This would be a perfect time for SS to offer a raise on their payouts. Even a modest 1 cent more for every level would send a clear signal how confident they are.

Quote from: JPSDK on March 05, 2014, 15:21
We can share numbers if we want.

But shutterstock kindly asked us not to, because numbers could be extrapolated back.
And as long as they kindly ask us, we kindly follow their advice, to keep the good relations between contributor and agency.

They kindly made it legally binding on us not to, which means you can get booted out of there if you do. 

Anyway, everyone can do what they like and take whatever consequences, if any, there might be.

.

It might be a joke to you but if the first level after 500 dollars was to match the istock exclusive offer of 34 cents...and maybe the 500 dollars cut in half...it would send a signal.

And every level afterward is higher than what istock is now offering the exclusives. The S+ sub offered is easily balanced by sod´s.

.

Quote from: tickstock on March 05, 2014, 16:05

Quote from: cobalt on March 05, 2014, 15:57
It might be a joke to you but if the first level after 500 dollars was to match the istock exclusive offer of 34 cents...and maybe the 500 dollars cut in half...it would send a signal.

And every level afterward is higher than what istock is now offering the exclusives. The S+ sub offered is easily balanced by sod´s.

Do you remember when Shutterstock gave raises every year?  How long has it been now?  Don't get me wrong I'd love to see it too, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.  All the speak from them is that they are happy with how things are for the forseeable future.

The rises stopped at the time of the financial crash, didn't they? 2008 or 2009 I suppose.

I wasn´t there...I´m still new...

In the beginning I wasn´t that impressed with my downloads,but things are picking up...I only have 650 files and less than 500 photos...but if I can use that data to extrapolate, I understand why the contributor community loves SS.

And like I said before: I can choose which files go to a subs agency and which files I consider low volume, but high value files and place them with an appropriate agency with high prices and no subs.

This is the choice the istock exclusives do not have.

.

That is not what I am trying to do. I am interested in all agencies, but istock and SS are the biggest.

What happens there concerns most of the community.

And looking for a raise when it seem to be a good opportunity - what´s wrong with that?

.

Quote from: tickstock on March 05, 2014, 16:22

Quote from: cobalt on March 05, 2014, 16:19
That is not what I am trying to do. I am interested in all agencies, but istock and SS are the biggest.

What happens there concerns most of the community.

And looking for a raise when it seem to be a good opportunity - what´s wrong with that?

Like I said nothing wrong with the raise, I hope they do but history, Jon, the Shareholders, etc.. tell me they aren't going to do it.

I keep seeing your name pop up on this thread titled "How are sales going? - Shutterstock". Why?

Do you have any information to share with us about your sales or recent experiences on SS?

.

Quote from: tickstock on March 05, 2014, 16:14
I don't think this has anything to do with Shutterstock offering a raise.  But hey if you want to turn everything into an iStock vs. Shutterstock pissing match, I'll bow out of this exchange.

I thought that was your job. Have you been sacked?

.

Quote from: tickstock on March 05, 2014, 16:43
This part of the discussion wasn't about sales.  I do have an interest in what Shutterstock is paying so I think it's ok to comment on that, if it's ok with you of course.  I feel like I've said this before to you but I have many friends and family that do contribute to Shutterstock so I know a bit about what's happening with sales for at least 5 people.

So, in summary, just to be clear;

a) You don't have any sales on SS yourself

b) You already know what exactly SS are paying because you are always quoting from their ToS

c) You already know "what's happening with sales for at least 5 people" from friends and family.

Pray tell what it is you hope to gain from your multiple posts about an agency that you don't contribute to?

Would you advise that my time would be best spent writing lots of posts on threads about all the agencies that I don't contribute to? It seems a curious strategy to me.

.

Quote from: tickstock on March 05, 2014, 18:46

Quote from: gostwyck on March 05, 2014, 18:44

Quote from: tickstock on March 05, 2014, 16:43
This part of the discussion wasn't about sales.  I do have an interest in what Shutterstock is paying so I think it's ok to comment on that, if it's ok with you of course.  I feel like I've said this before to you but I have many friends and family that do contribute to Shutterstock so I know a bit about what's happening with sales for at least 5 people.

So, in summary, just to be clear;

a) You don't have any sales on SS yourself

b) You already know what exactly SS are paying because you are always quoting from their ToS

c) You already know "what's happening with sales for at least 5 people" from friends and family.

Pray tell what it is you hope to gain from your multiple posts about an agency that you don't contribute to?

Would you advise that my time would be best spent writing lots of posts on threads about all the agencies that I don't contribute to? It seems a curious strategy to me.

I couldn't care less about what you do and I certainly am not going to advise you on what or where to post.

Tickstock, Gostwyck does make a valid point (bolded above).  Your only goal at MSG, mostly anyway, seems to solely focus on SS bashing, discrediting everything anyone says positive about them, while trying to take a turd (Istock) and pawn it off as a tulip.  Isn't that obvious to you?

Quote from: tickstock on March 05, 2014, 17:14

Quote from: Red Dove on March 05, 2014, 17:08

Quote from: tickstock on March 05, 2014, 16:14
I don't think this has anything to do with Shutterstock offering a raise.  But hey if you want to turn everything into an iStock vs. Shutterstock pissing match, I'll bow out of this exchange.

I thought that was your job. Have you been sacked?

I see conspiracy theories die slowly in these parts.  Seriously, I have to ask, do you really believe that?

Of course not silly.

.

.

Absolutely terrible last 3 days just a pathetic $1.26 and yet 100's added in the last 12 months and sales poor. For each sale you get a mere 33 cents. How are we to live off that ? At least IS pay more per sale.

Yesterday I had one of BDE, some ODs and SODs... Not so bad, but weekend was really weak.

Quote from: Herg on March 11, 2014, 06:48
Absolutely terrible last 3 days just a pathetic $1.26 and yet 100's added in the last 12 months and sales poor. For each sale you get a mere 33 cents. How are we to live off that ? At least IS pay more per sale.

No they don't. iS pay 16c per sale (and it used to be 8c before they abolished the smallest size).

At least, that's how it works if you calculate on a like-for-like lowest commission paid basis. If you look at it on a more realistic average commission price basis, Shutterstock's average commission has been quoted here in the past at around 80c per sale, in January iStock's average (the last month for which the figures are in) for me was 58c per sale.

Also, in cash terms SS produces more per month than iS.

So whichever metric you work on - total earnings, average commission per sale or lowest commission paid, iStock is paying less than Shutterstock.

Well I can assure you they don't make me as much money as IS. Where do you get 16 cents from ? I cant see any single photo sale for my work that is that low. For instance, 3 extra small regular sales show 66,78,76 cents. Not sure why the prices differ for the same file size though but non as low as 33 cents.

Yesterday, I made 50% more off of ODDownloads than 25aDay.  Interesting.