pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: I reached level 2 today! How is your progress?  (Read 10540 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SVH

« Reply #100 on: January 13, 2022, 13:46 »
+2
As with all the agencies, we don't really know anything about who's downloading what. We have to trust them.
That is why I got out of Alamy. You are dependent on clients that report uses but nobody checks. I don't have a blind faith in people's good intentions. Same goes for companies as Wirestock. You have to trust that every sale that is made, through them, will be reported back to you and they are only the middleman, so you need to trust them, the agency and the client. Greed is around the corner, everywhere, honesty is not, unfortunately.


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #101 on: January 13, 2022, 14:53 »
+2
And I ask myself, who uses 750 subscription images a month
Magazine publishing houses which may put out dozens of titles per month.

« Reply #102 on: January 13, 2022, 15:19 »
+1
Not to mention ad agencies and designersthe monthly fee is a pittance compared to the historical cost of image acquisition. Be that custom or stock. Dont forget about bloggers either. Prolific bloggers can easily justify the larger subscription packages, even if they dont use their entire quota every month.

« Reply #103 on: January 13, 2022, 17:06 »
+1
In fact I would say that SS designed it so that the bigger packages would be attractive to more buyers - instead of a 25/day limit, make it 750/month - or whatever, and who knows what secret under the table deals they have going on. They don't really care how many are available in the subscription, they know most places won't use anywhere near the total and all they have to pay is .10 each - at least until they feel the need to lower what they pay us. I would even say that a lot of the reason they changed the terms was so that they could charge less and still make plenty of $.

Wait for the first quarter earnings report to see what %age they are actually paying out overall. My guess is pretty low.

« Reply #104 on: January 14, 2022, 07:00 »
0
Hello
Im mainly a video contrubitor to shutterstock
I know i went back to level 1 January but allthough the number of sales not much different than last years January, im getting way too many 1 dollar 2 dollar 3 dollar sales since January 1
Did something changed about sales policy of SS
Any similar situation out there?


newbielink:https://www.shutterstock.com/g/scubadesign/video?rid=600961 [nonactive]

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #105 on: January 14, 2022, 10:37 »
0
In fact I would say that SS designed it so that the bigger packages would be attractive to more buyers - instead of a 25/day limit, make it 750/month - or whatever, and who knows what secret under the table deals they have going on. They don't really care how many are available in the subscription, they know most places won't use anywhere near the total and all they have to pay is .10 each - at least until they feel the need to lower what they pay us. I would even say that a lot of the reason they changed the terms was so that they could charge less and still make plenty of $.

Wait for the first quarter earnings report to see what %age they are actually paying out overall. My guess is pretty low.

True but we don't really know and anecdotal evidence that many buyers don't use their allotment doesn't mean also, how many other don't use their allotment. The real answer would be, how many use the whole 350 a month and how many don't? But the argument remains, we are being paid for the allotment, not the actual number of downloads, and there's no arguing against that, it's a fact.  :)

I'd also agree that we can see something of what the cost of our work is, from the first quarter earnings. I don't know if it's that specific that the report shows paid to contributors or something like cost of goods sold?

I'd be hard pressed to find a quote but Jon used to say, early on, that he made a profit on subscriptions because most people never used their full amount allowed. Which makes sense because how could he pay us 38 a download that he was only collecting 39 cents for each download. Someone has to pay for that floor of the Empire State Building, all the employees, the servers and storage and other expenses.

He also used to say that just over 20% was paid out to contributors. Now I don't know if that was 20% of the profits or 20% of the Net?

...But we don't really know if someone is so stupid that they use 200 images a month and buy the 750 plan or do they actually pay attention and buy the 350 plan? And I ask myself, who uses 750 subscription images a month or who's willing to pay $199 a month for up to 350 images a month? Why? For what?...

As with all the agencies, we don't really know anything about who's downloading what. We have to trust them.

However, the very likely source of unused downloads is corporate buyers where the people who handle the budget want to be able to allocate a sum to cover all the needs without any further requests for money from one department or another. During vacation-heavy seasons - spring break, summer, "the holidays" - there will be low usage of the annual subscriptions such organizations probably buy.

Shutterstock's VP of Finance pointed out early in the pandemic how well SS did from unused subscriptions - money coming in but no royalties to pay - so it really does happen even now. Way back when, Jon Oringer was direct about wanting to see how download patterns changed after a price increase before increasing our royalty amount per subscription. But that was when it was still 25 a day - which gave them a built-in buffer of weekends with few or no downloads.

The other factor to consider is discounts - amounts below the posted price offered to entice a would-be-departing customer to stay or a new one to subscribe. All the agencies do that (look at your Adobe Stock subscription amounts to see discounted royalties from the nominal $3.30, $0.99, $0.66 amounts). Shutterstock can now afford to discount much more heavily than when they had that 38 cent royalty to consider...

More good points. The last one is interesting because they could be selling these packs for less than the advertised prices and losing even more money on every download. Yes, some big businesses like to have neat expense columns, easy is annual subscription.

Something I only thought of just now, those corporate rates and unlimited contracts, which have to be creating many of our Dime Downloads as SSTK pays us the minimum guaranteed in the contract. Those aren't even the absurdly high 750, they are "unlimited"

And I ask myself, who uses 750 subscription images a month
Magazine publishing houses which may put out dozens of titles per month.

Yes, but, why are the majority of my downloads at any level, all year long 10 cents? And I concluded these are coming from 750 packs, not 350 packs. Most of my downloads are from 750 packs? I thought the magazine market was down because of digital and the Internet. How many of these Big Publishing houses can there be?

SSTK is making money, they are losing money on the majority of 10 downloads. Especially from the 750 packs. How can that be? And personally my downloads volume is down, which means besides making less for each one, I'm getting less volume.

This just doesn't add up?

« Last Edit: January 14, 2022, 10:40 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #106 on: January 14, 2022, 14:32 »
0
I reached level 3. "25% royalty earnings as of Jan 13",  and half of today's downloads are still 10 cents.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #107 on: January 14, 2022, 16:30 »
0
I reached level 3. "25% royalty earnings as of Jan 13",  and half of today's downloads are still 10 cents.

Exactly what I'm trying to point out. Those are minimal cost for buyers, which wouldn't make the guaranteed minimum 10 commission, if paid at 15-20-25% and sometimes higher. Why are we getting mostly those?

Because SSTK is selling images at such a low price with the unlimited, the API and the large subscription packs.

Hardly anyone is buying singles, or 10/25 packs, or ELs anymore, where 25% would be a better number.

« Reply #108 on: January 14, 2022, 17:56 »
0
I reached level 3. "25% royalty earnings as of Jan 13",  and half of today's downloads are still 10 cents.

But this knowledge is not new either. You know this from last year and the year before last from Level 5.

« Reply #109 on: January 15, 2022, 07:59 »
0
I know i went back to level 1 January but allthough the number of sales not much different than last years January, im getting way too many 1 dollar 2 dollar 3 dollar sales since January 1
Did something changed about sales policy of SS
Any similar situation out there?
I also mainly create videos.
I didn't have any videos on SS in January 2021, not until August. That's why I can't compare.
But I see a gigantic difference compared to December last year.
Now in January my portfolio was in weekend mode for the first 9 days. Only then there were a bit more downloads, but much less than in December. Mostly for a few dollars between $1,- and $4,-, but also one for over $10,- and one for over $20,-.
RPD for my video sales last month (december) is $10.06

My AS portfolio was also in weekend mode for the first 9 days of January, but then it took off very well right away. Fewer downloads than SS but already 3x as many earnings so far.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2022, 07:33 by Findura »

« Reply #110 on: January 18, 2022, 18:25 »
+3
Looks like I might make less than I did my first month Jan 2014.  Thats ten times less than my monthly peak.

« Reply #111 on: January 19, 2022, 00:43 »
0
Looks like I might make less than I did my first month Jan 2014.  Thats ten times less than my monthly peak.


I had to go back to 2011 to find similar earnings compared to the first half of January 2022.
 
Comparing my numbers after the levels change from the first part of Jan 2021 to 2022, my DL's are 22% less and my $$ are 28% less.

« Reply #112 on: January 19, 2022, 10:33 »
+3
Looks like I might make less than I did my first month Jan 2014.  Thats ten times less than my monthly peak.


I had to go back to 2011 to find similar earnings compared to the first half of January 2022.
 
Comparing my numbers after the levels change from the first part of Jan 2021 to 2022, my DL's are 22% less and my $$ are 28% less.

If the trend holds, I even have to go back to January 2010 to find similarly low earnings. My alltime best month was 9 times as high. Level 4 already.

« Reply #113 on: January 19, 2022, 12:05 »
0
Just reached 101 with a piss poor start.   ::)

Extrapolating based on this months earnings for 2022 I'll be lucky to see $600 this year as opposed to $3,000 on my best year in 2018.

« Reply #114 on: January 19, 2022, 16:35 »
+2
At this rate, I'll have to go back to January 1930 to find similarly low earnings.

« Reply #115 on: January 20, 2022, 06:15 »
+1
SSTK is making money, they are losing money on the majority of 10 downloads. Especially from the 750 packs. How can that be? And personally my downloads volume is down, which means besides making less for each one, I'm getting less volume.

This just doesn't add up?

I suspect they're making money on the 10c massive subscription packages purely because a large number of buyers don't download their full quota every month.
So they get all the package revenue but only pay out for the images sold.

Contrast this to IS who calculate payments based on what was actually bought and sold.

« Reply #116 on: January 20, 2022, 06:16 »
+2
At this rate, I'll have to go back to January 1930 to find similarly low earnings.

At least $5 was a lot of money in 1930!


« Reply #117 on: January 20, 2022, 06:40 »
+5
Progress? Which progress?

Some have to go back to 1930. I have to go back to Ramses II.

S2D2

« Reply #118 on: January 20, 2022, 06:53 »
0
Progress? Which progress?

Some have to go back to 1930. I have to go back to Ramses II.

Put your hand up if you just Googled 'Ramses II'

🙋‍♀️

« Reply #119 on: January 20, 2022, 06:59 »
0
 ;D

« Reply #120 on: January 20, 2022, 14:49 »
+1
Abu Simbel, Ramses II

« Reply #121 on: January 20, 2022, 16:06 »
+2
Sales vol at SS is about normal but $ are running at about 40% of what would be normal >:( robbing bast....
« Last Edit: January 20, 2022, 16:08 by HalfFull »

« Reply #122 on: January 20, 2022, 16:13 »
0
I am a little amazed myself. The numbers at shutterstock are absolutely miserable. But they are actually better than at the same time last January. However, at the end of the month there were still some notable SODs coming in - let's see if that works out this year as well.

« Reply #123 on: January 20, 2022, 17:05 »
0
I am a little amazed myself. The numbers at shutterstock are absolutely miserable. But they are actually better than at the same time last January. However, at the end of the month there were still some notable SODs coming in - let's see if that works out this year as well.

It's funny you should say that but, my stats are the same. As soon as I hit level 4 last year (around the 20th), things started to improve. Here's hoping the last week and a bit will be a lot better!

Given the volumes the $ difference is tiny. Just over $2 difference between 2021 & 2022 by the 19th.

« Reply #124 on: January 20, 2022, 17:39 »
0
I am a little amazed myself. The numbers at shutterstock are absolutely miserable. But they are actually better than at the same time last January. However, at the end of the month there were still some notable SODs coming in - let's see if that works out this year as well.

It's funny you should say that but, my stats are the same. As soon as I hit level 4 last year (around the 20th), things started to improve. Here's hoping the last week and a bit will be a lot better!

Given the volumes the $ difference is tiny. Just over $2 difference between 2021 & 2022 by the 19th.

Even though it may look similar for us, there is a significant difference:

The times when I would have reached level 4 on the 20th are over for me. Last year, that was at the beginning of February. So you're way ahead of me.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
3769 Views
Last post February 26, 2008, 11:21
by fotografer
7 Replies
4366 Views
Last post April 03, 2008, 04:17
by vphoto
5 Replies
1954 Views
Last post November 11, 2012, 21:11
by linma
5 Replies
2161 Views
Last post March 18, 2013, 04:15
by morning.light
7 Replies
2752 Views
Last post February 19, 2021, 14:07
by gnirtS

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle