MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Last SS Raise - May 13, 2008 - 2013 Q1 RPI download increases 8% to $2.29  (Read 15806 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

vlad_the_imp

« Reply #25 on: February 07, 2013, 10:39 »
+2
Quote
I'd still rather have 10x $0.38 than one $3, wouldn't you?

Yes, I agree, I think IS went wrong  by making prices too high, it's more the principle of people applauding sales at such a low price point. I'd rather have 10 x $5, as an unrealistic comparison.


« Reply #26 on: February 07, 2013, 13:30 »
+3
Quote
Personally I think 0.38 for subs is already a lot better than most sites

 Where else would someone, producing a unique creative product, think that being paid 38 cents for it was something to celebrate. People running agencies and their backers and shareholders, must have a really good laugh in private.

I have to agree.  I think we're seriously losing perspective over time.  The bottom line is that the perceived value of imagery has been gutted.   Photographers are adapting, by concentrating on photos that are either dirt cheap to produce, or can sell zillions of times - and the former is a lot easier.  We don't see all the good photos, the niche subjects, that no one bothers to do because it can't pay off with this dumb one-size-fits-all pricing. 

Some people can make today's model work because their material is cheap and easy to shoot, yet there is some demand for it.  For others, it doesn't work and money is left on the table.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2013, 13:32 by stockastic »

« Reply #27 on: February 07, 2013, 13:44 »
+2
and money is left on the table.

That should be typed in giant letters.

« Reply #28 on: February 07, 2013, 14:23 »
0

If you have earned $10,000 in lifetime earnings, we will increase your payment per Standard License download to 38 per download. This is a raise of 8 (27%) per download over the current applicable rate of 30.


Does this apply to all earnings including from referrals?

« Reply #29 on: February 11, 2013, 00:27 »
0


Some people can make today's model work because their material is cheap and easy to shoot, yet there is some demand for it.  For others, it doesn't work and money is left on the table.

honestly that is why I keep up with microstock. It lets me make money with almost no overhead other then camera gear that I buy, but honestly I would end up with the gear with or without microstock.
But no my goal is to keep cost as low as possible. I shoot stuff I already have, or stuff I'm already doing, or places I'm already going. If I need a model I photograph myself or my kids. If I need new subject matter it either has to be under 10 bucks or something I can justify using for day to day life.
So far this has worked and those cheap images have done alright and cost wise I'm doing great as most shots can be done for * near free.


I'd still rather have 10x $0.38 than one $3, wouldn't you?  I prefer making more money overall than the amount I make per image download.

Partly why I love shutterstock so far. I make the least amount of money per image but then again I make about 50% of all my earnings on shutterstock. Though Sure it would be nice if they would increase the sales price of the images or increase the comission like Istock, Bigstock, fotolia, or one of those do... But then again I can easily see my sales going to where they do on those sites also.
Thinking of that I'm fine with make pennies on the buck compared to those other "higher paying" microstock sites.

« Reply #30 on: February 21, 2013, 18:36 »
+1
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-full-210500878.html

Shutterstock Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2012 Financial Results
-- Fourth quarter revenue increases 42% from prior year
-- Full year revenue increases 41% from prior year
-- Adjusted EBITDA of $11.3 million in fourth quarter
-- Quarterly image downloads reach record of 21.4 million
-- Collection exceeds 23 million images and video clips
-- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 750,000

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Shutterstock, Inc. (SSTK) a leading global provider of commercial digital imagery, today announced financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2012. 

"Our fourth quarter results capped a very strong year for Shutterstock," said Founder and CEO Jon Oringer. "We are very pleased with our progress on product innovation, global market penetration and financial performance over the course of 2012."

Tror

« Reply #31 on: February 21, 2013, 18:58 »
0
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-full-210500878.html

Shutterstock Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2012 Financial Results
-- Fourth quarter revenue increases 42% from prior year
-- Full year revenue increases 41% from prior year
-- Adjusted EBITDA of $11.3 million in fourth quarter
-- Quarterly image downloads reach record of 21.4 million
-- Collection exceeds 23 million images and video clips
-- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 750,000

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Shutterstock, Inc. (SSTK) a leading global provider of commercial digital imagery, today announced financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2012. 

"Our fourth quarter results capped a very strong year for Shutterstock," said Founder and CEO Jon Oringer. "We are very pleased with our progress on product innovation, global market penetration and financial performance over the course of 2012."


So, in a Ideal situation we would see a 41% increase  8) But guess what? This won`t happen. SS is now a shareholder company which means the top priority is increasing this 41% as much as possible and not decreasing it by paying more to us or asking the customers for less.

« Reply #32 on: February 21, 2013, 19:21 »
0
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-full-210500878.html

Shutterstock Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2012 Financial Results
-- Fourth quarter revenue increases 42% from prior year
-- Full year revenue increases 41% from prior year
-- Adjusted EBITDA of $11.3 million in fourth quarter
-- Quarterly image downloads reach record of 21.4 million
-- Collection exceeds 23 million images and video clips
-- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 750,000

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Shutterstock, Inc. (SSTK) a leading global provider of commercial digital imagery, today announced financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2012. 

"Our fourth quarter results capped a very strong year for Shutterstock," said Founder and CEO Jon Oringer. "We are very pleased with our progress on product innovation, global market penetration and financial performance over the course of 2012."


So, in a Ideal situation we would see a 41% increase  8) But guess what? This won`t happen. SS is now a shareholder company which means the top priority is increasing this 41% as much as possible and not decreasing it by paying more to us or asking the customers for less.


Yup.  But at least we can read their press releases and listen to the investors calls, and pretend we're somehow participating in the success. 

Tror

« Reply #33 on: February 21, 2013, 19:31 »
0
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-full-210500878.html

Shutterstock Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2012 Financial Results
-- Fourth quarter revenue increases 42% from prior year
-- Full year revenue increases 41% from prior year
-- Adjusted EBITDA of $11.3 million in fourth quarter
-- Quarterly image downloads reach record of 21.4 million
-- Collection exceeds 23 million images and video clips
-- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 750,000

NEW YORK, Feb. 21, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Shutterstock, Inc. (SSTK) a leading global provider of commercial digital imagery, today announced financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2012. 

"Our fourth quarter results capped a very strong year for Shutterstock," said Founder and CEO Jon Oringer. "We are very pleased with our progress on product innovation, global market penetration and financial performance over the course of 2012."


So, in a Ideal situation we would see a 41% increase  8) But guess what? This won`t happen. SS is now a shareholder company which means the top priority is increasing this 41% as much as possible and not decreasing it by paying more to us or asking the customers for less.


Yup.  But at least we can read their press releases and listen to the investors calls, and pretend we're somehow participating in the success.


...maybe they even listen. Hope is always the last thing to die....

OM

« Reply #34 on: February 21, 2013, 20:58 »
-3
Bye and large everyone is happy with Shutterstock. Contributors keep on uploading and increasing their earnings. Shareholders see increasing share price and increasing profits (discounted future cash flow) which keeps 'em buying the stock. What's not to like? After all, a contributor's increase in payments has to come from somewhere...........like the shareholders.........like not gonna happen!
 ;D

« Reply #35 on: February 21, 2013, 22:36 »
+1


can we know how many minus? ;D

(Oct 0.662$, Nov 0.567$, Dec 0.604$)
- 0.611$ / 2.30$ = 0.265 = 26.5%
« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 22:46 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #36 on: February 22, 2013, 00:31 »
0
Quote
Personally I think 0.38 for subs is already a lot better than most sites

 Where else would someone, producing a unique creative product, think that being paid 38 cents for it was something to celebrate. People running agencies and their backers and shareholders, must have a really good laugh in private.

True, no doubt. But I bet the ones having the biggest laugh of all are those who aim to keep 80% of the revenue and pass only 20% on to the people who do the work. They must think agencies paying 30% or more to the dupes supplying the content are off their rockers.

« Reply #37 on: February 22, 2013, 01:13 »
+11
I have never been a defitist or fatalist.  I learened long ago that we teach our business associates how we expect to be treated and they are more than happy to comply.

If we are not proactive in asking for and then expecting what we have earned and deserve,  we deserve what we get.  And that will be less and less all the time.

IS pushed it too far and SS has benifited from the results of that blatant greed over the last two years with a 36% increase in revenue in 2011 and a 42% increase in 2012.

My cost`s  have gone up across the board.  It is time for a raise and time to send BS a message with our wallets and our feet.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2013, 01:23 by gbalex »

« Reply #38 on: February 22, 2013, 06:06 »
-4
I have never been a defitist or fatalist.  I learened long ago that we teach our business associates how we expect to be treated and they are more than happy to comply.

If we are not proactive in asking for and then expecting what we have earned and deserve,  we deserve what we get.  And that will be less and less all the time.

IS pushed it too far and SS has benifited from the results of that blatant greed over the last two years with a 36% increase in revenue in 2011 and a 42% increase in 2012.

My cost`s  have gone up across the board.  It is time for a raise and time to send BS a message with our wallets and our feet.

SS are operating for growth (very successfully) whereas IS were operating for profit (for H&F's short-term objectives). Big difference. At least with SS you can buy some stock and then voice your displeasure in person at the shareholders' meeting.

Anyway, you have had a raise at SS. Apart from the increase in sub volume you should also be enjoying the proceeeds from ODD's and SOD's which didn't exist in 2008. Personally my own income from SS has roughly doubled since 2008. I just wish other agencies had done the same.

Tror

« Reply #39 on: February 22, 2013, 06:31 »
+3
I have never been a defitist or fatalist.  I learened long ago that we teach our business associates how we expect to be treated and they are more than happy to comply.

If we are not proactive in asking for and then expecting what we have earned and deserve,  we deserve what we get.  And that will be less and less all the time.

IS pushed it too far and SS has benifited from the results of that blatant greed over the last two years with a 36% increase in revenue in 2011 and a 42% increase in 2012.

My cost`s  have gone up across the board.  It is time for a raise and time to send BS a message with our wallets and our feet.

SS are operating for growth (very successfully) whereas IS were operating for profit (for H&F's short-term objectives). Big difference. At least with SS you can buy some stock and then voice your displeasure in person at the shareholders' meeting.

Anyway, you have had a raise at SS. Apart from the increase in sub volume you should also be enjoying the proceeeds from ODD's and SOD's which didn't exist in 2008. Personally my own income from SS has roughly doubled since 2008. I just wish other agencies had done the same.

SS is a Profit oriented company like any other. It is growing with our help and material and I am glad that they do so ad congratulate them for their success. And this is what they should share with us, because ultimate we work in a _partnership_ with them.

I vote for a pay raise and think it would be more than fair.

« Reply #40 on: February 22, 2013, 06:56 »
0
Let's be clear, a pay rise for us means a price rise for the buyers.

If you vote for a pay rise then you need to be sure that increasing the subscription rate is something that the market will tolerate, without buyers heading off to TS or BS or elsewhere.

« Reply #41 on: February 22, 2013, 07:17 »
-4
SS is a Profit oriented company like any other. It is growing with our help and material and I am glad that they do so ad congratulate them for their success. And this is what they should share with us, because ultimate we work in a _partnership_ with them.

I vote for a pay raise and think it would be more than fair.

Unfortunately your 'vote' on MSG is meaningless, empty talk. If you really want to vote then buy some SSTK stock and attend the shockholders' meetings.



« Reply #42 on: February 22, 2013, 07:32 »
+1
I'm sure they'll listen if you turn up at the AGM with 10 shares and ask for a pay rise :)  Look how well that worked when Getty were a public company.

« Reply #43 on: February 22, 2013, 07:40 »
+2
Shutterstock is a corporation. A corporation knows nothing of ethics, morality or fairness. It exists for only one purpose: to make a profit.

« Reply #44 on: February 22, 2013, 09:05 »
-3
Shutterstock is a corporation. A corporation knows nothing of ethics, morality or fairness. It exists for only one purpose: to make a profit.

oh man, how expensive was your bike?

Tror

« Reply #45 on: February 22, 2013, 09:34 »
0
Let's be clear, a pay rise for us means a price rise for the buyers.

If you vote for a pay rise then you need to be sure that increasing the subscription rate is something that the market will tolerate, without buyers heading off to TS or BS or elsewhere.

Not necessarily. A pay raise would mean they make less Profit. They would only have to raise prices if they would want to keep the same or more profit numbers technically. They would only be forced to raise prices if they would make no profit.


« Reply #46 on: February 22, 2013, 09:54 »
+4
Let's be clear, a pay rise for us means a price rise for the buyers.

If you vote for a pay rise then you need to be sure that increasing the subscription rate is something that the market will tolerate, without buyers heading off to TS or BS or elsewhere.

Not necessarily. A pay raise would mean they make less Profit. They would only have to raise prices if they would want to keep the same or more profit numbers technically. They would only be forced to raise prices if they would make no profit.

Get real, how do you think the shareholders' meeting would go when they announce that profits are down because they decided to pay artists more without changing the prices?

« Reply #47 on: February 22, 2013, 10:07 »
+1
Let's be clear, a pay rise for us means a price rise for the buyers.

If you vote for a pay rise then you need to be sure that increasing the subscription rate is something that the market will tolerate, without buyers heading off to TS or BS or elsewhere.

What better way to reduce cost per sale than to funnel sales over to BS which just implemented reduced and unobtainable royalty rates.

We teach sites how to treat us, IS is learning what happens when you stiff contributors as we speak.

« Reply #48 on: February 22, 2013, 10:19 »
0
I have never been a defitist or fatalist.  I learened long ago that we teach our business associates how we expect to be treated and they are more than happy to comply.

If we are not proactive in asking for and then expecting what we have earned and deserve,  we deserve what we get.  And that will be less and less all the time.

IS pushed it too far and SS has benifited from the results of that blatant greed over the last two years with a 36% increase in revenue in 2011 and a 42% increase in 2012.

My cost`s  have gone up across the board.  It is time for a raise and time to send BS a message with our wallets and our feet.

SS are operating for growth (very successfully) whereas IS were operating for profit (for H&F's short-term objectives). Big difference. At least with SS you can buy some stock and then voice your displeasure in person at the shareholders' meeting.

Anyway, you have had a raise at SS. Apart from the increase in sub volume you should also be enjoying the proceeeds from ODD's and SOD's which didn't exist in 2008. Personally my own income from SS has roughly doubled since 2008. I just wish other agencies had done the same.

I will let you put your own money into SS, be sure to let us know how that goes.

« Reply #49 on: February 22, 2013, 10:34 »
0
Let's be clear, a pay rise for us means a price rise for the buyers.

If you vote for a pay rise then you need to be sure that increasing the subscription rate is something that the market will tolerate, without buyers heading off to TS or BS or elsewhere.

I tend to agree. When I looked at their IPO statement, it looked like they literally couldn't afford to pay us 50%. They may be able to squeeze in a little more money, but it's doubtful without raising prices.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
25 Replies
7231 Views
Last post October 17, 2007, 12:01
by ALTPhotoImages
8 Replies
2632 Views
Last post May 29, 2008, 08:42
by toneteam
26 Replies
7707 Views
Last post June 16, 2008, 13:12
by Mormegil
11 Replies
3075 Views
Last post June 01, 2009, 10:46
by azurelaroux
4 Replies
2034 Views
Last post December 09, 2010, 03:19
by 123XXX

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results