pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: How I got from 400 sales a day to 130  (Read 3458 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 03, 2020, 02:43 »
+3
I've been a contributor for 12 years now. I do it full time and upload quality photos and illustrations.

In the peak time (2016) I used to have 400 downloads a day on Shutterstock. A year ago I was happy with 200-250 downloads. These days I am getting about 130 downloads a day. DESPITE regular uploads.

I am aware of the Covid19 situation, but how is it possible the downfall is strong ? On the contrary I am getting record sales on Adobe.



Has Shutterstock fell so much for you as well ?


PS: my username was created some years ago, it's meaning may no longer be true :)


« Reply #1 on: April 03, 2020, 02:53 »
+3
As of November 2019 my revenue dropped by 40% even though oddly the number of downloads has not.

They did something and they aren't telling us.

« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2020, 03:22 »
+2
I also have an abrupt drop in the number of sales. But the drop in the income is even more worrying. Not only the value received for the EL's is much lower, it has become almost non-existent. The Single & Others only sell by small values contrary to the beginning where I had sales for $100, $60 and so on.

The quality of the images uploaded almost doesn't matter has to produce good images I cannot focus on large quantities. So, when they become available for search the images enter immediately into the 10th page of the Fresh Content becoming invisible in the midst of all those spamming trash SS now accepts that it's downgrading their collection.


Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2020, 04:41 »
+8
Increased competition from other contributors (both quality and quantity), market saturation, the industry's race to the bottom which reduces the number of OD and Enhanced License sales, corona crisis, commission cuts....So there you have it.

« Reply #4 on: April 03, 2020, 04:57 »
+7
As of November 2019 my revenue dropped by 40% even though oddly the number of downloads has not.

They did something and they aren't telling us.

Same here and been with them since 2005. in 2010 they started to find ways of manipulating the search in order to gain as much as possible. In 2015 they started to drop older contributors to give way to new members and calling it a "fair chance " for them to earn some money and as you say in 2018-19 they stared to aim and nurse countries where lets say 4 dollars could get you through a whole day. That way the members from these countries started to upload like crazy, quantity and quantity became the name of the game. Quality went out the window!.....of course a saturated market with millions of members all fighting for a buck just adds to the misery.  Nowadays I just let my portfolio hang in there and earn what it can any uploading is just futile.:)
« Last Edit: April 03, 2020, 05:05 by Horizon »

« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2020, 05:00 »
+3
1. Shutterstock made the mistake of showing total payout vs total new content making it easy to plot graphs. What it showed was that in previous years payout was increasing more than image library size by percentage. In recent years things have shifted crazily in the other direction. I mean it is nuts how much the collection grows each year now. This just isn't sustainable anymore and is unmanageable by the agencies who are seeing a huge volume of spam and outright stolen work appearing on the site.

2. Total downloads in the market seem to have been pretty stable for a while from where I'm sitting. Agencies claims of opening up new market have been total BS every time. So your increase in sales at Adobe could mean less downloads from SS too. This great news as AS has a better RPD (at least for me), but historically a lot of DLs have shifted to lower paying sites, unlimited DL models, partner sales (incl. fake "partner" sales on sites owned by the same agencies allowing double dipping into our cut), free sites etc.

3. Yes, coronavirus has been devastating to the last few weeks too, and likely to get worse as subscriptions run out and aren't renewed and more of our business buyers go under.

« Last Edit: April 03, 2020, 06:53 by Justanotherphotographer »

« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2020, 06:13 »
+3
With coronavirus, I'm seeing Shutterstock dropping fast but Adobe Stock is remaining very strong... it's almost as if SS has lost its clients to them.

« Reply #7 on: April 04, 2020, 07:53 »
+3
With coronavirus, I'm seeing Shutterstock dropping fast but Adobe Stock is remaining very strong... it's almost as if SS has lost its clients to them.
I'm not seeing that, SS is not dropping for me. Although, I would like to see Adobe stronger, or any other agency, since this domination of SS is not good for anybody except SS owners.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #8 on: April 04, 2020, 08:07 »
+4
Agencies claims of opening up new market have been total BS every time.


« Reply #9 on: April 04, 2020, 21:20 »
+1
SS has dropped quite a lot for me to less than half of what it used to be but i haven't uploaded much lately except in occasional spurts (like now when I'm home more).  Adobe was a real bright spot for a while there and I thought they might overtake SS eventually but they have dropped like a rock the past few months.  Last month I think they finished number 6 for me and are maybe fifth so far this month.  They had been a solid number three for quite a while there but are now dropping back with the others.  I do probably 35-40% editorial so that might be part of it, but they are now less than 50% of what they were 2-3 years ago.  Too bad.

« Reply #10 on: April 05, 2020, 00:08 »
+3
With coronavirus, I'm seeing Shutterstock dropping fast but Adobe Stock is remaining very strong... it's almost as if SS has lost its clients to them.
I'm not seeing that, SS is not dropping for me. Although, I would like to see Adobe stronger, or any other agency, since this domination of SS is not good for anybody except SS owners.

I'm not seeing that either. Lately, SS is surpassing AS for me in quite a significant way everything from a (wow, surprise!) EL to quite a few more $2.70 commissions, to a whole lot more regular downloads.

I don't tend to add my data to the list on the right, but what I'm seeing with my own recent sales is tracking exactly with the SS vs AS data shown in the chart here.

« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2020, 09:31 »
0
SS has dropped quite a lot for me to less than half of what it used to be but i haven't uploaded much lately except in occasional spurts (like now when I'm home more).  Adobe was a real bright spot for a while there and I thought they might overtake SS eventually but they have dropped like a rock the past few months.  Last month I think they finished number 6 for me and are maybe fifth so far this month.  They had been a solid number three for quite a while there but are now dropping back with the others.  I do probably 35-40% editorial so that might be part of it, but they are now less than 50% of what they were 2-3 years ago.  Too bad.

Agree 100% Adobe started brilliant and then just faded away! but its been tested and Adobe also play the numbers game of quantity and giving all new members a premiere spot and all glory.

« Reply #12 on: April 05, 2020, 10:43 »
+2
SS has dropped quite a lot for me to less than half of what it used to be but i haven't uploaded much lately except in occasional spurts (like now when I'm home more).  Adobe was a real bright spot for a while there and I thought they might overtake SS eventually but they have dropped like a rock the past few months.  Last month I think they finished number 6 for me and are maybe fifth so far this month.  They had been a solid number three for quite a while there but are now dropping back with the others.  I do probably 35-40% editorial so that might be part of it, but they are now less than 50% of what they were 2-3 years ago.  Too bad.

Agree 100% Adobe started brilliant and then just faded away! but its been tested and Adobe also play the numbers game of quantity and giving all new members a premiere spot and all glory.
That's not true for me. My Adobe numbers haven't dropped. You can't make conclusions about the agency in the whole just based on your, and few others, experience. I'm not saying they are not giving the new members an advantage, but we can't be sure.

« Reply #13 on: April 05, 2020, 13:58 »
0
Same kind of story for me ...despite quality or whatever ... with the cover crisis it seem like a Sunday everyday ... regarding adobe before was Fotolia with a lot of costumers in Germany and northern europe countries with are less impacted by the virus ... and the second wave will reduce more download because Brazil and USA are yet into it but they will and they will pay more than the other countries which have confined sooner ...
I'm really pessimist for the future ... but all the world is asking the same question ... Hold tight because after should some revolts if not revolutions from people who lost everything ...

« Reply #14 on: April 05, 2020, 16:26 »
+1
Mostly what others have said above - supply vastly outstripping demand plus agencies either openly or somewhat shadily working to get a larger cut or funnel the sales to other things - eg offset at SS.

For me SS is well under half what it was, both in total downloads and especially in $. Almost no big sales at all (I think maybe 1 over $10 in the last year), and a lower percent of anything other than subs.

Adobe seems to have dropped more than SS recently, but my numbers are not enough to be particularly statistically valid.

in general I think the long slide to less income will continue - with a bigger dip from the pandemic coming. Hopefully the somewhat worldwide nature of this business dulls that hit.

« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2020, 22:46 »
0
For some reason, my sales are up since the Coronavirus situation started. Had my BME on SS in March.

« Reply #16 on: April 06, 2020, 01:48 »
+1
For some reason, my sales are up since the Coronavirus situation started. Had my BME on SS in March.

Wow, thats great to hear, I am facing terrible month here.
What kind of content do you have in your portfolio?


« Reply #17 on: April 06, 2020, 04:18 »
+1
I had great sales in jan, feb and partially march. Then at the end of march they removed the 'popular' button from the search options and my sales plummeted. Most relevant shows on first page some mediocre or downright awful looking stuff

« Reply #18 on: April 06, 2020, 04:21 »
0
Had my BME on SS in March.
Same here in terms of number of downloads despite the decline at the end of the month

« Reply #19 on: April 06, 2020, 05:15 »
0
Same thing happened in November 2016. Huge drop in sales on SS. I hope it is connected with corona, but I doubt because other agencies still not affected. Besides that many of you reporting BME, or at least great sales, so probably older contributors are pushed down in search. :(

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #20 on: April 06, 2020, 12:30 »
0
Same thing happened in November 2016. Huge drop in sales on SS. I hope it is connected with corona, but I doubt because other agencies still not affected. Besides that many of you reporting BME, or at least great sales, so probably older contributors are pushed down in search. :(

No doubt about that, new files get a boost and better placement. If you upload new files, yours will also be pushed to the front for a time. If they don't get downloads, they will drop and drop.

« Reply #21 on: April 06, 2020, 16:59 »
0
I've been a contributor for 12 years now. I do it full time and upload quality photos and illustrations.

In the peak time (2016) I used to have 400 downloads a day on Shutterstock. A year ago I was happy with 200-250 downloads. These days I am getting about 130 downloads a day. DESPITE regular uploads.

I am aware of the Covid19 situation, but how is it possible the downfall is strong ? On the contrary I am getting record sales on Adobe.



Has Shutterstock fell so much for you as well ?


PS: my username was created some years ago, it's meaning may no longer be true :)

wooowww 400 dl in one day, man, you must be so rich... 130 dl in one day is ten times more than my sales, even in this state, you have very good sales. enjoy with it.

« Reply #22 on: April 07, 2020, 04:06 »
+2
I've been a contributor for 12 years now. I do it full time and upload quality photos and illustrations.

In the peak time (2016) I used to have 400 downloads a day on Shutterstock. A year ago I was happy with 200-250 downloads. These days I am getting about 130 downloads a day. DESPITE regular uploads.

I am aware of the Covid19 situation, but how is it possible the downfall is strong ? On the contrary I am getting record sales on Adobe.



Has Shutterstock fell so much for you as well ?


PS: my username was created some years ago, it's meaning may no longer be true :)

wooowww 400 dl in one day, man, you must be so rich... 130 dl in one day is ten times more than my sales, even in this state, you have very good sales. enjoy with it.
He can't enjoy with 130dl a day because he constantly reminds himself about 400dl/d :) That's in human nature. Beside, imagine how much hard work is behind it. It didn't just fall down from the sky. And seeing that your hard work is not rewarded anymore is just adding to not being happy. But, you are right, despite all that he should be happy! Those are still good numbers!

« Reply #23 on: April 07, 2020, 16:50 »
0
I've been a contributor for 12 years now. I do it full time and upload quality photos and illustrations.

In the peak time (2016) I used to have 400 downloads a day on Shutterstock. A year ago I was happy with 200-250 downloads. These days I am getting about 130 downloads a day. DESPITE regular uploads.

I am aware of the Covid19 situation, but how is it possible the downfall is strong ? On the contrary I am getting record sales on Adobe.



Has Shutterstock fell so much for you as well ?


PS: my username was created some years ago, it's meaning may no longer be true :)

wooowww 400 dl in one day, man, you must be so rich... 130 dl in one day is ten times more than my sales, even in this state, you have very good sales. enjoy with it.
He can't enjoy with 130dl a day because he constantly reminds himself about 400dl/d :) That's in human nature. Beside, imagine how much hard work is behind it. It didn't just fall down from the sky. And seeing that your hard work is not rewarded anymore is just adding to not being happy. But, you are right, despite all that he should be happy! Those are still good numbers!

I am same with you, 130 dl in one day is really great success these days, yes, BELIEVEME...GREAT!!!!!

« Reply #24 on: April 07, 2020, 17:28 »
+1
In a sense Adobe is worse then SS. Fotolia was great for me then came Adobe and wrecked a good agency. I had reached Emerald at Fotolia but that meant nothing when Adobe took over.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #25 on: April 08, 2020, 11:07 »
+2
In a sense Adobe is worse then SS. Fotolia was great for me then came Adobe and wrecked a good agency. I had reached Emerald at Fotolia but that meant nothing when Adobe took over.

Why does that mean nothing?

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html

Lifetime Downloads    Minimum Subscription Royalty
0-999    $0.33
1,000-9,999    $0.36
10,000 and above    $0.38

Maybe they don't have cute metal or jewel names but you still make more than "Bronze and Silver".  ;D Is that .38 a drop from what FT paid for the same subscription downloads?

Other royalties were raised and standardized, making them higher than Fotolia was. There's the bonus program, which I understand doesn't mean everyone benefits, but any artist type can now get a free years subscription to one of the CC products, for free. Only 150 downloads needed. That's not a huge number?

I can't speak if overall downloads changed, some people say they make more, some say they make less. I dropped FT when DPC came in, and only re-joined when Adobe bought them.

If the problem is lower sales, not lower royalties, that's a different issue than being Emerald and somehow getting less commission? Or both maybe?

« Reply #26 on: April 08, 2020, 12:03 »
+1
In a sense Adobe is worse then SS. Fotolia was great for me then came Adobe and wrecked a good agency. I had reached Emerald at Fotolia but that meant nothing when Adobe took over.

No, they have not wrecked it. It is just not better for you but that does not mean that it is worse for everybody. Many other contributors are happy with the performance of Adobe Stock (including me).


« Reply #27 on: April 08, 2020, 12:54 »
+1
I uploaded significantly more last year and was seeing an income bump from that effort that is now gone. Before March my SS income was on a strong upward trajectory, doubling from December to January, and then doubling again from January to February. But it dropped 75% in March, as the coronavirus really hit the US, and April has been abysmal.

Much of my content is travel oriented, and most of it is US-based, so not a surprise. I added a lot of backgrounds and illustrations in 2019, and some coronavirus- themed images this year, but this is not making up for the drop in my travel image my best-sellers.

Concepts around the US election were selling until the primary and general election were eclipsed by the coronavirus. Bernie dropping out isn't going to change that in terms of the images I have.

Adobe's promise still hasn't come through for me to the extent I'd hoped, despite higher RPI and steady earnings since last year. With a significant reliance on travel images in my portfolio, I recognize that this puts me at a disadvantage, not just because oof the coronavirus, but also because Adobe appeals more to designers than editorial buyers.

Now that I am limited by what I can shoot at home, I've been brainstorming timely ideas, but it has been hard to motivate myself to shoot when sales are drying up. I've been cooking a lot and keep thinking I should shoot what I cook but with all the photos on instagram, are people going to bother buying them from stock sites in a tumbling economy?
« Last Edit: April 08, 2020, 13:06 by wordplanet »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #28 on: April 09, 2020, 13:45 »
+2
In a sense Adobe is worse then SS. Fotolia was great for me then came Adobe and wrecked a good agency. I had reached Emerald at Fotolia but that meant nothing when Adobe took over.

No, they have not wrecked it. It is just not better for you but that does not mean that it is worse for everybody. Many other contributors are happy with the performance of Adobe Stock (including me).

Here's what happened when Adobe took over. I can't compare the percentages for the other licenses, that could have dropped or increased. And I think for many people, sales could have dropped. But the point is, Emeralds did not get cut, they actually got a raise.



White or whatever it was, was eliminated, (I didn't know that?) everyone starts as Bronze? 6c raise. Silver 7c raise. Gold, Emerald, Sapphire, Ruby all got a raise. The only people making less were the ones with over 1,000,000 downloads.

If someone is making less, maybe the reason is less sales. Or what else changed? Type of licenses? But everyone is getting more per sub except who? Anyone here who had 1 Million downloads?  :)



« Reply #29 on: April 09, 2020, 19:32 »
+1
Anyone here who had 1 Million downloads?  :)

Definitely not moi! :D

« Reply #30 on: April 10, 2020, 04:01 »
0
In a sense Adobe is worse then SS. Fotolia was great for me then came Adobe and wrecked a good agency. I had reached Emerald at Fotolia but that meant nothing when Adobe took over.

Why does that mean nothing?

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html

Lifetime Downloads    Minimum Subscription Royalty
0-999    $0.33
1,000-9,999    $0.36
10,000 and above    $0.38

Maybe they don't have cute metal or jewel names but you still make more than "Bronze and Silver".  ;D Is that .38 a drop from what FT paid for the same subscription downloads?

Other royalties were raised and standardized, making them higher than Fotolia was. There's the bonus program, which I understand doesn't mean everyone benefits, but any artist type can now get a free years subscription to one of the CC products, for free. Only 150 downloads needed. That's not a huge number?

I can't speak if overall downloads changed, some people say they make more, some say they make less. I dropped FT when DPC came in, and only re-joined when Adobe bought them.

If the problem is lower sales, not lower royalties, that's a different issue than being Emerald and somehow getting less commission? Or both maybe?


Not sure I understand what you are trying to say?..I reached Emerald about six month's before the Adobe takeover and was earning very well indeed. Adobe came along and after two month my income was down by 50%  and I wasn't alone I spoke to at least a dozen members in my position and it was all the same down by 50%  the sales started to go to lower members with a lower royalty percentage....Adobe treats Fotolia as a side-kick thats all.

« Reply #31 on: April 10, 2020, 05:41 »
0
Just popping in to say SS keeps degrading for me, while Adobe is skyrocketing. Now I'am getting 160dl a day on Adobe hah. This keeps me wondering how can one agency be affected so much by the coronavirus (SS), and another agency (Adobe) is selling like crazy in these crazy times.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #32 on: April 10, 2020, 11:53 »
+1
In a sense Adobe is worse then SS. Fotolia was great for me then came Adobe and wrecked a good agency. I had reached Emerald at Fotolia but that meant nothing when Adobe took over.

Why does that mean nothing?

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html

Lifetime Downloads    Minimum Subscription Royalty
0-999    $0.33
1,000-9,999    $0.36
10,000 and above    $0.38

Maybe they don't have cute metal or jewel names but you still make more than "Bronze and Silver".  ;D Is that .38 a drop from what FT paid for the same subscription downloads?

Other royalties were raised and standardized, making them higher than Fotolia was. There's the bonus program, which I understand doesn't mean everyone benefits, but any artist type can now get a free years subscription to one of the CC products, for free. Only 150 downloads needed. That's not a huge number?

I can't speak if overall downloads changed, some people say they make more, some say they make less. I dropped FT when DPC came in, and only re-joined when Adobe bought them.

If the problem is lower sales, not lower royalties, that's a different issue than being Emerald and somehow getting less commission? Or both maybe?


Not sure I understand what you are trying to say?..I reached Emerald about six month's before the Adobe takeover and was earning very well indeed. Adobe came along and after two month my income was down by 50%  and I wasn't alone I spoke to at least a dozen members in my position and it was all the same down by 50%  the sales started to go to lower members with a lower royalty percentage....Adobe treats Fotolia as a side-kick thats all.

You made less and your sales were less, but if you look, you actually got a raise. Everyone except Rainbow or whatever that one is, got a raise. And because you were Emerald you made 38 cents instead of 33 cents for a sub. That's subs, it's near impossible to figure out how the others changed. So if becoming Emerald did nothing, I'd disagree.

But the other part seems to be what many people found. Less sales, lower commissions on sales, and in general, less earnings. I don't think it has to do with being Emerald or not, was my point?

You'll have to wait for someone who has found better sales from AS than FT and I can't make that claim as I left during DPC and came back after Adobe. There are some people who are saying that their sales picked up after Adobe, and others like you have found their income has dropped after Adobe. Maybe the flood of new people and returning artists had something to do with taking away your business?

I do feel that the drop is unfortunate since you worked hard and stuck with FT for so long. I can't see much of a change except, like other times when there's re-organization, more things were made subs and less specific licenses. Look at the whole old FT thing, image sizes and a shopping list of different types. Adobe simplified. FT had Royalty based on size?

We've also been making less at SS even though no commission cuts. Same things happened, Licenses changed, priced charged changed, less EL, OD and Single. So Oh nice, I make the same commission, but the agency charges less, so in reality, I make less.

Just a guess that that's part of what happened at Adobe?

Hopefully someone else who didn't leave will know how their percentages changed. But subs didn't go down, everyone makes more now, than we did before. I kind of like the 99c subs.  :) But I still don't make as much as I do on SS.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #33 on: April 10, 2020, 12:01 »
+1
Anyone here who had 1 Million downloads?  :)

Definitely not moi! :D

Reminds me of when Bigstock started levels and all someone needed was 50,000 downloads a year to go up. If I had stayed there from the time I joined in 2008, I still wouldn't have 50,000 downloads. How anyone got to 1 million on FT, they must have been really big and prolific.

I didn't take notes on all the changes, but basically, I used to get 50c a download on BS. After SS took over, I got 25c a download. Talk about cuts!

IS dropped the independent people to 15% for photo and 20% for illustrations. Oh thank you.

Adobe bought FT and gave us all a raise FOR SUBS, but cut the price by size accounting. I'm just guessing that could have been what cut all the higher people down and made their earnings drop up to 60%?

 

« Reply #34 on: April 10, 2020, 12:12 »
0
...
« Last Edit: April 10, 2020, 13:18 by pics2 »

« Reply #35 on: April 12, 2020, 11:17 »
+1
Not sure I understand what you are trying to say?..I reached Emerald about six month's before the Adobe takeover and was earning very well indeed. Adobe came along and after two month my income was down by 50%  and I wasn't alone I spoke to at least a dozen members in my position and it was all the same down by 50%  the sales started to go to lower members with a lower royalty percentage....Adobe treats Fotolia as a side-kick thats all.

Once again. Because YOU are getting less money on Adobe does not mean that EVERYBODY does and that the agency was ruined and it is a side-kick (it has been integrated to Photoshop and other Creative Cloud apps,...). It is true that for some people, the direction of Adobe Stock is not great, but for many people it is opposite. The polls here are also showing the fact that Shutterstock which was way higher than Fotolia, is nowadays comparable. So, it does not seem that you are true. If Adobe is failing than all others are failing much faster.

For example, for me, Adobe Stock extremely improved in recent times and is far better than SS. But I am not saying that Adobe is better than SS only because it is true in MY case.

wds

« Reply #36 on: April 12, 2020, 13:21 »
0
Generally speaking in terms of ups and downs, it's as much about the direction as the quantities. Upward trends at any level are very encouraging, downward trends at any level are very discouraging


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
3149 Views
Last post December 27, 2012, 15:44
by Microbius
34 Replies
54071 Views
Last post January 21, 2015, 10:11
by mendopato
63 Replies
15553 Views
Last post November 29, 2015, 19:16
by Digital66
10 Replies
5431 Views
Last post March 11, 2017, 10:47
by helloitsme
6 Replies
3920 Views
Last post February 06, 2018, 10:14
by trucic

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle