MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Is Shutterstock ending 25 a day subs in favor of monthly limits?  (Read 43667 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 15, 2015, 11:13 »
+2
It looks like Shutterstock is selling subscriptions to some customers without the 25/day restriction and instead doing 750/month.  This should mean more downloads for contributors and lower margins for SS.  Will they raise prices, lower royalties, or take the hit to their profits?  Or is this a short term test that most customers won't have access to?
« Last Edit: March 15, 2015, 15:37 by tickstock »


« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2015, 11:40 »
+7
without the 25/day restriction and instead doing 750/month.  This should mean more downloads for contributors and lower margins for SS

I doubt it will make much difference. Except that it sounds like a much better offer. AFAIK the whole point of all you can eat is that most people tend not to pig-out.

« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2015, 11:42 »
+2
You don't think there will be more downloads?  I would expect there to be more, otherwise why would they put in the restriction in the first place? 

Shelma1

« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2015, 11:50 »
+5
Shutterstock tests their offers in an A/B split before extending them to everyone. I'm sure their test showed this offer was more attractive and would get more people to sign up. The number of DLs per month has stayed the same. It sounds more exciting to have no daily limits, but what difference does it make, other than that verbiage leading to better ROI in customer acquisition? The goal here is more market share, would be my guess.

(This is in direct opposition to iS, who just tosses stuff against the wall hoping something will stick.)

« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2015, 11:57 »
+1
You don't think there will be more downloads?

I don't believe that there will be more downloads because of the limits are lifted. But I do believe it is possible that there will be more downloads as a result of them attracting more customers with what seems like a more attractive offer.

People can only use so much content - and in most ways subscription is about the service rather than a specific quantity of images. ie for most people subscription is probably about getting all you need - not all you can get. Even if they offered unlimited downloads I doubt that many more images would be downloaded per genuine subscriber.

(The case against unlimited downloads is that it would be difficult to stop contributors working together to download each other's images)

« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2015, 12:00 »
0
I'm sure their test showed this offer was more attractive and would get more people to sign up. The number of DLs per month has stayed the same.
Yes I'm sure it's more attractive because customers will download more.  I doubt you know what downloads per customer are for these new subscriptions since they just started.  Over the next few months, if it is rolled out to most customers then I would expect downloads to go up.  I don't think you will see anything on the first few days it's rolled out to a small percentage of customers.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2015, 12:01 »
+1
It looks like Shutterstock is selling subscriptions to some customers without the 25/day restriction and instead doing 750/month.  This should mean more downloads for contributors and lower margins for SS.  Will they raise prices, lower royalties, or take the hit to their profits?  Or is this a short term test that most customers won't have access to?

It looks like
This should

New conspiracy theory?

But I must admit that these last weeks I have seen less and less SOD :(

« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2015, 12:03 »
0
No conspiracy, they have already started selling them.  I have been offered this new subscription and people have been talking about it on twitter, so I know I'm not the only one.

« Reply #8 on: March 15, 2015, 12:05 »
0
Wait a second, what test are you all talking about? What am I missing?  ???

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #9 on: March 15, 2015, 12:08 »
0
I see nothing on their forum. Strange, such a change should generate a very active discussion I think

« Reply #10 on: March 15, 2015, 12:09 »
+1
If I go and try to renew, it currently still says that my subscription would be a 25/day deal. Maybe they're not rolling this out across the board yet?

You don't think there will be more downloads?  I would expect there to be more, otherwise why would they put in the restriction in the first place?

People who max out their subscription quotas daily are a very small percentage of subscribers. I've known a good number of subscribers personally and been one on and off myself, and I've never encountered anyone who frequently used up the entire day's quota. Or came close to 750 per month. I'm sure some people/companies do it, but they must be the exception, not the rule.

Keep in mind that the point at which the cost of a subscription makes sense over On Demand packs is pretty low. If you need more than 25 images per month, it makes sense to just subscribe instead of buying images individually or in packs. So there will be a lot of people who never even come close to downloading 750 per month or 25 per day. You could literally download 1 image per day and the subscription would still be worthwhile.

Releasing the 25/day limitation isn't going to change the buying behavior of most subscribers.

Shelma1

« Reply #11 on: March 15, 2015, 12:13 »
+1
I'm sure their test showed this offer was more attractive and would get more people to sign up. The number of DLs per month has stayed the same.
Yes I'm sure it's more attractive because customers will download more.  I doubt you know what downloads per customer are for these new subscriptions since they just started.  Over the next few months, if it is rolled out to most customers then I would expect downloads to go up.  I don't think you will see anything on the first few days it's rolled out to a small percentage of customers.

Well, I hope you're right and customers will make more DLs, but I doubt it. It seems to me SS would lose money that way, since they pay us a flat rate for subs. And I doubt they'd roll out something that didn't make them more money.

« Reply #12 on: March 15, 2015, 12:16 »
0
I see nothing on their forum. Strange, such a change should generate a very active discussion I think
Might be that new or a small trial?

« Reply #13 on: March 15, 2015, 12:25 »
+2
...I doubt they'd roll out something that didn't make them more money.

Exactly. They already know that most people don't use up their daily quotas. This has to be a pretty low-risk move, lifting the daily restriction. They wouldn't do it if they thought a lot of people would alter their downloading behavior.

Shelma1

« Reply #14 on: March 15, 2015, 12:39 »
0
The offer could very well still be in testing if not everyone's seeing it. Though if people are tweeting about it, the cat's halfway out of the bag.

« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2015, 12:42 »
0
if people are tweeting about it, the cat's halfway out of the bag.

1 person seems to have Tweeted about it from what I can see.

« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2015, 12:47 »
+3
It could result in FEWER downloads! (more $ for SS) :P
Imagine you're a designer working on a project and not sure of which images you'll be using. You have this 25 a day quota so at the end of the day you fill it up with possible images you may use in the next few days so you don't run out of choices.
Instead, now (other than near the end of the month) you're working away. Tomorrow you may need a bunch of images, so you no longer have to download 25 possible images, you simply wait and download the exact images you need tomorrow while working on the project.


« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2015, 13:21 »
+1
if people are tweeting about it, the cat's halfway out of the bag.

1 person seems to have Tweeted about it from what I can see.

I had searched a little while ago on Twitter and couldn't find anything about that. I did find a couple of interesting tid bits, including one person wanting to know if anyone had 5 spare SS downloads they'd be willing to give him! No replies (but then you'd have to be daft to admit publicly to doing that).

Any links to these tweets about changes in subs?

As far as encouraging more subs, I don't see that as being very interesting for contributors. The good months are those in which the OD/SOD/EL numbers are good - that's the business I'd like to see continue to grow

« Reply #18 on: March 15, 2015, 13:29 »
0
if people are tweeting about it, the cat's halfway out of the bag.

1 person seems to have Tweeted about it from what I can see.

I had searched a little while ago on Twitter and couldn't find anything about that. I did find a couple of interesting tid bits, including one person wanting to know if anyone had 5 spare SS downloads they'd be willing to give him! No replies (but then you'd have to be daft to admit publicly to doing that).

Any links to these tweets about changes in subs?

As far as encouraging more subs, I don't see that as being very interesting for contributors. The good months are those in which the OD/SOD/EL numbers are good - that's the business I'd like to see continue to grow
https://twitter.com/AdamParks/
SS replied:Shutterstock ‏@Shutterstock Mar 13

@AdamParks We're excited too! Thanks for the shout-out, Adam. :)


Milinz

« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2015, 14:00 »
0
if people are tweeting about it, the cat's halfway out of the bag.

1 person seems to have Tweeted about it from what I can see.

I had searched a little while ago on Twitter and couldn't find anything about that. I did find a couple of interesting tid bits, including one person wanting to know if anyone had 5 spare SS downloads they'd be willing to give him! No replies (but then you'd have to be daft to admit publicly to doing that).

Any links to these tweets about changes in subs?

As far as encouraging more subs, I don't see that as being very interesting for contributors. The good months are those in which the OD/SOD/EL numbers are good - that's the business I'd like to see continue to grow
https://twitter.com/AdamParks/
SS replied:Shutterstock ‏@Shutterstock Mar 13

@AdamParks We're excited too! Thanks for the shout-out, Adam. :)

I look forward to the increase income. How many subscribers will make 25 downloads a day. When SS does this you can be sure they tested the plan 1st. As I make more for more downloads I will like it more.

Shelma1

« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2015, 14:22 »
+11
Can I just point out how disingenuous the title of this thread is? If you're first reading it you might think SS is ending subs. All they're doing is lifting the 25-per-day-limit, but keeping the monthly limit, the pricing, everything else the same. In other words, it's just a marketing tactic to attract new customers. They're not lowering prices, they're not changing what we get paid, they're not ending anything, they're not giving any more content to customers. (In fact, this might just be a test.)

On the other hand, it looks to me like iS HAS lowered credit pricing. And if you're not sure whether iStock is doing poorly, here's a Bloomberg interview posted by jjneff in the iStock forums:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2015-03-02/why-the-blurry-outlook-for-getty-images-

« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2015, 14:35 »
-2
Can I just point out how disingenuous the title of this thread is? If you're first reading it you might think SS is ending subs. All they're doing is lifting the 25-per-day-limit, but keeping the monthly limit, the pricing, everything else the same. In other words, it's just a marketing tactic to attract new customers. They're not lowering prices, they're not changing what we get paid, they're not ending anything, they're not giving any more content to customers. (In fact, this might just be a test.)
I think once customers know that some people are getting 750/month they will ask for that rather than the 25/day model.  It seems that once they start this they probably will have to do it for everyone.  How would you feel getting the worse subscription plan while other people are paying the same for the better one?
« Last Edit: March 15, 2015, 14:38 by tickstock »

Uncle Pete

« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2015, 15:15 »
+1
Probably won't make any difference to me, I don't have any buyers who DL their 25-A-Day of anything I do. Might be good news for designers and people who shoot popular and topical things and especially vector artists.

If I get more subs, I'm all for it. What I'd like to watch is someone who's warehousing images, (not that it's legal in the contract) come and spend a day downloading their entire quota. Then they have nothing to use for a month. A project comes in and there's something they "must have" so they have to pay for a SOD or ODD.  :)

This is all based on IF, since it's you and one guy on Twitter so far. Maybe tomorrow it will roll out officially or maybe it's something that needs to be programmed in a rolling change, so the whole system doesn't come to it's knees.

Looks like a positive change, allowing people to access what they need, when they need it and since we still get paid the same and the price seems to be the same. Good News. Some people will be making more on their subs. Could be that pay increase that people have been looking for?

Unlike IS that just announced reduced price credits and a 20% discount which means, we'll all make less on every credit sale...  :-\



It looks like Shutterstock is selling subscriptions to some customers without the 25/day restriction and instead doing 750/month.  This should mean more downloads for contributors and lower margins for SS.  Will they raise prices, lower royalties, or take the hit to their profits?  Or is this a short term test that most customers won't have access to?

« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2015, 15:48 »
-5
Looks like a positive change, allowing people to access what they need, when they need it and since we still get paid the same and the price seems to be the same. Good News. Some people will be making more on their subs. Could be that pay increase that people have been looking for?
I think it is positive right now but only if they take the hit for the increased payouts.  They've said they like to keep the payout rate consistent, in order to do that they will need to adjust royalties down or increase the subscription cost otherwise margins will be down.  I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theories but they could also push sales to lower royalty contributors, which I doubt they would.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2015, 15:51 by tickstock »

« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2015, 15:49 »
-1
I think it will mean lower pay for contributors, on the one hand it can mean more downloads of contributors images but that means more pay out from SS to contributors even though they are collecting the same amount of money by consumers so the only advantage would be trying to take costumers from iStock to compensate for everything. In the end when profits drop for SS and their Stock Holders the contributors will end up with lower compensation.

At some point there is a bottom before the entire thing comes apart and the industry falls apart. I personally think we are getting close to that bottom before veteran photographers and even new photographers say "it's not worth my time, effort and capital to produce images for these agencies anymore."

When that happens is the time photographers will have the opportunity to step in with their own sites, so start making yours now and join forces with other photographers.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
2091 Views
Last post August 29, 2007, 08:41
by souper
6 Replies
2949 Views
Last post March 02, 2012, 12:33
by Pixart
38 Replies
7575 Views
Last post November 18, 2013, 16:59
by Uncle Pete
62 Replies
8567 Views
Last post April 06, 2015, 20:37
by robhainer
43 Replies
12044 Views
Last post December 23, 2016, 22:37
by helloitsme

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results