Not for us!

Wait I have an idea. Since SS is so profitable and we are the suppliers who helped make it that way, how about a raise. One more level for the true artists who make the sales, and were important for making SS what it is? Now there's a plan I could like.

They gave us a raise every year for a few years, and we could still be getting one if we stopped taking lower rates from other sites. If they know we will take less why would they pay more? they are a business not a charity.

That we, doesn't necessarily include me, and I agree. I stopped working for the parasites that have nothing to offer but low prices, low pay and driving down the value of our work. Race to the bottom and some agencies are still trying to win.

They make their money off our backs at worse than minimum wage. I'm not going to support any of them except three and one that takes special images for 50%. What I mean, it's not only based on income, but also ethics and value of my time.

iStock is on the edge of being irrelevant and dropped after this last move. How much is 15% of nearly nothing?

But your point exactaly. If people are willing to sell out and take less, why would any of them offer to pay us more? The same files on 100 sites, or 50 or 25, it's the same. The buyers and the agencies are making the profits and the workers are slaves. Willing victims is what it is.

I'm not going to take that. Too bad there are so many people desperate for low pay that they will supply the blood * cheap agencies that do nothing but drive down our worth.

alno

« Reply #54 on: February 04, 2017, 03:26 »
+5
Can we keep trump off this thread? This is about business and politics is off topic. I am not sure why the op chose to insert him here and it's too late to start a new thread.

Isn't democracy allow us to choose titles we want? It seems that some people are tired of democracy. That's why so many protests these days. The topic is about SS unfair payment. If you do not like the title, please read the rest.

It's democracy, you are right. But Shutterstock is not solely an American company, I guess the number of US contributors is less than 30%. Maybe even less. I can understand your concerns about your new president but believe me, the rest of the world doensn't give a s*** about who lives in the White house and what he promises. 

« Reply #55 on: February 04, 2017, 04:06 »
+6
Actually US contributors make up less than 5% of contributors

Shutterstock relies on Thais, Russians and Ukrainians

http://www.microstock.top/index.phtml

« Reply #56 on: February 04, 2017, 10:10 »
+1
Actually US contributors make up less than 5% of contributors

Shutterstock relies on Thais, Russians and Ukrainians

http://www.microstock.top/index.phtml
Thats interesting but those stats don't really pass the sniff test...they just don't look plausible to me. I could be wrong of course

niktol

« Reply #57 on: February 04, 2017, 10:31 »
+1
Actually, the numbers look reasonable. Residents of countries with a lower cost of living are more likely to participate because the incentive is higher.

« Reply #58 on: February 04, 2017, 10:44 »
+1
Can we keep trump off this thread? This is about business and politics is off topic. I am not sure why the op chose to insert him here and it's too late to start a new thread.


Isn't democracy allow us to choose titles we want? It seems that some people are tired of democracy. That's why so many protests these days. The topic is about SS unfair payment. If you do not like the title, please read the rest.


It's democracy, you are right. But Shutterstock is not solely an American company, I guess the number of US contributors is less than 30%. Maybe even less. I can understand your concerns about your new president but believe me, the rest of the world doensn't give a s*** about who lives in the White house and what he promises.




« Reply #59 on: February 04, 2017, 11:36 »
+5
I removed a couple posts from this thread - trying to keep the discussion on topic.

« Reply #60 on: February 04, 2017, 12:12 »
+1
Actually US contributors make up less than 5% of contributors

Shutterstock relies on Thais, Russians and Ukrainians

http://www.microstock.top/index.phtml
Thats interesting but those stats don't really pass the sniff test...they just don't look plausible to me. I could be wrong of course


Those stats are gleaned from the Shutterstock site itself.

« Reply #61 on: February 04, 2017, 18:31 »
+2
Yes I know and its kind of academic but when you look at the table of the 1.6 million registered contributors only 165,000 have more than 0 images which makes me wonder about the overall accuracy.  The South American, African, Indian contributors are way down...is there something about Thailand I'm missing? Is the population of Andora (79,000) totally comprised of photographers? ...14th in the table They took a relatively small small sample I suspect some kind of bias has crept into it.

niktol

« Reply #62 on: February 04, 2017, 20:48 »
0
Tax residencies perhaps? Who knows...

« Reply #63 on: February 04, 2017, 22:39 »
+1
Yes I know and its kind of academic but when you look at the table of the 1.6 million registered contributors only 165,000 have more than 0 images which makes me wonder about the overall accuracy.  The South American, African, Indian contributors are way down...is there something about Thailand I'm missing? Is the population of Andora (79,000) totally comprised of photographers? ...14th in the table They took a relatively small small sample I suspect some kind of bias has crept into it.

I was in Thailand before 3 years, I am sure there arent enough people who can buy nice camera and take good photos. I dont know why they are listed as one of the bigger contributor countries.

« Reply #64 on: February 05, 2017, 07:15 »
+1
Yes I know and its kind of academic but when you look at the table of the 1.6 million registered contributors only 165,000 have more than 0 images which makes me wonder about the overall accuracy.  The South American, African, Indian contributors are way down...is there something about Thailand I'm missing? Is the population of Andora (79,000) totally comprised of photographers? ...14th in the table They took a relatively small small sample I suspect some kind of bias has crept into it.

I was in Thailand before 3 years, I am sure there arent enough people who can buy nice camera and take good photos. I dont know why they are listed as one of the bigger contributor countries.
Isn't Thailand a top destination for nomad type westerners bootstrapping their businesses? I think there is quite a community of young Western designers and illustrators that work from Thailand to keep costs down.

« Reply #65 on: February 05, 2017, 07:24 »
+2
Is the population of Andora (79,000) totally comprised of photographers? ...14th in the table They took a relatively small small sample I suspect some kind of bias has crept into it.

If 176 out of 79,000 equals 100% to you, then yes... Naturally, the answer is no.

« Reply #66 on: February 05, 2017, 07:25 »
+2
I was in Thailand before 3 years, I am sure there arent enough people who can buy nice camera and take good photos. I dont know why they are listed as one of the bigger contributor countries.

Are you kidding? Sure, the average income isn't anywhere close to the UK but to say that 1,823 people can't afford a DSLR is a bit ridiculous. Out of a population of 67 million... 6.3 million in the modern city of Bangkok alone.


ShadySue

« Reply #67 on: February 05, 2017, 08:08 »
+1
I was in Thailand before 3 years, I am sure there arent enough people who can buy nice camera and take good photos. I dont know why they are listed as one of the bigger contributor countries.

Are you kidding? Sure, the average income isn't anywhere close to the UK but to say that 1,823 people can't afford a DSLR is a bit ridiculous. Out of a population of 67 million... 6.3 million in the modern city of Bangkok alone.

Also I can't speak about Thailand, but I know equipment is a lot cheaper in many other countries than it is in the UK (and at least one where it is, or at least was, much more expensive!). Partly due to taxes, partly because it seems that manufacturers price according to the market.

« Reply #68 on: February 05, 2017, 08:15 »
0
Yes I know and its kind of academic but when you look at the table of the 1.6 million registered contributors only 165,000 have more than 0 images which makes me wonder about the overall accuracy.  The South American, African, Indian contributors are way down...is there something about Thailand I'm missing? Is the population of Andora (79,000) totally comprised of photographers? ...14th in the table They took a relatively small small sample I suspect some kind of bias has crept into it.

I was in Thailand before 3 years, I am sure there arent enough people who can buy nice camera and take good photos. I dont know why they are listed as one of the bigger contributor countries.
Isn't Thailand a top destination for nomad type westerners bootstrapping their businesses? I think there is quite a community of young Western designers and illustrators that work from Thailand to keep costs down.
I can see thats a possibility but still think its a stretch to think they are no 1.
 

« Reply #69 on: February 05, 2017, 08:20 »
+1
Is the population of Andora (79,000) totally comprised of photographers? ...14th in the table They took a relatively small small sample I suspect some kind of bias has crept into it.

If 176 out of 79,000 equals 100% to you, then yes... Naturally, the answer is no.
I was being a bit sarcastic but its still an extraordinarly high proportion of the population don't you think? Tax reasons maybe.

« Reply #70 on: February 05, 2017, 08:51 »
0
Also I can't speak about Thailand, but I know equipment is a lot cheaper in many other countries than it is in the UK (and at least one where it is, or at least was, much more expensive!). Partly due to taxes, partly because it seems that manufacturers price according to the market.

Well, brand equipment is rarely cheaper than Hong Kong or the US. It's just that there are more knock-offs in certain countries.

That being said, even in so called "poor" countries (which Thailand isn't really), there are plenty of rich people, and plenty of middle-class people able to afford whatever middle-class people in the UK can afford. The countryside is a different story.

niktol

« Reply #71 on: February 05, 2017, 09:49 »
0
Despite of a couple of apparent statistical outliers (where the fact that only about 10% of people creating an account with a few keystrokes can be bothered with uploading anything really isn't), the main point which started the discussion remains IMO pretty valid. The US isn't the largest supplier of active stock contributors. This isn't surprising at all. The major theme of this (English language) forum is doom and gloom.

We can ask Irina Anosova if Russians feel the same about stock photography or they are much more optimistic about it.

Perhaps being "poor" is a relative and sometimes subjective term. If defined as the purchasing power of discretionary income, could the photographers living in the West be considered to be the ones who are poor?

« Reply #72 on: February 05, 2017, 10:17 »
0
Despite of a couple of apparent statistical outliers (where the fact that only about 10% of people creating an account with a few keystrokes can be bothered with uploading anything really isn't), the main point which started the discussion remains IMO pretty valid. The US isn't the largest supplier of active stock contributors. This isn't surprising at all. The major theme of this (English language) forum is doom and gloom.

We can ask Irina Anosova if Russians feel the same about stock photography or they are much more optimistic about it.

Perhaps being "poor" is a relative and sometimes subjective term. If defined as the purchasing power of discretionary income, could the photographers living in the West be considered to be the ones who are poor?

maybe not poor, but poor-ly paid. yes... definitely. if you consider that 38 cts to 2.50 or whatever
is your pay for the use of your photo, definitely poorly paid.
it's much like the other commodity, coffee beans, clothing, flip-flop, etc..
you pay pennies to a worker in the third world and get the same product as someone in USA
or UK paid enough in one day which the third world worker could do well in a week or whatever.

going global does not benefit the first world. even MacDonald's, telemarketing etc know that in the first world, when they hire a third world refugee and get a happy smiling worker serving customers,
as opposed to a 3rd generation immigrant itizen, who "belongs" there who sulks over being paid minimum wage even if both are equally educated with high school and no experience.

microstock is the result of going global. it's been ages since i was paid 150 dollars for a session
, when i was then, a mere apprentice using a view or medium format film camera.
today, with decades of experience, i don't even get what i use to pay for coffee. LOL
when they hire

niktol

« Reply #73 on: February 05, 2017, 10:27 »
0
The difference between a stock photographer in a big city, USA, and a stock photographer in Thailand, Russia, Ukraine, etc. isn't necessarily that the latter ask for less. They just get it for less.

The subject of purchasing power disparity isn't something new. If I remember correctly Mark Twain addressed this subject in his "Connecticut Yankee". That's 19th century economics.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2017, 10:35 by niktol »

JimP

« Reply #74 on: February 05, 2017, 11:13 »
0
Actually US contributors make up less than 5% of contributors

Shutterstock relies on Thais, Russians and Ukrainians

http://www.microstock.top/index.phtml
Thats interesting but those stats don't really pass the sniff test...they just don't look plausible to me. I could be wrong of course


Those stats are gleaned from the Shutterstock site itself.


From Shutterstock itself makes me believe it's accurate to the point that 25% are unknown. Poverty and cost of living can make an investment very difficult to get started. Artists do not need a camera.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
5551 Views
Last post May 20, 2008, 15:40
by Adeptris
11 Replies
4350 Views
Last post May 06, 2011, 08:07
by fotografer
7 Replies
1878 Views
Last post March 07, 2015, 13:11
by pixel8
38 Replies
7913 Views
Last post May 17, 2015, 02:16
by Sammy the Cat
51 Replies
8178 Views
Last post October 07, 2015, 13:52
by PixelBytes

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results